Mobil 1: 100% synthetic base stocks? Please settle this.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 10, 2004
Messages
3
Location
Portland, oR
Dumb question. Read over on the Shell/Rotella website a really long post regarding what oil to use in motorcycles. Quite a few guys swore that Mobil 1, even though beging called 100 syn., doesn't use 100% syn. basestocks. I opened my mouth in reference to this and was charbroiled on the spot. Is there any truth to this idea? Can an oil claim 100% fully synthetic and not be made from 100% syn. base stocks? I realize how stupid this sounds but have to ask it anyway. Besides, I'm a "newbie" here! Thanks.
 

2x

Joined
Oct 10, 2003
Messages
67
Location
Massachusetts
Castrol is the reason why an oil can call themselves 100% synthetic and not be so. Mobil 1 is a synthetic oil in the true "pre-Castrol litigation suit old school definition of synthetic" sense. Mobil 1 uses Group 4 and Group 5 basestocks. That, if you ask almost anyone, is a synthetic oil. Others like Castrol and Valvoline etc use Group 3+ basestocks which are not considered synthetic by the majority here. This article is a good beginning point to use against those who charred you http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=27&article_id=3631&page_number=1
 
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
64
Location
Northern California
Being new, I was never quite sure of the reason for all the Castrol bashing. Now, after reading the article, I wonder why you guys aren't bashing Castrol even more ;-) I was going to start using some GC, but now I'm honestly wondering if I should support a company like this.
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
35,313
Location
NJ
Mobil 1 is without a doubt a 100% fully synthetic oil using only Group IV and V basestocks, NOTHING else. We've had many debates on this. Mobil 1 actually will get angry if you question their oil. My response was: "Yes! Mobil 1 only uses grp IV and V basestocks and is a fully synthetic oil!! [Big Grin] Mobil 1 was never a grp III.
 
Joined
Sep 27, 2003
Messages
2,233
Location
Wisconsin
What might be interesting is to turn the question around & ask "What info do you have that indicates M1 contains group 3?" Since so little data is available on the M1 formulations, even on this site, more than likely the claim that M1 is less than 100% is, to be kind, "speculation"!
 
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
207
Location
The Badger State
In the past, I remember reading a Mobil 1 gear lube container. There was an asterik by the large word SYNTHETIC that appeared on the bottle and the fine print read: "exclusive of the additive carrier." So at the time, I assume they were using a small amount of mineral oil in the mix.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
9,425
Location
Pensacola & Vero Beach FL
quote:
Originally posted by Rebel Rouser: In the past, I remember reading a Mobil 1 gear lube container. There was an asterik by the large word SYNTHETIC that appeared on the bottle and the fine print read: "exclusive of the additive carrier." So at the time, I assume they were using a small amount of mineral oil in the mix.
That was just the oil used to dissolve and carry the additives. Mobil abandoned this practice over a decade ago. It's all syn now.
 
Joined
Jul 2, 2003
Messages
5,358
Location
Gone
Before everyone goes on the Castrol witch hunt again, ask the Shell experts on the other website about Shell TMO (if they have been around long enough to remember it (80s). Pretty sure it was hydrocracked but Shell charged about 13 Deutschmarks ($8.33) a liter for it (I bought it when I lived in Europe)...sure seems like "synthetic" pricing scale to me. I just love how "experts" are everywhere.
 
Joined
May 26, 2004
Messages
155
Location
Kingsland, GA
In 1972 Amsoil developed the first truely synthetic oil (help me out Amsoil reps). My understanding is that Castrol uses group III basestocks (mineral?) to develop their synthetic oils. Others, like Amsoil, Redline, Royal Purple, Mobil and a few mainstream European version namebrands use fully synthetic PAO and ester basestocks to develope their oils. My understanding is that even though Castrol claims to be 100% synthetic, the fact trhat they use group III basestocks contradicts that claim in the purest sense. Correct me if I'm wrong guys.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2002
Messages
922
Location
Ontario , Canada
The supersyn formula is 100% syn., I thought the last Trisynthetic formula had a smidge of non-syn fluid in it, I may be wrong but that is what I remember hearing. Could be a rumour though. As far as Shell goes , do they have a 100% syn product ? , I thought all of their OTC stuff was group 3 . Either way Mobil1 Supersyn is 100% syn. group 4 and 5, that is all you need to know. You should not have to prove your statement, they should have to prove that Mobil1 is not 100% before putting you through the ringer, I doubt anyone has an oz. of proof.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
556
Location
Melbourne Australia
quote:
Originally posted by Idrinkmotoroil: As far as Shell goes , do they have a 100% syn product ?
I thought Shell Helix Ultra uses that weird Group 3- like base stock ?
 

Crusty1

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 10, 2004
Messages
3
Location
Portland, oR
I should point out that I'm the idiot that mentioned something off the Rotella forum discussion that talked about M1 not using 100% syn. basestocks. Thanks to your response, I now see how this whole thing started: pre tri-syn. formulation. Thanks for the excellent, and fast, info!
 
Joined
Jul 2, 2003
Messages
5,358
Location
Gone
Please permit me to add to the debate that has gone on and on and on here at BITOG (I've been just a guilty as everyone else, but I'd like to see it laid to rest. Until proven it should be otherwise my position is reflected in Jim Pasha's article, Motor Oil for Older Porsches in the "Tech Forum" of Excellence magazine.
quote:
Hard-core oil aficionados will already know that what is generically called "synthetic" motor oil is actually two distinct types: synthetic and hydrocrack...Conventional motor oil is refined crude oil, pumped out of the ground and distilled for use in car engines. Synthetic motor oils are made from a conventional oil base but contain added synthetic hydrocarbon lubricants (such as polyalpaolefins) [he obviously does not include Group V here] to improve low-temperature lubrication as well as high-temperature stability. [Key points] Hydrocrack oils have the same protective properties as synthetics but are created by "cracking" the long hydrocarbon chains in conventional oil--shorter chains lubricate better than long ones. Is there an advantage in choosing a synthetic over a hydrocrack...Porsche regards the two types of oils as equals: "Non-conventional oils are relatively similar with respect to performance, regardless of whether they were produced using the synthetic or hydrocrack process."
Now whether you feel you should pay the same for synthetic vice hydrocrack depends on the relative cost of the two processes, but why don't we let the Group III vs Group IV issue die. Porsche doesn't seem to think it is worth worrying about.
 
Joined
Oct 28, 2002
Messages
49,771
Location
Everson WA - Pacific NW USA
per the quote above:
quote:
Synthetic motor oils are made from a conventional oil base but contain added synthetic hydrocarbon lubricants (such as polyalpaolefins)
Simply wrong.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2002
Messages
922
Location
Ontario , Canada
now where does he find out Porsche's opinions on such discussions , are there people at Porsche going around saying " oil is oil use anything you want, it's all the same crap " . Or is he simply referring to the owner's manual which permits you to use any approved oil. Personally I dont think Porsche is the all deciding final word on whether Group 3 oils are as good as true synthetic Group 4 and 5's. I'm willing to bet Ferrari has a true synthetic recommendation for their vehicles and I'd be more inclined to hear their opinion on motor oils. Like all things rumours in the auto industry do nothing but drive you nuts.
 
Joined
Jul 2, 2003
Messages
5,358
Location
Gone
The quote at the end of the excerpt is implied to be directly from Porsche...whether it is from a technical bulletin or owner's manual (or other source) I can't say. Although Porsche has now switched to Mobil 1, I can tell you <b>for sure</b> that for years (some of the years during which Porsche, in my opinion, built its toughest-on-motor-oil motors) Porsche did factory fill with and recommended for continued use, Shell TMO, which I am almost certain was hydrocracked. PAOs and, I believe, esters and PAO/ester combos were available at that time. So I'd have to say they backed up the words quoted in the article. I'd just like to see more occurances of people who make blanket statements and perpetuate endless debate back it up with test data. Sure everyone can have and state an opinion, that's only reasonable, but how about we don't go on an on simply based on opinion. I don't think that is too much to ask. I've also noticed, woe to the poster who challenges prevailing thought...even if the prevailing thought has no proven basis. I will tell you for sure, I am watching what I say.
 
Joined
Jul 2, 2003
Messages
5,358
Location
Gone
quote:
Originally posted by Whimsey: pscholte, Take heart and don't get upset and take it personally when posters come on strong... Whimsey
Whimsey, I'm not upset at all (when I write with emphasis I guess I sound that way). I am just trying to appeal to our members (myself included)to stay off bandwagons and think whether what they are saying is echo or informed original thought. [Cheers!]
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2002
Messages
4,727
Location
The Garden State
pscholte, Take heart and don't get upset and take it personally when posters come on strong about Group III "synthetics" versus Group IV and V's. It's because of the "Castrol Syndrome". Charging the same price for a "lesser cost to produce" product. Even though the Group III's seem to provide good wear numbers people think that because their components are less expensive the manufactures automatically pass their cost savings onto you. Welcome to capitalism and G*d bless it [bowdown] . If you do your homework and determine that product X is better than product Y you are free to buy it. If you're sucked in just by advertising then so be it [Big Grin] . I think the earlier Porsche's, especially the 911 group, had very large oil sumps and not so large engines. Though they wrung a heck of a lot of power out of them. So maybe they were "gentler" on the oil than a vehicle with a small oil sump [I dont know] . Plus if it was the "earlier" Porsche years then maybe the Group IV & V oil's were not that common. While in certain respects Group IV & V have advantages over Group III & or Group III & IV combo's. It's up to us to determime what's best for us as far as oil performance and cost. For me I'm using Schaeffer #701 5W-30. It costs less than Mobil 1 5W-30, at least where I live, plus it's delivered to my door [Wink] . And It's rated very highly on this site by some very knowledgeable people. This is a great site for knowledge. It's up to us as how to apply that knowledge. Whimsey
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top