Mobil 1 uoa's (high iron)

[Al]

There has been discussion on this subject many times. It will depend on how the other numbers look. I think (personally) Mobil 1 has a tendancy to show higher iron. The iron is probably from the block, oil pan, etc. I really dond't think it's a problem-but it is annoying.

 

[tpi]

I don't think too much should be read into this. Bore wear can go out the exhaust or into the oil sump. Anything changing that proportion will show up as changing PPM in analysis. Perhaps this proportion changes with different oil formulations, and under different operating conditions.

 

[TR3-2001SE]

What if the high iron numbers where due to rust. Mobil 1 removing the iron rust would be a plus then. It does seem to correspond to winter weather, it is higher in the winter lower in the summer. Rust takes moisture/air/iron or steel. I do wish we really knew the answer to this but it would take Terry or some other high level guru to give us some input.

 

[unDummy]

What if its engine wear that is too small to filter? Or would you rather have more wear(larger particles) that are trapped by the oil filter but do NOT show up in the UOA? With the additive package(boron/zdp/moly...), I don't think that it is a real issue.

 

[DavoNF]

It might be a lousy oil

 

[buster]

I think Mobil 1's Iron is fine. I think M1's over all wear is great. Certain oils like RL show elevated wear, but it's not really wear from use. You can nit pick these oils to death but IMO any oil today will do the job.

 

[JohnBrowning]

3MP's study so far has not shown any significant differences between M1 and Amsoil. Sure we are only 4000 in to this but you would think you would see a huge difference and we don't!

 

[Amkeer]

ok then I shouldn't bring the M1 I just purchased at wally world back, right? Daily Drives: -2003 Toyota Tacoma PreRunner XtraCab, Impulse Red, Peppy 2.7 Liter 4 Banger, Running Mobil1 Synthetics SS 5W-30. ODO 7200 Miles. -1995 Toyota 4-Runner, Evergreen, 3.0 V6, Running Mobil1 Synthetic SS 10W-30. ODO 83300 Miles. (Switching to GC next)Nope sticking with M1. http://community.webshots.com/user/amkeer

 

[Patman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JohnBrowning: 3MP's study so far has not shown any significant differences between M1 and Amsoil. Sure we are only 4000 in to this but you would think you would see a huge difference and we don't!

---

But we are seeing a huge difference in iron so far on 3MPs test, and isn't that the topic of discussion here?

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi, Patman - The iron level is still very very low. The increasing trend in iron between each sample has still only been 1-5ppm or so - quite remarkable really Don't you think this is a very low trend rate commencing with the first sample and considering that the engine was newer when the M1 oil chanrge was in? As you have probably read, my truck engines have a tolerance level of iron of up to 150ppm, and many petrol engines do too. Using my trends and this engine's too, 3MP's engine will do at least 500k without too much trouble ( tongue in cheek ). I always wonder about the Copper! The problem is that we really do not know what GM's tolerance levels are - why? Haley10 - sadly, iron is not solely related to valve train wear there are a number of sources Regards Doug [ February 27, 2004, 11:29 PM: Message edited by: Doug Hillary ]

 

[haley10]

I did search the board, but didn't find much of relevance. Forgive me if this has been beaten to death already. Any real facts on why the high iron numbers? Do you think this actually indicates higher valve train wear etc. or is something more subtle??

 

[Road Rage]

PAO's usually do very well in resisting rust, unless perhaps the car is stored for exceptionally long periods so the gravity pull leavs exposed metal on the cam , crank, etc. I would like to view the sample in our Lab's high power microscopes to measure the size od the iron particles, as well as their shape - as someone else pointed out, if the particles are small, they really do little damage, and may have sidestepped the filter - either by a partially fractured filter, or a stuck bypass valve, or are just too small for the filter, esp if it is something like a K&N, whose filter media provides high flow at a somewhat reduced micron capture capability. The shape might tell something about where they came from, and how they were spawned - "sheared" asperities, or true wear from a film breakdown (which you would see first on the cam lobes).

 

[buster]

http://www.rtvanderbilt.com/news_19.htm This link above is interesting. What Jay said in another thread regarding RL and spiked wear metals could also be used to explain Mobil 1 and Fe. I'm starting to seriously doubt it has anything to do with ZDDP. For one, most of the new GF-4 oils are showing great wear with LOWER ZDP. Also notice that in many cases we see some dino oils showing lower wear then M1 and RL. As Jay said, it's a balancing act. You might give up a few ppm with one formula to gain better deposit control/solvency in another formula. So if I ran Mobil clean 5000 and it showed lower Fe then Mobil 1 EP, would I run it in a Corvette? No. I'd take the detergency/cold/hot performance of Mobil 1 EP over the 5000 and ignore the insignificant difference in ppm Fe wear. Thoughts?

quote:

---

Every blender must strike a balance between friction wear and corrosive wear. Some AW/FM adds are corrosive, such as the sulpher and phosphorus in ZDDP, which causes soft metal corrosion. That's why, for example, GL-5 lubes don't belong where GL-4 lubes should go. In my opinion, RedLine uses a highly active (corrosive) additive pack that protects well in racing conditions, but is corrosive to soft metals. It's a good balance for a racing engine, but not a good balance for a daily driver.

---

It's very difficult to distinguish corrosive wear from actual engine wear isn't it? I would also add something posted by Motorbike : newer Borated FM's the Borates plate and form a hard " surface " layer of an " Iron Borate " directly to the metal German Castrol and many other oils if not all have low ZDDP levels and show low Fe wear. [ March 14, 2005, 06:25 PM: Message edited by: buster ]

 

[fuel tanker man]

"Also notice that in many cases we see some dino oils showing lower wear then M1 and RL." Excellent point. But you forgot to mention one thing: REDLINE IS GOOD OIL ~!! And not only that, but REDLINE IS GOOD OIL ~!!

 

[MolaKule]

Just an observation; German Castrol 0W30 is NOT using the borated compounds, but Mobil 1 is. But we cannot simply blame the Boron for alleged elevated FE levels, just as we cannot blame the moly and the esters in Redline for their whatever alleged elevated levels. [ March 14, 2005, 09:06 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]

 

[TooSlick]

Amsoil uses borates in most of their 30wt gas engine oils and their Fe levels are very low. Delvac 1 also uses borates and Fe levels using D1 are also very low. Next theory ... TS

 

[JohnBrowning]

Things we can rule out. 1) Base Stock PAO and Alkylated Naphtatetic blah blah...... 2)ZINK 3)Borate additives 4) Calcium 5)Moly So if this high Fe issue is really even an issue then it must be in something that is missing or inadequate in the additive package. Could it be the anti-corrosive compound being used? Could be the need to more amines? Could it be the need for more solvency? I wounder if it is even worth worrying about? I am preety sure that most people will either gro tired of the vechile or other stuff starts to nickle and dime them long before the increased iron wear from M1 would ever do the engine in!

 

[tenderloin]

What/where does iron get "worn" from that has some in a tizzy? TIA

 

[goodvibes]

I don't know much about AN but perhaps something that can pass O is dispalcing the POA or just allowing free O into the oil and allowing oxidation when the engine is off.

 

[Tommy]

Holy man you guys.......I think we should start a spelling board! Naphtatetic ZINK wounder preety gro vechile dispalcing Tests on Fridays....what do you think?