what's your question?
Reply from Mobil 1 concerning basestocks
- Thread starter KJA426
- Start date
- Status
what's your question?
Just noticed this whole mobil 1 going group III is spreading across the internet pretty fast. It's on many car forums already!
I totally agree. That's my biggest beef with Mobil 1. But as been said many times: They courted the "Holy Ground" with their GR IV being a "True Synthetic" and then making sure that "Fully Synthetic" meant "Non-Group III" And now "Fully Synthetic" 'can' mean Group III. I am sure that they knew that they would get caught, but they just figured the damage would be light. They might have miscalculated.
Hahahahahahaha..yea you are the man Vilan.
Ironically, his decision to never again post an oil composition (presubmably due to actual or anticipated pressure from Mobil) will result in all sorts of people who'd stick with other weights of M1 (as long as they're still primarily PAO), to now stop using all those as well (because theyre'll be no telling when they'll be switched to Grp III).
I've been hunting for M1 TDT 5w40 for many months now, even buying outrageously expensive Delvac 1 instead because it wasn't to be found.
Being high-priced is apparently unlikely to keep Delvac 1 from being re-mixed, so even though I was previously sold on using it in my TDI based on others' UOAs, so I'm certainly very seriously considering ending the hunt/overpayment and just going to GC permanently. Only good for regular "short" 10k OCIs, and less soot loading capability, but on the other hand, it actually is VW approved.
All I know about M1 5w40 at this point is that it's expensive, hard to find, and may be replaced without relabelling at any moment.
And I don't really see this as a problem if Mobil's dirty little secrets get exposed. I feel plenty taken advantage of myself, mistreating my Chevy V8s with thin M1 10w30 for years. I sure don't feel like going back to pre-Internet believe-the-manufacturer's-label ignorance.
I've been hunting for M1 TDT 5w40 for many months now, even buying outrageously expensive Delvac 1 instead because it wasn't to be found.
Being high-priced is apparently unlikely to keep Delvac 1 from being re-mixed, so even though I was previously sold on using it in my TDI based on others' UOAs, so I'm certainly very seriously considering ending the hunt/overpayment and just going to GC permanently. Only good for regular "short" 10k OCIs, and less soot loading capability, but on the other hand, it actually is VW approved.
All I know about M1 5w40 at this point is that it's expensive, hard to find, and may be replaced without relabelling at any moment.
And I don't really see this as a problem if Mobil's dirty little secrets get exposed. I feel plenty taken advantage of myself, mistreating my Chevy V8s with thin M1 10w30 for years. I sure don't feel like going back to pre-Internet believe-the-manufacturer's-label ignorance.
What is going to happen to Mobil 1? How can the other majors capitalize on this? Are they now going to advertise that Mobil 1 now uses the same inferior Grp lll base stock that they have been using and over charging the customer for years?
Nothing will happen. The 99% of clueless (or apathetic) consumers out there will go right on buying it. You know, the same ones who buy Frams. Or perhaps word will spread educating more people about the Grp III "syn" thing in many oils. The vast majority of auto enthusiasts I know don't even know about that. They think if it says synthetic on the bottle it's grown in a lab.
Poor Tom. I bet he's just dumbfounded by all this
Poor Tom. I bet he's just dumbfounded by all this
The lawyer in you is coming out, G-man. How much of this did you know before you joined BITOG? The average Mobil1 user doesn't know the ins and outs of formulations. But I'd be willing to bet a good many of them have heard of PAO and how it's supposedly the best. They go to Mobil1 b/c that's what they think they are getting. Have we reached the point where it doesn't matter? Probably....but if so, Mobil should be up front about it and not throw in caveats that hide the true composition of the oil. Rat p.ee may be a much better base stock but I won't pay $6.50 a bottle for it.
"Rat p.ee may be a much better base stock but I won't pay $6.50 a bottle for it. "
No UPA?
No UPA?
It's really sweet how you've declared yourself the conscious of BitOG and feel the need to step-in and protect the vunderable oil company professionals.
Obviously, there are pressures behind the scenes that we are not aware of, but since we are not aware of them... why should they be considered? Does someone have an answer for that?
Tom is a good guy and added some priceless content to the Forum, and I commend him on that. I even went so far, early in the thread, to caution against involving Tom personally in any angst that belongs to Mobil. What I posted was not that at all, but a call for Tom to re-examine the basis for ~his~ desision. As it ended up, Tom panicked and declaratively withdrew his participation...obviously not his prefered route, but he could have just let his role diminish and decline to do any more tests (which he had done anyway). His spurious claim that he did not think the results would cause any contraversy is a bit of smokescreen too. It seemed more like a CYA move that (imo) put the Forum in it's place, below the prestige that is allocated to ~professional~ contacts. For that, I gave the example of how *I* would handle a similar situation. Thanks again to Tom for his input, but he ultimately chose not to be one with the Forum.
Last edited:
Quote:
It's really sweet how you've declared yourself the conscious of BitOG and feel the need to step-in and protect the vunderable oil company professionals.Too bad you are not the one with any say-so, JAG. Funny how, to someone who can actually read and correctly comprehend my post, I did not even direct a comment to Tom. All I stated, using myself as an example, is that if *I* decided to do something (like post some test data the *I* owned) I would follow-through and not (for lack of a better term) "chicken-out" after I let the cat out of the bag. Likely and correctly, the Moderators were able to see that no one Member deserves ~special~ protection from extremely mild "second-guessing" from another. (really just intended to see of he would reconsider his position)
Obviously, there are pressures behind the scenes that we are not aware of, but since we are not aware of them... why should they be considered? Does someone have an answer for that?
Tom is a good guy and added some priceless content to the Forum, and I commend him on that. I even went so far, early in the thread, to caution against involving Tom personally in any angst that belongs to Mobil. What I posted was not that at all, but a call for Tom to re-examine the basis for ~his~ desision. As it ended up, Tom panicked and declaratively withdrew his participation...obviously not his prefered route, but he could have just let his role diminish and decline to do any more tests (which he had done anyway). His spurious claim that he did not think the results would cause any contraversy is a bit of smokescreen too. It seemed more like a CYA move that (imo) put the Forum in it's place, below the prestige that is allocated to ~professional~ contacts. For that, I gave the example of how *I* would handle a similar situation. Thanks again to Tom for his input, but he ultimately chose not to be one with the Forum.
I think you could have been more understanding of Tom's plight when he shared good and interesting information and realized that it became bigger and more potentially troublesome than he could accept.
I think that most of us on the forum are mature enough to admit that sometimes things take a bad turn and the best move is to not proceed.
Tom had every right to post info, or to stop posting info, and he deserves our thanks and respect for reminding us not to take things for granted.
"understanding of Tom's plight"
Of what? The "plight" that Tom did not seem to even understand himself when he originally posted?
Gimmie a break, more of the same "fluff".
Of what? The "plight" that Tom did not seem to even understand himself when he originally posted?
Gimmie a break, more of the same "fluff".
Original Text:
Hi Guys,
I have decided not to report any more base oil compositions on the forum.
I mentioned the change in a couple of M1 grades simply because this was a news item of the type that are frequently discussed here, and fitting with the theme of the forum. What I expected to be a friendly discussion on motor oil trends has exploded into a controversy that threatens to move from a forum chat to an industry event. That was not my intention, nor would I want our customers or potential customers to think that we may next be reporting their base oil types - we certainly would not. The only way to slow this down and assure others is to stop.
Don't get me wrong, I don't blame the members here who are only reacting in an honest and passionate way, the same characteristics that make this board so great. Nor have I been pressured by anyone; this is a personal decision based on practical considerations.
I fully intend to continue participating on this board as the learning, teaching, and sharing is very fulfilling. And I'll be happy to discuss any topic on lubricants and base oils - I'll just refrain from reporting specific compositions. I hope you can understand and appreciated this change.
Tom
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...like nobody saw that coming.
Personally, when I made a decision to do something, I stick to it. A-U
Hi Guys,
I have decided not to report any more base oil compositions on the forum.
I mentioned the change in a couple of M1 grades simply because this was a news item of the type that are frequently discussed here, and fitting with the theme of the forum. What I expected to be a friendly discussion on motor oil trends has exploded into a controversy that threatens to move from a forum chat to an industry event. That was not my intention, nor would I want our customers or potential customers to think that we may next be reporting their base oil types - we certainly would not. The only way to slow this down and assure others is to stop.
Don't get me wrong, I don't blame the members here who are only reacting in an honest and passionate way, the same characteristics that make this board so great. Nor have I been pressured by anyone; this is a personal decision based on practical considerations.
I fully intend to continue participating on this board as the learning, teaching, and sharing is very fulfilling. And I'll be happy to discuss any topic on lubricants and base oils - I'll just refrain from reporting specific compositions. I hope you can understand and appreciated this change.
Tom
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...like nobody saw that coming.
Personally, when I made a decision to do something, I stick to it. A-U
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Maybe there should be a Mobil 2 product line.
Hi Auto-Union,
I did not take offense to your comment. I admit I didn't quite understand it, and appreciate your clarification above, but didn't view it as a big deal and would not want to see you banned for expressing your opinion.
I truly mentioned my surprising findings on the M1 composition as a news item and discussion point on the forum. I am only on this forum for a couple of months and did not know the power it apparently possesses. And remember, unlike 99% of the members here I am not typing behind a cloak of anonymity - I am exposed and flapping in the breeze. My professional reputation and 37 year career is on the line, not to mention any other repercussions. It's easy to scream an opinion (not you) when one is hiding behind a wall.
This isn't a question of running scared, just a prudent and practical assessment of reality. I gain nothing from revealing base oil compositions and the risks are just not worth it. My primary concern is to make sure our customers and potential customers can trust me to not add them to a list of public G.C.s
Tom
I did not take offense to your comment. I admit I didn't quite understand it, and appreciate your clarification above, but didn't view it as a big deal and would not want to see you banned for expressing your opinion.
I truly mentioned my surprising findings on the M1 composition as a news item and discussion point on the forum. I am only on this forum for a couple of months and did not know the power it apparently possesses. And remember, unlike 99% of the members here I am not typing behind a cloak of anonymity - I am exposed and flapping in the breeze. My professional reputation and 37 year career is on the line, not to mention any other repercussions. It's easy to scream an opinion (not you) when one is hiding behind a wall.
This isn't a question of running scared, just a prudent and practical assessment of reality. I gain nothing from revealing base oil compositions and the risks are just not worth it. My primary concern is to make sure our customers and potential customers can trust me to not add them to a list of public G.C.s
Tom
Tom,
When you retire I hope you do not retire your G-C interpretation skills. When it no longer puts you in a conflicting position of course. In the meantime I look forward to more of your valued and experienced input on this forum. The more like you Terry, Mola Bruce etc. that actively participate the more it keeps us armchair triboligist honest.
When you retire I hope you do not retire your G-C interpretation skills. When it no longer puts you in a conflicting position of course. In the meantime I look forward to more of your valued and experienced input on this forum. The more like you Terry, Mola Bruce etc. that actively participate the more it keeps us armchair triboligist honest.
A good deed goes unpunished I guess.
The terminology used to characterize Tom's action by 1 poster is classless.
He does something to educate us & the dude terms its conclusion: "panicked" or "CYA". It should have been better presented.
That poster should be careful what he wish for. Cause unless you walk in the man's shoe, don't throw rocks. Lets see how you react if some big conglomerate puts the squeeze on your paycheck. It's fine & dandy to stand back & say what you would do...but words are small little man.
Thanks for your help again Tom.
The terminology used to characterize Tom's action by 1 poster is classless.
He does something to educate us & the dude terms its conclusion: "panicked" or "CYA". It should have been better presented.
That poster should be careful what he wish for. Cause unless you walk in the man's shoe, don't throw rocks. Lets see how you react if some big conglomerate puts the squeeze on your paycheck. It's fine & dandy to stand back & say what you would do...but words are small little man.
Thanks for your help again Tom.
Tom has done us all a service.
thanks Tom.
thanks Tom.
Great job Tom. I've been a Mobil 1 user for sometime as well as other family members that I do their oil changes. Needless to say that I will move on to another oil brand.
In regards to the one poster on this board. Well, lets say there always has to be ONE.
In regards to the one poster on this board. Well, lets say there always has to be ONE.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
