The difference between Mobile 1 and Wal-Mart oil?
- Thread starter discobiscuit
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: astronomy
Originally Posted By: Doog
Originally Posted By: discobiscuit
I only use Mobil 1 in my cars. I'm wondering what the difference in Mobil 1 and Wal-Mart oil is. The wal-mart oil has the approval seal on the bottle so is it the same as Mobil 1?
No: Mobil 1 is much better, higher quality and therefore more expensive. Kind of like the difference between a Chevy and a Cadillac.
Wouldn't a more accurate analysis be that Mobil 1 is marginally better and significantly more expensive than Supertech full synthetic?
Since you don't know the formulation makeup of M1,(base oil and additives) can you explain your statement"marginally better"? Does this statement fit all oils of the same rating?
Since you don't know M1's formulation either, couldn't the opposite of what you're suggesting also be true? According to PQIA, there's not much difference between them at all, aside from more magnesium in the M1. But if that Mobil name on the bottle makes you feel better, buddy, it's your money.
http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/supertech.htm
http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/mobil1.htm
Originally Posted By: astronomy
Originally Posted By: Doog
Originally Posted By: discobiscuit
I only use Mobil 1 in my cars. I'm wondering what the difference in Mobil 1 and Wal-Mart oil is. The wal-mart oil has the approval seal on the bottle so is it the same as Mobil 1?
No: Mobil 1 is much better, higher quality and therefore more expensive. Kind of like the difference between a Chevy and a Cadillac.
Wouldn't a more accurate analysis be that Mobil 1 is marginally better and significantly more expensive than Supertech full synthetic?
Since you don't know the formulation makeup of M1,(base oil and additives) can you explain your statement"marginally better"? Does this statement fit all oils of the same rating?
Since you don't know M1's formulation either, couldn't the opposite of what you're suggesting also be true? According to PQIA, there's not much difference between them at all, aside from more magnesium in the M1. But if that Mobil name on the bottle makes you feel better, buddy, it's your money.
http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/supertech.htm
http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/mobil1.htm
Really.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Mobil 1 is no better or worse than any other API approved oil changed at a proper interval.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Mobil 1 is no better or worse than any other API approved oil changed at a proper interval.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Really.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Mobil 1 is no better or worse than any other API approved oil changed at a proper interval.
Yes really, I would have to agree. It all depends on the users definition of a proper interval.
Really.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Mobil 1 is no better or worse than any other API approved oil changed at a proper interval.
Yes really, I would have to agree. It all depends on the users definition of a proper interval.
It is quite funny to see a periodic (every ~ 6months) debate on who makes SuperTech oil. People will check the bottle shape and compare to common manufacturers, they will look at the stamp on the bottom, they will look at the MSDS and address on MSDS calling the 1800 number. Then the final conclusion is no one has a clue because there are regional differences. People will call the 1800 number which will take them to the MSDS company for Shell with an address of Texaco. LoL
It makes for nice reading if you want some humor for the day.
I conclude no one has a clue who makes the oil except someone in Walmart with a sense of humor and an eye to find the cheapest bottler/blender who can meet SN/GF-5 specs.
The oil that PQIA analyzed from SuperTech happened to at that one point in time have a completely different additive package and some difference in base oil (at least by NOACK) than Mobil 1.
It makes for nice reading if you want some humor for the day.
I conclude no one has a clue who makes the oil except someone in Walmart with a sense of humor and an eye to find the cheapest bottler/blender who can meet SN/GF-5 specs.
The oil that PQIA analyzed from SuperTech happened to at that one point in time have a completely different additive package and some difference in base oil (at least by NOACK) than Mobil 1.
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
It is quite funny to see a periodic (every ~ 6months) debate on who makes SuperTech oil. People will check the bottle shape and compare to common manufacturers, they will look at the stamp on the bottom, they will look at the MSDS and address on MSDS calling the 1800 number. Then the final conclusion is no one has a clue because there are regional differences. People will call the 1800 number which will take them to the MSDS company for Shell with an address of Texaco. LoL
It makes for nice reading if you want some humor for the day.
I conclude no one has a clue who makes the oil except someone in Walmart with a sense of humor and an eye to find the cheapest bottler/blender who can meet SN/GF-5 specs.
The oil that PQIA analyzed from SuperTech happened to at that one point in time have a completely different additive package and some difference in base oil (at least by NOACK) than Mobil 1.
This is not quite right,Super Tech is usually made by either Warren Performance Products/Warren Northeast or Mobil with a small percent being made by Shell.Citgo came into the picture recently but that didnt seem to last long,WPP/WNE has been and still is the supplier in my area and it has been this way for a long time.
WPP/WNE has been shown to make quality oils.
The Super Tech Syn. is made by WPP/WNE and WPP/WNE alone as far as I know.
For most people,Super Tech will do a good job and the vehicle wont know the difference.SN/GF5 conventional oils are really nothing like the oils they have replaced and many if not all will even have some amount of syn. in them to meet the SN standard.
As has been said,unless the op wants to extend his OCI,the Super Tech Syn. should do fine.
The Super Tech Syn. tested by PQIA is made by WPP/WNE.
It is quite funny to see a periodic (every ~ 6months) debate on who makes SuperTech oil. People will check the bottle shape and compare to common manufacturers, they will look at the stamp on the bottom, they will look at the MSDS and address on MSDS calling the 1800 number. Then the final conclusion is no one has a clue because there are regional differences. People will call the 1800 number which will take them to the MSDS company for Shell with an address of Texaco. LoL
It makes for nice reading if you want some humor for the day.
I conclude no one has a clue who makes the oil except someone in Walmart with a sense of humor and an eye to find the cheapest bottler/blender who can meet SN/GF-5 specs.
The oil that PQIA analyzed from SuperTech happened to at that one point in time have a completely different additive package and some difference in base oil (at least by NOACK) than Mobil 1.
This is not quite right,Super Tech is usually made by either Warren Performance Products/Warren Northeast or Mobil with a small percent being made by Shell.Citgo came into the picture recently but that didnt seem to last long,WPP/WNE has been and still is the supplier in my area and it has been this way for a long time.
WPP/WNE has been shown to make quality oils.
The Super Tech Syn. is made by WPP/WNE and WPP/WNE alone as far as I know.
For most people,Super Tech will do a good job and the vehicle wont know the difference.SN/GF5 conventional oils are really nothing like the oils they have replaced and many if not all will even have some amount of syn. in them to meet the SN standard.
As has been said,unless the op wants to extend his OCI,the Super Tech Syn. should do fine.
The Super Tech Syn. tested by PQIA is made by WPP/WNE.
i've never seen a debate... just a bunch of people saying it varies by region
some of it is warren, some is exxonmobil, some is sopus
the pqia sample is most likely warren
some of it is warren, some is exxonmobil, some is sopus
the pqia sample is most likely warren
Originally Posted By: motorguy222
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
It is quite funny to see a periodic (every ~ 6months) debate on who makes SuperTech oil. People will check the bottle shape and compare to common manufacturers, they will look at the stamp on the bottom, they will look at the MSDS and address on MSDS calling the 1800 number. Then the final conclusion is no one has a clue because there are regional differences. People will call the 1800 number which will take them to the MSDS company for Shell with an address of Texaco. LoL
It makes for nice reading if you want some humor for the day.
I conclude no one has a clue who makes the oil except someone in Walmart with a sense of humor and an eye to find the cheapest bottler/blender who can meet SN/GF-5 specs.
The oil that PQIA analyzed from SuperTech happened to at that one point in time have a completely different additive package and some difference in base oil (at least by NOACK) than Mobil 1.
This is not quite right,Super Tech is usually made by either Warren Performance Products/Warren Northeast or Mobil with a small percent being made by Shell.Citgo came into the picture recently but that didnt seem to last long,WPP/WNE has been and still is the supplier in my area and it has been this way for a long time.
WPP/WNE has been shown to make quality oils.
The Super Tech Syn. is made by WPP/WNE and WPP/WNE alone as far as I know.
For most people,Super Tech will do a good job and the vehicle wont know the difference.SN/GF5 conventional oils are really nothing like the oils they have replaced and many if not all will even have some amount of syn. in them to meet the SN standard.
As has been said,unless the op wants to extend his OCI,the Super Tech Syn. should do fine.
The Super Tech Syn. tested by PQIA is made by WPP/WNE.
BLAM!
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
It is quite funny to see a periodic (every ~ 6months) debate on who makes SuperTech oil. People will check the bottle shape and compare to common manufacturers, they will look at the stamp on the bottom, they will look at the MSDS and address on MSDS calling the 1800 number. Then the final conclusion is no one has a clue because there are regional differences. People will call the 1800 number which will take them to the MSDS company for Shell with an address of Texaco. LoL
It makes for nice reading if you want some humor for the day.
I conclude no one has a clue who makes the oil except someone in Walmart with a sense of humor and an eye to find the cheapest bottler/blender who can meet SN/GF-5 specs.
The oil that PQIA analyzed from SuperTech happened to at that one point in time have a completely different additive package and some difference in base oil (at least by NOACK) than Mobil 1.
This is not quite right,Super Tech is usually made by either Warren Performance Products/Warren Northeast or Mobil with a small percent being made by Shell.Citgo came into the picture recently but that didnt seem to last long,WPP/WNE has been and still is the supplier in my area and it has been this way for a long time.
WPP/WNE has been shown to make quality oils.
The Super Tech Syn. is made by WPP/WNE and WPP/WNE alone as far as I know.
For most people,Super Tech will do a good job and the vehicle wont know the difference.SN/GF5 conventional oils are really nothing like the oils they have replaced and many if not all will even have some amount of syn. in them to meet the SN standard.
As has been said,unless the op wants to extend his OCI,the Super Tech Syn. should do fine.
The Super Tech Syn. tested by PQIA is made by WPP/WNE.
BLAM!
Originally Posted By: Doog
No: Mobil 1 is much better, higher quality and therefore more expensive. Kind of like the difference between a Chevy and a Cadillac.
I found this comparison amusing, they are both GM products, same base for the most part, just a little frilly addition here or there.
Maybe that was the point?
No: Mobil 1 is much better, higher quality and therefore more expensive. Kind of like the difference between a Chevy and a Cadillac.
I found this comparison amusing, they are both GM products, same base for the most part, just a little frilly addition here or there.
Maybe that was the point?
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: slush
Originally Posted By: Doog
No: Mobil 1 is much better, higher quality and therefore more expensive. Kind of like the difference between a Chevy and a Cadillac.
I found this comparison amusing, they are both GM products, same base for the most part, just a little frilly addition here or there.
Maybe that was the point?
Cavalier vs. Cimarron?
Originally Posted By: Doog
No: Mobil 1 is much better, higher quality and therefore more expensive. Kind of like the difference between a Chevy and a Cadillac.
I found this comparison amusing, they are both GM products, same base for the most part, just a little frilly addition here or there.
Maybe that was the point?
Cavalier vs. Cimarron?
If you think that most store brands and the established brand name foods are the same (they tend to be nutritionally similar), then Mobil 1 and ST are the same. If you think that there is little comparison between name brand and store brand foods, then Mobil 1 and ST are very different.
The API symbol means that each oil passed the same set of tests. If you needed surgery, would you want the surgeon that passed all of his classes with a C's or the surgeon that passed all of his classes with A's. They both passed the same classes...
The API symbol means that each oil passed the same set of tests. If you needed surgery, would you want the surgeon that passed all of his classes with a C's or the surgeon that passed all of his classes with A's. They both passed the same classes...
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Really.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Mobil 1 is no better or worse than any other API approved oil changed at a proper interval.
Yes really, I would have to agree. It all depends on the users definition of a proper interval.
Thank you.
With Mobil 1 I personally would be comfortable running it for 10000 in a non-severe service type application,supertech I would be apprehensive running their syn at that interval until I had some data to help my comfort level.
Lets remember that Dnewton has put his money where his mouth is and is running supertech conventional out to 10000 miles in his villager,so he is proving that it can be done,however I'm just not comfortable pushing that far.
Tig is proving that M1 in his duratechs will do the 10000 mile interval easily,not that those engine are particularly hard on oil however that is still a long interval.
And I think M1 has their own guarantee that the regular M1 will go 10000 miles and the EP 15000 miles. Although I don't know how tough it would be to prove a failure was due to their oil,and not an engineering issue with the engine.
If its anything like the Amsoil warranty I wouldn't even bother trying.
This whole debate is why I prefer conventional. 5000 miles and done. No fuss,no trying to push the interval to get return on investment,none of it.
I will always use syn in the winter. -40 sucks and anything I can do to help the engine at those temps I'm going to try,but unless your application requires a synthetic based on performance criteria I just don't see the point of paying more.
Synthetic oils last longer in service in most applications however they aren't magic. In most applications you will see absolutely no difference in wear when comparing a mineral oil vs a syn at a 5000 mile interval.
But this is bitog. We are oil nerds who think an engine is dissolving if a used oil analysis shows a few ppm more than the previous run and most think they are doing their engines a favour by dumping a syn at 5000 or less miles because we've convinced ourselves that it ads peace of mind or some type of absurdity like cheap insurance.
Yes. This is bitog,where some feel that re-using an oil filter contaminates the new oil we put in,yet we've overlooked that there is up to a quart still in the top end.
We can split hairs so razor thin that a by-bass filter couldn't filter it out,and that's what makes this site so grand.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Really.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Mobil 1 is no better or worse than any other API approved oil changed at a proper interval.
Yes really, I would have to agree. It all depends on the users definition of a proper interval.
Thank you.
With Mobil 1 I personally would be comfortable running it for 10000 in a non-severe service type application,supertech I would be apprehensive running their syn at that interval until I had some data to help my comfort level.
Lets remember that Dnewton has put his money where his mouth is and is running supertech conventional out to 10000 miles in his villager,so he is proving that it can be done,however I'm just not comfortable pushing that far.
Tig is proving that M1 in his duratechs will do the 10000 mile interval easily,not that those engine are particularly hard on oil however that is still a long interval.
And I think M1 has their own guarantee that the regular M1 will go 10000 miles and the EP 15000 miles. Although I don't know how tough it would be to prove a failure was due to their oil,and not an engineering issue with the engine.
If its anything like the Amsoil warranty I wouldn't even bother trying.
This whole debate is why I prefer conventional. 5000 miles and done. No fuss,no trying to push the interval to get return on investment,none of it.
I will always use syn in the winter. -40 sucks and anything I can do to help the engine at those temps I'm going to try,but unless your application requires a synthetic based on performance criteria I just don't see the point of paying more.
Synthetic oils last longer in service in most applications however they aren't magic. In most applications you will see absolutely no difference in wear when comparing a mineral oil vs a syn at a 5000 mile interval.
But this is bitog. We are oil nerds who think an engine is dissolving if a used oil analysis shows a few ppm more than the previous run and most think they are doing their engines a favour by dumping a syn at 5000 or less miles because we've convinced ourselves that it ads peace of mind or some type of absurdity like cheap insurance.
Yes. This is bitog,where some feel that re-using an oil filter contaminates the new oil we put in,yet we've overlooked that there is up to a quart still in the top end.
We can split hairs so razor thin that a by-bass filter couldn't filter it out,and that's what makes this site so grand.
Originally Posted By: GMorg
If you think that most store brands and the established brand name foods are the same (they tend to be nutritionally similar), then Mobil 1 and Super Tech are the same. If you think that there is little comparison between name brand and store brand foods, then Mobil 1 and Super Tech are very different.
The API symbol means that each oil passed the same set of tests. If you needed surgery, would you want the surgeon that passed all of his classes with a C's or the surgeon that passed all of his classes with A's. They both passed the same classes...
This is a little misleading,there is a difference between a doctor making C's and an oil that must meet a set of standard(s) to be certified as API and GF5 approved.With the API/GF5 certification,the oil either meets or fails,a doctor can make a grade from A to D and still pass.An oil must meet the standards set,not make a 'C' etc. but must meet the standards that are set for certification.
While I agree that a doctor with A's will most likely be a better doctor,does an oil with higher amounts of additive 'X' make it that much better?
From the reports we have seen,there is little proof of such in most if not all instances.
We have seen several times here on the board that an oil that is API SN certified and meets GF5 standards would for all intents and purposes,be a good oil.The SN/GF5 standards are high and an oil has to be a really descent oil to meet these standards.
We also have to look at the base oil suppliers,there are really only a few and they make good base oils.
There is also the fact that there are only a few 'add pack' companies and they too make quality products.Afton and Lubrizol probably being the biggest.
Are the lesser 'brands' bad? Not if they are certified.
Are the name brands better? It depends on what you mean by better? Do they work any better? They cost more but do they perform better?
We have seen uoa after uoa of Super Tech oils and they have performed very well.
We have seen uoa after uoa of name brands and they too perform well.
But,have the name brands done anything above and beyond what Super Tech has done?
If we look at the information,Super Tech has performed as well as the name brands.Since it has,why pay more money for something that isnt going to give any better results?
It is possible that a vehicle might not 'like' Super Tech but that can happen with the name brands too.
I have a car that had 8X K miles when I got it,it now has
over 225K miles and much of that has been with 'store brand' oils.
If you think that most store brands and the established brand name foods are the same (they tend to be nutritionally similar), then Mobil 1 and Super Tech are the same. If you think that there is little comparison between name brand and store brand foods, then Mobil 1 and Super Tech are very different.
The API symbol means that each oil passed the same set of tests. If you needed surgery, would you want the surgeon that passed all of his classes with a C's or the surgeon that passed all of his classes with A's. They both passed the same classes...
This is a little misleading,there is a difference between a doctor making C's and an oil that must meet a set of standard(s) to be certified as API and GF5 approved.With the API/GF5 certification,the oil either meets or fails,a doctor can make a grade from A to D and still pass.An oil must meet the standards set,not make a 'C' etc. but must meet the standards that are set for certification.
While I agree that a doctor with A's will most likely be a better doctor,does an oil with higher amounts of additive 'X' make it that much better?
From the reports we have seen,there is little proof of such in most if not all instances.
We have seen several times here on the board that an oil that is API SN certified and meets GF5 standards would for all intents and purposes,be a good oil.The SN/GF5 standards are high and an oil has to be a really descent oil to meet these standards.
We also have to look at the base oil suppliers,there are really only a few and they make good base oils.
There is also the fact that there are only a few 'add pack' companies and they too make quality products.Afton and Lubrizol probably being the biggest.
Are the lesser 'brands' bad? Not if they are certified.
Are the name brands better? It depends on what you mean by better? Do they work any better? They cost more but do they perform better?
We have seen uoa after uoa of Super Tech oils and they have performed very well.
We have seen uoa after uoa of name brands and they too perform well.
But,have the name brands done anything above and beyond what Super Tech has done?
If we look at the information,Super Tech has performed as well as the name brands.Since it has,why pay more money for something that isnt going to give any better results?
It is possible that a vehicle might not 'like' Super Tech but that can happen with the name brands too.
I have a car that had 8X K miles when I got it,it now has
over 225K miles and much of that has been with 'store brand' oils.
Originally Posted By: motorguy222
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
It is quite funny to see a periodic (every ~ 6months) debate on who makes SuperTech oil. People will check the bottle shape and compare to common manufacturers, they will look at the stamp on the bottom, they will look at the MSDS and address on MSDS calling the 1800 number. Then the final conclusion is no one has a clue because there are regional differences. People will call the 1800 number which will take them to the MSDS company for Shell with an address of Texaco. LoL
It makes for nice reading if you want some humor for the day.
I conclude no one has a clue who makes the oil except someone in Walmart with a sense of humor and an eye to find the cheapest bottler/blender who can meet SN/GF-5 specs.
The oil that PQIA analyzed from SuperTech happened to at that one point in time have a completely different additive package and some difference in base oil (at least by NOACK) than Mobil 1.
This is not quite right,Super Tech is usually made by either Warren Performance Products/Warren Northeast or Mobil with a small percent being made by Shell.Citgo came into the picture recently but that didnt seem to last long,WPP/WNE has been and still is the supplier in my area and it has been this way for a long time.
WPP/WNE has been shown to make quality oils.
The Super Tech Syn. is made by WPP/WNE and WPP/WNE alone as far as I know.
For most people,Super Tech will do a good job and the vehicle wont know the difference.SN/GF5 conventional oils are really nothing like the oils they have replaced and many if not all will even have some amount of syn. in them to meet the SN standard.
As has been said,unless the op wants to extend his OCI,the Super Tech Syn. should do fine.
The Super Tech Syn. tested by PQIA is made by WPP/WNE.
Hey Nate1979....this is the real answer. Pay attention. I haven't followed Super Tech oil in awhile, but I do know (it did at least) that the oil that was in the Virginia/DC/Maryland area was bottled by XOM. Maybe that has changed lately. I remember seeing an old PQIA Super Tech report that was the XOM flavor...produced numbers that almost equaled MC5K.
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
It is quite funny to see a periodic (every ~ 6months) debate on who makes SuperTech oil. People will check the bottle shape and compare to common manufacturers, they will look at the stamp on the bottom, they will look at the MSDS and address on MSDS calling the 1800 number. Then the final conclusion is no one has a clue because there are regional differences. People will call the 1800 number which will take them to the MSDS company for Shell with an address of Texaco. LoL
It makes for nice reading if you want some humor for the day.
I conclude no one has a clue who makes the oil except someone in Walmart with a sense of humor and an eye to find the cheapest bottler/blender who can meet SN/GF-5 specs.
The oil that PQIA analyzed from SuperTech happened to at that one point in time have a completely different additive package and some difference in base oil (at least by NOACK) than Mobil 1.
This is not quite right,Super Tech is usually made by either Warren Performance Products/Warren Northeast or Mobil with a small percent being made by Shell.Citgo came into the picture recently but that didnt seem to last long,WPP/WNE has been and still is the supplier in my area and it has been this way for a long time.
WPP/WNE has been shown to make quality oils.
The Super Tech Syn. is made by WPP/WNE and WPP/WNE alone as far as I know.
For most people,Super Tech will do a good job and the vehicle wont know the difference.SN/GF5 conventional oils are really nothing like the oils they have replaced and many if not all will even have some amount of syn. in them to meet the SN standard.
As has been said,unless the op wants to extend his OCI,the Super Tech Syn. should do fine.
The Super Tech Syn. tested by PQIA is made by WPP/WNE.
Hey Nate1979....this is the real answer. Pay attention. I haven't followed Super Tech oil in awhile, but I do know (it did at least) that the oil that was in the Virginia/DC/Maryland area was bottled by XOM. Maybe that has changed lately. I remember seeing an old PQIA Super Tech report that was the XOM flavor...produced numbers that almost equaled MC5K.
Originally Posted By: motorguy222
Originally Posted By: GMorg
If you think that most store brands and the established brand name foods are the same (they tend to be nutritionally similar), then Mobil 1 and Super Tech are the same. If you think that there is little comparison between name brand and store brand foods, then Mobil 1 and Super Tech are very different.
The API symbol means that each oil passed the same set of tests. If you needed surgery, would you want the surgeon that passed all of his classes with a C's or the surgeon that passed all of his classes with A's. They both passed the same classes...
This is a little misleading,there is a difference between a doctor making C's and an oil that must meet a set of standard(s) to be certified as API and GF5 approved.With the API/GF5 certification,the oil either meets or fails,a doctor can make a grade from A to D and still pass.An oil must meet the standards set,not make a 'C' etc. but must meet the standards that are set for certification.
While I agree that a doctor with A's will most likely be a better doctor,does an oil with higher amounts of additive 'X' make it that much better?
From the reports we have seen,there is little proof of such in most if not all instances.
We have seen several times here on the board that an oil that is API SN certified and meets GF5 standards would for all intents and purposes,be a good oil.The SN/GF5 standards are high and an oil has to be a really descent oil to meet these standards.
We also have to look at the base oil suppliers,there are really only a few and they make good base oils.
There is also the fact that there are only a few 'add pack' companies and they too make quality products.Afton and Lubrizol probably being the biggest.
Are the lesser 'brands' bad? Not if they are certified.
Are the name brands better? It depends on what you mean by better? Do they work any better? They cost more but do they perform better?
We have seen uoa after uoa of Super Tech oils and they have performed very well.
We have seen uoa after uoa of name brands and they too perform well.
But,have the name brands done anything above and beyond what Super Tech has done?
If we look at the information,Super Tech has performed as well as the name brands.Since it has,why pay more money for something that isnt going to give any better results?
It is possible that a vehicle might not 'like' Super Tech but that can happen with the name brands too.
I have a car that had 8X K miles when I got it,it now has
over 225K miles and much of that has been with 'store brand' oils.
Stop it lol! You are on a roll....another post that makes sense.
Originally Posted By: GMorg
If you think that most store brands and the established brand name foods are the same (they tend to be nutritionally similar), then Mobil 1 and Super Tech are the same. If you think that there is little comparison between name brand and store brand foods, then Mobil 1 and Super Tech are very different.
The API symbol means that each oil passed the same set of tests. If you needed surgery, would you want the surgeon that passed all of his classes with a C's or the surgeon that passed all of his classes with A's. They both passed the same classes...
This is a little misleading,there is a difference between a doctor making C's and an oil that must meet a set of standard(s) to be certified as API and GF5 approved.With the API/GF5 certification,the oil either meets or fails,a doctor can make a grade from A to D and still pass.An oil must meet the standards set,not make a 'C' etc. but must meet the standards that are set for certification.
While I agree that a doctor with A's will most likely be a better doctor,does an oil with higher amounts of additive 'X' make it that much better?
From the reports we have seen,there is little proof of such in most if not all instances.
We have seen several times here on the board that an oil that is API SN certified and meets GF5 standards would for all intents and purposes,be a good oil.The SN/GF5 standards are high and an oil has to be a really descent oil to meet these standards.
We also have to look at the base oil suppliers,there are really only a few and they make good base oils.
There is also the fact that there are only a few 'add pack' companies and they too make quality products.Afton and Lubrizol probably being the biggest.
Are the lesser 'brands' bad? Not if they are certified.
Are the name brands better? It depends on what you mean by better? Do they work any better? They cost more but do they perform better?
We have seen uoa after uoa of Super Tech oils and they have performed very well.
We have seen uoa after uoa of name brands and they too perform well.
But,have the name brands done anything above and beyond what Super Tech has done?
If we look at the information,Super Tech has performed as well as the name brands.Since it has,why pay more money for something that isnt going to give any better results?
It is possible that a vehicle might not 'like' Super Tech but that can happen with the name brands too.
I have a car that had 8X K miles when I got it,it now has
over 225K miles and much of that has been with 'store brand' oils.
Stop it lol! You are on a roll....another post that makes sense.
Originally Posted By: NHGUY
If Mercedes made a small,2 door hatchback,it would be a Yugo....But not at a Yugo price though...lol
^^^Today it's called the SMART car.
If Mercedes made a small,2 door hatchback,it would be a Yugo....But not at a Yugo price though...lol
^^^Today it's called the SMART car.
Originally Posted By: john_pifer
Originally Posted By: slush
Originally Posted By: Doog
No: Mobil 1 is much better, higher quality and therefore more expensive. Kind of like the difference between a Chevy and a Cadillac.
I found this comparison amusing, they are both GM products, same base for the most part, just a little frilly addition here or there.
Maybe that was the point?
Cavalier vs. Cimarron?
Oh man I remember those! I wanted to find one in a junk yard and put the drive train in my 85 Cavalier wagon. Hahaha!
Originally Posted By: slush
Originally Posted By: Doog
No: Mobil 1 is much better, higher quality and therefore more expensive. Kind of like the difference between a Chevy and a Cadillac.
I found this comparison amusing, they are both GM products, same base for the most part, just a little frilly addition here or there.
Maybe that was the point?
Cavalier vs. Cimarron?
Oh man I remember those! I wanted to find one in a junk yard and put the drive train in my 85 Cavalier wagon. Hahaha!
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: AmishFury
i've never seen a debate... just a bunch of people saying it varies by region
some of it is warren, some is exxonmobil, some is sopus
the pqia sample is most likely warren
But as far as I recall all Supertech Syn is Warren. It is the conventional variety that varies by region.
Also we are talking about two very common non exotic vehicles here. I will go on the record if the OP is following the OCI laid out in his owners manual Super Tech Syn and M-1 will protect his engines 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999991% the same. Now if he where to track a Corvette daily then I can see where M-1 would have a advantage.
i've never seen a debate... just a bunch of people saying it varies by region
some of it is warren, some is exxonmobil, some is sopus
the pqia sample is most likely warren
But as far as I recall all Supertech Syn is Warren. It is the conventional variety that varies by region.
Also we are talking about two very common non exotic vehicles here. I will go on the record if the OP is following the OCI laid out in his owners manual Super Tech Syn and M-1 will protect his engines 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999991% the same. Now if he where to track a Corvette daily then I can see where M-1 would have a advantage.
Wow motorguy222, my intent doesn't seem to have come through since you interpreted my comments as misleading. I think that for most procedures, either surgeon would be fine. The class grade examples were offered as a parallel for passing a standard. Within a major, usually C is the minimum grade required for passing. I even suggested that store brand and name brand are usually nutritionally similar.
ST is fine and generally cheaper. It doesn't have the same staying power as Mobil 1. Both are adequate for most applications. Under extreme situations (high operational temps, extended load, long OCI, ect, I would rather have Mobil 1.
ST is fine and generally cheaper. It doesn't have the same staying power as Mobil 1. Both are adequate for most applications. Under extreme situations (high operational temps, extended load, long OCI, ect, I would rather have Mobil 1.
- Status
