why different oil for U.S. and Europe?

[Steve S]

Originally Posted By: Mitch Alsup
Originally Posted By: Geonerd
I see people fleeing Phoenix go flying N. on I-17 at 80MPH in 110 degree heat, towing boats, trailers, etc. The cars and trucks are close to WFO for well over half an hour - plenty of time to heat saturate the engine and oil.


4 years and a couple of months ago, I was driving from Taos to Claton NM in 103dF heat. There was a 86 mile stretch of road, dead straight and almost flat. I spent 5 minutes at each of {110, 120, 130, 140} MPH and my car oil and water temperatures were pegged on the lower thermostatic limits (water ~= 183dF, oil ~= 185df). This should dispel the notion that driving fast is necessarily hard on the engine or on the oil or leads necessarily to high temperatures.

Car: 1995 Ferrari F355B, 52K miles, and did not consume more than a tablespoon of oil over 3K miles that trip.
Try that on a Nissan 370Z. Ferraris tend to lean towards race car duty.

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
prax - Please show a M1 MSDS where "mineral oil" is contained therein. I for one am very interested indeed!

 

[prax]

Go to the link, select Japan and type in Mobil 1 10w-30. There will be 2 MSDS, English and Japanese. You can also search for 0w or 5w30. As expected, 0w and 5w have less mineral oil than the 10w.

I think the Korean ones show PAO % while the Japanese ones show Group III %.

 

[Stanley Rockafeller]

Originally Posted By: Steve S
Originally Posted By: Mitch Alsup
Originally Posted By: Geonerd
I see people fleeing Phoenix go flying N. on I-17 at 80MPH in 110 degree heat, towing boats, trailers, etc. The cars and trucks are close to WFO for well over half an hour - plenty of time to heat saturate the engine and oil.


4 years and a couple of months ago, I was driving from Taos to Claton NM in 103dF heat. There was a 86 mile stretch of road, dead straight and almost flat. I spent 5 minutes at each of {110, 120, 130, 140} MPH and my car oil and water temperatures were pegged on the lower thermostatic limits (water ~= 183dF, oil ~= 185df). This should dispel the notion that driving fast is necessarily hard on the engine or on the oil or leads necessarily to high temperatures.

Car: 1995 Ferrari F355B, 52K miles, and did not consume more than a tablespoon of oil over 3K miles that trip.
Try that on a Nissan 370Z. Ferraris tend to lean towards race car duty.


what would happen to a nissan 370Z?

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: prax


MSDS will say "mineral oil." And not a little bit either. Also, some will only list a little bit of PAO and you know Mobil is not putting 80% Group V.

I don't think XOM ever claimed that M1 oil is 100% PAO. Not now, and not 10-20 years ago. All oil companies play this game... they'll tell you it contains PAO, but will not tell you how much. But it's kind of safe to assume that whatever is not PAO or Ester is in fact mineral oil (either group III or II). Castrol does the same thing with Edge in the US - they tout the PAO content, even though its % amount is not known.

Still, no proof that M1 sold in the US is any different than M1 sold in other parts of the world, unless I missed it somewhere.

 

[prax]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
I don't think XOM ever claimed that M1 oil is 100% PAO. Not now, and not 10-20 years ago.


True, Mobil has never claimed it had very little or no Group III.

Quote:
All oil companies play this game... they'll tell you it contains PAO, but will not tell you how much.


Not all. I don't think Pennzoil, QS, Chevron have made any claims about PAO. I don't remember them mentioning PAO at all. They simply avoid the game and say "100% synthetic" which is true in the US. Not that it really matters. Group III and IV are close enough that the whole formulation is more important.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: prax


Not all. I don't think Pennzoil, QS, Chevron have made any claims about PAO.

Yeah. By all, I meant all the ones that do use PAO to some extent.

Quote:
Not that it really matters. Group III and IV are close enough that the whole formulation is more important.

Agreed. There is too much focus on base oils here instead of on actual performance.

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
prax - Thanks for the explanation. Yes, the Product description of "Synthetic Base Stocks - Additives" is well warranted

The "mineral oil" content is variable and this is consistent with other "synthetic" lubricants of various Brands, types and formulations

Semi-synthetic lubricants are those "we" class as being primarily Group 3 hydrocracked types. Mobil market these here in various nomlecature as do a number of others as we know. Castrol & Mobil appear to be on track to rationalise these on a Global basis. Mobil is using the M1, 1000, 2000, 3000 and etc market names.
Many have Euro Manufacturer's Approvals and they are very very popular in Europe as a result. They are well "engineered" to meet the Manufacturer's increasingly complex demands - at an affordable price. I have used them for many years and Field Tested a number of such HDEOs for Castrol!

The dilemma for some is the likes of Shell and it's Ultra Synthetic range that use their XHVI base! Great lubricants these and quite popular in Europe too with many Manufacturer Approvals
Do we call these synthetics or semi-synthetics? They out perform many "synthetics" in the real world

It is interesting to note that the "Clean" range from Mobil originally contained esters as a significant operative ingredient

It is clear that the API has played catch-up with ACEA in recent years and some of the Test Protocols have become "near things"

Significant reasons for lubricant differences between the US and Europe are also long standing and go back many decades. It is simply a case of supply lines and cost. IMO while the US continues to underprice petroleum products against the rest of the "developed" world, market forces alone will create a divide in formulation needs IMO

M1 0W-40 sells here in OZ for around $A19-$A25 per litre pack. In Germany it sells (as "Tri-synthetic") for up to double the OZ price. This alone spells the need for extended OCIs.

Used oil disposal is another big issue now both here in OZ and in Europe. What about in the US?

 

[Tornado Red]

Originally Posted By: Geo_Prizm
That is why even Mobil 1 is dumping mineral oil in the US market labeling it 'full synthetic'. That is why Castrol has to put real synthetic oil in their bottles in Europe.Or else...


We've heard these bogus claims over and over for about three years now, with absolutely no evidence ever presented. I think it's "put up or shut up" time.

Mobil 1 carries the "full synthetic" label in Europe. Why would they produce a weaker product for North America and risk destroying a reputation that they've spent possibly more than $1 billion to establish?

 

[Geoff]

I remember commenting on the CAFE some years ago. I still think its behind Ford's big push for 5w-20. They need the extra .3 mpg across their truck lines since CAFE is a fleet average. The best selling vehicle in the US is the Ford F150, remember? The clincher for me at the time was the CAFE rule that the owner's manual had to clearly state that the oil used for CAFE testing was "preferred" grade.

In Europe, the driving seems to be either very short
As to high speed driving, there is a big difference in my experience with driving for 5 mins at top speed and 1 hour at top speed in terms of oil temps.

Chevy tried using small block v-8s in some Opel models in the '60s. The engines would take the extended periods at full throttle and they cancelled the program.

 

[el_zorro]

The Mobil-1 topic is one that is most debated and controversial here. I am newer to this board but didnt come to the board with any predispositions as far as anything to do with oil. I used Mobil-1 and Valvoline Synpower interchangably for years in my GMC pickup with good results (262,000 miles and going strong). Since the are only facts that we have here(other than interpretations of MSDS sheets) are UOAs we must go on this to for our analysis. The high FE critique of Mobil-1 is the only fact that we can point to that something might have changed. However, when I go back and look through old UOA threads 2002-2004, I see the same higher FE with Mobil-1. Some would say this is detergent action and not more wear. Other things in the VOAs have changed (lower Zinc and Phosphorus) but this had to do more with GF-4 than changing the base stock.

We started this thread to answer why we think we have different formulations for Europe and the US and many pointed to CAFE as the reason. The Starburst symbol and all those friction modifiers. I havent seen any scientific measure of the specification of Starburst and so in my opinion operating temperature viscosity is the only measure of fuel economy that we have.

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
el_zorro - Many additives are designed to interact with the metallurgy within the engine (or component) and this ia a principle of modern lubrication. This can produce a wide range of results. When "real" additives were introduced around the mid 1970s these reactions of course began and continue today

It is not productive to use UOAs as a real measure of component wear by isolating wear metal rates

The real test of any lubricant after the Lab testing is done - is field testing (with tear down inspections) and testing in the hands of the end user

 

[el_zorro]

Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
The real test of any lubricant after the Lab testing is done - is field testing (with tear down inspections) and testing in the hands of the end user

I agree with you on this one, my point is that no one has offered conclusive evidence that there is a difference in tear down inspections with a older version of Mobil-1 vs a newer version.

 

[dickwells]

Originally Posted By: Geoff
I remember commenting on the CAFE some years ago. I still think its behind Ford's big push for 5w-20. They need the extra .3 mpg across their truck lines since CAFE is a fleet average. The best selling vehicle in the US is the Ford F150, remember? The clincher for me at the time was the CAFE rule that the owner's manual had to clearly state that the oil used for CAFE testing was "preferred" grade.

In Europe, the driving seems to be either very short
As to high speed driving, there is a big difference in my experience with driving for 5 mins at top speed and 1 hour at top speed in terms of oil temps.

Chevy tried using small block v-8s in some Opel models in the '60s. The engines would take the extended periods at full
throttle and they cancelled the program.


This makes no sense, do you mean the engines would NOT take the extended WOT?

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
el_zorro - IME each formulation upgrade of a product has produced a better end result

Once in a while a totally new product (eg. GC Formula XL 0W-30 of 1995) has been a poor performer. End user reaction - especially where Manufacturer Approvals are involved - and the resulting upgrades restore its reputation. Some are withdrawn and never appear again!

Amsoil's latest products seem to have left their "thickening out of grade" reputation-end result behind them and now seem to perform well in their intended application

 

[pavelow]

There's no reason in this day and age of modern engine engineering and design that a "special" 40wt oil should be needed or required. Same goes for automatic transmission fluid in European vehicles. The Europeans need to get their stuff together and use more standard lubrication sources! FYI-I'm not picking on the Europeans here, I love their cars, I just hate thier oil and other driveline fluid snobbery.

 

[Tornado Red]

Originally Posted By: pavelow
There's no reason in this day and age of modern engine engineering and design that a "special" 40wt oil should be needed or required. Same goes for automatic transmission fluid in European vehicles. The Europeans need to get their stuff together and use more standard lubrication sources! FYI-I'm not picking on the Europeans here, I love their cars, I just hate thier oil and other driveline fluid snobbery.

When you sell the same cars in dozens of countries, you need to specify some kind of minimum standard. You cannot just assume that an adequate oil will be available at every outlet in every country.

API has excellent standards, but not every company in every country tests their oil against API specifications.

Also, not every car buyer bothers to become super-knowledgeable about oil specifications, or has the incentive to learn what alternatives should be okay if the factory spec oil is unavailable.

Finally, European car makers sell most of their cars in Europe. Why would they use API specs instead of ACEA or their own Daimler or BMW or VAG standards?

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
Tornado_Red - It is always wise to remember too that the Oil Industry "owns" the API

ACEA is "owned" by the European Auto Industry!

That alone is a huge difference in ideology!

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: pavelow
Same goes for automatic transmission fluid in European vehicles.


This is an issue with Japanese vehicles too. Used to be that at least MB and toyota ATs used dexron... now who knows what their fluids are...

 

[Geoff]

Originally Posted By: dickwells
Originally Posted By: Geoff
I remember commenting on the CAFE some years ago. I still think its behind Ford's big push for 5w-20. They need the extra .3 mpg across their truck lines since CAFE is a fleet average. The best selling vehicle in the US is the Ford F150, remember? The clincher for me at the time was the CAFE rule that the owner's manual had to clearly state that the oil used for CAFE testing was "preferred" grade.

In Europe, the driving seems to be either very short
As to high speed driving, there is a big difference in my experience with driving for 5 mins at top speed and 1 hour at top speed in terms of oil temps.

Chevy tried using small block v-8s in some Opel models in the '60s. The engines would take the extended periods at full
throttle and they cancelled the program.


This makes no sense, do you mean the engines would NOT take the extended WOT?


Yes I should have said NOT take the extended WOT. Here is the article w/quote from Bob Lutz about the 60's small block trials in Europe:

http://www.motortrend.com/features/112_0506_favorite_small_block/index.html

Note the comments about "finned oil pan" and "huge oil cooler" needing to be used.