Mobil 1 controversy on wikipedia.org
- Thread starter Kitto
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,587
Weird. I emptied my browser's cache and when I went back to the wiki page, the controversy part showed up today. Yesterday it didn't.
I had always heard good things about Mobil 1 until I started reading some posts on this forum. Am I hearing correctly that it is no longer a good synthetic oil, but some kind of blend? I just looked at the data sheet for Mobil 1 (Not the new extended version) and it said "Fully synthetic formula with SuperSyn Technology". I was going to start using this oil in my 2004 Sienna because I thought it was one of the better fully synthetic oils. After reading some of the posts, it sounds like it had deteriated to the point it is no better than conventional oils. Am I misreading something into this?
With all the money they spend downplaying global warming, this group3 group4 thing shouldn't be much to "fix".
Certainly better than most conventionals (Open to debate of course). Not really as bad as its made out to be on BITOG. For alot of people its just politics and ethics that are making them shy awy from the product. But for most on here I'd say its the poor performing used oil analysis that Mobil has had lately. That's the dagger in the chest, doesn't perform good enough to justify the cost. But do your own research into the oil, make your own decision.
Lately is an relative term. Mobil 1 has been posting bad used oil analysis since I joined. But then again I am an newbie.
Would one of you gentlemen, dave1251 or Z ombie please post a link to some of these poor used oil analysis produced by Mobil 1? Could you also please provide your detailed analysis that eliminates all the variables and directly attributes the poor UOA to Mobil 1's poor performance? Thank you in advance.
farrarfan1
Facts from the anti M1 bandwagoners?
Facts from the anti M1 bandwagoners?
Hey it's worth a try. And I asked in a very polite and civil manner.
I shouldn't have used the word "poor", its meaning is too varied. I thought I cleared my usage of it up by saying "not good enough for the money". I suppose even that goes back to my dislike of the price vs performance of it. When I say that I put M1 against its mainstream rivals, GC and PP. Most of the time GC and PP can be had cheaper, and will do just as good or exceed M1. Its hard to justify the higher M1 price all things considered. Never said it was a bad oil.
Thank you for your response. I agree that the word "poor" has several definitions.
Instead of asking OTHER people to prove or disprove a position, why don't YOU do some data analysis? Pick out all the used oil analysis from the past two years that you believe are a fair comparison between M1 and an equivalent brand.
When people claimed that 5w30 conventionals usually sheered down to a 5w20 grade, that's exactly what I did to verify or nullify their claim.
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...true#Post803501
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...true#Post799341
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...part=1&vc=1
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...true#Post797867
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...true#Post781879
Now farra for 6 dollars a qt I my expectations that it better perform better than any oil out there that cost less. Notice the increased iron compaired to other oil out there. Now it is not a lot. But it is higher than other oils sampled. Will M-1 work good in some applications. Yes toyota engines come to mind. But then again 49 cent chevron works just as well and it is just a fraction of the cost. Now this is poor.
Because I'm not the one making the unsubstantiated claims. If I did make such a claim and was asked to provide something to back that claim up I would have it available.
Why don't you take an sample of your M-1 in you van. Then run some valvoline since you like it so much. And see for yourself. Your valvoline will probably have an better UOA.
Then what would you think of Mobil 1?
I believe it's more of a shared responsibility. Imagine the case where people just show up and ask for people to "prove" things to them instead of doing some homework on their own.
Further, M1's elevated Fe level has become such a signature trait to those who read a lot of the used oil analysis posted here that's it's even called....well...M1's Fe signature. Even people who have an undying love of all things from EM, like buster, will admit this.
And for the final pièce de résistance, search for Terry's comment. Little nuggets of gold.
If you see M1 for $6 a qt. most majors are priced the same. At the vast majority of outlets M1 is priced the same as most major brands INCLUDING PP. The only consistent "bargain" price for PP (excluding rebates) is the jugs at Walmart. A very good deal....But this nonsense about the high cost of M1 and the low price of other major synthetics including PP for non WalMart shoppers is pure #@$%!!
Just more lemmings on the anti Mobil...anti Mobil 1 bandwagon.....and people say "facts" rule this place?
BTW my local WalMarts have M1 in 5W and 10w30 for $4.37. Lower than the other majors and .40 more than PP.
Just more lemmings on the anti Mobil...anti Mobil 1 bandwagon.....and people say "facts" rule this place?
BTW my local WalMarts have M1 in 5W and 10w30 for $4.37. Lower than the other majors and .40 more than PP.
- Status
Similar threads
