quote:Primus, does this link that you posted answer your question on whether or not Mobil 1 is PAO? The above quote is off the US FAQ webpage. This is from a Ferrari webpage:
Is Mobil 1 with SuperSyn™ a fully synthetic motor oil? Yes, it is. To meet the demanding requirements of today's specifications (and our customers' expectations), Mobil 1 with SuperSyn™ uses high-performance fluids, including polyalphaolefins (PAOs), along with a proprietary system of additives. Each Mobil 1 with SuperSyn™ viscosity grade uses a unique combination of synthetic fluids and selected additives in order to tailor the viscosity grade to its specific application
quote:[ March 20, 2004, 10:51 AM: Message edited by: buster ]
As far as the dino/syn content of Mobil 1, I received this email from Mobil: "All Mobil1 motor oils that have ever been introduced are fully synthetic motor oils and are not hydrocracked. Mobil1 motor oils only contain Group IV and V basestocks."
quote:Buster, Never asked such question. Quite the reverse, based on European experience I expressed my supposition that M1 SS 0W-30, 5W-30, 10W-30 and 15W-50 are mainly PAO based oils and the amount of esters are quite insignificant, if any. In the same post I also supposed that 5W-30, 10W-30 and 15W-50 contain hydrocracked oil in this or that volume depending on M1 weight. Over this now I'm inclined to think that Mobil has also changed its 5W-50 from 100 % PAO to PAO + HC. I cannot find another explanation for the NOACK volatility growth from 7,5 % to 11 %. But what nice metal cans ! Think I would forget about volatility.
Originally posted by buster: Primus, does this link that you posted answer your question on whether or not Mobil 1 is PAO? The above quote is off the US FAQ webpage.
quote:Mobil 1 NOAK's 5w-30 = 9% 10w-30= 8% 15w-50= 5% 0w-30= ? 0w-40= 8.8% [ March 20, 2004, 02:39 PM: Message edited by: buster ]
Base stocks can include PAO, esters, and alkylated naphtalenes and or alkylated benzenes. Remember, EM makes all three full synthetic base stoks. While they also make GRIII, these are mostly in their blends. Why use a GRPIII with a GRPIV when a PAO has better all around specs than a GRPIII? Using a GRPIII with a GRPIV requires more esters for solubility of the add pack, which raises cost, so one would NOT be gaining anything by going with a PAO/GRIII stock. Chemistry/cost wise, it doesn't make sense. Consider too, the backlash if it were found that Mobil was using GRPIII and calling it synthetic, after the little tussle with Castrol. It would be as hypocritical as Amsoil's move to use GRPIII in their XL-series. On the other hand, I do appreciate Amsoil making a demarcation of their fluids. Example, Amsoil XL-series versus their full PAO series.
quote:Let's not to overestimate. The use 20-30 % HC oil is not the same as to fully substitute PAO by HC. Would this step damage Mobil reputation ? May be, but only with a small group of crazy car enthusiasts like we are and may be more in the US because in Europe people have hardly heard about Castrol-Mobil case. Now the majority of European manufacturers use PAO & HC mixt and this did not have an impact on their sales. Moreover, some manufacturers like TotalFinalElf claim that new generation of hydrockracked oils outperform PAO from 90th in many areas and the use of 100 % PAO oils is justified in sport application only. As for MolaKule statement, may be he is right, but this is a theory. In practice everything will depend on: 1). target - desired oil properties, 2). required GRP III volume and its actual cost, 3). required amount and cost of esters. As I know esters' content usually does not exceed 2-5 % in oils using PAO as a main component, at least in Europe.
Originally posted by buster: Primus, it doesn't make sense from a chemical standpoint to use ANY GRP III and if Mobil was caught doing this, their reputation would fall off the planet.
quote:Think it would wrong if such decision is caused only by a presence of hydrocracked oil. To tell the truth I have more and more confidence in HC oils and would probably prefer HC & PAO mist (say at 70/30 ratio) in 10W-30, 10W-40 and 15W-40 grades over 100 % PAO in 0W-40 or 5W-40. But I would hardly accept 100 % HC in 5W-40 "fully synthetic oil" like Shell Helix Ultra even if viscosity modifiers from Shell are considered the best.
Originally posted by Lubricious: After reading this, I would not buy the 10w-30 variety, especially since I've seen the 15w-50 at the same price. There is certainly something very different about the 10w-30 formulation, since this is probably the most popular multigrade, makes it even more suspicious.
quote:Schaeffer Supreme 5w30 is about 75-80% group 3 and 20-25% PAO though and it works well.
Originally posted by buster: Primus, only problem is it makes no sense to use any Grp III with a PAO. Molekule stated this awhile back.
quote:Actually, he doesn't. Bob posted on here last year that he got it directly from Schaeffer's head chemist: Their 5w30 blend is Group III and PAO. I pointed out at the time that the online spec sheets says Group II/PAO and Bob responded that the spec sheet needs updating and that the Group III/PAO is their newest formulation.
Originally posted by Motorbike: Patman , You have your group and percentages off a bit