Mobil1 users are the most stubborn people I've....

[zulu]

Originally Posted By: tig1
XM is the industry leader. As engine builders around the world change their product, XM is most often the company re-formulating to meet the higher standards. They have the resources to do that. Know wonder M1 is tagged on MB, Vette, Viper, and all the rest.


I've said it once and I'll say it again... just because all the manufacturers use M1 as factory fills does not AUTOMATICALLY mean it is the best oil for that application. More often than not, EM has the MONITARY RESOURCES to make it worth the manufacturers time to use/promote thier product. I'm not knocking M1 at all, but EM DEPENDS on these manufacturers as a part of their marketing. Look how often EM refers to thier factory fill list in their ads or responses to quality questions. That's their ace in the hole. And it's something that SOPUS/Ashland can't claim.

Still however, it doesn't say anything about THE PRODUCT ITSELF...

 

[tig1]

Zulu,
XM would be fools not to use FF customers for advertising. As for quality, XM is the company with the R&D to meet all the new standards coming from the manfacturers. As good as the other oil producers are, they still follow XMs lead.

 

[Audi Junkie]

I've avoided the M1 threads, but I understand what this original post is about. Mobil 1 is the top synth oil in the US. People know it's good, but don't know a lot about oil in general.

What is that? Ignorance. What does ignorane breed? Arrogance, but a special kind. Shure it's arrogance when you KNOW a lot about a subject, but it's also arrogant to be ignorant about it and just repeat what marketing has instilled as an analog for knowledge.

These are the same people who only ~believe~ factory/dealer service tech's diagnoses, but curse these same people when they leave with their free advice.

 

[jamas1]

I know I'm not helping this discusion, but this sure is good reading! Beats whats on t.v!

 

[opposite_locker]

There is a reason that they (we) are stubborn...because it works VERY well! People always stand behind what has worked for them, and with the market share that EM has with their M1 line, what do you expect?

Is it the best oil available? Probably not...but it is a solid product. M1 is not my favorite oil, but it is my choice of the "mainstream" synthetics.

If it weren't for opinions, these boards would be boring.

 

[tropic]

M1 users rank up there with Dallas Cowboys fans. Especially the ones who succumb to the XOM marketing BORG, have their M1 changed out on a reasonable schedule, and never agonize over whether they've put the "best" PCMO in their sump. Probably sleep well at night, too. Jerks.

 

[Trav]

Quote:
ExxonMobil was the largest profiteer during the gas price gouging going on and that really soured me on that company and their products.

I don't know about that but it i wonder how much uncle Sam and the futures traders made on their products and did absolutely nothing other than hold out the hand to get it.

 

[MatchboxCar]

Originally Posted By: Hethaerto
I know a few people that use Mobil1 exclusively.

Why exactly do Mobil1 users believe so steadfastly that M1 is the best synthetic oil on the market?


In thirty years of Mobil 1 use, I have never had a bad UOA. (I UOA at almost every OC.) In fact, the UOA have been exeedingly great. I see no reason to change as long as my cars continue to go the 150k to 400k miles they have gone, all on Mobil 1, with proven low wear.

....and I loathe pyramid schemes.

 

[Rolf]

Originally Posted By: MatchboxCar
In thirty years of Mobil 1 use, I have never had a bad UOA.


Now we're at the meat of the matter.

To talk about "Mobil 1" in general is silly - there are several formulas, some with quite different characteristics.

Placing 5W-30 EP, 5W-40 Turbo Diesel, and 4T 10W-40 motorcycle oil side-by-side you'd find they're as different from each other as they are from oils from other manufacturers.

Once you get a match to your vehicle and driving style, supported by UOA, you shouldn't care whose brand is on the bottle.





.

 

[buster]

Mobil 1 has always been one of the best synthetic oils on the market and still is to this day in certain grades. It's XOM's flagship product so I don't see that changing.

I do think they cluttered their product line a bit with two Mobil 1 oils. They should have just kept ONE Mobil 1 and made it more robust. Just put on the bottles "capable of 15,000/1 yr drain intervals when out of warranty". My .02

Their M1 TDT is one of the best 5w40's I can think of.

 

[1sttruck]

"I've said it once and I'll say it again... just because all the manufacturers use M1 as factory fills does not AUTOMATICALLY mean it is the best oil for that application. More often than not, EM has the MONITARY RESOURCES to make it...."

A common sign of some sort of cult is that something is the way that it is because 'it's a conspiracy', as there is no good reason for things being the way that 'I think they should be'. Now sometimes people should be paranoid because it really is a conspiracy, but it's hard to envision that Mobil hires enforcers to complete purchase orders with OEMs the world over. In this case the evidence in Mobil's favor is that there doesn't seem to be much of a competitor for OEM synthetic oils.

 

[PT1]

Originally Posted By: tenderloin


You really believe that Aston Martin, Bentley, MB AMG, Porsche and the rest are bought off by a few dollars per car in free oil?


Yes, absolutely 100% I do. After working as a consultant to the automotive industry for 28 years I would say that is probably a hard fact. Most people don't know that the Ford Explorer/Firestone tire debacle that killed over 800 people worldwide was due to a $0.25 per tire cost reduction offered by Firestone versus Goodyear who had a better tire for $1 more per vehicle. So for free factory fill for all of your vehicles? Any of those manufacturers would sell their Mother. JMHO

 

[Rolf]

Originally Posted By: PT1
After working as a consultant to the automotive industry for 28 years .....


Brave or retired.

Originally Posted By: PT1
Most people don't know that the Ford Explorer/Firestone tire debacle that killed over 800 people worldwide was due to a $0.25 per tire cost reduction offered by Firestone versus Goodyear who had a better tire for $1 more per vehicle.


Ford, since the old man, had used Firestone tires.

The major problems were underinflation, women driving, and overloading.




.

 

[greenaccord02]

Originally Posted By: Rolf

The major problems were underinflation, women driving, and overloading.

 

[Liquid_Turbo]

Originally Posted By: Rolf
Originally Posted By: PT1
After working as a consultant to the automotive industry for 28 years .....


Brave or retired.

Originally Posted By: PT1
Most people don't know that the Ford Explorer/Firestone tire debacle that killed over 800 people worldwide was due to a $0.25 per tire cost reduction offered by Firestone versus Goodyear who had a better tire for $1 more per vehicle.


Ford, since the old man, had used Firestone tires.

The major problems were underinflation, women driving, and overloading.

.


Unnecessary sexist comment.

I agree. A chance to claw at pennies is always taken. Remember Dodge Caravans not equipped with a brake-shift interlock, as well as a single latch causing the rear hatch causing kids to get ejected out of vehicles.. because of saving a few bucks.

 

[Rolf]

Originally Posted By: Liquid_Turbo
Unnecessary sexist comment.


Absolutely not.

The number of women who drive cars with low tire pressure, low oil levels, and low transmission fluid are easily ten times the number of men who do the same.

The stats on the Explorer tire debacle indicated 80% of the drivers were women.

If you don't look at your tires, check the pressure, and can't tell when something is amiss, you'll drive to destruction.




.

 

[Bill in Utah]

Originally Posted By: MatchboxCar
Originally Posted By: Hethaerto
I know a few people that use Mobil1 exclusively.

Why exactly do Mobil1 users believe so steadfastly that M1 is the best synthetic oil on the market?


In thirty years of Mobil 1 use, I have never had a bad UOA. (I UOA at almost every OC.) In fact, the UOA have been exeedingly great. I see no reason to change as long as my cars continue to go the 150k to 400k miles they have gone, all on Mobil 1, with proven low wear.

....and I loathe pyramid schemes.


You must have not received the memo...

UOAs are useless. Only tear downs matter.

That is according to the new "thought" process here.

Bill

PS: I should correct myself.. It has always been if the UOA has shown your oil to be good, then UOAs are ok. If they show other oils performance (that you do not care about) then they are useless.

Now they are useless.

 

[OVERKILL]

Bill isn't quite explaining it correctly (though he seems to be doing this intentionally).

UOA's are not a good tool to determine how an engine is wearing. They are not useless. Engine and oil manufacturers use tear-down testing to evaluate wear and lubricant performance.

UOA's cover a small spread of particulate size. They can potentially give you an IDEA that you MIGHT have something going on if there is an increase in wear metals but no real idea as to what. This is because that narrow spectrum is supposed to represent the "average" of the particulate matter sampled, but in practise, may not. A member on here had fantastic UOA's, but no bearings left when he did a tear-down. This would be because the bearing material was too large to show up in the UOA's....

The PURPOSE of UOA's, as I understand it, is to monitor lubricant life and contamination levels. That is why they are performed on OTR trucks. They can be used to identify potential problems, which are then investigated via tear-down.

Doug Hillary has done extensive fleet testing, using UOA's to track the lubricant contamination levels and service life and using 150ppm of iron as his condemnation limit for wear-metal contamination. He recently posted pictures of one of those engines during a routine tear-down inspection and the bearings and sleeve still spec'd out to "like new" with 1.2 million Km on them. The engine is still in service with those parts, now with 2.5 million Km on it.

Obviously, the average oil nut is not going to be willing or potentially even able to tear his engine down just to mic everything and then put it back together. Which I think is what Bill is sort of taking a stab at.

And this is reasonable. That is why we depend on the engine and oil manufacturers to have performed this kind of testing for us. And why, if you use oil that is rated to be used in your car and follow your manufacturers recommendations for oil grade, specs and change intervals, that your cars, like Bill's, will live a long and uneventful life. Because this is what the manufacturers test for.

Tom NJ and Doug Hillary have BOTH touched on this subject recently, and I would like to think that they both know what they are talking about.

 

[FrankN4]

Originally Posted By: Rolf
Originally Posted By: Liquid_Turbo
Unnecessary sexist comment.


Absolutely not.

The number of women who drive cars with low tire pressure, low oil levels, and low transmission fluid are easily ten times the number of men who do the same.

The stats on the Explorer tire debacle indicated 80% of the drivers were women.

If you don't look at your tires, check the pressure, and can't tell when something is amiss, you'll drive to destruction.

.

 

[buster]

Why do you think they are stubborn though?

Mobil 1 has been a top notch oil for over 30 years now. It has a flawless track record. It therefore has a strong following of people that have used it with success over the years.

I personally believe Ashland's claims so this is kind of a first known flaw of the Mobil 1 brand that has been advertised publicly.