You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter Ed_Flecko
- Start date

the one on the left has more green on it so it is better for the environment.

Mobil 1 Extended Performance High Mileage 0w20.

edit: sorry wrong thread, thought I was posting in the latest oil purchase thread.

edit: sorry wrong thread, thought I was posting in the latest oil purchase thread.

Last edited:

In my mind the only nagging question is how proud of that oil were they? Oh do they offer rebates?

Thanks for posting this. Yes, the bottle tells (almost) everything.

There is a four-digit formulation number (revision number) on the back label of all ExxonMobil oils. By looking at this number, you can tell what the formulation is.

The original TGMO 0W-20 SN had RN5953. It was Group-III-based and looked liked it had a lot of polyol ester (POE) if my FTIR oxidation number was correct. It also used trinuclear moly.

Years later PQIA tested a TGMO 0W-20 SN that had RN6378. It was GTL-based with a very high amount of 787 ppm sulfurless Molyvan 855 moly. It also likely had some POE according to Russian FTIR data, but it was only a few percent if at all. TGMO seems to like to have ester.

The SN PLUS version you posted also has RN6378; therefore, the formulation hasn't changed for the last two years or so. You can see the PQIA VOA of this formulation

Now, someone needs to find the SP bottle so that we can see if the SP formulation is different.

Moreover, if you could also post the four-digit RN numbers for TGMO 0W-16, it would be appreciated. In a few years most newer Toyota engines will use 0W-16. Already almost half of them use it.

Thanks for posting this. Yes, the bottle tells (almost) everything.

There is a four-digit formulation number (revision number) on the back label of all ExxonMobil oils. By looking at this number, you can tell what the formulation is.

The original TGMO 0W-20 SN had RN5953. It was Group-III-based and looked liked it had a lot of polyol ester (POE) if my FTIR oxidation number was correct. It also used trinuclear moly.

Years later PQIA tested a TGMO 0W-20 SN that had RN6378. It was GTL-based with a very high amount of 787 ppm sulfurless Molyvan 855 moly. It also likely had some POE according to Russian FTIR data, but it was only a few percent if at all. TGMO seems to like to have ester.

The SN PLUS version you posted also has RN6378; therefore, the formulation hasn't changed for the last two years or so. You can see the PQIA VOA of this formulationhere. Note that the PQIA version is labeled SN but it is the same RN6378 formulation.

Now, someone needs to find the SP bottle so that we can see if the SP formulation is different.

Moreover, if you could also post the four-digit RN numbers for TGMO 0W-16, it would be appreciated. In a few years most newer Toyota engines will use 0W-16. Already almost half of them use it.

TGMO 0W16 RN6378.

Really? How can 0W-16 and 0W-20 have the same RN? Could you post a photo of the back label?TGMO 0W16 RN6378.

Really? How can 0W-16 and 0W-20 have the same RN? Could you post a photo of the back label?

I don't know but this has RN6378 printed on it too.

Thanks. Interesting. Perhaps they share the four-digit revision number across the viscosity grades within the same brand.I don't know but this has RN6378 printed on it too.

View attachment 28260

This could be checked by comparing the RN's for M1 5W-20 vs. M1 5W-30 or M1 EP 5W-20 vs. M1 EP 5W-30 etc.

The date code 10219K24A means Plant 102, 2019 November (K = 11th letter) 24.

The QR codes merely identify the print versions for the front and back labels, not the formulation. Labels may change while the formulation remains the same, or the formulation may change while the labels remain the same.

There is a four-digit formulation number (revision number) on the back label of all ExxonMobil oils. By looking at this number, you can tell what the formulation is.

The original TGMO 0W-20 SN had RN5953. It was Group-III-based and looked liked it had a lot of polyol ester (POE) if my FTIR oxidation number was correct. It also used trinuclear moly.

Years later PQIA tested a TGMO 0W-20 SN that had RN6378. It was GTL-based with a very high amount of 787 ppm sulfurless Molyvan 855 moly. It also likely had some POE according to Russian FTIR data, but it was only a few percent if at all. TGMO seems to like to have ester.

The SN PLUS version you posted also has RN6378; therefore, the formulation hasn't changed for the last two years or so. You can see the PQIA VOA of this formulationhere. Note that the PQIA version is labeled SN but it is the same RN6378 formulation.

Now, someone needs to find the SP bottle so that we can see if the SP formulation is different.

Moreover, if you could also post the four-digit RN numbers for TGMO 0W-16, it would be appreciated. In a few years most newer Toyota engines will use 0W-16. Already almost half of them use it.

Just got a bottle of the TGMO SP 0W-20. It's RN6674 and date code 10220J21A.

Alright, so, they have changed the formulation again! Thanks for letting us know and let's see a VOA/UOA.Just got a bottle of the TGMO SP 0W-20. It's RN6674 and date code 10220J21A.

My bottle. Purchased 4-5 weeks ago. List price is currently $7.23/qt.

Is this the same as M1 0w20 AFE ?

Who knows? Probably.Is this the same as M1 0w20 AFE ?

- Replies
- 90

- Views
- 14K

- Replies
- 96

- Views
- 13K

- Replies
- 32

- Views
- 12K

- Replies
- 19

- Views
- 3K