New Telluride - Mobil 1 HM?

R

RonRonnster

Joined
Dec 6, 2017
Messages
149
Location
Idaho
Just purchased a new Kia Telluride for the family. It's the first vehicle we've ever purchased new, and we are really enjoying the car so far. Any reason to not use Mobil 1 HM 5W30 in this? The owner's manual states ACEA A5 or above (*whatever "above" means), which HM does meet according to Exxon/Mobil - as well as SN Plus and SP.

Why you may ask? Well the Telluride takes 6.5-6.8 quarts. My '98 Chevy takes 5 quarts. I've been running the HM in the '98 and like it. I can buy the 12 quart box of M1 HM from Walmart and it's the perfect amount for both vehicles. I can get the Vanilla M1 in the same box, for the same price, but I like the HM in the pickup. I also like the slightly thicker formulation of the HM version over the Vanilla M1. I guess I am a thickie after all! I think I already know it's fine - I just want a sanity check I guess. I'll put Vanilla M1 in the pickup if it means doing what's best for the newer and much more expensive vehicle.

Also, if any other Telluride/3.8 Lambda owners have any previous experience they'd like to share, please do! This is our first Kia (owned several GMs and Hondas in the past). It's also our first GDi vehicle.

Oh - pics are always required for these kind of posts!

IMG_8010.JPG
 
I don't know if HM is marketing or not. Conventional wisdom says it has seal swellers, or whatever. Brand new, I'd use PP, or any other lower NOACK oil and be done with it. Mobil 1 burned in my 19' Sorento, but that's only one vehicle. Don't want to start a catch can debate, but installing one might be something to consider.
 
No reason not to run any oil brand/type you want. The HM oil is a great choice.

Only recommendations I make are an early 1k break-in oil/filter change out and no overly extended intervals.... Kia/Hyundai don't have the best engine reputation. I wouldn't go 7500 miles on the oil, regardless of the fancy marketing.

Exercise the warranty for every issue. Kia/Hyundai has learned a thing or two about taking care of customers and will take care of almost anything.
 
Nice car. I've been considering getting one for a bit now. Will probably get one in the next couple of years once the kids are out of the "make a mess in everything stage."

There's no reason you can't use that oil. It meets the specs so it's fine. Wouldn't be my personal first choice but that's just me. If you like it for your truck and it's easier for you that way, then fantastic. Go for it!
 
Greasymechtech said:
No reason not to run any oil brand/type you want. The HM oil is a great choice.

Only recommendations I make are an early 1k break-in oil/filter change out and no overly extended intervals.... Kia/Hyundai don't have the best engine reputation. I wouldn't go 7500 miles on the oil, regardless of the fancy marketing.

Exercise the warranty for every issue. Kia/Hyundai has learned a thing or two about taking care of customers and will take care of almost anything.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with an early change. Real data to show that has positive benefits down the road (longevity).

I use the M1 10w30 HM in several (basically all) cars - out to 7,500. NA, turbo, and Turbo GDI. Have done UOA to test it and it's been fine, including in the turbo GDI.
 
skyactiv said:
I love posting this video, even if it's wrong, or right, who knows.

Click to expand...

Watch @ 1:03 where he says you'll be committed to running a "high mileage synthetic" for the rest of the life of the car. I wonder why he said a high mileage "synthetic" and not a high mileage "conventional"? Wonder if XOM slid him some cash to advertise for them?
 
Last edited:
Not even worth watching video

There is a seal/gasket compatibility testing. If the bottle labelled with something from API/ILSAC? Then, it meets the ASTM requirements.

You can swap from conventional to blends to synthetic and back forth any time you want. You can change viscosities any time you want. And, you can go from HM to non-HM and back forth as often as you want whenever you want.

The question you should REALLY ask is why the non-HM oils are all blended with the least possible amount of additives and if they are pushing the discount bottom 'edge' of a spec too much. And, the massive increase in dose of conditioners from 1% to 1.1% worthy of the marketing label?
Its almost as funny as the anti-z/p crowd that have a fit when someone recommends an oil that has 1000/1100ppm over an API oil with 800/900ppm worrying about your catalytic failing instantaneously after you use the non-API oil with a little extra ppm of additives. My oil, with extra megadose of moly, that is 60ppm of moly, is drastically better than your oil with only a hohum generic 55ppm of moly 🤣 Megaextradose is a great marketing term too!

HM is a marketing term. Its motor oil. It meets ASTM/SAE/API/ILSAC/.... specs. Using it on a brand new engine is fine.

What's the warranty on Kia engines/seals? You have 10years/100k miles to wreck your engine!
 
Greasymechtech said:
The question you should REALLY ask is why the non-HM oils are all blended with the least possible amount of additives and if they are pushing the discount bottom 'edge' of a spec too much. And, the massive increase in dose of conditioners from 1% to 1.1% worthy of the marketing label?
Click to expand...

Yes, this here - if we are talking an otherwise equivalent oil with slightly more additives and the same price, why aren't we using HM oil all the time in everything? That's always confused me. I would understand if the HM version of an oil didn't come with the same API or ACEA specifications. But in this case it still has the same specifications, so it must not have too little or too much of a certain ingredient in order to stay within specs. VOAs and UOAs do NOT tell us the whole story, but they at least tell us there something different between the normal and HM formulations. So if HM has more of the good stuff why not always buy that if it's the same price anyway?

Probably, (and most likely) the answer is the additional additives don't make a lick of difference in the long run and it's just a way to get more shelf space or cater to more potential buyers. I don't subscribe to the theory that a HM oil will make any engine last longer, BUT at least in my experience, they can sometimes slow an oil seep or help curb consumption. Maybe the key there is a slightly thicker viscosity? In which case, stepping up a grade would likely accomplish the same thing? 🤷‍♂️
 
The Critic said:
Unrelated question - did you have to pay more than MSRP?
Click to expand...
No - but I didn't get any discounts or incentives either. I lucked out - the model we saw had just arrived so it still had the original MSRP sticker on it. The dealer wanted to mark it up but I told them I wasn't paying a different price than what printed on the sticker. I did get the dealer to include some accessories though.
 
aquariuscsm said:
Watch @ 1:03 where he says you'll be committed to running a "high mileage synthetic" for the rest of the life of the car. I wonder why he said a high mileage "synthetic" and not a high mileage "conventional"? Wonder if XOM slid him some cash to advertise for them?
Click to expand...
I caught that, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Kia Telluride (2023) Initial Fill UOA
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
candoo1
J
A3/B4 in 2GR-FE
Replies
14
Views
1K
Georgiey22
Twisted1
High mile 4.6 Ford - Ok to use heavier oil?
2 3
Replies
45
Views
2K
Cujet
N
Mixing 5 quarts Mobil 1 EP + 0.7 quart M1 AFE 0W-20
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
odie
BrendanC
Mobil 1 M1-113a C&P
Replies
7
Views
303
Sayjac
Back
Top