Mobil 1 10W40 HM in diesel applications
- Thread starter austinlunsford
- Start date
- Status
Ramblejam -
]
The specs are there.
You can look at the SAPS, you can look at all the specs. M1 TDT is virtually indistinguishable from M1 10w40HM. Simply a label. Please tell me you see a real difference between the two? Or what is wrong with an ACEA B3 test? I have to a third time ask, given links to the specs on the oil, is there something that makes it look like it will blow up the engine in a 5k OCI? Between the fact is is ACEA light-duty diesel rated, and a Mobil 1 heavy-duty oil, why are we [censored] our pants about running it a few thousand miles as a substitute oil? Really?
You keep saying or intimating it will blow up diesel engines. I encourage you to actually look at the oil, not the petty argument.
The ad-hominem attacks I shrug off. One can engage in honest, clear debate or your can take a low road. Your choice
]
The specs are there.
You can look at the SAPS, you can look at all the specs. M1 TDT is virtually indistinguishable from M1 10w40HM. Simply a label. Please tell me you see a real difference between the two? Or what is wrong with an ACEA B3 test? I have to a third time ask, given links to the specs on the oil, is there something that makes it look like it will blow up the engine in a 5k OCI? Between the fact is is ACEA light-duty diesel rated, and a Mobil 1 heavy-duty oil, why are we [censored] our pants about running it a few thousand miles as a substitute oil? Really?
You keep saying or intimating it will blow up diesel engines. I encourage you to actually look at the oil, not the petty argument.
The ad-hominem attacks I shrug off. One can engage in honest, clear debate or your can take a low road. Your choice
So I had a look at the B3 and the CG-4 specs. On the surface there are many similarities, they both need to pass:
- Oxidation Thickening Tests
- Valve Train Wear Tests
- Oil Foaming tests
- Piston Ring sticking tests
It's hard to do a direct comparison as they often (but not always) refer to different standards for these tests.
They also both do some tests that are unique to themselves. For example B3 oils need to pass an Elastomer Compatibility test, while CG-4 oils need to pass a Bearing Corrosion test.
With respect to diesels fuel, CG-4 need to a soot loaded viscosity increase test, while B3 needs to pass a DI Diesel piston cleanliness test.
If you compare the B3 (Euro light duty diesel) to the Euro HD Diesel E7 & E9 test, where they appear to step it up is the Soot in Oil tests, and the Foaming Tendency test. Plus it adds in the Corrosion Test.
I think any modern oil should have Elastomer and Corrosion under control. Soot handling can be fixed with short oil change intervals. So that leaves foaming as the property that stands out to me.
Believe it or not, both B3 and CG-4 use the same ASTM D892 standard, and require the same level in Seq I & III, but CG-4 has tighter limits on Seq II (the high temp phase of the test).
Anyway up to you. I was just having a quick read of both out of interest. The detail is in the second level down, the test standards that the specs refer too. I haven't dived in that deep, so I don't really know.
- Oxidation Thickening Tests
- Valve Train Wear Tests
- Oil Foaming tests
- Piston Ring sticking tests
It's hard to do a direct comparison as they often (but not always) refer to different standards for these tests.
They also both do some tests that are unique to themselves. For example B3 oils need to pass an Elastomer Compatibility test, while CG-4 oils need to pass a Bearing Corrosion test.
With respect to diesels fuel, CG-4 need to a soot loaded viscosity increase test, while B3 needs to pass a DI Diesel piston cleanliness test.
If you compare the B3 (Euro light duty diesel) to the Euro HD Diesel E7 & E9 test, where they appear to step it up is the Soot in Oil tests, and the Foaming Tendency test. Plus it adds in the Corrosion Test.
I think any modern oil should have Elastomer and Corrosion under control. Soot handling can be fixed with short oil change intervals. So that leaves foaming as the property that stands out to me.
Believe it or not, both B3 and CG-4 use the same ASTM D892 standard, and require the same level in Seq I & III, but CG-4 has tighter limits on Seq II (the high temp phase of the test).
Anyway up to you. I was just having a quick read of both out of interest. The detail is in the second level down, the test standards that the specs refer too. I haven't dived in that deep, so I don't really know.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SR5
Soot handling can be fixed with short oil change intervals.
When my dad got his first Powerstroke, he fainted when he heard the oil capacity. He used to drive truck, but wasn't use a to a passenger truck diesel holding that much. I'm sure the short oil change interval that Ford specified then didn't make him feel any better, either.
Soot handling can be fixed with short oil change intervals.
When my dad got his first Powerstroke, he fainted when he heard the oil capacity. He used to drive truck, but wasn't use a to a passenger truck diesel holding that much. I'm sure the short oil change interval that Ford specified then didn't make him feel any better, either.
Originally Posted By: Pontual
It is CF in paper. Come on, it's a Mobil 1, fully synthetic oil, with higher ZDDP and detergents. Soot, deposits, corrosion protection, thickening performance worst than a cheapo dino?
That's a classic example of an oil that really supersedes its rating. They just didn't homologe as CJ4, but, maybe it could pass with flying colors.
Where's the M1 crowd?
I don't see any problem with a short oci.
Agree 100%.
It is CF in paper. Come on, it's a Mobil 1, fully synthetic oil, with higher ZDDP and detergents. Soot, deposits, corrosion protection, thickening performance worst than a cheapo dino?
That's a classic example of an oil that really supersedes its rating. They just didn't homologe as CJ4, but, maybe it could pass with flying colors.
Where's the M1 crowd?
I don't see any problem with a short oci.
Agree 100%.
Originally Posted By: SR5
So that leaves foaming as the property that stands out to me.
Believe it or not, both B3 and CG-4 use the same ASTM D892 standard
Incorrect. I mentioned this earlier in the thread...
"In the HEUI fuel system, the engine oil from the oil sump not only lubricates the engine, it also supplies a high-pressure oil system that takes oil from the main gallery and pressurizes it up to 20.7 MPa in a plunger pump. This oil is used to operate unit injectors that, when used in combination with intensifiers, increase the fuel injection pressure up to 145 MPa, independent of engine speed. The electronic controls permit varied injection timing and duration to provide optimum fuel economy and emissions. This system may, however, circulate all the oil in the sump in approximately 8 s; as a consequence, aeration of the oil can occur with some engine oils. International determined that 8% oil aeration was the limit beyond which engine operation and performance would be impaired in actual service.
Prior to 1994, the ability of an engine lubricant to resist aeration was measured by Test Method D892. During the development of the API CG-4 category in 1994, however, it was found that this bench test did not correlate with aeration in the International T 444E engine. The EOAT was developed, therefore, to provide a better measurement of the ability of a lubricant to resist aeration during engine operation.
This test method was designed to evaluate an engine oil's resistance to aeration in automotive diesel engine service. It is commonly referred to as the Engine Oil Aeration Test (EOAT). The test is conducted using a specified 7.3L, direct-injection, turbocharged diesel engine on a dynamometer test stand. This test method was developed as a replacement for Test Method D892 after it was determined that this bench test did not correlate with oil aeration in actual service. The EOAT was first included in API Service Category CG-4 in 1995."
In case anyone has forgot by this point, OP's engine is a 7.3L Power Stroke/T444E.
So that leaves foaming as the property that stands out to me.
Believe it or not, both B3 and CG-4 use the same ASTM D892 standard
Incorrect. I mentioned this earlier in the thread...
"In the HEUI fuel system, the engine oil from the oil sump not only lubricates the engine, it also supplies a high-pressure oil system that takes oil from the main gallery and pressurizes it up to 20.7 MPa in a plunger pump. This oil is used to operate unit injectors that, when used in combination with intensifiers, increase the fuel injection pressure up to 145 MPa, independent of engine speed. The electronic controls permit varied injection timing and duration to provide optimum fuel economy and emissions. This system may, however, circulate all the oil in the sump in approximately 8 s; as a consequence, aeration of the oil can occur with some engine oils. International determined that 8% oil aeration was the limit beyond which engine operation and performance would be impaired in actual service.
Prior to 1994, the ability of an engine lubricant to resist aeration was measured by Test Method D892. During the development of the API CG-4 category in 1994, however, it was found that this bench test did not correlate with aeration in the International T 444E engine. The EOAT was developed, therefore, to provide a better measurement of the ability of a lubricant to resist aeration during engine operation.
This test method was designed to evaluate an engine oil's resistance to aeration in automotive diesel engine service. It is commonly referred to as the Engine Oil Aeration Test (EOAT). The test is conducted using a specified 7.3L, direct-injection, turbocharged diesel engine on a dynamometer test stand. This test method was developed as a replacement for Test Method D892 after it was determined that this bench test did not correlate with oil aeration in actual service. The EOAT was first included in API Service Category CG-4 in 1995."
In case anyone has forgot by this point, OP's engine is a 7.3L Power Stroke/T444E.
Nice pick-up Ramblejam.
So foaming / aeration is the big question.
So foaming / aeration is the big question.
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
In case anyone has forgot by this point, OP's engine is a 7.3L Power Stroke/T444E.
As I recall, there were foaming issues in the early Powerstroke days, with the common suggestion at the time to stick to Motorcraft oil, until the foaming issue was settled with other oil companies, too, as you indicate.
In case anyone has forgot by this point, OP's engine is a 7.3L Power Stroke/T444E.
As I recall, there were foaming issues in the early Powerstroke days, with the common suggestion at the time to stick to Motorcraft oil, until the foaming issue was settled with other oil companies, too, as you indicate.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky