New Mobil 1 5w30 ESP Formulation?

[buster]

Many that like to see additives on paper won't like this change (assuming it is true/Russia does have fake oils in the market place). However, this corroborates with the latest MSDS change (Jan 30 2023). Draw your own conclusions.

I can't infer much from this. I will say that Mobil 1 oils always tend to get better and not worse often using the very latest in chemistry.

 

[Bjornviken]

That's German , Russian doesn't get M1 any more. They usually copy uoas from german oil club

 

[buster]

That's German , Russian doesn't get M1 any more. They usually copy uoas from german oil club

Good catch I missed that. Thank you.

 

[Bjornviken]

What i have noticed, is that moving to Api SP oils many brand have reduced pao content Of course i could be wrong

 

[buster]

What i have noticed, is that moving to Api SP oils many brand have reduced pao content Of course i could be wrong

It seems like most brands are a blend of III/GTL/PAO in varying amounts. I'm curious what Mobil is doing with their line as they SA continues to get lower and lower. They have consistently reduced the level of metallic additives over the years.

 

[Bjornviken]

It seems like most brands are a blend of III/GTL/PAO in varying amounts. I'm curious what Mobil is doing with their line as they SA continues to get lower and lower. They have consistently reduced the level of metallic additives over the years.

Who knows what they uses what we can not se in the voa, still believe its a better version. More approvals for example. I Actually i going to buy this oil for the Hilux, Land Cruiser uses M1 0w-40 and its running super smooth on that oil, so only M1 0w-40 in that car

 

[chris719]

It seems like most brands are a blend of III/GTL/PAO in varying amounts. I'm curious what Mobil is doing with their line as they SA continues to get lower and lower. They have consistently reduced the level of metallic additives over the years.

Certainly we don't know what secret sauce they are adding, hopefully it's something because otherwise this oil is looking increasingly pedestrian. Almost no moly, too.

 

[Deleted member 89374]

What i have noticed, is that moving to Api SP oils many brand have reduced pao content Of course i could be wrong

You're not wrong. It has to do with advances in additive technology. Blending with PAO is a PITA and only the thinnest high-NOACK PAOs offer those stupid-low pour points. It is beyond me why so many hunt for oils with PAO content. I suspect it has something to do with "getting your money's worth" rather than getting a properly formulated oil. For cold climate it is understandable, however, other than that, there isn't a single good reason to use PAO.

 

[tbm5690]

So the 5w-30 ESP carries SP as well as C3 certification? I just put 0w-30 ESP in one of my vehicles and that is C3 only, no API AFAIK.

 

[Bjornviken]

So the 5w-30 ESP carries SP as well as C3 certification? I just put 0w-30 ESP in one of my vehicles and that is C3 only, no API AFAIK.

Yes

 

[chris719]

You're not wrong. It has to do with advances in additive technology. Blending with PAO is a PITA and only the thinnest high-NOACK PAOs offer those stupid-low pour points. It is beyond me why so many hunt for oils with PAO content. I suspect it has something to do with "getting your money's worth" rather than getting a properly formulated oil. For cold climate it is understandable, however, other than that, there isn't a single good reason to use PAO.

The overall point that the finished product’s performance trumps all is correct. Still, I think there are legit concerns as to the primary motivation in some of these reformulations. It’s not just a lack of PAO. The GTL and Group V seems to be gone, too. GTL didn’t have the solubility or seal shrinking issues of PAO and so a move to mostly VHVI seems like a cost cutting move. The new oil meets even more specifications despite losing better base stocks and moly. Clearly there must be some chemistry at work to enable that, but it makes you wonder if this product is as good as it could have been without cost cutting.

 

[Deleted member 89374]

The overall point that the finished product’s performance trumps all is correct. Still, I think there are legit concerns as to the primary motivation in some of these reformulations. It’s not just a lack of PAO. The GTL and Group V seems to be gone, too. GTL didn’t have the solubility or seal shrinking issues of PAO and so a move to mostly VHVI seems like a cost cutting move. The new oil meets even more specifications despite losing better base stocks and moly. Clearly there must be some chemistry at work to enable that, but it makes you wonder if this product is as good as it could have been without cost cutting.

 

[chris719]

I think it's a fair question. Why does HPL not use 100% Group III bases then? People will bash other companies here when they reduce Grp IV / V content but Mobil gets a pass on reputation alone? It feels like there are a lot of M1 fans here and anything they do is automatically praised.

In theory it is quite possible that you could add an approval like LL-04 but have to compromise the margins by which it passed other tests in order to do so. We'll never know because no one publishes actual data.

Again, it's obvious the product meets all the approvals on the bottle, but most people here are interested in how much an oil may exceed a given specification. If it's just about meeting then why bother with anything but Amazon Basics?

 

[Bjornviken]

I think it's a fair question. Why does HPL not use 100% Group III bases then? People will bash other companies here when they reduce Grp IV / V content but Mobil gets a pass on reputation alone? It feels like there are a lot of M1 fans here and anything they do is automatically praised.

In theory it is quite possible that you could add an approval like LL-04 but have to compromise the margins by which it passed other tests in order to do so. We'll never know because no one publishes actual data.

Again, it's obvious the product meets all the approvals on the bottle, but most people here are interested in how much an oil may exceed a given specification. If it's just about meeting then why bother with anything but Amazon Basics?

What HPL uses i don't know, but i need to know a oils approvals to be sure in what car i can run it. How do i know how much a oil exceeds a given specification?

 

[chris719]

What HPL uses i don't know, but i need to know a oils approvals to be sure in what car i can run it. How do i know how much a oil exceeds a given specification?

We don't because the data is never made public, unfortunately. People try to infer it and marketing often tries to claim it, though.

 

[Mekks]

This is the newest info Mobil sent me about ESP 5w-30 being SP raited.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

I think it's a fair question. Why does HPL not use 100% Group III bases then? People will bash other companies here when they reduce Grp IV / V content but Mobil gets a pass on reputation alone? It feels like there are a lot of M1 fans here and anything they do is automatically praised.

In theory it is quite possible that you could add an approval like LL-04 but have to compromise the margins by which it passed other tests in order to do so. We'll never know because no one publishes actual data.

Again, it's obvious the product meets all the approvals on the bottle, but most people here are interested in how much an oil may exceed a given specification. If it's just about meeting then why bother with anything but Amazon Basics?

Don't they use Gr3/Gr3+/GTL in some formulations?

 

[chris719]

Don't they use Gr3/Gr3+/GTL in some formulations?

They do. My comment was based on the spectra shown on the oil-club.de for this new API SP ESP 5W-30 which doesn't look like the previous iteration, which did have GTL and some ester.

 

[OVERKILL]

They do. My comment was based on the spectra shown on the oil-club.de for this new API SP ESP 5W-30 which doesn't look like the previous iteration, which did have GTL and some ester.

64742-54-7 is an interesting number because it also includes Mobil's EHC bases (Group II+). It's also the main based used in Royal Purple HPS, lol.

Maybe Shell's price for Pearl GTL went up and now Yubase is cheaper?

 

[Bjornviken]

64742-54-7 is an interesting number because it also includes Mobil's EHC bases (Group II+). It's also the main based used in Royal Purple HPS, lol.

Maybe Shell's price for Pearl GTL went up and now Yubase is cheaper?

optimum additive solubility and oxidation stability and good lubrication properties and less biodegradable base oils. Will be perfect in a light duty diesel engine