Castrol EDGE 8 X better Wear Protection than Mobil
- Thread starter Art_Vandelay
- Start date
- Status
If the claims are true, it is not ridiculous. The ASTM Seq IVA test has to be met in order to meet the basic API spec's.
Something is going on and we are not being told the truth. So, it's not just Ashland now but BP finding this flaw....interesting.
Something is going on and we are not being told the truth. So, it's not just Ashland now but BP finding this flaw....interesting.
Anxiously awaiting Exxon-Mobil's response to all this... 
10 times... 10 times... hobida, hobida, .... do I hear a 12 times... 12 times.... can I get 14.... SOLD to the uniformed consumer in the green jacket.
Originally Posted By: addyguy
The fact that BP is also using this 'finding' gives it a little more validity...they judged it a valid enough result to base thier claims on it....ie, it is not something that Ashland, and ONLY Ashland found....
EXACTLY.
The fact that BP is also using this 'finding' gives it a little more validity...they judged it a valid enough result to base thier claims on it....ie, it is not something that Ashland, and ONLY Ashland found....
EXACTLY.
Originally Posted By: OMCWankel
The interesting thing here is the silence from Mobil.
I would like to be listening when the corporate bulk buyers ask the Mobil reps "what is the deal with the claims from Ashland and BP?".
Did you ever think they're taking the high road. The last time they took someone to court, Castrol, and Mobil was in the right, they ended up losing the case. What do they have to gain by denying these claims? There are no facts behind them. Only someone who is not to bright can't see through all the [censored].
The interesting thing here is the silence from Mobil.
I would like to be listening when the corporate bulk buyers ask the Mobil reps "what is the deal with the claims from Ashland and BP?".
Did you ever think they're taking the high road. The last time they took someone to court, Castrol, and Mobil was in the right, they ended up losing the case. What do they have to gain by denying these claims? There are no facts behind them. Only someone who is not to bright can't see through all the [censored].
I am sure both Ashland and BP would not make these claims if there were not facts to support this. I am not saying Mobil 1 is bad oil. Especially after Johnny saw racing teams use the oil in 24 hour endurance races. But I am sure there are facts for one particular test.
Originally Posted By: brian12
Only someone who is not to bright can't see through all the [censored].
I would guess majority of customers could be easily swayed... I can imagine a typical buyer at an auto part store looking at M1 and Syntec/Edge... seeing both sell for around the same price but one claims to be 8x better. Guess which one will more likely get purchased?
Only someone who is not to bright can't see through all the [censored].
I would guess majority of customers could be easily swayed... I can imagine a typical buyer at an auto part store looking at M1 and Syntec/Edge... seeing both sell for around the same price but one claims to be 8x better. Guess which one will more likely get purchased?
Originally Posted By: buster
So BP & Ashland are making all this up? Doubt it.
No. They're just not providing any details. Like how many tests were run until they got the result they wanted?
Did Mobil1 actually protect 16X better in other tests? We'll never know. I'm just saying that I'm pretty skeptical of all of them, and that both are throwing stones at a glass mansion from another glass house...
So BP & Ashland are making all this up? Doubt it.
No. They're just not providing any details. Like how many tests were run until they got the result they wanted?
Did Mobil1 actually protect 16X better in other tests? We'll never know. I'm just saying that I'm pretty skeptical of all of them, and that both are throwing stones at a glass mansion from another glass house...
Last edited:
You know who will be along shortly to make sure you don't believe your lying eyes or ears and its just a conspiracy against the all-mighty beloved, can never do wrong, friend of the poor, benefactor of humanity, Exxon/Mobil.
And for the record, I have a Mobil 1 sigh in my garage, 4 mobil 1 hats, one says oil of Nascar, Two sheets of Mobil stickers and decals, and have used this oil in the past. So I don't need to be just passed off as a Mobil hater.
And for the record, I have a Mobil 1 sigh in my garage, 4 mobil 1 hats, one says oil of Nascar, Two sheets of Mobil stickers and decals, and have used this oil in the past. So I don't need to be just passed off as a Mobil hater.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: brian12
Only someone who is not to bright can't see through all the [censored].
I would guess majority of customers could be easily swayed... I can imagine a typical buyer at an auto part store looking at M1 and Syntec/Edge... seeing both sell for around the same price but one claims to be 8x better. Guess which one will more likely get purchased?
Whenever I see a bottle with all kinds of unsubstantiated claims written all over it I avoid it like the plague. The first thing that comes to mind when I see something like that is "snake oil".
Originally Posted By: brian12
Only someone who is not to bright can't see through all the [censored].
I would guess majority of customers could be easily swayed... I can imagine a typical buyer at an auto part store looking at M1 and Syntec/Edge... seeing both sell for around the same price but one claims to be 8x better. Guess which one will more likely get purchased?
Whenever I see a bottle with all kinds of unsubstantiated claims written all over it I avoid it like the plague. The first thing that comes to mind when I see something like that is "snake oil".
Originally Posted By: addyguy
The fact that BP is also using this 'finding' gives it a little more validity...
It's not a conspiracy or else they'd both offer 8 X better protection.
These two companies wouldn't make this claim without being able to substantiate it. Otherwise they'd claim every formula weight beats Mobil respectively. They've said nothing of the kind.
It's interesting that this concerns 5w-30 which is the most popular weight in the United States. It's probably the easiest weight to formulate and likely the easiest to cut back on. I'm guessing that makes it the most profitable oil of all.
The fact that BP is also using this 'finding' gives it a little more validity...
It's not a conspiracy or else they'd both offer 8 X better protection.
These two companies wouldn't make this claim without being able to substantiate it. Otherwise they'd claim every formula weight beats Mobil respectively. They've said nothing of the kind.
It's interesting that this concerns 5w-30 which is the most popular weight in the United States. It's probably the easiest weight to formulate and likely the easiest to cut back on. I'm guessing that makes it the most profitable oil of all.
Originally Posted By: brian12
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: brian12
Only someone who is not to bright can't see through all the [censored].
I would guess majority of customers could be easily swayed... I can imagine a typical buyer at an auto part store looking at M1 and Syntec/Edge... seeing both sell for around the same price but one claims to be 8x better. Guess which one will more likely get purchased?
Whenever I see a bottle with all kinds of unsubstantiated claims written all over it I avoid it like the plague. The first thing that comes to mind when I see something like that is "snake oil".
Castrol and Ashland don't produce snake oil. They are large, legitimate lubricant producers.
I'll say it again - if these claims were untrue, ExxonMobil would have both Ashland and BP in federal court so fast your head would be spinning. You don't think this will cut into Exxon's market share? They would have or will stop it if they can/could in a major lawsuit.
The best available evidence shows us Exxon [censored] up bigtime. Maybe they just had a quick quality control gap. But one can not conclude that based on Ashland's claim that the inferior Mobil 1 was found over 4 years of testing.
Unless Exxon comes out with complete denial and sues both companies, the only thing I can believe is they [censored] up.
And Exxon hacks sent here with an agenda to dispute claims with extreme prejudice aren't going to sway my opinion.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: brian12
Only someone who is not to bright can't see through all the [censored].
I would guess majority of customers could be easily swayed... I can imagine a typical buyer at an auto part store looking at M1 and Syntec/Edge... seeing both sell for around the same price but one claims to be 8x better. Guess which one will more likely get purchased?
Whenever I see a bottle with all kinds of unsubstantiated claims written all over it I avoid it like the plague. The first thing that comes to mind when I see something like that is "snake oil".
Castrol and Ashland don't produce snake oil. They are large, legitimate lubricant producers.
I'll say it again - if these claims were untrue, ExxonMobil would have both Ashland and BP in federal court so fast your head would be spinning. You don't think this will cut into Exxon's market share? They would have or will stop it if they can/could in a major lawsuit.
The best available evidence shows us Exxon [censored] up bigtime. Maybe they just had a quick quality control gap. But one can not conclude that based on Ashland's claim that the inferior Mobil 1 was found over 4 years of testing.
Unless Exxon comes out with complete denial and sues both companies, the only thing I can believe is they [censored] up.
And Exxon hacks sent here with an agenda to dispute claims with extreme prejudice aren't going to sway my opinion.
Originally Posted By: Art_Vandelay
I just read Valvoline's 4 X better wear protection thread( vs. Mobil 1) and happened to see this display for Castrol EDGE 5W-30. Some poster's mentioned that Valvoline may be making an unsubstantiated claim against Mobil 1 but now Castrol is doing it too, citing the Sequence IVA wear test.
Check out the photo from their display:
You better not be screwing with us Art!
What store?
I just read Valvoline's 4 X better wear protection thread( vs. Mobil 1) and happened to see this display for Castrol EDGE 5W-30. Some poster's mentioned that Valvoline may be making an unsubstantiated claim against Mobil 1 but now Castrol is doing it too, citing the Sequence IVA wear test.
Check out the photo from their display:
You better not be screwing with us Art!
What store?
Last edited:
I share Drew's view until XOM can prove it otherwise.
For those that say it's just "marketing", obviously it is but that doesn't mean there is no factual basis to claims being made. I would think the facts were established, and then marketed.
For those that say it's just "marketing", obviously it is but that doesn't mean there is no factual basis to claims being made. I would think the facts were established, and then marketed.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
