After reading this thread http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001714 If what george is saying is true wouldn't M1 be just as effective with auto-rx as a dino oil?
Frank
Frank
Auto-rx in new M1 with no esters?
- Thread starter Not the Autorx Frank
- Start date
- Status
Here is What he says:
The esters in Mobil 1 are "no more".. One of the evolutionary changes was the elimination of the ester portion of the formulation (needed for additive solubility, natural detergency, seal swell). Thus Mobil 1 is essentially all PAO now, enabled through the magic of chemistry; even superior performance without the negative aspects of the ester.
George Morrison, STLE CLS
I realize my statement (Esers gone!) is a bit of a shocker. But it is true.. Mobil's latest formulation goal was to eliminate ester's from the program. Ester additization has been around since day 2 (day one found the additives at the bottom of the container: additive fallout!) and have been a cornerstone of Group IV PAO synthetic oil formulation. But, if one looks at the current MSDS for Mobil 1, you will note the absence of ester.. It took years of work to achieve a formulation that significantly outperformed the PAO/Ester blend but, Mobil did it..
This is what Sypersyn was all about; the ads about it being revolutionary, new, etc. were true..
Additive solubility, seal swell, detergency were all achieved..
George Morrison, STLE CLS
Regarding the supposed advantages of ester in Mobil 1: it was merely a balancing of chemistries to achieve an end. It has always been a goal to eliminate or minimize the ester 'blend'. As previously indicated, esters are *very* hygroscopic. The last thing we need in an oil formulation is a component drawing water into the fluid, which is what esters do.. Esters are very reactive. (i.e. the natural detergency, seal swell, additive hold). So the real chemical breakthrough was the ability to have a homogeneous chemistry that enabled all the positive aspects of ester without the drawbacks: which is exactly what has taken place. And performance-wise, which has always been the Mobil standard, no compromise: just the opposite, increased performance in every parameter.
Regarding Mobil tech support: they are not going to share formulation. This formulation is multi-patentable, super secret deal!.
However, it is not rocket science: the MSDS for old formulation Mobil 1 indicated >10% ester. New formulation Mobil 1: no ester component is mentioned....
This is what Mobil was all excited about! To be able to significantly surpass the PAO/Ester blend performance without the ester.
George Morrison, STLE CLS
The esters in Mobil 1 are "no more".. One of the evolutionary changes was the elimination of the ester portion of the formulation (needed for additive solubility, natural detergency, seal swell). Thus Mobil 1 is essentially all PAO now, enabled through the magic of chemistry; even superior performance without the negative aspects of the ester.
George Morrison, STLE CLS
I realize my statement (Esers gone!) is a bit of a shocker. But it is true.. Mobil's latest formulation goal was to eliminate ester's from the program. Ester additization has been around since day 2 (day one found the additives at the bottom of the container: additive fallout!) and have been a cornerstone of Group IV PAO synthetic oil formulation. But, if one looks at the current MSDS for Mobil 1, you will note the absence of ester.. It took years of work to achieve a formulation that significantly outperformed the PAO/Ester blend but, Mobil did it..
This is what Sypersyn was all about; the ads about it being revolutionary, new, etc. were true..
Additive solubility, seal swell, detergency were all achieved..
George Morrison, STLE CLS
Regarding the supposed advantages of ester in Mobil 1: it was merely a balancing of chemistries to achieve an end. It has always been a goal to eliminate or minimize the ester 'blend'. As previously indicated, esters are *very* hygroscopic. The last thing we need in an oil formulation is a component drawing water into the fluid, which is what esters do.. Esters are very reactive. (i.e. the natural detergency, seal swell, additive hold). So the real chemical breakthrough was the ability to have a homogeneous chemistry that enabled all the positive aspects of ester without the drawbacks: which is exactly what has taken place. And performance-wise, which has always been the Mobil standard, no compromise: just the opposite, increased performance in every parameter.
Regarding Mobil tech support: they are not going to share formulation. This formulation is multi-patentable, super secret deal!.
However, it is not rocket science: the MSDS for old formulation Mobil 1 indicated >10% ester. New formulation Mobil 1: no ester component is mentioned....
This is what Mobil was all excited about! To be able to significantly surpass the PAO/Ester blend performance without the ester.
George Morrison, STLE CLS
Yeah seems to me everyone was recommending dino oil because of the esters in syn competing with auto-rx cleaning. Now I'm curious about this M1?
its just that mobil 1 is a synthetic (if i hear u guys right ) and the esters in there are going to battle over the cleaning stuff in auto rx. thats why frank perscribes auto rx to be used with dino oil. dino oil is much easier for auto rx. though if u do use mobil 1 then u have to run it a bit longer, but in my opinion whats the point of killin 20 dollars worth of oil when u can spend 5 dollars on oil and change it after wards
if its not synthetic its fine, if it is just leave it in longer
if its not synthetic its fine, if it is just leave it in longer
o man i may of made a mistake...haha if i did then
synthetic=leave in longer
non synthetic= leave in less
hahah i havent read up on that new mobil 1...though im thinking of running synthetic in my 91 after the whole auto rx process
synthetic=leave in longer
non synthetic= leave in less
hahah i havent read up on that new mobil 1...though im thinking of running synthetic in my 91 after the whole auto rx process
Auto-Rx works fine with "Synthetics", in fact, some dealers with a well known synthetic oil sold by dealers prep customers engines with Auto-Rx
prior to adding there oil to customers engine. (Superior Results than this oil company's additive cleaner). The "Complex Additive Packages" in Synthetic Oil fight with Auto-Rx for space on the engine metal at 750 miles Auto-Rx is cleansing (synthetic esters don't compete with natural easters). Why would you use expensive synthetic oil to do a cleansing of your engine?
Use "Dino" and when your done with Auto-Rx application go back to your synthetic. Last but not least, Synthetic Base Oil is never a problem
and 500 miles would work fine, however, add the complex additive packages and Auto-Rx needs 750 miles. Look at it this way, your oil after cleansing with Auto-Rx will perform so much better - read Dyson Oil Analysis Tests on www.auto-rx.com
prior to adding there oil to customers engine. (Superior Results than this oil company's additive cleaner). The "Complex Additive Packages" in Synthetic Oil fight with Auto-Rx for space on the engine metal at 750 miles Auto-Rx is cleansing (synthetic esters don't compete with natural easters). Why would you use expensive synthetic oil to do a cleansing of your engine?
Use "Dino" and when your done with Auto-Rx application go back to your synthetic. Last but not least, Synthetic Base Oil is never a problem
and 500 miles would work fine, however, add the complex additive packages and Auto-Rx needs 750 miles. Look at it this way, your oil after cleansing with Auto-Rx will perform so much better - read Dyson Oil Analysis Tests on www.auto-rx.com
I've used AutoRX - it works exactly as advertised....There is no downside to using this product.
I highly recommend using it before changing over a high mileage engine to Amsoil, to clean preexisting sludge/varnish/carbon deposits. It does a very thorough job of cleaning and actually lowers wear rates while this cleaning process is going on. It boosts the additive chemistry of the host oil, which is unique in my experience with cleaners/solvents.
TooSlick
Dixie Synthetics
I highly recommend using it before changing over a high mileage engine to Amsoil, to clean preexisting sludge/varnish/carbon deposits. It does a very thorough job of cleaning and actually lowers wear rates while this cleaning process is going on. It boosts the additive chemistry of the host oil, which is unique in my experience with cleaners/solvents.
TooSlick
Dixie Synthetics
Well some synthetics don't necessarily have more additives than other oils. Schaeffer dino for example or HDD oils have a lot. I could swear that the official story was the esters competing. Since it is now the additives that is the problem...it seems I would have done better to use a generic SL PCMO for the treatments instead of a HDD oil. I thought Frank even recommended Delvac 1300 at one time, so is the additive problem a new discovery? Would you not recomend Delvac anymore?
Yeah I'm just Gonna run it the last 1000 miles of the M1 thats in there now. I'm not fixin seals just cleanin it up. I'll just change filter and top up with driveclean dino.
Frank
Frank
- Status
