I am not sure if this has been posted before.
http://www.motor-talk.de/forum/aktion/Attachment.html?attachmentId=695007
http://www.motor-talk.de/forum/aktion/Attachment.html?attachmentId=695007
Mobil Oil - technical write up
- Thread starter virginoil
- Start date
- Status
Thanks.
It's been discussed a number of times. That's how we learned a few years back that M1 0w-40 isn't group IV anymore.
It's been discussed a number of times. That's how we learned a few years back that M1 0w-40 isn't group IV anymore.
Interesting that the article states the change from PAO to Visom will be "invisible to consumers" except in Germany...does that sound like concealing the facts or shading the truth to anyone else?
It goes back to the marketing definition of "synthetic". A definition that is mostly irrelevant these days as it's the performance of the oil that matters more than its physical composition, which by the way oil companies are not required to reveal.
My question was somewhat rhetorical...we all suspected that ExMo had a history of shading the truth, but this article is proof that we were right.
Note to all the M1 fans: I am in no way disparaging the quality of ExMo's products...I know they're first rate, I just don't like their politics.
Note to all the M1 fans: I am in no way disparaging the quality of ExMo's products...I know they're first rate, I just don't like their politics.
Shading ?
Looks like a clear lucid explanation .
Looks like a clear lucid explanation .
I was referring to the comment I quoted above...about hiding the truth from consumers except in Germany.
There was another white paper from XOM (I can't seem to locate it now) showing that all the M1 grades were actually a blend of group III+ and group IV base stocks and some grades also contained some group V base stock. This stands to reason as motor oil engineering has become much more concerned with the actual performance of the product these days, and this IS after all the bottom line.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: RF Overlord
My question was somewhat rhetorical...we all suspected that ExMo had a history of shading the truth, but this article is proof that we were right.
But what "truth" are you referring to? Has XOM misled anyone by claiming in recent years that their M1 product is strictly PAO?
FYI, I'm not trying to defend XOM here. They play marketing games just like everyone else in the business.
My question was somewhat rhetorical...we all suspected that ExMo had a history of shading the truth, but this article is proof that we were right.
But what "truth" are you referring to? Has XOM misled anyone by claiming in recent years that their M1 product is strictly PAO?
FYI, I'm not trying to defend XOM here. They play marketing games just like everyone else in the business.
MolaKule
Staff member
Quote:
As we developed the Mobil 1 ESP
technology we found that combining Visom with PAO could deliver a formulation of equivalent performance to an all PAO formulation.
BTW, I do NOT work for EXOM nor do I have any interests in EXOM, Amsoil, etc.
I think what they are saying is, due to variability and short supply of expensive PAO, they will blend their GroupIII Visom with PAO, and then use GTL when that GroupIII+ supply increases.
As far as transparency,
Quote:
With the exception of Germany, this reformulation will be invisible to consumers and B2B customers.
In Germany, you can only claim to be a synthetic if you have a high percentage base oil of PAO and or Esters.
In NA, you can still claim a synthetic if you use GroupIII, PAO, and AN's, and esters, due to the Castrol/Mobil fiasco.
I mentioned this patent years ago on Bitog:
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6713438/fulltext.html
As we developed the Mobil 1 ESP
technology we found that combining Visom with PAO could deliver a formulation of equivalent performance to an all PAO formulation.
BTW, I do NOT work for EXOM nor do I have any interests in EXOM, Amsoil, etc.
I think what they are saying is, due to variability and short supply of expensive PAO, they will blend their GroupIII Visom with PAO, and then use GTL when that GroupIII+ supply increases.
As far as transparency,
Quote:
With the exception of Germany, this reformulation will be invisible to consumers and B2B customers.
In Germany, you can only claim to be a synthetic if you have a high percentage base oil of PAO and or Esters.
In NA, you can still claim a synthetic if you use GroupIII, PAO, and AN's, and esters, due to the Castrol/Mobil fiasco.
I mentioned this patent years ago on Bitog:
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6713438/fulltext.html
Last edited:
Sounds right to me.
They definitely did not want consumers to know much about the switch. I'm sure they knew the possible effect it could have among loyal M1 users. M1 has traditionally always been a IV/V based oil.
Certain grades of M1 contain more/less of different base oils. I'd say a good amount of them contain significant Group III+ but also PAO/esters/AN's.
Visom is on par with PAO's, so you're not losing much.
Some grades may even be mostly PAO. Hard to say.
They definitely did not want consumers to know much about the switch. I'm sure they knew the possible effect it could have among loyal M1 users. M1 has traditionally always been a IV/V based oil.
Certain grades of M1 contain more/less of different base oils. I'd say a good amount of them contain significant Group III+ but also PAO/esters/AN's.
Visom is on par with PAO's, so you're not losing much.
Some grades may even be mostly PAO. Hard to say.
Originally Posted By: buster
Sounds right to me.
They definitely did not want consumers to know much about the switch. I'm sure they knew the possible effect it could have among loyal M1 users. M1 has traditionally always been a IV/V based oil.
Certain grades of M1 contain more/less of different base oils. I'd say a good amount of them contain significant Group III+ but also PAO/esters/AN's.
Visom is on par with PAO's, so you're not losing much.
Some grades may even be mostly PAO. Hard to say.
Hard to say and it no longer matters.
Sounds right to me.
They definitely did not want consumers to know much about the switch. I'm sure they knew the possible effect it could have among loyal M1 users. M1 has traditionally always been a IV/V based oil.
Certain grades of M1 contain more/less of different base oils. I'd say a good amount of them contain significant Group III+ but also PAO/esters/AN's.
Visom is on par with PAO's, so you're not losing much.
Some grades may even be mostly PAO. Hard to say.
Hard to say and it no longer matters.
From what i've read, they show worst performance with their 0w40 SHC compared to the previous 0w40 PAO.. page 36 - thin film oxidation, page 43 (pour point) and page 45 (low temp pumpability) and worst VI as seen on page 45.
The thing is, there is nothing we can do about it.
I've been comparing images from their Mobil 1 and Mobil Super 3000, and the ones sold in germany state SHC for Mobil 1 and HC for Mobil Super 3000.
So, am i correct in reasoning that Mobil 1 is Visom with some PAO and Mobil Super 3000, just visom?
I'm currently considering Mobil Super 3000 5w30 XE for my next OCI, and i would be ok if it is "just" visom (50€/5L)
As for Mobil 1, i do not accept paying the same premium price for lower quality Mobil 1.
The thing is, there is nothing we can do about it.
I've been comparing images from their Mobil 1 and Mobil Super 3000, and the ones sold in germany state SHC for Mobil 1 and HC for Mobil Super 3000.
So, am i correct in reasoning that Mobil 1 is Visom with some PAO and Mobil Super 3000, just visom?
I'm currently considering Mobil Super 3000 5w30 XE for my next OCI, and i would be ok if it is "just" visom (50€/5L)
As for Mobil 1, i do not accept paying the same premium price for lower quality Mobil 1.
Originally Posted By: TugaSaudade
The thing is, there is nothing we can do about it.
Incorrect, we can avoid buying it.
The thing is, there is nothing we can do about it.
Incorrect, we can avoid buying it.
Thanks for posting this as I hadn't seen it.
From what I can tell it is a couple of years old.
The move away from PAO has resulted in a reduction in oxidative stability and extreme cold temp' performance.
The paper mentions the increase in MRV @-40 degrees as dropping from 22,000cP (and that was years ago) to 29,000cP. Well the latest M1 0W-40 version is even worse than that at 35,000cP.
I suspect there is very little if any PAO used in the current version of M1 0W-40.
Up until a couple of months ago in Canada we were still getting the largely PAO based SM oil. If one can still find some old stock at some retailers I'd suggest cleaning them out.
It reminds me of the efforts we went to to stock up with the last remaining Green GC before it disappeared.
From what I can tell it is a couple of years old.
The move away from PAO has resulted in a reduction in oxidative stability and extreme cold temp' performance.
The paper mentions the increase in MRV @-40 degrees as dropping from 22,000cP (and that was years ago) to 29,000cP. Well the latest M1 0W-40 version is even worse than that at 35,000cP.
I suspect there is very little if any PAO used in the current version of M1 0W-40.
Up until a couple of months ago in Canada we were still getting the largely PAO based SM oil. If one can still find some old stock at some retailers I'd suggest cleaning them out.
It reminds me of the efforts we went to to stock up with the last remaining Green GC before it disappeared.
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Quote:
As we developed the Mobil 1 ESP
technology we found that combining Visom with PAO could deliver a formulation of equivalent performance to an all PAO formulation.
BTW, I do NOT work for EXOM nor do I have any interests in EXOM, Amsoil, etc.
I think what they are saying is, due to variability and short supply of expensive PAO, they will blend their GroupIII Visom with PAO, and then use GTL when that GroupIII+ supply increases.
As far as transparency,
Quote:
With the exception of Germany, this reformulation will be invisible to consumers and B2B customers.
In Germany, you can only claim to be a synthetic if you have a high percentage base oil of PAO and or Esters.
In NA, you can still claim a synthetic if you use GroupIII, PAO, and AN's, and esters, due to the Castrol/Mobil fiasco.
I mentioned this patent years ago on Bitog:
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6713438/fulltext.html
Reading the patent, I happened upon this phrase:
it would be desirable to provide lubricant compositions which can function effectively under high temperature conditions and which possess good Theological properties to provide adequate. film thickness
The implications of this statement are staggering:
Is Mobil using holy water to make their lubricants?
Does this mean if we have faith in our oil, it will provide good protection, regardless of its HTHS?
Who is the patron saint of motor oil?
(OK, I'm milking it I know, but some patent attorney trusted his spell-checker, and it didn't weed out Theological and replace it with Rheological.)
Quote:
As we developed the Mobil 1 ESP
technology we found that combining Visom with PAO could deliver a formulation of equivalent performance to an all PAO formulation.
BTW, I do NOT work for EXOM nor do I have any interests in EXOM, Amsoil, etc.
I think what they are saying is, due to variability and short supply of expensive PAO, they will blend their GroupIII Visom with PAO, and then use GTL when that GroupIII+ supply increases.
As far as transparency,
Quote:
With the exception of Germany, this reformulation will be invisible to consumers and B2B customers.
In Germany, you can only claim to be a synthetic if you have a high percentage base oil of PAO and or Esters.
In NA, you can still claim a synthetic if you use GroupIII, PAO, and AN's, and esters, due to the Castrol/Mobil fiasco.
I mentioned this patent years ago on Bitog:
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6713438/fulltext.html
Reading the patent, I happened upon this phrase:
it would be desirable to provide lubricant compositions which can function effectively under high temperature conditions and which possess good Theological properties to provide adequate. film thickness
The implications of this statement are staggering:
Is Mobil using holy water to make their lubricants?
Does this mean if we have faith in our oil, it will provide good protection, regardless of its HTHS?
Who is the patron saint of motor oil?
(OK, I'm milking it I know, but some patent attorney trusted his spell-checker, and it didn't weed out Theological and replace it with Rheological.)
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Thanks for posting this as I hadn't seen it.
From what I can tell it is a couple of years old.
The move away from PAO has resulted in a reduction in oxidative stability and extreme cold temp' performance.
The paper mentions the increase in MRV @-40 degrees as dropping from 22,000cP (and that was years ago) to 29,000cP. Well the latest M1 0W-40 version is even worse than that at 35,000cP.
I suspect there is very little if any PAO used in the current version of M1 0W-40.
Up until a couple of months ago in Canada we were still getting the largely PAO based SM oil. If one can still find some old stock at some retailers I'd suggest cleaning them out.
It reminds me of the efforts we went to to stock up with the last remaining Green GC before it disappeared.
Guess I'll be cleaning out the Chrysler dealership.......
Thanks for posting this as I hadn't seen it.
From what I can tell it is a couple of years old.
The move away from PAO has resulted in a reduction in oxidative stability and extreme cold temp' performance.
The paper mentions the increase in MRV @-40 degrees as dropping from 22,000cP (and that was years ago) to 29,000cP. Well the latest M1 0W-40 version is even worse than that at 35,000cP.
I suspect there is very little if any PAO used in the current version of M1 0W-40.
Up until a couple of months ago in Canada we were still getting the largely PAO based SM oil. If one can still find some old stock at some retailers I'd suggest cleaning them out.
It reminds me of the efforts we went to to stock up with the last remaining Green GC before it disappeared.
Guess I'll be cleaning out the Chrysler dealership.......
- Status
