About Mobil full synthetic and Engine noise

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: SatinSilver
Biscut,

What about the early 90's Camry you used to have, was M1 noisy in that application?


I don't remember that 4banger noisy on any of the oils used. It would burn a bit of oil (probably rings) at 90+ mph highway stints. I do remember using plenty of PYB for changes.
 
Not all Mobil1 cause ticking noise at start up. I run M1 Tri-synthetic 5w30 in a Honda Accord up to 270k k.m with no noise whatsoever even in cold -20C. However, M1 5w20 always make noise at start up on Honda Odyssey (feel like engine start with no oil pump up, same Fram synthetic oil filter were used in both case). The colder the weather, the longer the noise would last. M1 AFE produce less noise. Valvoline synthetic also make noise at start up in Honda. On other other hand, PP 5w20 seem to quiet the engine. These are not an indication of quality of each oil. Independent research is needed to come up with an objective conclusion.
 
I thought I heard more valve train noise wit M1 in 02 Mustang with the 4.6. I had run M1 5w30 for years. I decided to try 5w30 PP in it. The valve train noise was quite a bit quieter for the entire OCI. I then put M1 back in it. The noise got louder. Next change pup PP back in it and valve train noise decreased. I've worked on cars for years and have always worked hard to be astute to odd engine noises. I did this same process with my 95 F150 and my wifes old 2003 Accord, got the same results both.

I'm not saying M1 is bad or anything like that. It's a great oil that I have no problem using. However, going back to back with the switching I did notice more noise with the M1.
 
I put M1 to QUIET my engine (and it worked). Not because I switched brands, but because I moved from 5W-30 to 5W-50..... eliminated a lot of chatter/shaking in the hot desert summer.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: virginoil
It is possible to measure mpg down to 0.2, I have done so for many weeks when I choose to measure the mpg.

How do you account for the pump's inherent accuracy not even being that good? I know up here, they're allowed to be out up to 5%, depending upon the direction, despite the fact that they tell us volume down to the nearest millilitre. By nominal significant figures, it's relatively easy to go to four significant figures, but that involves ignoring a lot of reality about the errors in our measurement.


I fill at the same fuel pump, fill to the first click on the fuel pump, record the litres to fill the tank,measure the kilometers and then calculate the mpg or L/km.

I usually drive the same route and in similar traffic conditions another factor.

However, the calculations are usually with +- 0.2mpg and these are consistent and on vehicle that gets 23mpg it is within 2% band and the tolerances in readings are good enough for my purposes.

It is ridiculous to mention 4 significant figures as it appears all the potential errors cancel out if you use the same pump each week.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: virginoil
It is possible to measure mpg down to 0.2, I have done so for many weeks when I choose to measure the mpg.

How do you account for the pump's inherent accuracy not even being that good? I know up here, they're allowed to be out up to 5%, depending upon the direction, despite the fact that they tell us volume down to the nearest millilitre. By nominal significant figures, it's relatively easy to go to four significant figures, but that involves ignoring a lot of reality about the errors in our measurement.


I fill at the same fuel pump, fill to the first click on the fuel pump, record the litres to fill the tank,measure the kilometers and then calculate the mpg or L/km.

I usually drive the same route and in similar traffic conditions another factor.

However, the calculations are usually with +- 0.2mpg and these are consistent and on vehicle that gets 23mpg it is within 2% band and the tolerances in readings are good enough for my purposes.

It is ridiculous to mention 4 significant figures as it appears all the potential errors cancel out if you use the same pump each week.



Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: virginoil
It is possible to measure mpg down to 0.2, I have done so for many weeks when I choose to measure the mpg.

If all things being equal and the only change was the switching of the oil brands for a season and the mpg went back to normal after the switch back to the usual oil brand then the OPs claims are valid, and you don't need a LAB to confirm the result.


That is not correct. .........................................................
The isolation of variables becomes more difficult but more important as the variable effect gets smaller. The wide noise band (as Garak notes) of real-world driving masks a lot.


Sober up please, the consistency in the results are good enough for me in real world conditions.
 
Originally Posted By: JoelB
We aren't even sure if a quieter engine is a better running engine, it's just an assumption.


Noise indicates contact. There are plenty parts that tap against each other, especially in the valve train. If you can hear it, it's impacting. Maybe not enough to do damage, maybe just taking off a molecule here and there.

If you've wrenched on engines as long as I have you are sensitive to noises. The ones they make when in normal operation, and the ones they make when things are getting out of whack.

It's always best to have quiet when you can get it. I've tried M-1 in about 5 engines. First change in my new used 01 Saab. Sounded like marbles in a can on cold start. Went 2,500 miles and out it came. Delo 400 went in. Very quiet.

Since it was a new car to me, I wanted quiet so I could "learn" the sounds of the car. It's run best when it stays quiet. Currently running T-6 at 142K and purring right along
smile.gif
 
Last edited:
I need to go outside in 25F (pretty cool for here) and dump out the BITOG darling Pennzoil Platinum Ultra ...
Loudest oil in my 3.5L to date ... (M1 & VSP were others)

The big players are doing Proof of Performance testing - some for two years before tear downs and micro the kit ...
One clarification on the Chrysler deal ... Mobil Super has it - M1 did not do 2 year PoP test ? No cigar ?
 
Originally Posted By: virginoil
I fill at the same fuel pump, fill to the first click on the fuel pump, record the litres to fill the tank,measure the kilometers and then calculate the mpg or L/km.

Personally, I'm pickier than that when it comes to mathematical rigour for calculating fuel economy. I did a writeup here about it some time ago, and I'm generally not prepared to accept results with an error bar of under 10% for ordinary use. I do see where you're coming from, but I'm picky, or pedantic, or whatever.
 
Just an update, i changed the oil from M10W40 to Amsoil 5W40 on my BMW. The engine noise immediately stopped. I remember the same thing happened when i switch from M10W40 to Castrol 5W30 (dino).

There is no doubt that all are good oils. But when the car is old, the M1 is making the noise louder. Right now, the noise at the secondary chain is almost gone. I am sure with new tensioner and pads, even with M10W40, it may not make noise. But changing the oil is lot easier than changing the secondary tensioner
smile.gif


Did not check the fuel economy in details. It looks same as M10W40. The sound was the main reason to switch the oil.
 
Originally Posted By: veryHeavy
I put M1 to QUIET my engine (and it worked). Not because I switched brands, but because I moved from 5W-30 to 5W-50..... eliminated a lot of chatter/shaking in the hot desert summer.

The same issue with me: switched from 0W40 to 5W50 to keep the well oil pressure at idling Summer on the city roads in my SAAB. However, it neither cured the oil burning effect nor rattling noise at low revs.
The real medicine was the engine refurbishment! :)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top