Mobil 1 has (mostly) improved the HTFS viscosity and VII content with API SP

[Gokhan]

I put a few Mobil 1 API-SP oils into the HTFS/VII calculator. They don't provide HTHS in the PDS, but I can estimate it by adjusting it so that the base-oil viscosity index (BO VI) ~ 135.

That said, most API-SP Mobil 1 oils have a reduced VII content and a higher HTFS viscosity (high-temperature, full-shear viscosity = base-oil + additive-package viscosity at 150 ℃) than their API-SN counterparts. This is a good thing, as less VII results in a cleaner engine, and a higher HTFS results in less engine wear.

There was at least one exception. They increased the VII content and thinned down the base oil in Mobil 1 Extended-Performance (M1 EP) 0W-20 quite a bit, which is unfortunate because the API-SN/SN PLUS version was an excellent oil that was mostly PAO.

You can find the HTFS/VII table and the background behind it here:

HTFSV: High-temperature, full-shear viscosity

It is theorized that the wear for the following engine components depends on these variables among other things: Bearings: high-temperature, high-shear (HTHS) viscosity, TBN/TAN/base-oil oxidation performance (lead and copper corrosion) Piston rings: base-oil viscosity, TBN/TAN/base-oil...

bobistheoilguy.com

 

[The_Sheriff]

I put a few Mobil 1 API-SP oils into the HTFS/VII calculator. They don't provide HTHS in the PDS, but I can estimate it by adjusting it so that the base-oil viscosity index (BO VI) ~ 135.

That said, most API-SP Mobil 1 oils have a reduced VII content and a higher HTFS viscosity (high-temperature, full-shear viscosity = base-oil + additive-package viscosity at 150 ℃) than their API-SN counterparts. This is a good thing, as less VII results in a cleaner engine, and a higher HTFS results in less engine wear.

There was at least one exception. They increased the VII content and thinned down the base oil in Mobil 1 Extended-Performance (M1 EP) 0W-20 quite a bit, which is unfortunate because the API-SN/SN PLUS version was an excellent oil that was mostly PAO.

You can find the HTFS/VII table and the background behind it here:

HTFSV: High-temperature, full-shear viscosity

It is theorized that the wear for the following engine components depends on these variables among other things: Bearings: high-temperature, high-shear (HTHS) viscosity, TBN/TAN/base-oil oxidation performance (lead and copper corrosion) Piston rings: base-oil viscosity, TBN/TAN/base-oil...

bobistheoilguy.com

..
For the M1 EP 0W-20, are you referring to the new triple action formula as the one that has been thinned down? I ask because I picked up three jugs that do not say triple action formula, yet they have the API-SP specification. Thanks.
..

 

[doublebase]

..
For the M1 EP 0W-20, are you referring to the new triple action formula as the one that has been thinned down? I ask because I picked up three jugs that do not say triple action formula, yet they have the API-SP specification. Thanks.
..

Yes that’s what I believe he means. And I’ll tell you what...I just bought a jug of the triple action formula...I’ll trade you that jug for a jug of the old formula you just bought.

 

[doublebase]

I put a few Mobil 1 API-SP oils into the HTFS/VII calculator. They don't provide HTHS in the PDS, but I can estimate it by adjusting it so that the base-oil viscosity index (BO VI) ~ 135.

That said, most API-SP Mobil 1 oils have a reduced VII content and a higher HTFS viscosity (high-temperature, full-shear viscosity = base-oil + additive-package viscosity at 150 ℃) than their API-SN counterparts. This is a good thing, as less VII results in a cleaner engine, and a higher HTFS results in less engine wear.

There was at least one exception. They increased the VII content and thinned down the base oil in Mobil 1 Extended-Performance (M1 EP) 0W-20 quite a bit, which is unfortunate because the API-SN/SN PLUS version was an excellent oil that was mostly PAO.

You can find the HTFS/VII table and the background behind it here:

HTFSV: High-temperature, full-shear viscosity

It is theorized that the wear for the following engine components depends on these variables among other things: Bearings: high-temperature, high-shear (HTHS) viscosity, TBN/TAN/base-oil oxidation performance (lead and copper corrosion) Piston rings: base-oil viscosity, TBN/TAN/base-oil...

bobistheoilguy.com

Well, that’s bad news for me. I just bought the new Mobil1 EP 0W20 formula, and I intend to run it 10,000 miles. I did mix it with 2 quarts of the old formula I had laying around...perhaps that will help?

Either way, the only thing I really care about with oil, is a clean engine. I assume protection, isnt an issue with my 500 mile weekly highway commute (as the industry standards should handle my use easily). But, I never want my oil control rings to stick. I never want carbon buildup or sludge in those lands, sticking those rings, and leading to excessive oil consumption. I want the cleanest capable oil I can find, and I want it to deliver for 10,000 miles. I don’t have direct injection. Or turbos. Just a Toyota V6, with 108,000 miles...zero issues, zero oil consumption. I want it to stay that way, and I’d like an oil that can easily take that engine to 10,000 miles. Cleanly. Mobil1 EP has been that oil for me, nit sure if it still will be.

 

[OVERKILL]

I'm not surprised by the change to the EP 0W-20 unfortunately. That oil's specs were a carry over from the M1 AP product, as AP 0W-20 became EP 0W-20. It was inevitable that it would be "cost improved".

 

[Deleted member 89374]

@Gokhan there are at least two Mobil 1 API SP product versions: Dexos 1 Gen 2 and Dexos 1 Gen 3. Their marketing is fantastic, calling it the "Tripple Action Formula." from what I can tell, the most significant changes happened when Mobil 1 went to D1G3. Before this change, we had M1 EP 0W-20 that was 2/3rds PAO and other goodies. Now everything is primarily thin group III base oil. Is this a bad thing? No, but probably and realistically, the change in formulation won't affect the average motorist in any tangible way, good or bad. Also, don't forget that there is more to motor oil than the base oil group blended with, and Mobil formulates and tests their lubes accordingly.

 

[travis8352]

There are at least two Mobil 1 API SP product versions: Dexos 1 Gen 2 and Dexos 1 Gen 3. Their marketing is fantastic, calling it the "Tripple Action Formula." from what I can tell, the most significant changes happened when Mobil 1 went to D1G3. Before this change, we had M1 EP 0W-20 that was 2/3rds PAO and other goodies. Now everything is primarily thin group III base oil. Is this a bad thing? No, but probably and realistically, the change in formulation won't affect the average motorist in any tangible way, good or bad. Also, don't forget that there is more to motor oil than the base oil group blended with, and Mobil formulates and tests their lubes accordingly.

Good video of their testing

Also the formula was the same until dexos 1 gen 3 that was the reformulation. It appears to be a good one to. Now we need a VOA

 

[Gokhan]

This is the first time I heard about the "triple-action formula."

The values I used are for the version with API SP and dexos1 Gen 3.

M1 EP 0W-20 SP/dexos1 Gen 3 is still OK to use. The HTFS viscosity decreased by 0.15 cP and VII content increased by 1.75% (hence a higher VI of 181), but that is not too drastic.

M1 AFE 0W-20 SP/dexos1 Gen 3 is more stout in terms of the base-oil (HTFS) viscosity, but you lose the extra antioxidant (AO) and possibly some extra detergent and dispersant.

For longer OCIs, definitely go with M1 EP instead of M1/M1 AFE.

 

[Brian123]

This is the first time I heard about the "triple-action formula."

The values I used are for the version with API SP and dexos1 Gen 3.

M1 EP 0W-20 SP/dexos1 Gen 3 is still OK to use. The HTFS viscosity decreased by 0.15 cP and VII content increased by 1.75% (hence a higher VI of 181), but that is not too drastic.

M1 AFE 0W-20 SP/dexos1 Gen 3 is more stout in terms of the base-oil (HTFS) viscosity, but you lose the extra antioxidant (AO) and possibly some extra detergent and dispersant.

For longer OCIs, definitely go with M1 EP instead of M1/M1 AFE.

What about Mobil 1 ESP?

 

[travis8352]

What about Mobil 1 ESP?
i have not seen ESP in API SP in the wild yet. I dont believe they will say "triple action formula"

 

[CoachRoss07]

Also the formula was the same until dexos 1 gen 3 that was the reformulation. It appears to be a good one to. Now we need a VOA

I just posted a 3 day old vid of this oil (5w30) being tested in the VOA section. This oil has been sent off with 4 others for VOA. It will be intresting to see to say the least.

 

[travis8352]

I just posted a 3 day old vid of this oil (5w30) being tested in the VOA section. This oil has been sent off with 4 others for VOA. It will be intresting to see to say the least.

Thank you!

 

[ChrisD46]

Great Post ! For my Hyundai 2.4L GDI (non turbo) , the Valvoline Advanced 10W30 would be especially friendly to a GDI engine ; the Pennzoil Platinum 10W30 is also a good looking GDI oil (based on your table) if your winter temps allow . If I was concerned I might be seeing a fair amount of temps in the single digits - I might substitute 1 qrt. of same brand 5W30 in the oil sump .

 

[chris719]

So, if you look at the updated M1 FS 0W-40 SP and ESP X3 0W-40, you see some pretty high VI numbers. Not that it's a surprise a 0W-40 would have high VI, but the ESP X3 in particular has a VI of 204. If you plug the numbers into Gokhan's spreadsheet you get a somewhat low HTFS, dipping near some 5W-20s and below ESP 0W-30 and 5W-30. The oil has an HTHS of 3.8 but with a higher KV100 of 14.1. I am wondering what the point of formulating an oil like this is. If the high VI is for intentional temporary shear to increase fuel economy, then why not just go thinner in the first place? I am presuming Mobil doesn't have magic VM here.

I guess it boils down to if there is a place where the higher HTHS is still beneficial knowing that under even more extreme conditions the oil will behave like something thinner. There's a number of papers that describe typical journal bearings having shear rates in the 10^5 to x*10^6 range, which seems to indicate HTHS is a good predictor. So, is that the point of this design? We know that in reality that the bearings sometimes enter mixed or boundary lubrication. Does this higher HTHS oil stay robust where it's actually needed?

 

[Deleted member 89374]

So, if you look at the updated M1 FS 0W-40 SP and ESP X3 0W-40, you see some pretty high VI numbers. Not that it's a surprise a 0W-40 would have high VI, but the ESP X3 in particular has a VI of 204. If you plug the numbers into Gokhan's spreadsheet you get a somewhat low HTFS, dipping near some 5W-20s and below ESP 0W-30 and 5W-30. The oil has an HTHS of 3.8 but with a higher KV100 of 14.1. I am wondering what the point of formulating an oil like this is. If the high VI is for intentional temporary shear to increase fuel economy, then why not just go thinner in the first place? I am presuming Mobil doesn't have magic VM here.

I guess it boils down to if there is a place where the higher HTHS is still beneficial knowing that under even more extreme conditions the oil will behave like something thinner. There's a number of papers that describe typical journal bearings having shear rates in the 10^5 to x*10^6 range, which seems to indicate HTHS is a good predictor. So, is that the point of this design? We know that in reality that the bearings sometimes enter mixed or boundary lubrication. Does this higher HTHS oil stay robust where it's actually needed?

What's the ASTM test for High Temperature Full Shear?

 

[buster]

So, if you look at the updated M1 FS 0W-40 SP and ESP X3 0W-40, you see some pretty high VI numbers. Not that it's a surprise a 0W-40 would have high VI, but the ESP X3 in particular has a VI of 204. If you plug the numbers into Gokhan's spreadsheet you get a somewhat low HTFS, dipping near some 5W-20s and below ESP 0W-30 and 5W-30. The oil has an HTHS of 3.8 but with a higher KV100 of 14.1. I am wondering what the point of formulating an oil like this is. If the high VI is for intentional temporary shear to increase fuel economy, then why not just go thinner in the first place? I am presuming Mobil doesn't have magic VM here.

I guess it boils down to if there is a place where the higher HTHS is still beneficial knowing that under even more extreme conditions the oil will behave like something thinner. There's a number of papers that describe typical journal bearings having shear rates in the 10^5 to x*10^6 range, which seems to indicate HTHS is a good predictor. So, is that the point of this design? We know that in reality that the bearings sometimes enter mixed or boundary lubrication. Does this higher HTHS oil stay robust where it's actually needed?

I'm not sure either. Same came be said for their 0w30 and 0w50 racing oils. Their 0w30 Racing oil is PAO based, with a HT/HS of 3.0 and the 0w50 only 3.9 with a VI of 202. My thinking is this is intentional by design, by why? More power? It's not hard to make a shear stable oil. Use less VII or a very shear stable VM. They do that with their V-Twin MC oil. So I'm curious to what their thinking is here.

On another note, the EP and other Triple Action grades they appear to be using less VII's.

 

[Shel_B]

Never mind, old thread

 

[chris719]

What's the ASTM test for High Temperature Full Shear?

It doesn’t really matter that this term is invented by someone here. The overall question remains the same. Are you ever interested in discussion or learning or just a perpetual smart-ass looking to flex about your superior oil knowledge and love of Mobil 1?

 

[Deleted member 89374]

It doesn’t really matter that this term is invented by someone here. The overall question remains the same. Are you ever interested in discussion or learning or just a perpetual smart-ass looking to flex about your superior oil knowledge and love of Mobil 1?

The concept of HTFS, including the intricate "calculations", is not merely a coined term, but an entirely novel creation, all thanks to @Gokhan's astute mind. Although, there are instances when his intelligence appears to collide with the complexity of certain realities.

For instance, consider that certain motor oils manufactured by EvoSyn and HPL, quite literally, confound @Gokhan's calculator. That's because for such lubricants, the calculator shows negative VII values while showing HTFS in the neighborhood of 7~8. Maybe you could reach out to @Gokhan and have him fix it.

Let's talk about Mobil 1, which is widely regarded as the premier consumer lubricant. It's not just common knowledge, it's a well-supported fact. ExxonMobil's unwavering commitment to research and development, to the tune of $1 billion annually, is a testament to their pursuit of excellence. Of course, their R&D efforts are not limited to lubricants, they innovate across a broad spectrum, creating novel chemicals for diverse applications.

ExxonMobil is unparalleled in their devotion to exhaustive lubricant testing on actual vehicles. Their rigorous testing protocols are not merely routine procedures. Rather, they reflect a strategic intention to uphold their superior market position.

I believe it's worth appreciating the intention and effort behind ExxonMobil's exhaustive research and comprehensive product testing. Their commitment to maintaining their top-ranking market position underscores the dedication that drives their ongoing success.

There is literally nothing preventing you from acquiring the necessary knowledge so you can become as well informed as I am.

 

[SavetheRimBrake]

From my limited time here, I just see a lot of hubbub about issues that we don't really know that matter, and this place seems like a bit of an echo chamber for people who think they know the REAL truth, and big automotive and big oil are just out to get everyone with cars that don't last and oils that are designed to destroy engines. And of course there are plenty of vendors who will happily make this chamber their market, by selling cures to diseases people have made up based on theory and not any actual evidence.