Someone with ties to XOM posted on here when Mobil 5000 came out that it's all Group III. Mobil chooses not to call it a synthetic because they have a vested interest in NOT labeling a Group III oil "synthetic," given that their official position is that only PAO and Group V should be called synthetic.
Mobil Clean 5000
- Thread starter boggs0214
- Start date
- Status
Someone with ties to XOM posted on here when Mobil 5000 came out that it's all Group III. Mobil chooses not to call it a synthetic because they have a vested interest in NOT labeling a Group III oil "synthetic," given that their official position is that only PAO and Group V should be called synthetic.
Frank (from ARX) has noted that M5000 is not a good ARX rinse oil b/c it [may?] contain esters.
If I read the MSDS right (which I probably didn't) it looks like it only lists the additives in it.
Reportable Hazardous Substance(s) or Complex Substance(s)
Name CAS# Concentration*
ZINC ALKYLDITHIOPHOSPHATE 68649-42-3 1 - 5%
If I read the MSDS right (which I probably didn't) it looks like it only lists the additives in it.
Reportable Hazardous Substance(s) or Complex Substance(s)
Name CAS# Concentration*
ZINC ALKYLDITHIOPHOSPHATE 68649-42-3 1 - 5%
would a VOA tell us if an oil is group 2, 3, 4, or 5?
...and exxon/mobil won't either
That's why we're here debating these things.
Intersting. I wish there were a way I could inquire about this, since I just bought five quarts of MobilClean 5000 HM today...
No, it does not.
I looked into this issue some time ago and was advised directly from EOM that the 5000 contains absolutely NO esters. It is a very good oil for ARX purposes, from my personal experience with it.
I have been unable to confirm Carpy's original assertion that it is a full Group III base, however.
In any case, other than the novel sodium readings it gives, it appears as good as any other premium price point conventional out there.
VH:
Do you have some explicit statement from EOM to this effect? Not challenging your veracity, I'd just like to give it to Frank so we can square the apparently contradictory statements. Frank was quite positive with me that MC5K was less suitable as a rinse oil because of polar ester content.
Do you have some explicit statement from EOM to this effect? Not challenging your veracity, I'd just like to give it to Frank so we can square the apparently contradictory statements. Frank was quite positive with me that MC5K was less suitable as a rinse oil because of polar ester content.
I was advised by one of their product engineers. It is a completely "conventional" formula in Mobilspeak, which only means it does not have any Group IV/V in it. I can get no more explicit than that, nor would they tell me any more than that. It's been impossible to confirm Carpy's Group III assertion.
I shared similar concerns to the OP here about the 5000's formula in an ARX environment and worked an answer on this last year.
Bless him, as I am a big advocate of ARX, but Frank's knowledge of motor oils is not as strong as that of his product. I say this because others with his company confirmed that it is OK to use 5000 as a rinse oil. It's even posted somewhere in their own forum archives.
In the 5w20 grade I would suggest the Mobil 5000 is a below average conventional oil, likely a straight Group II base oil. However the solvency of a Group II and the extra detergents that Mobil puts in it, would likely make for a clean engine - probably just as good or better than the ones that run M1. See this post which compares Mobil 5000 to other conventionals in the 5w20 grade.
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...4351#Post735364
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...4351#Post735364
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked