Motul 300V Ester Core oil launched

Status
Not open for further replies.
Agree that by specs and pricing alone the 300V is not a good value. But without seeing any UOAs (or even VOAs) we can't be certain.

I will probably try it out regardless. Thank God this car doesn't need 10L like the old one did...
 
Originally Posted By: dparm
Agree that by specs and pricing alone the 300V is not a good value. But without seeing any UOAs (or even VOAs) we can't be certain.

I will probably try it out regardless.


Same here, and although EVERYONE on here states, "basestocks alone do not a great oil make" (just like they do for addpacks), it does appear that Motul's basestocks beat BOTH Mobil's 0W-40 AND Red Line's 0W-40 basestocks, and at least match them on addpacks.

So who knows??
21.gif
Time and use alone will tell.
wink.gif
 
Exactly, that's why I plan to try it out.

I've been meaning to call Joey lately, maybe I'll ask him for some details on the new Core basestock.
 
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: chubbs1
Originally Posted By: dparm

I would not pay for their 0w40 over M1 0w40 anyway.

With Motul 300V at more than twice the price of M1 0W-40 I wouldn't either.


I'm sorry, don't want to open the can of worms, but the only time that M1 0W-40 gets close to Motul 300V is on paper, in the real life (and especially if you track your car) its ridiculous to compare them. Motul 300V is a ¨boutique¨ high performance ester oil and Mobil 1 is a group 3 ¨synthetic¨, on the shelf one. I have used both and IMO no comparison is posible.

I think the big difference between the prices of both oils is not a casualty.
 
Originally Posted By: turbokick


I'm sorry, don't want to open the can of worms, but the only time that M1 0W-40 gets close to Motul 300V is on paper, in the real life (and especially if you track your car) its ridiculous to compare them. Motul 300V is a ¨boutique¨ high performance ester oil and Mobil 1 is a group 3 ¨synthetic¨, on the shelf one. I have used both and IMO no comparison is posible.

I think the big difference between the prices of both oils is not a casualty.


According to this oil test Gokhan posted the expensive boutique-oils don't look so good.

http://bmwservice.livejournal.com/27699.html

Despite all the godly PAO and esters and whatnot the results are not what you would expect.
 
Originally Posted By: OpelFever
Originally Posted By: turbokick




According to this oil test Gokhan posted the expensive boutique-oils don't look so good.

http://bmwservice.livejournal.com/27699.html

Despite all the godly PAO and esters and whatnot the results are not what you would expect.



As I said I don't expect anything, I have used them (M1 for years) and I know from personal experience (on the track) that Motul 300V performs way better compared to Mobil 1. When you hold your engin above 5000rpm for some time the difference became quite noticeable.
Try making a whole drift/track day and you'll see what's the difference between PAO/Ester high-priced oils and the group 3 ¨synthetics¨.

If you drive ¨granny style¨ you can live your whole life without seeing any difference except the higher price, but as far as you begin practicing some motorsports discipline you'll see that nobody pays more bucks for the same thing and that more expensive things cost more for a reason.
 
Originally Posted By: OpelFever

According to this oil test Gokhan posted the expensive boutique-oils don't look so good.

http://bmwservice.livejournal.com/27699.html

Despite all the godly PAO and esters and whatnot the results are not what you would expect.


Cooking an oil at over 700°F in a glass flask and visually evaluating the sludge formed is utterly meaningless. The conditions are not even close to an automotive engine and no correlation to engine performance has been established. No scientific conclusions whatsoever can be drawn from such testing, and the results are more apt to mislead than guide.

The engine and/or fleet tests conducted for certification under API, ILSAC, and ACEA standards are run is actual engines under very severe conditions with standardized equipment and procedures and all variables under control. These are the only scientifically valid methods for evaluating motor oil performance in engines. Everything else is marketing.

Your best guide for selecting motor oils is certification under the official specifications relevant to your engine/environment/driving pattern.

Tom NJ
 
While I agree with everything you posted, I would like some kind of rational explanation as to why some of the oils left almost no residue while others left a lot of burned sludge?

Eventhough there may be no relevance to actual engine operation, it's odd that similarly specced oils react so differently to heat.

As far as marketing goes, I don't think the test favoured any brand or specific oil and was more of an armchair science project.
 
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Originally Posted By: OpelFever

According to this oil test Gokhan posted the expensive boutique-oils don't look so good.

http://bmwservice.livejournal.com/27699.html

Despite all the godly PAO and esters and whatnot the results are not what you would expect.


Cooking an oil at over 700°F in a glass flask and visually evaluating the sludge formed is utterly meaningless. The conditions are not even close to an automotive engine and no correlation to engine performance has been established. No scientific conclusions whatsoever can be drawn from such testing, and the results are more apt to mislead than guide.

The engine and/or fleet tests conducted for certification under API, ILSAC, and ACEA standards are run is actual engines under very severe conditions with standardized equipment and procedures and all variables under control. These are the only scientifically valid methods for evaluating motor oil performance in engines. Everything else is marketing.

Your best guide for selecting motor oils is certification under the official specifications relevant to your engine/environment/driving pattern.

Tom NJ


thumbsup2.gif
01.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Originally Posted By: OpelFever

According to this oil test Gokhan posted the expensive boutique-oils don't look so good.

http://bmwservice.livejournal.com/27699.html

Despite all the godly PAO and esters and whatnot the results are not what you would expect.


Cooking an oil at over 700°F in a glass flask and visually evaluating the sludge formed is utterly meaningless. The conditions are not even close to an automotive engine and no correlation to engine performance has been established. No scientific conclusions whatsoever can be drawn from such testing, and the results are more apt to mislead than guide.

The engine and/or fleet tests conducted for certification under API, ILSAC, and ACEA standards are run is actual engines under very severe conditions with standardized equipment and procedures and all variables under control. These are the only scientifically valid methods for evaluating motor oil performance in engines. Everything else is marketing.

Your best guide for selecting motor oils is certification under the official specifications relevant to your engine/environment/driving pattern.

Tom NJ


Extremely well put!
thumbsup2.gif
 
The exact deposit composition for each oil is something which would require lots of testing to determine, but really, what's the point? Your engine is going to have much bigger problems than sludge if your oil sees temperatures over 500*F, heck over 300*F usually spells trouble. The standard NOACK test is as extreme as any test needs to be.

Ester based oils were first developed for gas turbine engines where the operating temperatures are substantially higher than piston engines. In those applications esters are the only choice, but in road going piston engines other factors are much more important than ultra-high temperature stability.
 
Originally Posted By: OpelFever
While I agree with everything you posted, I would like some kind of rational explanation as to why some of the oils left almost no residue while others left a lot of burned sludge?

Eventhough there may be no relevance to actual engine operation, it's odd that similarly specced oils react so differently to heat.

As far as marketing goes, I don't think the test favoured any brand or specific oil and was more of an armchair science project.


700°F is beyond the thermal stability on many components in motor oil, and the rate of oxidation is thousands of time higher than what an engine sees. The chemical reactions that take place under these conditions bear no resemblance to the reactions taking place in an engine. An additive that out performs all others in an engine may fall apart at 700°F, but who cares if it never sees those temperatures. If you ran the test at 1,000°F for ten hours, all of the oils would turn to carbon, but that doesn't mean they are all the same.

My marketing comment refers to companies that use non-standard tests to promote their products.

Tom NJ
 
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ

My marketing comment refers to companies that use non-standard tests to promote their products.

Tom NJ

Before you know it, companies will be using machines made for testing gear oils to market their engine oils. Oh wait, nevermind!
lol.gif


-Dennis
 
Originally Posted By: turbokick

As I said I don't expect anything, I have used them (M1 for years) and I know from personal experience (on the track) that Motul 300V performs way better compared to Mobil 1. When you hold your engin above 5000rpm for some time the difference became quite noticeable.
Try making a whole drift/track day and you'll see what's the difference between PAO/Ester high-priced oils and the group 3 ¨synthetics¨.


I'll bite on this one. I've had my car on track for about 45 days this year alone. Nobody would accuse me of being a "granny" driver. I've run M1 0W40, RL 0W30, and RL 20WT Race oil. I can't tell a difference between them. What am I doing wrong? What big difference should I be noticing?



robert
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ

700°F is beyond the thermal stability on many components in motor oil, and the rate of oxidation is thousands of time higher than what an engine sees. The chemical reactions that take place under these conditions bear no resemblance to the reactions taking place in an engine. An additive that out performs all others in an engine may fall apart at 700°F, but who cares if it never sees those temperatures. If you ran the test at 1,000°F for ten hours, all of the oils would turn to carbon, but that doesn't mean they are all the same.

My marketing comment refers to companies that use non-standard tests to promote their products.

Tom NJ


Quite well formulated, I completly agree.

It is proved that all kind of tests on engine oils, which consist of cooking above 700F, friction machines etc. are irrelevant to a real engine oil test, don't prove or disprove anything, create conditions that have nothing to do with the lubrication of an engine.
 
Originally Posted By: robertcope

I'll bite on this one. I've had my car on track for about 45 days this year alone. Nobody would accuse me of being a "granny" driver. I've run M1 0W40, RL 0W30, and RL 20WT Race oil. I can't tell a difference between them. What am I doing wrong? What big difference should I be noticing?



robert




It's your car man, you can use whatever you want. If you think that holding an engine near the rev. limiter for hours in a 40C summer day is the same with a 7$ per cuart oil and with a 20$ per cuart one, it's your choice.
 
Originally Posted By: turbokick

It's your car man, you can use whatever you want. If you think that holding an engine near the rev. limiter for hours in a 40C summer day is the same with a 7$ per cuart oil and with a 20$ per cuart one, it's your choice.


I do drive in the summer here in Texas, where it can easily be 100F+ ambient and well over 120F+ on the asphalt. So far my motors have all held together just fine. I've got about 30K track miles on this one.

You clearly stated that the difference was big and noticeable. What should I be feeling for when I'm out on the track this weekend?

robert
 
Originally Posted By: bluesubie
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ

My marketing comment refers to companies that use non-standard tests to promote their products.

Tom NJ

Before you know it, companies will be using machines made for testing gear oils to market their engine oils. Oh wait, nevermind!
lol.gif


-Dennis


crackmeup2.gif
 
How does anyone pretend to know the composition of Mobil 1 0W-40? It may indeed contain group III+, but I bet a tidy sum that it's at least a blend of III+ and IV...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top