Mobil 1: Noiser Engine = More Wear or Just More Annoying?

[1sttruck]

"Some fluids are better at dampening noise than others. I just don't believe it has anything to do with which is a better lubricant..."

Everything else being equal less noise probably does suggest less wear and tear. In the case say 5W30 oils, dino vs Mobil 1, I guess you're relying on the higher film strength of the base oil if the additives are about the same. A thicker Mobil 1 with similar additives will tend to be quieter and will probably produce less wear. The issue wasn't just more noise, it was also more Fe, another symptom that needs to be explained away. Note that Delvac 1 seems to consistently get remarks about how quiet it is, and it also consistently good reports on not only good UOAs but wear too.

 

[kcryan]

Well to comment on the M1 being on the thin side, the new GF-4 M1 5w-30 NON EP is there thickest 30wt once your upto opperating temps.

But its my opinion that noise has nothing to do with wear.

I believe that this question is in the M1 FAQ's on there website too.

 

[Blue99]

quote:

---

Originally posted by goodvibes:

I agree with both the wear/noise statement and that M1 can be noisey regardless of weight in the right motor.

---

And I agree with Goodvibes, as the "noise" appears to be more of an issue of fluid properties associated with PAO than any mechanical contact such as knocking or scuffing that would generate wear.

As we have discussed in the past, PAO's have a tendency to transmit more engine sounds than dino's.

Whether it is an issue of fluid compressibility or the more uniform molecular size of the PAO hydrocarbon chains - I don't have a good answer.

What I did prove to myself is that a thicker PAO viscosity, specifically M1 5W-40 TSUV, did little to minimize the cold start knock in my GM 5.3L Vortec engine.

 

[Big O Dave]

So, the general consensus (with a few exceptions) is that M1 is indeed somehow related to increased noise in an engine.

The debate, then, is over whether or not that noise is related to increased wear.

 

[Bryanccfshr]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Big O Dave:
So, the general consensus (with a few exceptions) is that M1 is indeed somehow related to increased noise in an engine.

The debate, then, is over whether or not that noise is related to increased wear.

---

Exactly.
More specificly it is engine specific. Some engines do not have an extreme sensitivity to very minor viscosity change while others will go into fits over a drop in 1cst@ 100°c.

Well maybe the drivers of these cars are also ery sensitive. to theis.

 

[ex_MGB]

Whether it is an issue of fluid compressibility or the more uniform molecular size of the PAO hydrocarbon chains - I don't have a good answer.

Well, be that as it may, the situation at hand remains that in a given engine IF M1 produces more sound and IF M1 produces less wear, then it stands to reason that energy rather than being absorbed by wear and frictional loss is being converted into sound.

To carry this theme a step further, one could have relatively greater component wear with a different lubricant in an engine and greater resultant vibrational energy released. However, this additional vibrational energy may be in a range either above or below what the human ear can detect.

Thus M1 "sounds" greater because its vibrational energy release is in a range detected by the human ear.

[ June 24, 2005, 03:12 AM: Message edited by: ex_MGB ]

 

[RavenTai]

Fe has always been good in my reports with M1, lower than average. PB on the other hand

. Has anybody actually compiled data from a lot of UOA's and found higher iron? Or is this just from a few UOA's?

M1 15w-50 made my engine almost silent. Also was my best UOA, but the motor felt like it had less power. Been working with the different 40wt M1’s, about right for my current climate.

Blue99, I tried a lot of things including oils to try to reduce my cold start knock on my 8.1 Vortec, what finally worked was selling the truck.

It is a manufacturer defect that they will not own up to nor fix under warranty

It can turn from “cold start knock” into “knocks all the time” and burns >1 quart per 1000 miles at the young age of 65,000 miles.

 

[Flimflam]

quote:

---

Originally posted by jsharp:
I don't buy into the "increased noise = increased wear" statement anymore than the opposite. You could pack an engine with heavy grease or some type of foam and have it be very quiet - right up until it seized from inadequate lubrication.

I was using M1 15W-50 in air cooled motorcycle engines in the early 80's. One thing I noticed then was that without exception, every one I tried it in had more noise than the common 10W-40 or 20w-50 dino oils used at the time.

I really doubt it was showing increased wear vs. the dino oils of the day. Quite the opposite in fact. In one case I know of in highly tuned Honda 400 4 cylinder engines you could almost bet on having trashed bottom ends in a few weekends of endurance racing, yet the same engines would run all season using M1 with no problems.

Some fluids are better at dampening noise than others. I just don't believe it has anything to do with which is a better lubricant...

---

jsharp, another CB 400 F fan!!! I feel I just have to weigh in with my 2 cents' worth.

My 1976 CB 400 F is still running happily now, handed down to my Buddy. Never had the heads off since new.

It's always had Castrol GTX 20w-50 or Castrol HD-30.

I cannot say whether Mobil 1 20w-50 would have worked. but I can tell you this: My mechanic, also a CB 400 F fan from way back, has seen quite a few motors come apart (from all the Big 4 Japanese manufacturers) because of Mobil 1. Granted, it was Early Mobil 1. To this day, he still won't touch Mobil 1, even though everybody tells him new Mobil 1 is much improved from the old Mobil 1.

 

[TooSlick]

These oils folks are comparing are very similar in terms of high temp/high shear viscosity.

Obviously you can dampen noise with a much more viscous fluid - that's trivial - but that's not what's going on in this case. Mobil 1 is a PAO based fluid, just like GC/0w-30, RL, Royal Purple, Delvac 1 and Amsoil. I've seen very few complaints (if any) about these other formulations with regards to NVH levels.

I agree with 1sttruck, who works as a plant engineer of some kind and has no doubt run into this situation with equipment running 24/7....

Ted

 

[goodvibes]

Exactly, and dinos and RP are more shear prone yet may be quieter the entire OCI. ex_MGB, other than air movement, I doubt there if much energy above 15khz in a rotating motor that isn't showing abnormal wear and if you've experienced what we're talking about, it's not low freq. energy. Maybe an odd harmonic but above 15k would have a difficult time carrying through the heavy block and would constitute a very small % of sound. That said, maybe the AN in M1 improves the high frequency energy transfer and makes the audible noise more distinctive but that's pure conjecture. If you look at the M1's make up, there isn't much apperantly unique about it except for that solvency component.

[ June 24, 2005, 08:45 AM: Message edited by: goodvibes ]

 

[Mike_dup1]

quote:

---

So, the general consensus (with a few exceptions) is that M1 is indeed somehow related to increased noise in an engine.

---

If this were true, then every single engine would exhibit noise with the oil, not just yours. Yet you have respones from those that say its not so with thiers, mine niether. If you don't agree then consider that the oil must be very smart in order to make noise in your engine while not doing it in other engines? I think there is either a flaw in you engine or you are hearing a common engine operating noise. If the noise turns out to be a flaw, using a oil that hides the noise will not cure the flaw. Just because it does not make noise anymore, does not mean there is no longer a problem. My guess is that the noise you hear is just a common operating characteristic that you never noticed before and are more aware of things due to being aprrehensive on synthetic oils.

I have experience with a customer who complained about a engine tick in his newer truck after going to synthetic. He was irate, and getting really wound up about it. So he takes to the Chevy dealer, they can't hear any noise, goes to another dealer, they don't hear any noise. All he may have heard was a rock in one of this tires or a slight exhasut leak. Yet he is adament, a noise started after going to synthetic oil. In his 55 years he never used synthetic oil before and he is constanly fooling with his truck looking for problems to blame on the oil. According to him, all the GM dealers are lieing to him. I have listened to his engine and there is nothing more than normal operating noise but he won't accept that, no way, no how.

btw
My CTS came with Mobil 1 in it from the GM Assembly plant, now has aprroximately 2600 miles and it so quite I can hardly hear to 3.6L engine idling. I have darned near hit the starter thinking it was not even running, good thing it has a tach or I might never know. LOL

[ June 24, 2005, 09:15 AM: Message edited by: Mike ]

 

[goodvibes]

I've got 2 cars. One shows more noise with M1 and one doesn't. Some folks have experienced more noise with GC and Red Line also but it's just more common with M1. In a lot of motors it exists, is probably not related to Visc. and wear nor reflects on the quality of M1. We're just wondering were it comes from. I would think that a luxury vehicle would never actually get LOUD regardless of oil choice.

 

[NewGuy]

Let me add my experiences with M1 to this discussion.

1998 Honda Accord EX - 80K+ miles with M1 and no problems to mention. Sold it to my brother and it continues to get M1.

1998 Ford Expedition 5.4L - Have used M1 once and ran it with no problems for 6K miles. Plan to switch back soon.

2005 Chevy Tahoe - M1 10W30 - Ran great for 4K miles, but began to experience valve train noise after engine was hot and put under a full load (pulling trailer up some small hills). Castrol GTX, Syntec and Havoline give no noise under similar conditions and even warmer temperatures.

I do believe that M1 leads to more noise in some engines....especially GM V-8s....under some conditions. BITOG has several members on both sides of this issue (some using M1 in GM V-8s with no problems). I personally don't believe that my engine has problems as it works fine with other products. It also ran very smooth with the M1 for over 4K miles. I would like to try a M1 product for my car if I could find one a bit thicker.

As to whether or not something related to the noise leads to higher Fe numbers.......that remains to be seen, but the post from TooSlick makes sense to me.

Good discussion on this thread. There are some strong, well constructed points of view on this issue. If only people could talk politics so rationally

 

[jsharp]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Flimflam:

quote:

---

Originally posted by jsharp:
I don't buy into the "increased noise = increased wear" statement anymore than the opposite. You could pack an engine with heavy grease or some type of foam and have it be very quiet - right up until it seized from inadequate lubrication.

I was using M1 15W-50 in air cooled motorcycle engines in the early 80's. One thing I noticed then was that without exception, every one I tried it in had more noise than the common 10W-40 or 20w-50 dino oils used at the time.

I really doubt it was showing increased wear vs. the dino oils of the day. Quite the opposite in fact. In one case I know of in highly tuned Honda 400 4 cylinder engines you could almost bet on having trashed bottom ends in a few weekends of endurance racing, yet the same engines would run all season using M1 with no problems.

Some fluids are better at dampening noise than others. I just don't believe it has anything to do with which is a better lubricant...

---

jsharp, another CB 400 F fan!!! I feel I just have to weigh in with my 2 cents' worth.

My 1976 CB 400 F is still running happily now, handed down to my Buddy. Never had the heads off since new.

It's always had Castrol GTX 20w-50 or Castrol HD-30.

I cannot say whether Mobil 1 20w-50 would have worked. but I can tell you this: My mechanic, also a CB 400 F fan from way back, has seen quite a few motors come apart (from all the Big 4 Japanese manufacturers) because of Mobil 1. Granted, it was Early Mobil 1. To this day, he still won't touch Mobil 1, even though everybody tells him new Mobil 1 is much improved from the old Mobil 1.

---

They were interesting bikes and I liked them but I never owned one. The trouble with them was the same as a lot of other Honda designs of the time. You had to spin the engine into the stratosphere to get enough power out of them to make them competitive with the RD-350 and RD-400 Yamaha 2 cycles that were 50+ pounds lighter and handled better.

The bottom ends were just not strong enough to stand long term running at 11,000 or 12,000 RPM or more. Better rods, a better oil pump, and better lubricants would make them last well enough for the guys running them.

Me, I raced 2 stokes because I was cheap and lazy...

 

[Eddie]

Loose (sloppy tolerance) engines probably need heavy oil for quit running. My Subaru is a quit renning engine on Mobil 1 5w 0r 1030 makes no difference.

 

[goodvibes]

As stated before, it's not weight related and my Toyota 2ZZ is a tight motor that shows the added noise. That same motor is quiter with a havoline redline mix than anything else I've tried, (havn't run straight Redline) to the point that freinds have noticed without solicitation. Different oils have differing noise levels in various motors.

[ June 24, 2005, 10:24 AM: Message edited by: goodvibes ]

 

[T-Keith]

The old Iron dukes(pontiac 2.5) were very loud all the time, but they run forever. I don't think noise always coorilates to wear.

-T

 

[1sttruck]

"You had to spin the engine into the stratosphere to get enough power out of them to make them competitive with the RD-350 and RD-400 Yamaha 2 cycles that were 50+ pounds lighter and handled better.

The bottom ends were just not strong enough to stand long term running at 11,000 or 12,000 RPM or more. Better rods, a better oil pump, and better lubricants would make them last well enough for the guys running them."

I put over 62k miles on an RD400; short sport bars, better shocks, shaved seat, Bassini pipes, RD350 pistons, and lots of fun. It really needed to be water cooled for extended runs in hot weather though, unless it was jetted rich enough to not run well in any other condition. Way back then I had come to the conclusion that Honda had too large of an engineering department, as it seemed that they would design their bikes to be just strong enough for hard average use, but no more. For instance the plain bearing lower ends didn't take large HP increases, unlike the roller cranks in the other bikes, where stock cranks in some bikes were used at 2x and more power.

My '65 Honda 250 Scrambler was the slowest 250 at school, but at the end of the year the only one still running :^)

 

[tweeker43]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eddie:
Loose (sloppy tolerance) engines probably need heavy oil for quit running. My Subaru is a quit renning engine on Mobil 1 5w 0r 1030 makes no difference.

---

my subaru (2.5rs) sounds like a diesel with m1, but is substantially quieter with pennzoil dino.

not that substantially quieter is all that quiet

 

[Big O Dave]

How long would a CB400 run at 12,000 rpm with M1 5W-30 in it?

By answering this question, we'll bring the CB400 discussion right onto topic.

BTW, I love those old small fours of Honda's.