Mobil must be feeling the competition.............

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: toocrazy2yoo
Originally Posted By: FZ1
So,then,this pricing theory would apply to Amsoil also,would it not?


Well, if we want to expand on the boutique theory, I suppose so. But in VOA, isn't Amsoil superior to the equivalent grade of M1 in every way? Isn't Amsoil PAO, M1 GroupIII? Do we even care about that stuff anymore? Heck, for all we know, everyone is simply hanging on by their fingernails waiting for the GTL combos to come out?

And, with dino in SM/GF4 withstanding said API and GF4 testing in such outstanding fashion, for 1/6 the price-per-quart, does it matter whether we run a syn outside of extreme high pop engines and/or turbos anyway? It always comes back to vanity, utility, price, doesn't it?


I'm pretty sure that some of Mobil 1's grades are Group IV. I also remember reading on here that some of Amsoil's base-stocks come from Exxon-Mobil.

The issue was around the lawsuit that Mobil pursued with Castrol and lost about group III oils NOT being Synthetic. After they lost the lawsuit, they started making their own GIII oils.

I THINK (but don't quote me on this) that oils like their 0w40, Delvac 1...etc are ester-based. It was the "simple" grades like 5w30 and 10w30 that were theorized to have been switched to a group III, but I don't know if there is actually any proof of that.

 

[MGregoir]

The only grades I have heard significant claim of there being group III in are 5w30 and 10w30 and even then it was only that they are a blend of group III and PAO, and not primairly group III like Pennzoil Platinum. It was based on a cut and paste from the Japanese Mobil 1 site that said the 5w30 and 10w30 are PAO/Group III and all others are PAO and rumors that have been swirling since the post-Katrina formulation changes as well as the Castrol arbitration.

They went to the national advertising board to define what synthetic is because Mobil said Syntec isn't it going back to 1997 when they switched to Petro-Canada produced group III base, and lost. Many people assume "if you can't beat them, joint them" but at the same time I wonder if they realize ExxonMobil is the biggest producer of PAO and ester base oils in the world. It has to go somewhere.

The previous "Tri-Synthetic" Mobil 1 was alkylated naphthalene for additive solubility, PAO and ester based.

High quality group III in a fully formulated oil is not a detrimental thing and getting a used oil analysis after the s**t and abuse I put my engine through this winter, Mobil 1 proved itself to me. Stayed in grade, decent wear levels, and lots of life left in the oil in conditions that are a case study on what synthetic lubricants are for.

 

[Steve S]

Mobil Exxon corp could probably buy Amsoil with their last CEOs compensation and retirement package.

 

[FZ1]

Lol.

 

[buster]

I don't care what base oils are used. Some Amsoil oils use multiple base oils. End performance is what matters.

Since the internet has come along, especially BITOG, people have noticed higher wear metals in oil analysis reports in some engines, which have turned many people off to M1. Whether it means anything or not I do not know. They still seem to be highly regarded among OEMs and engines are not failing. They recently got the Nissan GTR factory oil - 0w40.

Does anyone find it odd that XOM removed this queston/answer from their website shortly after it was posted on here?

 

[Tempest]

Yes, but no surprise if they watch this place.

 

[mjfx]

That would smart of them. Theyd get an idea of what we like, and possibly find ways to exploit us. But whatever. I'd be worried if M1 really started giving people problems, but I've heard great things about 0w40 and I can grab it at anytime.

 

[toocrazy2yoo]

Originally Posted By: mjfx
That would smart of them. Theyd get an idea of what we like, and possibly find ways to exploit us.


I doubt Exxon/Mobil cares what we here like, nor do they choose to disclose. And that's fine. Frankly, as a share of their total income, I doubt motor oil is all that big an issue. Exxon doesn't tier their gasoline either, or didn't last I looked at the list. They don't CARE about that stuff, they don't HAVE to care. And they don't need us to like it. Outside of venues such as BITOG (ok, there IS none such as BITOG, but maybe within 20%?) the average "civilian" isn't paying any attention to this stuff. They roll in, they fill their tank, they GET their oil changed rather than change it, and they surly don't care what's going in as regards brand, grades or even whether a PCMO is synthetic and conventional. Folks of that automotive ilk probably lease their cars for a couple or three years or buy a new one every three or four years, and so durability issues that we here obsess over never come into play (unless a BITOG guy buys a leasing program car).

As for a way to exploit US, they couldn't care less, the entire system is now set to exploit everyone. My feeling is, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, Exxon and the others were blocked for so long by politicians, environmentalists and lawyers of every stripe for the last 40 years in their efforts to build more refineries and retrieve more oil off our coasts and in Alaska that they might just have said heck with it. Look at the dough they're making for delivering LESS product, for far more money and profit, and they have the additional benefit of not spending to find more oil or refine more finished product, or especially, blowing good dough on lawyers to fight everyone that wants to stop them from increasing size and capacity.

Ya know what? I don't blame them one damm bit.

 

[FZ1]

After all this flap and the iron I see in the used oil analysis,I just may change out my EP @5k and start running PP on a 5k oci which is about 10-11 months for me.

 

[buster]

toocrazy2yoo, I couldn't have said it better.

 

[Greggy_D]

Originally Posted By: JohnBrowning
Michigan does not see the $.49 a quart oil prices that Bill in Utah gets on his oil. Maybe when I move to Florida I can get deals like that. At $.49 a quart I would not bother with synthetics in my current applications and would find other ways to control depositsike anaual usage of LC20.


We just did at Murray's with Formula Shell ($0.49). And the deal is still on.

 

[ThirdeYe]

JohnBrowning - My stash would say otherwise! Greggy is right, Murray's has great deals. I won't buy conventional unless it's under $1/quart now.

 

[buster]

They took it off because Mobil believes the 4-ball wear test is a gear oil test and has no correlation to engine wear at all. They laugh at it.

 

[toocrazy2yoo]

Originally Posted By: buster
toocrazy2yoo, I couldn't have said it better.

I take it YOU don't blame em either? It's a strategy. Hey, you want to block us drilling, refining and producing more? Ok! Go see them fellahs in Saudi Arabia. Buy it from THEM. Meanwhile, WE (Exxon/Shell, etc.) are still the purveyors.

And look at us now.

 

[MolaKule]

Kestas, Now you're analyzing marketing claims like an educated consumer.

One of the most useful courses I ever took at the Univ. was a course called "Logic and Language." Good for analyzing the logic or illogic of language used.

One of the things we did in L and L class was to analyze marketing claims.

You will find nebulous claims or statements are made to obfuscate the real issues and to keep the important questions from being asked.

 

[buster]

Quote:
Answer:
That is a misleading claim. Some companies use meaningless bench tests to demonstrate superior performance. Although bench testing may be used in industry engine specifications, they are rarely used as the definitive discriminator for actual field performance. This is especially true of four ball testing, flash point, and other simple analytical measurements. The real proof of performance is done with rigorous engine and field testing. These tests are statistically controlled and are more representative of the performance you will see in your own vehicle. The specifications found on bottle labels document that the product has performed satisfactorily on these industry standard tests. Mobil 1 meets or exceeds those industry specifications. Mobil 1 is also Factory Fill for a wide variety of vehicles. You can also see more on how Mobil 1 Extended Performance performed in Las Vegas taxi fleets.



It's back up.

 

[Pablo]

Originally Posted By: mola
You will find nebulous claims or statements are made to obfuscate the real issues and to keep the important questions from being asked.


You mean like this?


Quote:
Answer:
That is a misleading claim. Some companies use meaningless bench tests to demonstrate superior performance. Although bench testing may be used in industry engine specifications, they are rarely used as the definitive discriminator for actual field performance. This is especially true of four ball testing, flash point, and other simple analytical measurements. The real proof of performance is done with rigorous engine and field testing. These tests are statistically controlled and are more representative of the performance you will see in your own vehicle. The specifications found on bottle labels document that the product has performed satisfactorily on these industry standard tests. Mobil 1 meets or exceeds those industry specifications. Mobil 1 is also Factory Fill for a wide variety of vehicles. You can also see more on how Mobil 1 Extended Performance performed in Las Vegas taxi fleets.

 

[buster]

Or this?

Interesting how in this Amsoil graph, Mobil 1 0w30 which meets the Corvette spec, allows 3 times the wear of Mobil 1 5w30. LOL

 

[Pablo]

Boy that's an oldie. Actually it's not a gear oil test.

Why are they using it? Because they don't have "adaptive molecules", I guess.

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: Pablo
Boy that's an oldie. Actually it's not a gear oil test.

Why are they using it? Because they don't have "adaptive molecules", I guess.

True it could be worse.

What about Castrol's "torture" test? LOL. Adaptive molecules. LOL