Mobil 1 0w40 SM vs SN

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: buster
Obsessing over VI is dumb. Yeah, the higher the better if you can do it without giving up something else as a compromise.

It's not obsessing, just the realization of it's clear advantages.
I'm not formulating oils, just taking advantages of the work, primarily the OEMs have done to formulate technically advanced synthetic oils.
If you want to use something inferior because you don't appreciate the benefits, that's you choice but it is pretty "dumb" as you say.

Originally Posted By: buster

Oils like RL/M1 that have high VI are great because they achieving that through the use of very high quality base oils. So these oils are going to be more shear stable and use less polymeric thickeners.

That's exactly right as is the case with all OEM oils, so what is you're point or do simply enjoy looking "foolish"

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Ford spec's a 5W-20 for their 400+ HP Mustang GT.
Is there any benefit from running a heavier oil even for track use?
Ford will tell your there is not, in fact it likely would be counter-productive.


And you and I both know that Ford would be talking out both sides of their mouth with that example because the Track Pack version of the same car, WITH an oil cooler, spec's 5w-50. The ONLY reason they can get away with the CAFE-driven 5w-20 recommendation for the base GT is the oil temperature based engine power management (castration mechanism) that prevents the engine from damage that could occur due to elevated oil temperatures.

Yes but we also know that the "castration mechanism" is not easily triggered even during track use as some members like Clevy have pointed out:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/2012-mustang-5-0-9500mi-track-autox-m1-0w20.195647/

The important point is that virtually all vehicles today have electronic safety systems in place to prevent engine damage if the oil does get too hot and therefore too thin. This fact makes it counter-productive from a lubrication view point to run a heavier than spec' oil. And in the case with Ford and other manufacturer's the real solution if the safeties are kicking in too often is to install the optional factory oil cooler, not run a heavier oil.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
And in the case with Ford and other manufacturer's the real solution if the safeties are kicking in too often is to install the optional factory oil cooler, not run a heavier oil.


Yet Ford did both with the Track-Pack and BOSS 302

....

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: BerndV
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: BerndV
"Mobil 1 0W-40 has had a 185 VI from day one. There has been literally no more than a 1 or 2 point VI variance over the years which is nothing"

The SJ formulation of Mobil 1 0W-40 had a VI of 196: http://www.ulei-mobil.ro/pdf/MobilAutoDataSheet/Mobil 1 0W-40 pds.pdf

I think your your credibility is waning.

That's a UK Mobil website, and represents a normal batch variation.
The nominal VI for Mobil 1 0W-40 is 185. It has never been higher than 187 in the past 10 years in NA and most parts of the world.
Your argument that it has declined therefore has no merit and Mobil certainly wouldn't agree with you.


Batch variation? It is a Mobil product data sheet. The only difference between the UK sheet and the US sheet is the mailing address. You yourself have stated that it has declined in it's current SN formulation due to the significantly higher MRV. Consistency would be helpful.

The product has evolved over the years and gotten heavier but the VI remains 185+.

 

[demarpaint]

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
And in the case with Ford and other manufacturer's the real solution if the safeties are kicking in too often is to install the optional factory oil cooler, not run a heavier oil.


Yet Ford did both with the Track-Pack and BOSS 302

....

It seems you'd really have to do some serious track time like actual racing for an hour or two in the desert when it's 110F and your bump drafting the car ahead of you.

A typical track day 20 minute session isn't going to do it.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
And in the case with Ford and other manufacturer's the real solution if the safeties are kicking in too often is to install the optional factory oil cooler, not run a heavier oil.


Yet Ford did both with the Track-Pack and BOSS 302

....

It seems you'd really have to do some serious track time like actual racing for an hour or two in the desert when it's 110F and your bump drafting the car ahead of you.

A typical track day 20 minute session isn't going to do it.


But you could do it, which was my point, LOL

I know you specifically mentioned "on the street" earlier, and I certainly agree that getting elevated oil temperatures is going to be much more difficult (nary impossible perhaps) in that scenario, however with an engine of high power density, given the right circumstances it is certainly possible to elevate oil temperatures beyond the "safe" range for a given lubricant. A premise in which Ford quite obviously is in complete agreement, otherwise the cars I noted wouldn't sport both an oil cooler and 5w-50 (as well I imagine, some different programming with respect to the castration/safety mechanism....).

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
And in the case with Ford and other manufacturer's the real solution if the safeties are kicking in too often is to install the optional factory oil cooler, not run a heavier oil.


Yet Ford did both with the Track-Pack and BOSS 302

....

It seems you'd really have to do some serious track time like actual racing for an hour or two in the desert when it's 110F and your bump drafting the car ahead of you.

A typical track day 20 minute session isn't going to do it.


But you could do it, which was my point, LOL

I know you specifically mentioned "on the street" earlier, and I certainly agree that getting elevated oil temperatures is going to be much more difficult (nary impossible perhaps) in that scenario, however with an engine of high power density, given the right circumstances it is certainly possible to elevate oil temperatures beyond the "safe" range for a given lubricant. A premise in which Ford quite obviously is in complete agreement, otherwise the cars I noted wouldn't sport both an oil cooler and 5w-50 (as well I imagine, some different programming with respect to the castration/safety mechanism....).

I think it's pretty impressive that you can run a 400+ Mustang on the track without an oil cooler on a semi-syn 5W-20 with oil temp's of at least 230F and still not have the nannies kick in.
That more than covers it more most of us.
And if you install an oil cooler, it really makes the argument for anything heavier for all street and track use hard imagine, let alone three grades heavier.

 

[buster]

Quote:
so what is you're point


Uh my point is 1. Use the correct viscosity in your manual, maybe deviate 1 grade up or down depending on the brand. 2. Look at the specifications the oil meets. 3. Don't obsess over any one particular oil property. 4. Don't play chemist thinking you can mix brands and exceed the performance of using a single brand alone.

The only thing that seems foolish to me is deviating from that.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize the benefits of a higher VI. The question is how did you achieve that VI and what other characteristics does that oil have?

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: buster
Quote:
so what is you're point


Uh my point is 1. Use the correct viscosity in your manual, maybe deviate 1 grade up or down depending on the brand. 2. Look at the specifications the oil meets. 3. Don't obsess over any one particular oil property. 4. Don't play chemist thinking you can mix brands and exceed the performance of using a single brand alone.

The only thing that seems foolish to me is deviating from that.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize the benefits of a higher VI. The question is how did you achieve that VI and what other characteristics does that oil have?

Well since you have never used an oil pressure gauge and have no intention of doing so and therefore have no actual experience I think that's pretty good advice for you to follow.
In fact it would be "foolish" of you to "deviate 1 grade up or down" because you would be doing so blind.
But if you're okay with that that's your business.

 

[buster]

Put Mobil 1 0w20 up against TGMO or Sustina in a IIIG test. That would be interesting. XOM makes both Mobil 1 0w20 and TGMO. Mobil 1 is their flaghship oil and represents the best of the company's brand. If they felt the importance of having a VI of 220 was worth that much they would have gone with it IMO. Instead, the product has a VI of 173, but an incredible MRV and excellent high temperature properties. Mobil 1 0w20 at one time was GM 4718M approved. In order to meet that GM spec, you need excellent high temperature and cold pump-ability properties.

 

[BerndV]

+1

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: buster
Mobil 1 is their flaghship oil and represents the best of the company's brand. If they felt the importance of having a VI of 220 was worth that much they would have gone with it IMO. Instead, the product has a VI of 173, but an incredible MRV and excellent high temperature properties. Mobil 1 0w20 at one time was GM 4718M approved. In order to meet that GM spec, you need excellent high temperature and cold pump-ability properties.

I don't agree with that at all. When Toyota decided to use another formulator to replace Nippon Oil they could have used Mobil's Mobil 1 0W-20 but that's no what happened, Mobil formulated to Toyota's specifications. Since then Mobil has continued to develop and evolve TGMO 0W-20. Being an OEM oil I'm sure a whole lot more R&D has gone into TGMO and Mobil 1 0W-40 (another OEM oil) than has ever gone into AFE 0W-20 and AFE 0W-30.

Both Mobil 1 0W-20 and 0w30 are old formulation basically unchanged since they where first released some 10 years ago (and Mobil has confirmed that.
To radically alter the oil's VI would of course mean totally changing the formulation. Like all companies Mobil is first and foremost in the business of making money so what is the point in doing that?
Mobil 1 0W-20 is a heavier oil than TGMO, marketed as being a substitute for any application where a 5W-20 is specified.

 

[JAG]

Caterham, I think some people are annoyed by how often you bring up VI. I believe some would classify it as an obsession. I think this is why you are seeing a lot of resistance in this thread. I appreciate you being a member here and I think you obsess over VI. The reasons you give for why VI is important as you believe it is don't sway me. VI matters but it's overblown.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: buster
Put Mobil 1 0w20 up against TGMO or Sustina in a IIIG test. That would be interesting. XOM makes both Mobil 1 0w20 and TGMO. Mobil 1 is their flaghship oil and represents the best of the company's brand. If they felt the importance of having a VI of 220 was worth that much they would have gone with it IMO. Instead, the product has a VI of 173, but an incredible MRV and excellent high temperature properties. Mobil 1 0w20 at one time was GM 4718M approved. In order to meet that GM spec, you need excellent high temperature and cold pump-ability properties.


+2

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: JAG
Caterham, I think some people are annoyed by how often you bring up VI. I believe some would classify it as an obsession. I think this is why you are seeing a lot of resistance in this thread. I appreciate you being a member here and I think you obsess over VI. The reasons you give for why VI is important as you believe it is don't sway me. VI matters but it's overblown.


+1