Mobil 1 and Bob's Bearing Test....

[csandste]

This is triggered by discussions on the "delo" thread, also a post that I made on the Car and Driver forums plugging this site. Some guy posted saying that the site was no good because of Bob's videos.

So, my question is why does Mobil 1 do so poorly on Bob's test? (I think it's the only oil that didn't plate up.) Is Mobil 1 over rated (very over rated, if it's the only oil to fail the test completely), or is Bob's test flawed? I'm sure given the domination of synthetic among the posters, and Mobil's domination of the syn. market, that many of you continue to use Mobil 1 despite this demonstration.

BTW-- I'm not an expert in reading numbers, but I'm also a bit disconcerted that the specs on Mobil's dino. oils seem to be so weak. Right down there with Wolf's Head and apparently weaker than Wal-Mart's house brand. Maybe because it's the "drive clean oil" and detergency is traded for viscosity and flash point.

I realize that even Bob realizes these tests aren't overly scientific. IMHO they are extremely interesting and I wish Bob would mount a few more videos.

[ June 28, 2002, 03:51 PM: Message edited by: csandste ]

 

[MolaKule]

Maybe its just because I'm from Missouri.

but I
just wish we knew what the testing conditions were.

 

[BOBISTHEOILGUY]

You're too dang scientific Mola as you're making it more complex than it really is.

Simple mechanics.

Here is the picture of the machine I'm reffering too..

Now, the lever on the left is about 2 hands width long, when pushed down it applies pressure up on the other lever that has the bearing(timken bearing)attached. This pivots at the halfway point, appling pressure downward against the rotating bearing(timken race is rotating).

The bowl has the oil to be tested. All start out at ambient temp and increase in heat produced by the friction where the bearing is meeting the rotating race that is covered by the oil from the little bowl.

A lot of pressure can be applied, and a little can be applied, So there is no consistant measurement provided other than by feel. In my videos, as you can see, I would use but a little up and down pressure to stay as consistant as possible. Each time by raising the arm up, allow the oil to regroup and recoat the bearing then reappling the slight pressure. I did this until I could apply enough pressure so to actually raise the motor (on the right attached by the wood base) and whole assembly without it stopping the motor. This would be my stopping point as now the oil has plated with what ever temp it took to establish the barrier on the race and bearing.

This test wasn't really to demonstrate the quality of each oil as much as it was to demonstrate the quality of the barrier lube properties of an oil.

I personally use this to establish if I'm going to use it in my car as I know this is the last line of defense for wear protection and if any oil can withstand this simple basic mechanical shearing on this machine, then I know it should be more than enough to establish a good barrier for my engine.

Now that aside, then I go to oil analysis to see how well the base oil with all the additives in play work with each other under the conditions I have.

CS... I'm not suprise to the ignorance of the guy stating my site is no good based on the videos as he missed the point all together as it is a simple demostrating about barrier additives and nothing to do with base oils.

 

[Don Stevens]

Regarding the guy saying the site is no good. Forget about it. Some people are going to rag on what you say or what we say no matter what we do. There are lots of bashers out there who like to think they are smart because they can find fault in someones statements. That is all just wasted time.

Regarding the scientific nature of Bob's test. If one wants to pick it is easy to find fault. But Bob admits it is not scientific and states that is not intended to be. It is merely a group of one group of demonstrations on various products in somewhat similar circumstances. His tests seem to lead to a conclusion that the barrier lube capabilities of his favorite oil are pretty doggone good. Some may argue that ths is what he was expecting and the he subconsciously lead the test to acheive the desired result. Forget it. Actually, if you watch the tests over in succession, he puts the Schaffer's under the most pressure of all the oils and it shines. Unscientific as it may be, it is pretty impressive.

Finally, regarding Mobil-1 with Supersyn and the fact that it seems to fare so miserably in this test. This test shows only one facet of a lubricant's properties. While it did poorly in this test, M-1 with Supersyn just might surprise us all and show some pretty good results in the real world. I doubt it, but it might. Mobil has some of the best lubricant designers in the world and a tremendous reputation. It is hard to imagine that they would put such a reputation at stake with a shaky product. Of course, it is also hard to imagine that Worldcom consciously hid $4 billion in expenses in an attempt to BS the stockholders. The point is, we don't really know, and won't know about M-1 with Supersyn performance until some used oil analysis results start showing up.

In the meantime, Lighten up and take the iformation you read here for what it is worth.

Don

 

[Patman]

As a long time Mobil 1 user (started in 88) I too hope the new stuff isn't as bad
as we think. However, if you think that just because it was good before, that it
will always be good, I have one company name that proves that a product
can go from being the best to being the worst:

FRAM

And they still market the h*** out of their d*** oil filters, so 99% of the American
driving public actually believes Fram is the best.

[ June 28, 2002, 11:22 PM: Message edited by: BOBISTHEOILGUY ]

 

[MolaKule]

Patman,

Marketing gives rise to a perception, whether the product is good or not.

BobIs,

In the other post, I was asking if the oil bath was brought up to temp by a heater or some such method. From what you are saying, friction heats up the oil bath.

OK,

I see the test setup since you zoomed into the actual mechanism. I couldn't see or visualize it before. As I understand it, there is a bearing race being spun by a motor which gets it oil from the oil bath in the tub. Two levers tranmsit the torque that applies a load to the metal sample (possibily a roller bearing) that presses down onto the turning race.

I see no problems with the test whatsover and for the record, I have never disagreed that MoTDC is an excellent barrier lube. And this test rig shows just that, MoTDC is an excellent last line of defense against boundary friction when all else has failed.

I don't necessarily see the test equating to a rod or journal bearing, but I do see an analogy between it and cam shaft/rocker assemblies and piston ring/cylinder sliding friction. The contact areas in piston rings and cams are very small and present a small area of contact which relates to high pressures in the contact area. In a rod or journal bearing, the areas are much larger with lower corresponding pressures.

Regarding those MALCONTENTS who negatively criticize this list: If you can't stand the open information, truth and honesty, remain ignorant and swallow the hype until you choke onm it!

 

[CourierDriver]

How many of us have ever lost a good engine to an oil failure, I have not. I have owned many cars and a few trucks, none ever died ( lost of an engine) due to oil failure) . Started driving in 1962 when oil was ancient as compared to todays oils and newer types of metals. My buddies had 55, 57, chevys and fords and older cars then. Havoline was a big oil then, and yes Kayo oil used oil in bottles out by the gas pumps, mercy. Gas was 30 cents a gallon, lets bring that part back.lol