Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Originally Posted By: tig1
Both are fine oils but M1 has the superior base stock.
Really?
Please list the base stocks for both.. (and list your resources)
As I have said several times "if M1 went out of business today I would start using PP". So I believe PP is an excellant product. However M1 does have a superior base stock according to the info Mobil tech told me. They have told me that they use a combination of Grp3+,4, and 5. Also they consider their base stock as Grp4 as a whole. Also Tom NJ has said the same(the blend of grps) and Buster has reprinted articles confirming this. Now for PP, I again called their tech line and they confirmed their base stock as Grp3+ which is IMO a very good base, but I believe M1s is somewhat better. So that's why I believe M1 has the edge on base stock over PP.
Are you sure it's not just their Vissom (sp?) basestock? I could understand why they wouls say they: "consider it Grp IV basestock" b/c its properties are just as good in most cases. But is it not at least technically just a Grp III+ basestock as well? Both SOPUS & M1 seem to have made great strides in the properties of these Grp III+ basestocks.
I'd also point out their wording to you "consider it Grp IV" as proof of it. If it was Grp IV surely they'd just say it was & not that they consider it. Which if their Grp III+ can meet all of the attributes of PAO then they rightly consider it so.
I only say this as it could very well be mostly Grp III+ [ie: Vissom] w/ a small shot of Grp IV & V but on the whole it performs as well or better than a mostly PAO stock oil (perhaps even their old, old formula's of decades past). As we all know mixtures of Grp's seem to be ideal in today's oils. But I think in this case it may be a majority Vissom basestock that just has inherently as-good or better properties than PAO. This is of course only my guess. But it seems a logical thing to do if their Vissom is all that.
