Valvoline vs Mobil 1 - Round 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm no fan of Ashland or Valvoline products, but these statements are pretty bold. Ashland must have a legal department they ran them by before publishing the results, and the legal department gave them the OK. Or they are the biggest bunch of a*.*holes going.

Somehow I see XOM coming out on top in all of this. Or they got bagged for marketing and selling a [censored] product, and they got called out.

Either way it makes for some great reading. If it is true anyone who used Mobil 1 and incurred damages will be entitled to payment for these damages from XOM if the oil doesn't meet the required specs. If somehow this got by Ashland's legal dept and the facts are just slightly skewed heads will be rolling, and there will be some new people filing for unemployment benefits. I hope all this comes to a conclusion before my next Mobil 1 OC
LOL.gif
.


Frank D

BTW as already mentioned 10W-30 is the number one selling oil, so already some credibility is already lost in my book.
 
I think there is more to this story ....

I do think there is a correlation between this event and the shortage we are seeing.

There is no news with respects to empty M1 shelves, none.

XOM unable to deliver automotive oil product is big news.

I have done some homework.... no mention on recent calls with analysts, no forward looking statements with respect to M1 product sales suffering. (I'm sure they will have to bite this bullet later)

I think IKE is the perfect cover.

The news of allocation is not comming from XOM, it is comming from the jobbers world or the lube industry.

WM is almost completely out. Lube centers will buy from their distribution, then WM, then finally from an auto parts store.
Two different WM counters told me the phone is ringing everyday: "Every Jiffy Lube in town is calling for oil"

At the end of it all, XOM will say:

"Ashland, thanks for pointing that out to us, we corrected some faulty processes while we were bringing our plants back online after they where damaged during the very active hurricane season. We are confident all of our products meet the most current API standards."
 
HondaMan makes a good point.

I've been a fan of M1 for years, but have been increasingly skeptical of their quality over the last few years. Ever since they came out with Mobil 1 EP actually. The need for 2 Mobil 1's kind of led me to believe they are more after $$ than anything else.

As far as the size difference between both companies, to me that is irrelevant. Just because XOM is a mass producer of base oils/esters doesn't mean their oil will always be superior. The ILMA's can compete with the larger companies well and in fact do. Amsoil, Schaeffer's, Redline.....all are small, American companies that produce great oils.

Mobil 1 may exceed a lot of industry tests, but if it does turn out to be true that it doesn't meet the Seq IVA portion of pass/fail test, Mobil will have a little problem on their hands.

From Valvman in a previous thread.

Quote:
Our strong wear results are likely due to SynPower's carefully balanced formulation and the specific anti-wear additive package that we use. Our anti-wear additives stay in the oil longer than those used by other leading synthetic motor oils. We use high quality base oils from several different base oil suppliers (including ExxonMobil) that complement our additive chemistry. It's the combination of base oils and additive chemistry that give us our strong performance.
 
Desipte all the claims Valvoline makes about superior performance, Valvoline still recommends 3 mths or 5000km on the Australian website regardless of oil base used.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: buster
HondaMan makes a good point.

I've been a fan of M1 for years, but have been increasingly skeptical of their quality over the last few years. Ever since they came out with Mobil 1 EP actually. The need for 2 Mobil 1's kind of led me to believe they are more after $$ than anything else.

As far as the size difference between both companies, to me that is irrelevant. Just because XOM is a mass producer of base oils/esters doesn't mean their oil will always be superior. The ILMA's can compete with the larger companies well and in fact do. Amsoil, Schaeffer's, Redline.....all are small, American companies that produce great oils.

Mobil 1 may exceed a lot of industry tests, but if it does turn out to be true that it doesn't meet the Seq IVA portion of pass/fail test, Mobil will have a little problem on their hands.

From Valvman in a previous thread.

Quote:
Our strong wear results are likely due to SynPower's carefully balanced formulation and the specific anti-wear additive package that we use. Our anti-wear additives stay in the oil longer than those used by other leading synthetic motor oils. We use high quality base oils from several different base oil suppliers (including ExxonMobil) that complement our additive chemistry. It's the combination of base oils and additive chemistry that give us our strong performance.


Buster, I think there is a marked difference between oil like Shaeffers, AMSOIL and Redline and that of Valvoline.

Boutique oils formulated to be the "absolute" best vs a readily available oil blended by a company that used to own a refinery and does not meet the GM or Honda specs but is drumming it's chest like it just bagged an Emmy?

As was said, it's all heresy until Exxon Mobil responds and more facts are brought to the table.

I see the EP line as a method to attempt to replicate the success AMSOIL has been having with their extended drain promoting, while still maintaining their flagship oils that comply to the OEM specs, which may prevent that capability.

As you and I had discussed before and in fact YOU had brought up: meeting all the specs and getting the approvals M1 does requires a balance. Part of that balance may affect the oil's performance in other areas. I would imagine one of those areas is extended drain performance. Enter the EP product line......
 
I think we're blowing this WAY out of proportion. EOM is a huge company, that supplies most of the base oils/gas/factory fills in NA, if not the world. Their name is probably the first one that comes to mind when not-so-informed customers want to use/try and synthetic oil. They have the marked covered in so many ways its not funny.

A company the size of Ashland is not a concern to them. They're probably just laughing at this campaign by Valvoline, and haven't bothered to respond to it. I think they know their products meet the specs they say they do, and that some lab, on one set of test showing they don't isn't enought proof to have them worried.

Who knows - maybe there is more 'inside dealing' to this than we know - Ashlnd buys a lot of base oil from EOM. Maybe they cooked up this scheme to 'let' Valvoline find that Synpower is better than M1, have the sales of Synpower booster up, and make more money off base oil sales. Maybe Ashland top brass are in on it, both of them laughing together at creating this 'fuss' and DRAWING A LOT OF FREE ATTENTION TO THEIR PRODUCTS!
 
ExxonMobil is probably too busy with bringing their plants back online. Ashland should know not to mess with a sleeping giant.
blush.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Liquid_Turbo
Who knew oil could be a source of drama.
Wathch this Liquid Turbo . So that makes Valvoline better than Amsoil?
 
Quote:
Buster, I think there is a marked difference between oil like Shaeffers, AMSOIL and Redline and that of Valvoline.
Boutique oils formulated to be the "absolute" best vs a readily available oil blended by a company that used to own a refinery and does not meet the GM or Honda specs but is drumming it's chest like it just bagged an Emmy?

As was said, it's all heresy until Exxon Mobil responds and more facts are brought to the table.

I see the EP line as a method to attempt to replicate the success AMSOIL has been having with their extended drain promoting, while still maintaining their flagship oils that comply to the OEM specs, which may prevent that capability.

As you and I had discussed before and in fact YOU had brought up: meeting all the specs and getting the approvals M1 does requires a balance. Part of that balance may affect the oil's performance in other areas. I would imagine one of those areas is extended drain performance. Enter the EP product line......


Agree, but all I'm saying is in order to meet API SM/GF4 you have to pass the Seq IVA and score under 90um's of wear. Mobil 1 is probably superior in terms of oxidation resistance, deposit control and long drain intervals but that really isn't the issue here. The issue is whether M1 passes the Seq IVA test.

Mobil 1 has always been tested for 25,000 mile drains the until EP came out. Not sure why they feel the need to have 2 Mobil 1's.

It's one thing to compare Seq IVA test scores, but it's another not to even pass it. The Seq IVA maybe be irrelevant to one's driving style, but it's still required to meet current API standards.
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
I'm too lazy to re-read through the thread or even the letter.

Did anyone mention the sample method and size?


I think Pablo nailed it? Did it take Ashland years of testing (they did say years of testing), to find a batch of 5W-30 Mobil 1 that was slightly out of spec? Then they jumped all over it. I've seen it with paint quality from one batch to the next, things happen. I'm willing to bet Valvoline has some bad oil batches too. Is the API, SAE, whoever there to draw a sample of every batch, and certify it? I'm willing to bet there would be a lot of oil pulled because they're out of spec from all companies.

Frank D
 
Originally Posted By: buster
Quote:
Buster, I think there is a marked difference between oil like Shaeffers, AMSOIL and Redline and that of Valvoline.
Boutique oils formulated to be the "absolute" best vs a readily available oil blended by a company that used to own a refinery and does not meet the GM or Honda specs but is drumming it's chest like it just bagged an Emmy?

As was said, it's all heresy until Exxon Mobil responds and more facts are brought to the table.

I see the EP line as a method to attempt to replicate the success AMSOIL has been having with their extended drain promoting, while still maintaining their flagship oils that comply to the OEM specs, which may prevent that capability.

As you and I had discussed before and in fact YOU had brought up: meeting all the specs and getting the approvals M1 does requires a balance. Part of that balance may affect the oil's performance in other areas. I would imagine one of those areas is extended drain performance. Enter the EP product line......


Agree, but all I'm saying is in order to meet API SM/GF4 you have to pass the Seq IVA and score under 90um's of wear. Mobil 1 is probably superior in terms of oxidation resistance, deposit control and long drain intervals but that really isn't the issue here. The issue is whether M1 passes the Seq IVA test.

Mobil 1 has always been tested for 25,000 mile drains the until EP came out. Not sure why they feel the need to have 2 Mobil 1's.

It's one thing to compare Seq IVA test scores, but it's another not to even pass it. The Seq IVA maybe be irrelevant to one's driving style, but it's still required to meet current API standards.


Perhaps some of the latest manufacturer specs dropped the oil's ability to be recommended for the 25K drains anymore?

As it does with Amsoil and the like; having a separate oil group that is not governed by the same constraints gives them a lot more flexibility in terms of what they do with the EP lineup.

And of course the potential to make more money
wink.gif
 
Well I know this: If Mobil 1 dose not indeed pass the wear test, and dose not indeed meet the Specs.


There WILL be a MASSIVE class action lawsuit from users of mobil 1. since the use of that oil would void there warranty, and for the fact M1 was useing false advertisments.

So yes. Mobil 1 is worried about these claims. The size of the company means nothing. Ashland is sending these statements world wide. If Mobil can disprove Ashlands claims, Ashland will be blown out of the water.
 
Bottom line...M1 is a quality product, has been, and will continue to be. Sure, they've had some hiccups, but I am sure we can continue to expect quality products. PP, M1, Amsoil, RL...all great oils.
 
Originally Posted By: rg200amp
Well I know this: If Mobil 1 dose not indeed pass the wear test, and dose not indeed meet the Specs.


There WILL be a MASSIVE class action lawsuit from users of mobil 1. since the use of that oil would void there warranty, and for the fact M1 was useing false advertisments.

So yes. Mobil 1 is worried about these claims. The size of the company means nothing. Ashland is sending these statements world wide. If Mobil can disprove Ashlands claims, Ashland will be blown out of the water.


I was thinking along those lines. Like all those 1-800 LAWYER commercials I see on TV. If you had/have an engine proplem related to oil, and you used M1 5W-30 you may be entitled to compensation.....I can see it now, that's if Valvoline is correct in their findings.

Frank D
 
Originally Posted By: HondaMan
At the end of it all, XOM will say:

"Ashland, thanks for pointing that out to us, we corrected some faulty processes while we were bringing our plants back online after they where damaged during the very active hurricane season. We are confident all of our products meet the most current API standards."


Correct-o. Still leaves questions for us each to answer for ourselves, doesn't it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top