Mobil 1 Triple Action 5w30 EP VOA
- Thread starter buster
- Start date
The HM version & Non HM EP version both meet SP spec so... Which one? lol
Non HM. I would have put that if it was HM.
I got it from here:
TESTING: Valvoline EP, Mobil 1 EP, LiquidMoly Moly Gen, Castrol Magnatec, Castrol Edge EP VOAs (Blackstone)
I know VOAs only tell half of the story but this will be intresting to watch none the least. Curious myself about this new "triple action formula" from mobil. He just sent these off a few days ago. I will also post his vid once he receives them back from Blackstone. Just thought some of you...
bobistheoilguy.com
Thanks, Sometimes I need to be talked to like I'm 10 to fully understand.Non HM. I would have put that if it was HM.
I got it from here:
TESTING: Valvoline EP, Mobil 1 EP, LiquidMoly Moly Gen, Castrol Magnatec, Castrol Edge EP VOAs (Blackstone)
I know VOAs only tell half of the story but this will be intresting to watch none the least. Curious myself about this new "triple action formula" from mobil. He just sent these off a few days ago. I will also post his vid once he receives them back from Blackstone. Just thought some of you...bobistheoilguy.com
This oil is Mobil's best Full Synthetic, that's why I run it in my mower lol.
This oils low add pack is something I suppose we should not always look at. It does beg to question of some botique oils that are FS but come with a healthy dose of additives also adds to confusion. Perhaps the lower add pack is there to "meet specs" but still allow long run.
D
Deleted member 89374
That VOA has an almost “Mobil Annual Protection” look to it.
Just saying……..
Just saying……..
AP had more calcium about 1000 ppm total
D
Deleted member 89374
Based on what exactly?
1 iron and 1 tin
There has to be some ashless secret sauce in here. Too bad it won’t show via ICP. All these SP VOAs are going to have people clamoring for four ball wear rankings and PF tests
.
Friends don't let friends clamor for PF oil tests.
This additive package is quite stripped down. Boron is low, detergents are low, and TBN is low, but that may not tell the whole story. At least this VOA is within grade, and the phosphorus within spec, unlike the PPHM 5W-30 posted recently.
The TBN here is 5.8 while Mobil 1's published TBN for this oil is 9.2. Blackstone uses a different method for determining TBN (D4739) compared to most other labs that use D2896. The difference between those methods is the strength of the acid used and the way it is administered. D4739, which is the lower result we see here, doesn't give a full picture of the reserve alkalinity as only the stronger base is titrated. That's why there's such a difference between these results and Mobil 1's published results. The D2896 method uses a stronger acid (perchloric acid) and more polar solvent system to fully measure both hard and soft base. Typically the difference will be ~2 TBN between the two methods, but it's >3 here, indicating a broader range of hard and soft base detergent additive content.
A reason for reducing additive content can be due to using higher quality base oils, that are more stable and oxidation resistant, and still meeting API requirements. Depending the cost of base oils and additives, as they tend to fluctuate (sometimes significantly), it may be a cheaper method of meeting the brand's standard. They could also be trying to lower valve deposits, though if they were already passing that test previously, there would be little incentive for a major brand to do that, so I'm a little skeptical to believe that. The most likely case is any reduction in deposits likely comes as a bonus to cost cutting measures with additives rather than the other way around.
Unfortunately, Mobil 1 doesn't publish (for this oil) all of the tests that would expose a superior base oil. We don't have CCS nor Noack data, two big indicators of base oil quality. We have MRV results (13,700 cP @ -35°C) which is decent. We have HTHS at "3" which could be a white washed number and not really a result to write about.
All in all... I don't know how I feel about this. I would need to see this oil run through PDSC, TGA, Teost 33c, and SRV in an A-B comparison with a previous SP or SN Plus formula to get a better picture of how it performs at this additive content.
This additive package is quite stripped down. Boron is low, detergents are low, and TBN is low, but that may not tell the whole story. At least this VOA is within grade, and the phosphorus within spec, unlike the PPHM 5W-30 posted recently.
The TBN here is 5.8 while Mobil 1's published TBN for this oil is 9.2. Blackstone uses a different method for determining TBN (D4739) compared to most other labs that use D2896. The difference between those methods is the strength of the acid used and the way it is administered. D4739, which is the lower result we see here, doesn't give a full picture of the reserve alkalinity as only the stronger base is titrated. That's why there's such a difference between these results and Mobil 1's published results. The D2896 method uses a stronger acid (perchloric acid) and more polar solvent system to fully measure both hard and soft base. Typically the difference will be ~2 TBN between the two methods, but it's >3 here, indicating a broader range of hard and soft base detergent additive content.
A reason for reducing additive content can be due to using higher quality base oils, that are more stable and oxidation resistant, and still meeting API requirements. Depending the cost of base oils and additives, as they tend to fluctuate (sometimes significantly), it may be a cheaper method of meeting the brand's standard. They could also be trying to lower valve deposits, though if they were already passing that test previously, there would be little incentive for a major brand to do that, so I'm a little skeptical to believe that. The most likely case is any reduction in deposits likely comes as a bonus to cost cutting measures with additives rather than the other way around.
Unfortunately, Mobil 1 doesn't publish (for this oil) all of the tests that would expose a superior base oil. We don't have CCS nor Noack data, two big indicators of base oil quality. We have MRV results (13,700 cP @ -35°C) which is decent. We have HTHS at "3" which could be a white washed number and not really a result to write about.
All in all... I don't know how I feel about this. I would need to see this oil run through PDSC, TGA, Teost 33c, and SRV in an A-B comparison with a previous SP or SN Plus formula to get a better picture of how it performs at this additive content.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
These are the only specs for this oil I've seen. It's all speculation from SDS to patents etc. Fun to guess though. Sometimes the MSDS are informative to some extent. Even the SDSs vary from Amsoil using 40% III, RL majority PAO but Dave. G saying up to 40% POE. Even the oxidation correlation is speculation. Who knows..
I've only seen PQIA and Wearcheck use D2896. Blackstone, NAPA, Oil Analyzers, and ALS all use D4739.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
If someone were to wake up from a multi-year coma and reach for a laptop on his hospital room's dresser, he could open this Forum Room inside BITOG and read this thread.
But his first impressions after seeing those numbers next to various additives, would be to think the UOA diagram was a mistake. He would swear to his Master in the Sky that there's a misprint..... has to be a misprint.
He would say "This is a VOA of a Mobil-1 oil that's guaranteed for 2k, not 20k"
But his first impressions after seeing those numbers next to various additives, would be to think the UOA diagram was a mistake. He would swear to his Master in the Sky that there's a misprint..... has to be a misprint.
He would say "This is a VOA of a Mobil-1 oil that's guaranteed for 2k, not 20k"
Similar threads
