Jump to content

Nothing outperforms Mobil 1??


Black02Silverado

Recommended Posts

Posted

Here is a little reading info for anyone that has some spare time. It is a PDF file so you have to have Adobe to view it.

 

Mobil 1 Comparison

 

It is set up to be printed out and folded so that is why it looks like it does. I didn't have time to reconfigure it for a web page read.  Sorry about that.

 

So far to date their isn't any lawsuites from Mobil. :smash:

Posted

Very interesting....

So far i've run only Mobile-One in my corvette, just becuase thats what came in it from the factory.

I've been thinking lately about switching my truck though...  :smash:

Posted
Ok i skimmed over the article but was the point to say that you have to change mobil more often than amsoil and that it will cost you more $$$???
Posted
Ok i skimmed over the article but was the point to say that you have to change mobil more often than amsoil and that it will cost you more $$$???

Basically what it is telling us is that Mobil is advertising that nothing outperforms them when that isn't all true.

Yes you have to change the oil more with Mobil than you would with Amsoil and it will cost you more as well. For one Mobil does not tell you that you can go extended drain where as Amsoil tells you that you can go 25k or one year which ever comes first, with a 12,500 mile Amsoil oil filter change or six months which ever comes first. Now if you use any other filter then you change that filter out by what that manufacture specifies but the oil is still good for one year or 25K. The TBN is a big part in how long the oil will last. The higher the TBN the longer you can leave the oil in the crank case.

Confused?   ???

 

:smash:

Posted

Confused?  

 

Nope.  Guess I am "old school" and dont want to use the same oil for 25K or 1 yr.  But hey thats just my opinion id rather spend extra money and have piece of mind  :smash:

 

By the way i only spend about $20-21 on a case of M1 (not the $28 the article said) and i bought 12 AC Delco filters at 50 cents each when walmart discontinued them.  Still have 4 left.  I do 4-5 oil changes a yr so if i do 5 thats a max of $107.50

Posted

Nothing wrong with that. It is all in what makes one happy. Just wanted to post a little reading material. :thumb:

 

:smash:

Posted

Basically what it is telling us is that Mobil is advertising that nothing outperforms them when that isn't all true

 

Umm, doesn't EVERY oil manufacturer pretty much say that?  Whether directly or indirectly?

 

I've been in many a heated debate with die hard Amsoil lovers including one of my best friends who will give up his wife before he would give up Amsoil.  At least that's how it was up until a year ago for two reasons.  For the record, before anyone blasts me for saying that Amsoil sucks, IT DOESN'T.  It's a #### fine product and has been used for decades in many different applications.  However cost is a moot point.

 

1) I don't care how magical and magnificant a lubricating fluid is, what teflon additives, what secret "ingredient X" it has, it isn't staying in my crankcase 25,000 miles no matter what they tell me!

 

2) Cost?  You argue that changing Mobil1 (or any other oil for that matter) costs more.  On a frequency basis, YES, you are correct.  However, there are other issues you must factor in.  A) I can't just walk into Wal-Mart, Napa, or any other retailer and pick up Amsoil like I can Mobil1.  B) Here in major metropolitan Chicago, I think the nearest place to get it is at a Pep Boys and in order for me to get to Pep Boys is an hour long excursion.  To put this in perspective, in the time that it'd take me to head somewhere to get Amsoil, I could've driven less than a half mile down to Napa and picked up a 6 pack of Mobil1 and finished changing the oil by the time I'd have gotten back from simply getting the Amsoil.  )Not that I don't keep things stocked.  :smash: )

 

My friend whom I spoke of previously had a 1996 Grand Prix.  Nothing special, it wasn't a GTP, it was just a regular, everyday driver.  He swore up, down, left, and right, that all other oils sucked in comparison to Amsoil.  I got to the point where I wouldn't argue with him anymore.  Especially the fact that he is automotive illiterate was another reason.  I said, "fine, go ahead, if you're happy, use it!"  He put it in since the day the car was new and followed their 25k drain frequencies with simple filter replacement at intervals in the interim.

 

At the 116,000 mile mark, we noted a audibly noticable ticking coming from the motor.  Of course he brings it to me to diagnose.  I traced it to the valvetrain, most likely lifters.  It was a short time afterwords that I was under the hood again, and noticed the coolant didn't look like Tang in the overflow.  Upon popping the cap, it looked like a Tang and oil surprise.  We checked the oil, it too looked similar to a milkshake.  Right away I told him a headgasket was shot.  This head gasket blowing, probably led to the lifters going berzerk because of oil and coolant mixing and not lubricating as well as the lifters not filling up properly.  He maintained the vehicle properly, it ran like a dream.  But I liken it's demise to 25,000 mile oil drain intervals.  Sorry, after 25,000 miles, the slickest fluid in the world will be turned to water!

 

At that point I told him his options, 1) to fix the car or 2) buy another one.  He chose 2 and now has a 2001 Maxima.  Upon purchase of this, I asked him if he was gonna use Amsoil again!  "NOPE!" was his response.  Funny how when I was in his garage last weekend, all I saw was Mobil1 on the shelf!!!  the Maxima now has 50k on it, after an oil analysis is in perfect shape and we just did a Bilstein flush as a PM measure.  I'm sure this Maxima will far surpass his 116,000 mile Grand Prix.

 

So once again;

 

1) Amsoil is a great product

2) Cost is more dependant on other factors besides actual price per quart!

 

Do what you feel best.  If you follow a regimented PM procedure, anything will last regardless of what oil you use provided you use a decent name brand oil.

Posted

I have never tried any synthetics in fear of seals leaking

Is that a myth or is it a fact that synthetic in higher mileage vehicles will cause seal failure ???

I have just over 160k on my 92 S-10 Blazer

Posted
I have never tried any synthetics in fear of seals leaking

Is that a myth or is it a fact that synthetic in higher mileage vehicles will cause seal failure ???

I have just over 160k on my 92 S-10 Blazer

From the Mobil 1 webpage under Myths:

 

Myth--Mobil 1 will leak out of the seals of older cars.

 

Reality--Mobil 1 does not cause leaks. In fact, new Mobil 1 with SuperSyn? was tested in dozens of industry standard and OEM tests to prove its seal performance. It is fully compatible with the elastomeric materials from which all automotive seals and gaskets are made.

 

ExxonMobil engineers are wary of conventional oils that tout their use of additional seal-swelling agents. With extended use, these agents can over-soften engine seals, resulting in leaks. More to the point, an oil additive will not rejuvenate worn or damaged seals. The damaged seal may have been caused by a worn rotating metal component in the engine.

 

If an older engine is in good condition and does not have oil leaks, Mobil 1 with SuperSyn? provides the same advantages as when used in a new engine. ExxonMobil recommends taking measures to repair the leaks, then using Mobil 1 with SuperSyn?. ExxonMobil also always recommends following the automobile manufacturer's manual for the proper oil to use.

 

 

When I look at the hundreds of millions of dollars that Formula 1 teams invest to race and the repercussions of engine failure to sales and publicity...I have to think they select Mobil 1 (save Ferrari and Agip) as it is the "best" choice for thier needs.

Posted

Another possibility of seeing an engine seal leaking after changing to synthetic is because it has the ability to find it's way into tiny cracks and crevices more so than conventional oil.  As such, an engine that has 100K+ on it may have normal wear cracks and crevices and as such might notice a slight oil leak upon going to synthetic.

 

Of course, it may not!  Ya never know.

Posted

I like Valvoline in general.  I wasn't to crazy about their Dura-Blend product that they had out awhile ago (don't know if they still do) and I know people who've used Max-Life and like it.  So it's up to you really.

 

It comes down to cost for me.  What will Max-Life give you vs. cost is always my question.  If you maintain regular oil and filter change procedures, will you see any benefit from Max-Life over regular Valvoline?  I dunno!

Posted
Another possibility of seeing an engine seal leaking after changing to synthetic is because it has the ability to find it's way into tiny cracks and crevices more so than conventional oil.  As such, an engine that has 100K+ on it may have normal wear cracks and crevices and as such might notice a slight oil leak upon going to synthetic.

 

Of course, it may not!  Ya never know.

It isn't so much that it finds the cracks as a synthetic cleans really well. So that small amount of sludge that built up around the seal is now being cleaned away and thus comes the leak. Synthetics clean really well and that is the major problem. You might not think you have a leak cause it is being stopped by build up over the years and then the switch comes and cleans out that sludge and wamo! The leak appears and then the wrap of synthetics "suck". Most synthetics have swell agents in them like the extended life oil that is out for older cars, to help recondition seals and keep life in the engine. But if there is already a problem and that problem is brought to light due to the engine being cleaned out due to the change over to synthetic, then no swell agent in the world can fix a mechanical problem.

I agree, any engine will last with regular 3k  oil changes. Had a friend with 360k on his Toyota, regular changes with Castrol and fram filters. But then there is another individual who did the same thing but with 4k changes and their engine didn't make it to the 70k mark before it let up on the rear bearing. So life is in the fate of the manufacture and how it was assembled at times. We are only human.

As long as we are all happy. If you want to change oil at 3k great. Then if you want to change oil at 25k then cool. Either way it is your piece of mind.

I'm just curious if Amsoil will stand behind their product. Water in the oil, seems to me no matter what your running, a fresh oil change, and then the gasket goes and fills up with water in the fresh oil then things will just plan fail. Now if the oil caused the gasket to fail then you would think Amsoil would cover a repair.

I'm still in search of problems using Amsoil and then to see what if anything was done by the company to compensate the individual for it. Amsoil bashing seems to be a common thing. I guess cause there are individuals out there that push the product to the point that turns others off.

I just posted the article for an info read, didn't mean to make it seem that if you don't use Amsoil then your a bad person.

:eek:

Did I get on a soap box?? Sorry about that.

If your happy with the PM you do then cool. It is America and we do what we want. Now if I can only get out of paying taxes life would be grand. :thumb:  Oh ya and win one of these lotteries, still waiting for this great state of NC to get one. I guess till then my money will go to Va.

 

:smash:

Posted

I have always heard that switching to synthetic oil after a lot of miles on an engine would cause a lot of oil burn. The synthetic, like mentioned above, has a cleaning affect and is much thinner which will get by the rings a lot easier. If the synthetic is cleaning the seals it's sure to be cleaning the carbon off of the oil rings as well.

 

I'll stick with Pennzoil 10w-30 & 40. I have over 275,000 on my '89 and is just recently starting to show a small amout of smoke.  :thumb:

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,947
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Sothpaw27
    Newest Member
    Sothpaw27
    Joined
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 382 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...