I've don't know since I've never shopped for EP (since 0W-40 goes that distance), but when M1 goes on sale is that not inclusive of EP?
Mobil 1 5w30 EP that much better than Mobil 1 5w30
- Thread starter Peted
- Start date
- Status
Has anyone, including XOM, been able to provide a logical explanation for the high iron levels seen in M-1 UOAs--or is that result just going to keep being ignored?
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: steve20
Has anyone, including XOM, been able to provide a logical explanation for the high iron levels seen in M-1 UOAs--or is that result just going to keep being ignored?
Define "high".
Has anyone, including XOM, been able to provide a logical explanation for the high iron levels seen in M-1 UOAs--or is that result just going to keep being ignored?
Define "high".
Don't forget Mobil Super Synthetic.
It's Mobil's new synthetic specially formulated for today's hard working engines.
http://www.grayoil.net/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=101
It's less than Mobil 1, Mobil EP and Mobil AFE.....and it's made by Mobil!
It's Mobil's new synthetic specially formulated for today's hard working engines.
http://www.grayoil.net/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=101
It's less than Mobil 1, Mobil EP and Mobil AFE.....and it's made by Mobil!
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: mongo161
Don't forget Mobil Super Synthetic.
It's Mobil's new synthetic specially formulated for today's hard working engines.
http://www.grayoil.net/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=101
It's less than Mobil 1, Mobil EP and Mobil AFE.....and it's made by Mobil!
Happy birthday Mongo!
Have you ever seen the movie The Warriors ?
The ending scene is on Coney Island. One of my favorite movies.
Don't forget Mobil Super Synthetic.
It's Mobil's new synthetic specially formulated for today's hard working engines.
http://www.grayoil.net/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=101
It's less than Mobil 1, Mobil EP and Mobil AFE.....and it's made by Mobil!
Happy birthday Mongo!
Have you ever seen the movie The Warriors ?
The ending scene is on Coney Island. One of my favorite movies.
Originally Posted By: steve20
Has anyone, including XOM, been able to provide a logical explanation for the high iron levels seen in M-1 UOAs--or is that result just going to keep being ignored?
According to Mobil 1 on the Q&A sticky...what I get out of their answer anyway...is that the iron levels we typically see on M1 UOAs are not considered high by Mobil 1 standards.
I think they seem to run higher than average. Probably not a big concern though.
Has anyone, including XOM, been able to provide a logical explanation for the high iron levels seen in M-1 UOAs--or is that result just going to keep being ignored?
According to Mobil 1 on the Q&A sticky...what I get out of their answer anyway...is that the iron levels we typically see on M1 UOAs are not considered high by Mobil 1 standards.
I think they seem to run higher than average. Probably not a big concern though.
Originally Posted By: river_rat
Originally Posted By: steve20
Has anyone, including XOM, been able to provide a logical explanation for the high iron levels seen in M-1 UOAs--or is that result just going to keep being ignored?
According to Mobil 1 on the Q&A sticky...what I get out of their answer anyway...is that the iron levels we typically see on M1 UOAs are not considered high by Mobil 1 standards.
I think they seem to run higher than average. Probably not a big concern though.
What a convenient answer!
Exactly--XOM will not (I doubt if they cannot, with the R&D they must have) provide a logical explanation why Fe levels are higher than when the same vehicle uses ANY other brand of oil. If Fram oil filters yielded high Fe levels, there would be violence, to say he least. I guess if you like M-1 the easiest thing to do is to just dismiss the results as ---??? I don't know, make up your own reason, you just ignore it
Originally Posted By: steve20
Has anyone, including XOM, been able to provide a logical explanation for the high iron levels seen in M-1 UOAs--or is that result just going to keep being ignored?
According to Mobil 1 on the Q&A sticky...what I get out of their answer anyway...is that the iron levels we typically see on M1 UOAs are not considered high by Mobil 1 standards.
I think they seem to run higher than average. Probably not a big concern though.
What a convenient answer!
Exactly--XOM will not (I doubt if they cannot, with the R&D they must have) provide a logical explanation why Fe levels are higher than when the same vehicle uses ANY other brand of oil. If Fram oil filters yielded high Fe levels, there would be violence, to say he least. I guess if you like M-1 the easiest thing to do is to just dismiss the results as ---??? I don't know, make up your own reason, you just ignore it
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: tig1
Either oil is outstanding for 10K OCIs in most engines.
Tig, I will soon need your encouragement. Wife's Camry is out of warranty and I will change from Toyota 0W20 syn to M1 next change. My plan is to adopt a 10K oci when I make the switch over.
Either oil is outstanding for 10K OCIs in most engines.
Tig, I will soon need your encouragement. Wife's Camry is out of warranty and I will change from Toyota 0W20 syn to M1 next change. My plan is to adopt a 10K oci when I make the switch over.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: steve20
Originally Posted By: river_rat
Originally Posted By: steve20
Has anyone, including XOM, been able to provide a logical explanation for the high iron levels seen in M-1 UOAs--or is that result just going to keep being ignored?
According to Mobil 1 on the Q&A sticky...what I get out of their answer anyway...is that the iron levels we typically see on M1 UOAs are not considered high by Mobil 1 standards.
I think they seem to run higher than average. Probably not a big concern though.
What a convenient answer!
Exactly--XOM will not (I doubt if they cannot, with the R&D they must have) provide a logical explanation why Fe levels are higher than when the same vehicle uses ANY other brand of oil. If Fram oil filters yielded high Fe levels, there would be violence, to say he least. I guess if you like M-1 the easiest thing to do is to just dismiss the results as ---??? I don't know, make up your own reason, you just ignore it
No, it is much easier to dismiss UOA's as a oil life monitoring tool and not one designed to determine "wear". Since that is of course factual.
Which then sets fire to the proverbial "high iron" straw man.
Originally Posted By: river_rat
Originally Posted By: steve20
Has anyone, including XOM, been able to provide a logical explanation for the high iron levels seen in M-1 UOAs--or is that result just going to keep being ignored?
According to Mobil 1 on the Q&A sticky...what I get out of their answer anyway...is that the iron levels we typically see on M1 UOAs are not considered high by Mobil 1 standards.
I think they seem to run higher than average. Probably not a big concern though.
What a convenient answer!
Exactly--XOM will not (I doubt if they cannot, with the R&D they must have) provide a logical explanation why Fe levels are higher than when the same vehicle uses ANY other brand of oil. If Fram oil filters yielded high Fe levels, there would be violence, to say he least. I guess if you like M-1 the easiest thing to do is to just dismiss the results as ---??? I don't know, make up your own reason, you just ignore it
No, it is much easier to dismiss UOA's as a oil life monitoring tool and not one designed to determine "wear". Since that is of course factual.
Which then sets fire to the proverbial "high iron" straw man.
Originally Posted By: river_rat
[/quote]
According to Mobil 1 on the Q&A sticky...what I get out of their answer anyway...is that the iron levels we typically see on M1 UOAs are not considered high by Mobil 1 standards.
I think they seem to run higher than average. Probably not a big concern though.
Agreed.
A two calorie diet drink has 100% more calories than a one calorie diet drink, but does it matter?
Tom NJ
[/quote]
According to Mobil 1 on the Q&A sticky...what I get out of their answer anyway...is that the iron levels we typically see on M1 UOAs are not considered high by Mobil 1 standards.
I think they seem to run higher than average. Probably not a big concern though.
Agreed.
A two calorie diet drink has 100% more calories than a one calorie diet drink, but does it matter?
Tom NJ
Originally Posted By: teddyboy
Originally Posted By: tig1
Either oil is outstanding for 10K OCIs in most engines.
Tig, I will soon need your encouragement. Wife's Camry is out of warranty and I will change from Toyota 0W20 syn to M1 next change. My plan is to adopt a 10K oci when I make the switch over.
The 10K OCI has been great for the Duratechs and I see no reason it won't be for your Toyota. But realize I have been doing 10K OCIs since 1978, so my that's my normal.
Originally Posted By: tig1
Either oil is outstanding for 10K OCIs in most engines.
Tig, I will soon need your encouragement. Wife's Camry is out of warranty and I will change from Toyota 0W20 syn to M1 next change. My plan is to adopt a 10K oci when I make the switch over.
The 10K OCI has been great for the Duratechs and I see no reason it won't be for your Toyota. But realize I have been doing 10K OCIs since 1978, so my that's my normal.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted By: steve20
Has anyone, including XOM, been able to provide a logical explanation for the high iron levels seen in M-1 UOAs--or is that result just going to keep being ignored?
I wondered the very same thing,so I studied a ton of uoa`s here. I kept thinking,how can M1 run so smooth,but show high wear metals? So what I found,is that it`s certain engines that shed iron no matter what oil is used,so it has nothing to do with M1. These said engines shed a ton of wear metals whether they were on a diet of pyb,wvb,Havoline,Redline,M1,RP,etc. The engines I found which showed very minute to no wear metals had the same outstanding results no matter what oil they used.
Has anyone, including XOM, been able to provide a logical explanation for the high iron levels seen in M-1 UOAs--or is that result just going to keep being ignored?
I wondered the very same thing,so I studied a ton of uoa`s here. I kept thinking,how can M1 run so smooth,but show high wear metals? So what I found,is that it`s certain engines that shed iron no matter what oil is used,so it has nothing to do with M1. These said engines shed a ton of wear metals whether they were on a diet of pyb,wvb,Havoline,Redline,M1,RP,etc. The engines I found which showed very minute to no wear metals had the same outstanding results no matter what oil they used.
I haven't done the analysis you have, but I do remember a ton of UOAs high iron with M-1, and then like someone waved a magic wand the iron levels decrease when another brand of oil is used......
M-1 has always produced more valvetrain noise in any vehicle I've used it in, that, the high iron levels, and that debacle after Katrina, when M-1 wasn't really M-1, is enough for me to choose SOPUS
I guess it comes down to... you use whatever trips your trigger
M-1 has always produced more valvetrain noise in any vehicle I've used it in, that, the high iron levels, and that debacle after Katrina, when M-1 wasn't really M-1, is enough for me to choose SOPUS
I guess it comes down to... you use whatever trips your trigger
Originally Posted By: steve20
I haven't done the analysis you have, but I do remember a ton of UOAs high iron with M-1, and then like someone waved a magic wand the iron levels decrease when another brand of oil is used......
I can't say for sure, but my impression from all I've seen agrees with this. The engine may very well wear faster with M1 as compared to an average dino or synth, but M1 is relatively cheap for a synthetic, readily available, and lots of weights in stock at Walmart. It will always be popular, even after that sequence IV fiasco that scared a lot of BITOGERs. I don't think the average user will keep their car long enough to matter anyway.
Lots of people here do not believe that UOAs can do anything to measure wear anyway.
I don't know the answer to that, as I am not an automotive engineer. I know that these companies who have developed the systems like Wear Check and Blackstone have developed it to give some indication of how things are going, particularly for fleet owners. I assume that there is some validity to this, as wear particles should come in an assortment of sizes that they can "see" under normal cicumstances...unless these companies are dead wrong in principal, and therefore either incompetent in their test designs, or blatantly ripping off their customers. Of course they are not designed to tell you that your camshaft will shatter in a month. There is often a spike in UOA particles in a failing engine...but not always.
I haven't done the analysis you have, but I do remember a ton of UOAs high iron with M-1, and then like someone waved a magic wand the iron levels decrease when another brand of oil is used......
I can't say for sure, but my impression from all I've seen agrees with this. The engine may very well wear faster with M1 as compared to an average dino or synth, but M1 is relatively cheap for a synthetic, readily available, and lots of weights in stock at Walmart. It will always be popular, even after that sequence IV fiasco that scared a lot of BITOGERs. I don't think the average user will keep their car long enough to matter anyway.
Lots of people here do not believe that UOAs can do anything to measure wear anyway.
I don't know the answer to that, as I am not an automotive engineer. I know that these companies who have developed the systems like Wear Check and Blackstone have developed it to give some indication of how things are going, particularly for fleet owners. I assume that there is some validity to this, as wear particles should come in an assortment of sizes that they can "see" under normal cicumstances...unless these companies are dead wrong in principal, and therefore either incompetent in their test designs, or blatantly ripping off their customers. Of course they are not designed to tell you that your camshaft will shatter in a month. There is often a spike in UOA particles in a failing engine...but not always.
Pesky deposits can really lead to premature engine wear. That's why I was never really concerned about the high avg Fe. You're talking a small range of low ppm. In cars that see high rpms or very cold weather, it's a great choice does well in those areas. It's why GM and Honda like it. It can handle high temperatures and keeping the rings and turbos clean.
Originally Posted By: steve20
I haven't done the analysis you have, but I do remember a ton of UOAs high iron with M-1, and then like someone waved a magic wand the iron levels decrease when another brand of oil is used......
M-1 has always produced more valvetrain noise in any vehicle I've used it in, that, the high iron levels, and that debacle after Katrina, when M-1 wasn't really M-1, is enough for me to choose SOPUS
I guess it comes down to... you use whatever trips your trigger
Was that every grade of M1 or just the 5w-30?
I haven't done the analysis you have, but I do remember a ton of UOAs high iron with M-1, and then like someone waved a magic wand the iron levels decrease when another brand of oil is used......
M-1 has always produced more valvetrain noise in any vehicle I've used it in, that, the high iron levels, and that debacle after Katrina, when M-1 wasn't really M-1, is enough for me to choose SOPUS
I guess it comes down to... you use whatever trips your trigger
Was that every grade of M1 or just the 5w-30?
just the 5-30 for higher iron levels
Hasn't Doug successfully used UOAs on his fleets for decades?
He does comment occasionally on the UOA posts-there must be some value to a B-Stone WearCheck or CAT UOA!
Maybe Doug used the 300 dollar UOAs with pictures of the wear particles magnified 1000 times?
I think RR hit it on the head with the following statement:
"""I don't think the average user will keep their car long enough to matter anyway"""
Hasn't Doug successfully used UOAs on his fleets for decades?
He does comment occasionally on the UOA posts-there must be some value to a B-Stone WearCheck or CAT UOA!
Maybe Doug used the 300 dollar UOAs with pictures of the wear particles magnified 1000 times?
I think RR hit it on the head with the following statement:
"""I don't think the average user will keep their car long enough to matter anyway"""
- Status