I just sent a sample of the Trisyn SJ formula in to be analyzed. I am currently running its Supersyn counterpart, and will analyze that when it hits 5K. Then we'll know more.quote:
Originally posted by Al:
I've also contacted Mobil and they indicated that they use no Group III. But again, ,we really don't know how good the new stuff is. Obviously the first the guy with 'proof' has a hard-on for Mobil. Time will tell. I hav no loyalties to any oil. I think like most here we want the oil which give us the best numbers.
Leave it to old Bob to stir up the pot.
MOBIL 1 is NOT SYNTHETIC - I FOUND PROOF!!!
- Thread starter BOBISTHEOILGUY
- Start date
- Status
Ok dbrowne, get into that car/truck, crank it up and get going!
I started it, You can finish it, right here and right now. BTW, You have 1 wk to go that distance. that'd put that oil to good use don't ya think.
It all comes down to, you get what you paid for (I'll expect some to agree to disagree here) FWIW, most formula 1 cars use Mobil 1 almost exclusively, as do road racing vehicles (24hr LeMans, Nurnburg Ring). F1 cars operate in the 16k-17k rpm range on a regular basis,that says quite a bit. I dont remember how many websites I've visited that state they use Mobil 1 in their cars and after tearing them down after 100,000 to 200,000 miles or MORE and they were amazed at what they had seen: internal engine components that met new specs.
And you really believe they are running the new supersyn oil in those race cars?
ColdFusion
Yes but its trendy to badmouth M1 as everybody did when Trisyn was released. It's like bagging MicroSoft and people forget what computing was before them. Forget M1, do a web search on Delvac 1 and that will really open your eyes on who/what/where it's being used. M1 on steroids and a bloody big dose at that!
Yes but its trendy to badmouth M1 as everybody did when Trisyn was released. It's like bagging MicroSoft and people forget what computing was before them. Forget M1, do a web search on Delvac 1 and that will really open your eyes on who/what/where it's being used. M1 on steroids and a bloody big dose at that!
Patman
Staff member
Anyone that is doing a back to back test of TriSynth vs SuperSyn, I hope you drive your cars hard! This is the true test. If you drive all highway and cruise along at light throttle, all oils will show similar results. But push it hard, and shear it back so it's relying on the barrier protection, and we'll know which works best. I know I picked a suitable test vehicle for my test, my wife's
2000 Civic, as she drives it hard, plus when I drive it I floor it everywhere since the car is so slow.
The ideal test would've been for me to run it in my Firebird during the dragrace season. But I got more interested in testing Maxlife vs Schaeffers.
I also hope those that are testing TriSynth vs SuperSyn are doing at least 5k on each interval, or more. I think I'm also going to use my mom's 94 Probe GT as a test bed. She's running SJ TriSynth right now, and I'll change that out in the fall and go with SuperSyn. She doesn't drive hard at all though, so it might not show much of a difference. That car never sees full throttle unless I drive it.
2000 Civic, as she drives it hard, plus when I drive it I floor it everywhere since the car is so slow.
The ideal test would've been for me to run it in my Firebird during the dragrace season. But I got more interested in testing Maxlife vs Schaeffers.
I also hope those that are testing TriSynth vs SuperSyn are doing at least 5k on each interval, or more. I think I'm also going to use my mom's 94 Probe GT as a test bed. She's running SJ TriSynth right now, and I'll change that out in the fall and go with SuperSyn. She doesn't drive hard at all though, so it might not show much of a difference. That car never sees full throttle unless I drive it.
Patman-
My car is about as nasty a test bed as one can find. It's a 20 valve I-4 with a turbocharger modified to run at the lunatic fringe of its compressor map, with some other mods as well. The car is driven over 100 miles a day on the highway commuting (not that hard on it, but those merges and passes at 16 psi of boost add up) and flogged around town quite a bit too.
Coldfusion-
I firmly believe that CART and F1 teams do, in fact, use off the shelf M1 products. I also firmly believe that they could use radioactive goat piss instead, and it wouldn't make a **** bit of difference, because those engines get babied and rebuilt after every race anyway. Choosing an oil for your personal vehicle based on what a F1 team uses is not a good way to go. Unless, of course, you rebuild your engine every week. It's just not a good comparison.
My car is about as nasty a test bed as one can find. It's a 20 valve I-4 with a turbocharger modified to run at the lunatic fringe of its compressor map, with some other mods as well. The car is driven over 100 miles a day on the highway commuting (not that hard on it, but those merges and passes at 16 psi of boost add up) and flogged around town quite a bit too.
Coldfusion-
I firmly believe that CART and F1 teams do, in fact, use off the shelf M1 products. I also firmly believe that they could use radioactive goat piss instead, and it wouldn't make a **** bit of difference, because those engines get babied and rebuilt after every race anyway. Choosing an oil for your personal vehicle based on what a F1 team uses is not a good way to go. Unless, of course, you rebuild your engine every week. It's just not a good comparison.
I don't know enough about it to pinpoint the cause of it, but a lot of synthetic oils have had rising pour points. Amsoils used to be much lower too.
I don't think it is critical though and I don't think this guy know what he is talking about.
Red Line oil only has a pour point of -45. So are they group III too? I seriously doubt it.
Some slightly flawed logic going on here.
I don't think it is critical though and I don't think this guy know what he is talking about.
Red Line oil only has a pour point of -45. So are they group III too? I seriously doubt it.
Some slightly flawed logic going on here.
MolaKule
Staff member
A paper from LE of November 2000 makes comparisons about various esters and the lengths of the molecular "chains."
They found that the better esters (meaning ester with lower coefficients of friction) had longer chain lengths.
So how does this relate to the discussion?
"The longer chain forms a better surface protecting film and allows for a lower coefficient of friction.... longer chain lengths ALSO INCREASE the POUR POINT."
They found that the better esters (meaning ester with lower coefficients of friction) had longer chain lengths.
So how does this relate to the discussion?
"The longer chain forms a better surface protecting film and allows for a lower coefficient of friction.... longer chain lengths ALSO INCREASE the POUR POINT."
Patman
Staff member
That's true! I remember when I first started using synthetic oils in the late 80s, a lot of them had pour points of -70F or lower, and had flash points of close to (if not more than) 500F!! What was it about these synthetics that made their specs so much different?
Yes, they use off the shelf products, and YES, the fact that they rebuild every race DOES matter. The fact that they rebuild every race suggests that the type of oil that they use really doesn't matter all that much, and it really doesn't have to perform all that well. On the other hand, Mobil supposedly used IRL or CART, along with top fuel dragsters, to test Supersyn long before we got it.quote:
Originally posted by ColdFusion:
Such negativity, all because ONE person defended Mobil 1....very interesting indeed. As a side note I must mention that rebuilding F1 engines every race (and especially using goat piss) has nothing to do with the type of oil you use(they rebuild them regardless of oil used). It's how that particular oil performs while in the engine that counts. Does F1 use Mobil 1 that we use? Yes. And Redline? Yes.
I'm not putting down M1...I've used it exclusively for years. I'm just saying that use by racing teams does not translate well to performance in a street car. The teams also get PAID to use and advertise their use of the oil, and Exxon-Mobil has very deep pockets.
[ July 22, 2002, 01:36 PM: Message edited by: dbrowne1 ]
Okay, to the person who posted that F1 teams use the same Mobil 1 that is on our shelf-RIGHT! You're kidding right?!
First off, ALL F1 teams use a fuel and motor oil combination that is so secretive and advanced that NO ONE, except those in the know, will know what the composition is of their oil and fuel. Also, in qualifying, many F 3000 teams use a 0W-5 oil in their engines. Thers no telling what an F1 team uses.
Also, the FIA has NO rules similar to the IRL or CART concerning the oil that they use. Every team's oil and fuel supplier uses a special and specific composition for their engines-and not something off the shelf! Do you really think that they would use an off the shelf motor oil in a 1 million dollar engine? These engines produce WELL over 800hp and run in excess of 18,000rpms. Some teams are even thought to run @ 20,000rpms! They use titanium gearboxes, exotic alloyes in their engines, etc.
Although the McLaren Mercedes team DOES employ ExxonMobil (or should I say EssoMobil? same difference)to develop and supply them their motor oil and fuel.
Lastly, if these teams are using motor oil that are bought over the counter then, how could their engine, not to mention the motor oil itself, last 1 second at at temps. over 600 degrees celsius? Answer: The motor oil they are using is something that we will never be able to afford or use in our cars and is only Mobil 1 in name only. Its called MARKETING!
First off, ALL F1 teams use a fuel and motor oil combination that is so secretive and advanced that NO ONE, except those in the know, will know what the composition is of their oil and fuel. Also, in qualifying, many F 3000 teams use a 0W-5 oil in their engines. Thers no telling what an F1 team uses.
Also, the FIA has NO rules similar to the IRL or CART concerning the oil that they use. Every team's oil and fuel supplier uses a special and specific composition for their engines-and not something off the shelf! Do you really think that they would use an off the shelf motor oil in a 1 million dollar engine? These engines produce WELL over 800hp and run in excess of 18,000rpms. Some teams are even thought to run @ 20,000rpms! They use titanium gearboxes, exotic alloyes in their engines, etc.
Although the McLaren Mercedes team DOES employ ExxonMobil (or should I say EssoMobil? same difference)to develop and supply them their motor oil and fuel.
Lastly, if these teams are using motor oil that are bought over the counter then, how could their engine, not to mention the motor oil itself, last 1 second at at temps. over 600 degrees celsius? Answer: The motor oil they are using is something that we will never be able to afford or use in our cars and is only Mobil 1 in name only. Its called MARKETING!
MolaKule
Staff member
Chris J is correct.
Most of the formulations are custom and proprietary. As I have stated before, many qualifying runs are done with a low viscosity formulation with a brand name bottle of oil, and then a high viscosity custom formulation is run for the main race.
Anyone can put any oil company sticker they want a race car, especially if the advertiser is supporting the racers. Think of it as Rental Space, similar to what you see on inner city busses.
Most of the formulations are custom and proprietary. As I have stated before, many qualifying runs are done with a low viscosity formulation with a brand name bottle of oil, and then a high viscosity custom formulation is run for the main race.
Anyone can put any oil company sticker they want a race car, especially if the advertiser is supporting the racers. Think of it as Rental Space, similar to what you see on inner city busses.
As was said before, I don't believe that his anecdotal evidence is anything near proof of Mobil 1's use of a mineral base. I still believe that Mobil 1 is all Group IV & V with a trace of mineral "carrier" oil. It's their marginal barrier protection (dating back years) that I have trouble with.
I think jjbula's theory/explanation is best. Mobil 1 may be substituting a higher-viscosty fluid composition for an EPA-friendly (read: scant/marginal) barrier package.
I think the way Mobil 1 SuperSyn is currently being marketed is in response to MANY complaints that users have experienced significant wear while using their Tri-Syn.
Cold Fusion: "... most Formula 1 cars use Mobil 1 almost exclusively, as do road racing vehicles (24hr LeMans, Nurnburg Ring). F1 cars operate in the 16k-17k rpm range on a regular basis,that says quite a bit."
It's obvious that Mobil wants consumers to THINK this way but I've only known of a few examples where serious race teams use off-the-shelf Mobil 1 and one was Indy cars where the engine power and development are strictly limited. If you look on the back of 15W50 SuperSyn, it says suitable for use in "amateur" racing. The examples you cite are professionals, and ceratinaly NOT amateurs. This only makes sense as a REAL racing oil should not have high levels of detergents, anti-corrosives, pour-point depressants, etc ... Racing lubricants need to be formulated differently ... and I would not take a team seriously if I knew they used some off-the-shelf product when much better alternatives exist.
My most recent visit to Limerock Park raceway showed about 90% of the competitiors (SCCA Trans-Am & Speed World Challenge ... professional racers) that advertised an oil choice used Red Line Oil. This is what one expects of racers.
I DID hear Ron Dennis of MacLaren comment on Mobil, however. He said it was a great company which was very helpful to him ... which is what one would expect when you figure he gets dozens of millions of dollars from them every year. But he never once mentioned or even implied that he used off-the-shelf Mobil 1 in their F-1 cars.
"I dont remember how many websites I've visited that state they use Mobil 1 in their cars and after tearing them down after 100,000 to 200,000 miles or MORE and they were amazed at what they had seen: internal engine components that met new specs."
That's odd. Mobil 1 couldn't even prevent my Honda Civic from developing piston-slap (piston skirt wear) for 70,000 miles.
The only example I know of which cites the results you mentioned ... is Mobil's own million dollar advertising campaign.
Sorry Cold Fusion, but your posts fail to assuage my skepticism.
I think jjbula's theory/explanation is best. Mobil 1 may be substituting a higher-viscosty fluid composition for an EPA-friendly (read: scant/marginal) barrier package.
I think the way Mobil 1 SuperSyn is currently being marketed is in response to MANY complaints that users have experienced significant wear while using their Tri-Syn.
Cold Fusion: "... most Formula 1 cars use Mobil 1 almost exclusively, as do road racing vehicles (24hr LeMans, Nurnburg Ring). F1 cars operate in the 16k-17k rpm range on a regular basis,that says quite a bit."
It's obvious that Mobil wants consumers to THINK this way but I've only known of a few examples where serious race teams use off-the-shelf Mobil 1 and one was Indy cars where the engine power and development are strictly limited. If you look on the back of 15W50 SuperSyn, it says suitable for use in "amateur" racing. The examples you cite are professionals, and ceratinaly NOT amateurs. This only makes sense as a REAL racing oil should not have high levels of detergents, anti-corrosives, pour-point depressants, etc ... Racing lubricants need to be formulated differently ... and I would not take a team seriously if I knew they used some off-the-shelf product when much better alternatives exist.
My most recent visit to Limerock Park raceway showed about 90% of the competitiors (SCCA Trans-Am & Speed World Challenge ... professional racers) that advertised an oil choice used Red Line Oil. This is what one expects of racers.
I DID hear Ron Dennis of MacLaren comment on Mobil, however. He said it was a great company which was very helpful to him ... which is what one would expect when you figure he gets dozens of millions of dollars from them every year. But he never once mentioned or even implied that he used off-the-shelf Mobil 1 in their F-1 cars.
"I dont remember how many websites I've visited that state they use Mobil 1 in their cars and after tearing them down after 100,000 to 200,000 miles or MORE and they were amazed at what they had seen: internal engine components that met new specs."
That's odd. Mobil 1 couldn't even prevent my Honda Civic from developing piston-slap (piston skirt wear) for 70,000 miles.
The only example I know of which cites the results you mentioned ... is Mobil's own million dollar advertising campaign.
Sorry Cold Fusion, but your posts fail to assuage my skepticism.
MolaKule
Staff member
Patman, "That's true! I remember when I first started using synthetic oils in the late 80s, a lot of them had pour points of -70F or lower, and had flash points of close to (if not more than) 500F!! What was it about these synthetics that made their specs so much different?"
If you see my post just before yours, the implication is that better esters are used, and these improved esters have longer chain lengths, which raise the pour point. The same is true about PAO's. The newly designed PAO's have higher oxidation resistance, wider VI, and lower coefficients of friction, through longer molecular chains, which raise their pour points.
But let's look at reality, except for operations in the Arctic and Antarctic, where would you need such a low pour point as -70 F?
If you see my post just before yours, the implication is that better esters are used, and these improved esters have longer chain lengths, which raise the pour point. The same is true about PAO's. The newly designed PAO's have higher oxidation resistance, wider VI, and lower coefficients of friction, through longer molecular chains, which raise their pour points.
But let's look at reality, except for operations in the Arctic and Antarctic, where would you need such a low pour point as -70 F?
Patman
Staff member
I agree, I'd never need a pour point that low, however if I had one oil with a -70F pour point, compared to another oil with a -40F pour point, the first oil should flow better when it's 0F outside, protecting me better in the winter. It's sort of like how I have Z rated tires on my car, when a V rated tire (good to 150mph) is already supposedly overkill for the type of day to day driving I do. Having that extra margin is just nice to have.
I'm not here to defend Mobil, but I have an SAE report (951026) in my hand that indicates that the '93 Indy Winner used the Mobil 1 15W-50 API/SG/CD with .11% Phos Level. The post race teardown indicated that there was very little wear on the engine and that it could have gone another 500 miles.
Patman
Staff member
I'm curious as to why they would use a multigrade oil like that 15w50 at all? That just doesn't make sense when they could use a much better single weight oil that would provide them with better protection.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Article