Are there any UOA showing Mobil 1 to have good wear levels, low iron etc ?
Thanks
Thanks
Are there any UOA of Mobil 1 with good wear level?
- Thread starter vxcalais
- Start date
- Status
Lots of them, just start reading! Don't be swayed by all the high iron posts. The high iron #'s are not high enough to be concerned w/ in my opinion!Sure they are slightly elevated compared to equivalent oils. Don't read to much into Uao's they are not good indicators of wear in an engine!Have you read Doug Hillary's paper on UAO's fine reading. It's posted in the "white papers" section of the forum I beleave, if not just do a search.
Joe
Joe
No none. It's a horrible oil that just somehow found it's way into all of these cars:
https://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/MotorOil/Factory_Fill/Vehicles_Filled_Mobil_1.aspx
Quote:
* Acura RDX
* Aston Martin DB9, DBS and Vantage
* All Bentley Vehicles
* Bristol Fighter and Fighter S
* Buick Regal GT
* Chevrolet Camaro SS, CR8 and HHR SS
* Daewoo G2X
* All Holden HSV
* Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT-8
* Mercedes-Benz AMG Vehicles
* Mercedes SLR McLaren
* Mitsubishi Evolution and Lancer Evolution FQ400
* Nissan GT-R
* Opel GT and Insignia
* Pontiac G8 GXP
* Saab 9-3 TTid
* Saturn Sky Red Line
* Vauxhall VXR8
https://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/MotorOil/Factory_Fill/Vehicles_Filled_Mobil_1.aspx
Quote:
* Acura RDX
* Aston Martin DB9, DBS and Vantage
* All Bentley Vehicles
* Bristol Fighter and Fighter S
* Buick Regal GT
* Chevrolet Camaro SS, CR8 and HHR SS
* Daewoo G2X
* All Holden HSV
* Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT-8
* Mercedes-Benz AMG Vehicles
* Mercedes SLR McLaren
* Mitsubishi Evolution and Lancer Evolution FQ400
* Nissan GT-R
* Opel GT and Insignia
* Pontiac G8 GXP
* Saab 9-3 TTid
* Saturn Sky Red Line
* Vauxhall VXR8
I think you'll find more good than bad.
But I guess it depends on your definition of good and bad. For people who use UOA's in real life (and don't play Tribologist on the Internet) an iron reading of under 150 is acceptable. Here, people get all worked up over 5 parts per million of iron levels in a 7500 mile uoa.
But I guess it depends on your definition of good and bad. For people who use UOA's in real life (and don't play Tribologist on the Internet) an iron reading of under 150 is acceptable. Here, people get all worked up over 5 parts per million of iron levels in a 7500 mile uoa.
Originally Posted By: vxcalais
Are there any UOA showing Mobil 1 to have good wear levels, low iron etc ?
Thanks
Yes. Most of them.
The "high iron" thing is a myth. The average difference is not enough to be significant even if it does reflect actual wear, which it might not do anyway.
Are there any UOA showing Mobil 1 to have good wear levels, low iron etc ?
Thanks
Yes. Most of them.
The "high iron" thing is a myth. The average difference is not enough to be significant even if it does reflect actual wear, which it might not do anyway.
If you dig long enough you will find tribologist studies that show:
The best antiwear packages form "chemical alloys" and that slighty elevated iron levels are associated with lower wear rates. Many real wear particle sizes do not show up in this test anyway.
Confusing?? Yes, this why the SAE/API tests measure wear in the test engines, instead of running a water witch over the used oil!!!
The best antiwear packages form "chemical alloys" and that slighty elevated iron levels are associated with lower wear rates. Many real wear particle sizes do not show up in this test anyway.
Confusing?? Yes, this why the SAE/API tests measure wear in the test engines, instead of running a water witch over the used oil!!!
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=249928&page=1
Take a look at that one!!!!! And the oil has 14,000 miles on it! That`s the M1 flavour I always use :^)
Take a look at that one!!!!! And the oil has 14,000 miles on it! That`s the M1 flavour I always use :^)
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: bepperb
I think you'll find more good than bad.
But I guess it depends on your definition of good and bad. For people who use UOA's in real life (and don't play Tribologist on the Internet) an iron reading of under 150 is acceptable. Here, people get all worked up over 5 parts per million of iron levels in a 7500 mile uoa.
+1
I can point to a bunch that I have done myself over the last many years. Use of a good syn can also be attributed to significantly reduced timing chain wear in vehicles such as MB diesels, which have the longest-lasting engines on the road.
While 5 vs 7.5 may be a huge difference percentage-wise, it may well be mostly in the noise of the analysis because of the equipment/technique. We may well strive a bit tooo hard for the last ppm, when it doesn't really mean anything, or its root cause for showing up is manifested through some secondary mechanism.
I think you'll find more good than bad.
But I guess it depends on your definition of good and bad. For people who use UOA's in real life (and don't play Tribologist on the Internet) an iron reading of under 150 is acceptable. Here, people get all worked up over 5 parts per million of iron levels in a 7500 mile uoa.
+1
I can point to a bunch that I have done myself over the last many years. Use of a good syn can also be attributed to significantly reduced timing chain wear in vehicles such as MB diesels, which have the longest-lasting engines on the road.
While 5 vs 7.5 may be a huge difference percentage-wise, it may well be mostly in the noise of the analysis because of the equipment/technique. We may well strive a bit tooo hard for the last ppm, when it doesn't really mean anything, or its root cause for showing up is manifested through some secondary mechanism.
REPEAT AFTER ME... UOA's are a terrible indicator of how well an engine is wearing, but are great indicators of the health of your oil and the level at which it can do its job. I really wish that was a sticky on this board.
That said, there are a bunch of Mobil guys on this board that have long histories of only using Mobil-1 in their engines and have achieved some pretty impressive mileages with spotless engine internals to boot.
The whole M1 causes excess wear started because someone "thinks" they know that M1 has cheapened out their basestocks by using more GRP-III versus PAO as in the past but this is just a rumor that M1 won't confirm.
Also most people that see high Iron numbers in their UOA's are seeing them because they are hopscotching from one oil to the next and then to M1. M1 is only guilty of being an excellent cleaner and could be cleaning up Iron residue left by other oils. Besides we are talking about a few parts per million. Doug says the condemnation point is something like 150ppm and not the low double digits some see. Most see single digits in their UOA. None of this matters thought because UOA's aren't a scientific way to prove wear is occuring. Even with trending it is a million to one that you can predict such wear.
There are members of this board that have had engine failure or engine damage and their UOA's showed them nothing out of the ordinary right before the disaster.
The man to speak to is Doug Hillary. He is the man when it comes to Mobil-1
I too have used M1 for the first 80K KM and have had nothing but excellent results. I switched because M1 is much more expensive up here compared to the US and I can get Amsoil for almost the same price. Amsoil offers me some things that the M1 oil doesn't and so I have stuck with them.
If I had access to cheap M1 oil here in this country on my store shelves as you do, I would use nothing else.
That said I like their Turbo Diesel Truck 5w40, their 0w40, and anything in their Extended Performance line. 5w30 etc. as these have super duper additive packages and base-stocks. Their regular line which doesn't fall into this category is good too, but just for not as many miles IMO.
That said, there are a bunch of Mobil guys on this board that have long histories of only using Mobil-1 in their engines and have achieved some pretty impressive mileages with spotless engine internals to boot.
The whole M1 causes excess wear started because someone "thinks" they know that M1 has cheapened out their basestocks by using more GRP-III versus PAO as in the past but this is just a rumor that M1 won't confirm.
Also most people that see high Iron numbers in their UOA's are seeing them because they are hopscotching from one oil to the next and then to M1. M1 is only guilty of being an excellent cleaner and could be cleaning up Iron residue left by other oils. Besides we are talking about a few parts per million. Doug says the condemnation point is something like 150ppm and not the low double digits some see. Most see single digits in their UOA. None of this matters thought because UOA's aren't a scientific way to prove wear is occuring. Even with trending it is a million to one that you can predict such wear.
There are members of this board that have had engine failure or engine damage and their UOA's showed them nothing out of the ordinary right before the disaster.
The man to speak to is Doug Hillary. He is the man when it comes to Mobil-1
I too have used M1 for the first 80K KM and have had nothing but excellent results. I switched because M1 is much more expensive up here compared to the US and I can get Amsoil for almost the same price. Amsoil offers me some things that the M1 oil doesn't and so I have stuck with them.
If I had access to cheap M1 oil here in this country on my store shelves as you do, I would use nothing else.
That said I like their Turbo Diesel Truck 5w40, their 0w40, and anything in their Extended Performance line. 5w30 etc. as these have super duper additive packages and base-stocks. Their regular line which doesn't fall into this category is good too, but just for not as many miles IMO.
Here are the M1 0W40 iron levels (shown in yellow) for the 2.0 FSI relative to other oils(outliers removed). They are higher than average for the most part.
Data is from many units/drivers etc. and some are single pass UOAs. Small sample size. These all limit the data's usefullness.
What the iron levels mean in terms of chemical or physical wear is not shown by this data, only the iron levels found in UOAs for a specific engine and small sample size. x axis is miles on engine, y axis is ppm Fe/1000 miles.
Data is from many units/drivers etc. and some are single pass UOAs. Small sample size. These all limit the data's usefullness.
What the iron levels mean in terms of chemical or physical wear is not shown by this data, only the iron levels found in UOAs for a specific engine and small sample size. x axis is miles on engine, y axis is ppm Fe/1000 miles.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
I'd play it safe if I was everyone out there. Buy Amsoil instead. I mean ...odds are in your favor ...but you need to ask yourself ..is it worth the risk?? Peace of mind has no value limit.
Now it certainly wouldn't bother me. Nope ..but there are 281 members out there that wouldn't touch it with a 10' pole.
..but, hey, what's a few particles of Fe here and there among oil friends??
Now it certainly wouldn't bother me. Nope ..but there are 281 members out there that wouldn't touch it with a 10' pole.
..but, hey, what's a few particles of Fe here and there among oil friends??
*COUGH* *COUGH* Plug for Amsoil *COUGH* *COUGH*
Gary...
Gary...
Originally Posted By: fsskier
How many manufacturers specify Amsoil as the factory fill?
OOPS, better duck now!
Amsoil is a small company only holding 4% of the market share compared to the Giant XOM which has something like 58% of the market.
Don't think Amsoil could keep up with the volume of the car makers.
Also just because it's a smaller brand doesn't mean it can't offer superior products to that of XOM.
BTW: They buy their base stocks from XOM.
I'm sure you were just funin' but thought I would post the information for others in the group.
How many manufacturers specify Amsoil as the factory fill?
OOPS, better duck now!
Amsoil is a small company only holding 4% of the market share compared to the Giant XOM which has something like 58% of the market.
Don't think Amsoil could keep up with the volume of the car makers.
Also just because it's a smaller brand doesn't mean it can't offer superior products to that of XOM.
BTW: They buy their base stocks from XOM.
I'm sure you were just funin' but thought I would post the information for others in the group.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Originally Posted By: fsskier
How many manufacturers specify Amsoil as the factory fill?
OOPS, better duck now!
How many "salt the mine" by being the OEM fluid in a "we'll scratch your back ..and you scratch mine" manner?
No, really, they're so big and Amsoil so small in comparison that even if someone wanted to spec Amsoil as an OEM fluid, they would never be able to produce the assembly line fluids. Even the R&D would be senseless for the exact same reason. It would either be too much or too little demand to be workable.
Not really a plug for Amsoil ..but I figured I'd add some semi-dim comedy to the discussion ...since we're talking M1's SIGNATURE Fe series oils
I don't put any weight to the Fe levels ..but it's a giggle to poke fun at it every once and a while.
How many manufacturers specify Amsoil as the factory fill?
OOPS, better duck now!
How many "salt the mine" by being the OEM fluid in a "we'll scratch your back ..and you scratch mine" manner?
No, really, they're so big and Amsoil so small in comparison that even if someone wanted to spec Amsoil as an OEM fluid, they would never be able to produce the assembly line fluids. Even the R&D would be senseless for the exact same reason. It would either be too much or too little demand to be workable.
Not really a plug for Amsoil ..but I figured I'd add some semi-dim comedy to the discussion ...since we're talking M1's SIGNATURE Fe series oils
I don't put any weight to the Fe levels ..but it's a giggle to poke fun at it every once and a while.
A fewgood UOA re mobil 1, PP has more. But remember you are not suppose to be moved by higher than other oils fe levels and that UOA is not really an indication of wear even though Mobil 1 has higher fe # And remember Daewoo or whatever the name is uses Mobil 1 for a factory fill. How many I wonder continue after that??? Thank God it is baseball play off time again..And a must you have to read Dougs article before you do anything. It contains the meaning of life... Have a good day.
yep another is mobil 1 [censored] thread, its been at least a week.....
There are a number of respected users here who prefer M1.
I do not pretend to their level of knowledge, but I have used it extensively myself, and have seen no ill effects.
The point made by a number of members is that a UOA tells you more about how an oil is holding up in service than it does about engine wear.
There is no substitute for taking an engine apart to determine wear and cleanliness.
I have had but one car engine apart, a VW.
It was clean and had almost no crankshaft wear, and after 110K on this air-cooled wonder, it still had hone marks on the inside of its jugs.
So why had it lost power?
Cracked heads, for which the Type IV is known.
What was used as oil?
10W-40 winter, 30HD summer.
If only I had used PP (not then available), the heads would not have cracked
.
I do not pretend to their level of knowledge, but I have used it extensively myself, and have seen no ill effects.
The point made by a number of members is that a UOA tells you more about how an oil is holding up in service than it does about engine wear.
There is no substitute for taking an engine apart to determine wear and cleanliness.
I have had but one car engine apart, a VW.
It was clean and had almost no crankshaft wear, and after 110K on this air-cooled wonder, it still had hone marks on the inside of its jugs.
So why had it lost power?
Cracked heads, for which the Type IV is known.
What was used as oil?
10W-40 winter, 30HD summer.
If only I had used PP (not then available), the heads would not have cracked
.- Status
