Mobil1 Ann Prot 20K Road Trip-Test Results Coming

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: The Critic
Originally Posted By: bbhero
Very, very true indeed demarpaint. They could have polled the members here about pricing of the oil... That would been a smart idea. Because them cats would have found out that $30 plus is not going to work with a high majority of people.


Considering that my local Jiffy Lube has raised the price of a synthetic oil change (no rotation, oil change only) to $89, Mobil's proposition of $40 for 5-qt of AP and $10 for a Mobil 1 oil filter is still reasonable.


They've dropped the price of AP since introduction. Going back to the intro, it was priced to collect dust.

Even at current prices I still see no reason or benefit in using it when EP is available and sells for less. The thought of putting any oil in one of my vehicles for 20K miles scares the [censored] out of me. With regard to Jiffy Lube, I don't see any of us named in quotes in this post letting anyone from Jiffy Lube within 50 yards of one of our vehicles. lol

 

[oil_film_movies]

The 20k Road Trip thing will send 4 samples from each car to "MobilServ" for oil analysis, as Mobil's instagram account is saying. They say: "Oil analysis programs might seem to be all the same, but look more closely and you’ll see clear differences. Mobil Serv℠ Lubricant Analysis delivers the full spectrum of analysis on your Mobil™ branded lubricants, which no other program can provide."



I can't see how its much different than Blackstone, Polaris, NAPA Autoparts, etc. oil analysis. Marketers have gone bananas again I guess.
Really sounds like Mobil is saying they have something unique when its standard industry stuff.

https://mobilserv.mobil.com/pdfs/engine-analysis.pdf
https://mobilserv.mobil.com/en/lubricant-oil-analysis-options/engine/
https://www.instagram.com/p/BkiwDedA9v1/

Of course, they may not want to show us the ringlands. How black the pistons get. They'll hide that. Its the real weak spot in going 20k miles.

 

[fdcg27]

Curious as to the reason you out of everyone else refer to M1 AP as "Ann Prot"?
I have a couple of jugs to use.
With store deals and the MIR, I have $17.00 in one and $18.00 in the other and this includes M1 oil filters with each.
Maybe I'll try a year in our older Forester and UOA the oil.
Be interesting to see what the oil looks like should I do this.

 

[CR94]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
... Really sounds like Mobil is saying they have something unique when its standard industry stuff. ...
They also use an icon of an antiquated engine on that report form.

 

[crazy_raccoon]

I would like to see M1 do a UOA for a severe service engine. A lot of people do short trips around town and fuel dilution and moisture is one if the biggest things that break down oil. People really dont mention the whole lot of short tripping thing on here but instead just really talk about overall mileage.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: crazy_raccoon
I would like to see M1 do a UOA for a severe service engine. A lot of people do short trips around town and fuel dilution and moisture is one if the biggest things that break down oil. People really dont mention the whole lot of short tripping thing on here but instead just really talk about overall mileage.
Very true, how lots of short-tripping produces some bad chemistry issues, forming sludge with all the condensation inside.
This Mobil 1 Annual Protection marketing-engineering stunt really just covers those cases where somebody puts a ton of miles on their ride, and are absolutely sick of changing the oil so often. Busy people like that who don't want to pay for or DIY an oil change too often.
For example, I knew a dude that put 140 miles/day on his car, and would always complain "Darn, another oil change needed!". This product might help him.

 

[WyrTwister]

He could always try walking .

 

[irv]

Originally Posted By: Patman
Originally Posted By: racin4ds
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
True for most people, the better and/or more expensive the engine, the more premium the engine oil should be.
For example: One buys a new or new-ish Corvette. High $$. They won't put in SuperTech Synthetic, they would go for M1 Annual Protection or Ravenol DXG (dexos1 PAO+POE oil).


Hopefully if they love their Vette and want a quality synthetic they'll go with some Pennzoil Ultra or Platinum and not M1!


First of all, there are a lot of Corvettes out there on the road that have run nothing but the basic Mobil 1 5w30 and they have no problems. And for those (like myself) that want something with a bit higher HTHS, we now have the option of the new Mobil 1 0w40 ESP (or in my case I'm running the 5w30 ESP)

This hatred of Mobil 1 is silly, it IS just as quality of a synthetic as Pennzoil Ultra or Platinum is.


The love affair with Mobil-1 is beyond silly.

Higher wear metals in UOA after UOA, failed wear/sequence tests, noisier engines and a "Premium" price all tell me many have been tricked/fooled into believing all the "Marketing hype" that Mobil oil is "Superior" to all others.

Please tell me why someone would pay a premium price for Mobil when less expensive oils like Pennzoil do a far superior job?
Isn't an oil's job to lubricate, help with wear and tear and reduce friction as much as possible? Tell me why Mobil oils consistently show higher wear metals in their UOAs then?

(The elusive question that never seems to get answered?)

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: irv
Originally Posted By: Patman
Originally Posted By: racin4ds
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
True for most people, the better and/or more expensive the engine, the more premium the engine oil should be.
For example: One buys a new or new-ish Corvette. High $$. They won't put in SuperTech Synthetic, they would go for M1 Annual Protection or Ravenol DXG (dexos1 PAO+POE oil).


Hopefully if they love their Vette and want a quality synthetic they'll go with some Pennzoil Ultra or Platinum and not M1!


First of all, there are a lot of Corvettes out there on the road that have run nothing but the basic Mobil 1 5w30 and they have no problems. And for those (like myself) that want something with a bit higher HTHS, we now have the option of the new Mobil 1 0w40 ESP (or in my case I'm running the 5w30 ESP)

This hatred of Mobil 1 is silly, it IS just as quality of a synthetic as Pennzoil Ultra or Platinum is.


The love affair with Mobil-1 is beyond silly.

Higher wear metals in UOA after UOA, failed wear/sequence tests, noisier engines and a "Premium" price all tell me many have been tricked/fooled into believing all the "Marketing hype" that Mobil oil is "Superior" to all others.

Please tell me why someone would pay a premium price for Mobil when less expensive oils like Pennzoil do a far superior job?
Isn't an oil's job to lubricate, help with wear and tear and reduce friction as much as possible? Tell me why Mobil oils consistently show higher wear metals in their UOAs then?

(The elusive question that never seems to get answered?)

 

[4WD]

What’s silly is your hate affair … and the same old (fill in the blank) you post here a hundred times a month … and noticed once again you ignore the “good” meaningless UOA’s but jump on the subjective meaningless reports … and when it’s PP (I use both BTW) it’s an air filter problem … I’m paying $5/ quart for 60-70% PAO and used dB meter to find PUP louder than M1 EP …
You want to repeat the same stuff … I’ll repeat mine …

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: irv
Please tell me why someone would pay a premium price for Mobil when less expensive oils like Pennzoil do a far superior job?
Isn't an oil's job to lubricate, help with wear and tear and reduce friction as much as possible? Tell me why Mobil oils consistently show higher wear metals in their UOAs then?

(The elusive question that never seems to get answered?)


That hyperbolic nonsense is half confirmation bias half conjecture. Intentionally omitting any context:

Current "low wear metals" UOA's on Mobil 1 in the UOA section, which would quite literally be impossible if your claim was true:

1. 2010 Civic
2. 2004 4-Runner
3. 2017 Corvette
4. Ford Fiesta

Current "high wear metals" UOA's on Pennzoil products in the UOA section, which would also be impossible if your claim was true:

1. 1999 Jeep Cherokee
2. 2017 Equinox
3. 2004 Explorer
4. 2014 Grand Cherokee


Oils yield mixed showings depending on the condition of the equipment, their "wear profile", how they are driven...etc. All of this stuff we've been over before, and of course they are not a direct measurement of actual physical wear.

However, there is a UOA that shows what a potential mechanical problem looks like:
2007 Corvette LS2

You can see how significant the departure is from "normal" here.

 

[4WD]

Bless you OverKill … excellent summation … but just as well RE Stevie Wonder …

 

[irv]

I find it funny whenever there is a good/decent UOA from Mobil most comment how good the wear metals look, but according to most Mobil users, wear metals mean nothing when the elevated, above average wear metals show up more often than not in Mobil UOAs.

I don't know, color me naive or whatever you want, but if I am paying a "Premium" price for an advertised/marketed "Superior" oil then I'd expect to see "Superior" UOAs. Does that not make sense to anyone else?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: irv
I find it funny whenever there is a good/decent UOA from Mobil most comment how good the wear metals look, but according to most Mobil users, wear metals mean nothing when the elevated, above average wear metals show up more often than not in Mobil UOAs.

I don't know, color me naive or whatever you want, but if I am paying a "Premium" price for an advertised/marketed "Superior" oil then I'd expect to see "Superior" UOAs. Does that not make sense to anyone else?

Look at the last UOA with the Corvette. That's what a bad UOA looks like and it is potentially indicative of a mechanical problem with the engine and has NOTHING to do with the oil.

If the SOPUS and Mobil 1 UOA lists I provided were reversed you'd have folks singing from the rooftops about "elevated this" and "elevated that" but that's not the case when it is the BITOG darling. There is a significant difference between what is perceived as "elevated" by many members on BITOG and what are truly troublesome numbers.

Defining "Superior" in the context of UOA contamination levels between approved lubricants, is like trying to measure the height of Everest with a dollar store ruler. It's the wrong tool for the job and the numbers you end up with aren't going to be reliable enough to base anything on.

 

[cheesepuffs]

The way I see it, Mobil 1 is the top selling synthetic, is it not? It’s factory fill for hundreds of thousands of Porsches and Corvettes for owners that take their cars back to the dealer for oil changes where the car sees nothing but M1 for years. If M1 was so bad then we would be seeing an epidemic of oil related issues with these cars. But we don’t. 99% of car owners don’t even think once about high wear metals this or used oil analysis that. And their cars are fine.

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted By: irv
I find it funny whenever there is a good/decent UOA from Mobil most comment how good the wear metals look, but according to most Mobil users, wear metals mean nothing when the elevated, above average wear metals show up more often than not in Mobil UOAs.

I don't know, color me naive or whatever you want, but if I am paying a "Premium" price for an advertised/marketed "Superior" oil then I'd expect to see "Superior" UOAs. Does that not make sense to anyone else?

First of all, the price of M1 is not higher than the price of all the other premium synthetics, so your argument there is downright silly, and frankly it's false. Here in Canada we can walk into Canadian Tire and pick up a jug of M1 for almost exactly the same price as a jug of Pennzoil Platinum and Castrol Edge. And in fact, in the US, M1 is often priced lower than the others at Walmart (do you really consider $22.88 for a 5qt jug a premium price??). Also, go take a look at all of the UOAs on the first page right now and if you take your blinders off you will see that M1 in fact really doesn't have elevated numbers compared to any other oils (in fact almost all of the UOAs with M1 on the first page look pretty darn good!). There are good reports and bad reports from M1, just like there are good reports and bad reports from the others. That's just the way it is. But you've got such a wicked hatred for M1 that you automatically just zone in on the bad UOAs with that oil, and ignore the fact that it also produces good UOAs too. How about these UOAs from my Honda using M1? You want to try to tell me that all of these wear numbers are elevated? Give me a break!!

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ub...06_#Post4675449
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ub...06_#Post4389312
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ub..._Ci#Post4136337
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ub...ivi#Post3762366

We get it, you don't want to use M1, but stop shoving your hatred down everyone's throats on here, it's getting real tiresome, real fast.

And before you call me an M1 fanboy, take a look at my sig line. I've got 3 different oils in my three different cars.

And as mentioned above, if M1 was so bad, why is it factory fill on so many cars? And why haven't we seen engines wearing out quickly from running it? We haven't, and that's a fact you can take to the bank.

 

[cheesepuffs]

Also regarding price, M1 is actually cheaper than Pennzoil Platinum at Walmart right now.

 

[oil_film_movies]

"irv" is partly right, if you take the now-famous Blackstone wear rate study, done on a lot of engines, and they did compute a per-mile basis for iron wear. https://www.blackstone-labs.com/Newsletters/Gas-Diesel/July-1-2017.php
Two points:
....1. That is regular-flavor Mobil1, not EP or AP, which are improved formulas in some ways.
....2. The Blackstone study only showed a slightly higher iron wear rate (see Subaru and Chevy engine wear rates in the document).

This Mobil1 Annual Protection experiment is a marketing stunt, yet that oil really is an attempt by Exxon-Mobil to throw some advanced chemistry at us. Its not regular-flavor Mobil1.

 

[cheesepuffs]

We also know that only certain sizes of metal particles can be found via UOA, so perhaps other oils are actually causes larger wear particles that are not being captured by the UOA.

UOA is good if you’re looking for a specific problem, like very excessive ring or bearing wear, or if you want to know if small amounts of coolant are making their way into your oil. But they really provide nothing useful about regular wear patterns because they just don’t tell the whole story.

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
"irv" is partly right, if you take the now-famous Blackstone wear rate study, done on a lot of engines, and they did compute a per-mile basis for iron wear. https://www.blackstone-labs.com/Newsletters/Gas-Diesel/July-1-2017.php




And from that link above, here is a very important quote from Blackstone that we need to pay attention to:

Quote:
Well, we’re no closer to saying that one type of oil is better than another,
that’s for sure. We see much more variation in wear levels from the type
of engine, the time on the oil, the viscosity, the use the engine sees, etc.
Whatever differences exist from oil brand to oil brand, we don’t see a lot
of difference in terms of wear for most types of engines.