Mobil 1 Product Guide- Flatt tappet

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:

Two weeks ago we tested Mobile 1 and there was NO P in the mix.. This means that there was NO ZDDP.. Yes, there was Zinc, but Zn alone does not make up the ZDDP molecule.

Click to expand...


Last week you said the same thing about Valvoline.

I didn't believe you then and I don't believe you now. You will have to post some pretty convincing evidence that oils are being sold with NO phosphorous when there are established minimum required amounts that certified oils have to contain. I think it is like 600 ppm minimum.

There is something wrong with your machine or with your analysis.
 
I've been running my '85 911 original engine on 800-1000ppm ZDDP for a year now, ~10K miles. After another year I'll post pictures of the cam lobes. I believe Doug Hillary and Bob Olree that it's not an issue.
 
We use Harris Testing Laboratories at 2502 Garrow Street, Houston, TX 77003, telephone 713-237-9039 for our tests. They perform D-4951 on the Phosphorus and AA on the Zinc as described by the API. If you don't believe, send in a sample.. As mentioned, both of those oils tested <0.001% by weight for Phosphorus. Since the P is bonded to the Zn to form the ZDDP molecule, there is no ZDDP in those oils. There may be Zinc, but that is not the same as ZDDP.
 
I just looked up the report (Certificate of Analysis)... Harris Testing Labs.. Lab Number; HH0710-0501, Sample M-4 (Mobile) = <0.001 % Phosphorus by weight. Sample V-4 (Valvolene) = <0.001 % by weight Phosphorus. Signed by the lab manager on October 11, 2007.
 
also as every UOA i have seen shows phosphorus in Mobil oil, and all of their own PDS' show phosphorus, and you are the only person i have EVER heard say M1 doesn't have any phosphorous in it.... AND it doesn't say what kind of oil sample M-4 (Mobile) was...

i am dubious of your claim.
 
I already countered it by Talking about cars that used API SF back in the day, and never needed a catalytic converter replacement.

Most failures I see come from missfires and injection or carb systems that dump in excess fuel.
 
OK. I scanned and uploaded the test report for Mobil 1 and Valvolene oils. On October 5, 2007 we submitted samples to Harris Testing Laboratories in Houston, TX... and they performed the API specified tests for both Zn and P. The Octiber 11, 2007 results came back with less than 0.001 % by weight for P for both oils. We have the original bottles.. but you can submit your own samples for testing.

http://www.davidnavone.com/a2000/HarrisV-4M-4.jpg
 
Thanks for sharing your test result Dave, that would raise some eyebrows! Did Harris comment on it? think I'd ask for a retest.
 
guys The Mobil One sample tested was 10w-30 synthetic and the Valvoline 10w-30 was conventional/standard/dino whatever you want to call it. Both were marked with API donut as SM. We were quite surprised since these very oils did have higher values first quarter of this year. I think some of us are arguing over the placement of a moving target as I have reason to believe the Phosp. is dropping on a regular basis. Each of these samples were purchased early Sep. at WalMart where I would think the stock is turned over fast and is "fresh". I can take a picture of the bottles and even give you the date codes on them if you like. If there is somebody on here that really takes offense to this I will even go so far as to say that I will send actual samples from the same bottles if you care enough to have them tested somewhere else.
 
theory? At least I have taken the time and money to test the stuff unlike many that just have faith or believe advertising. I personally believe (contrary to many) that Mobil One is one of the best automotive lubricants that money can buy if not THE BEST. I use it in my CTS-V because it is specified by GM but I would not use it in my GNX because I have 99.9% certainty that it has NO phosp. ie. no ZDDP. I was totally surprised to find it devoid of this important additive that is so important for older cars. There are a couple possible reasons. I have carefully read the documents that define the tests and standards for oil ratings/classifications. There is no quantity limit for zinc but there is for phosp. If I remember it is min.06/max.08 BUT that requirement is footnoted as a non-critical spec and elsewhere there are explanations for how a product could get around this. First is that since it is a non-critical spec there is something called a "provisional acceptance" that allows a product to pass as long as all the critical specs are met. The other possibility? The spec is intended to provide protection for one of the actual engine tests and perhaps they have some other ingredient that performs the same job. Both of these are reasonable considerations. Of course I have no way to know but I do know that both Mobil One 10w30 and Valvoline 10w-30 did not have ANY phosp in them as of Sep 07. Of course there could be other reasons like someone in the production facility forgot to add it and the QC dept didn't check it but I am extremely doubtful of that. Just as doubtful as I am confident in the test results have posted.
 
Quote:

min.06/max.08 BUT that requirement is footnoted as a non-critical spec and elsewhere there are explanations for how a product could get around this.

Click to expand...


Please post some evidence that the phosphorus minimum .06 wt% requirement is a "non-critical spec" .

Please post one of the API "explanations for how a product could get around this".
 
Mobil 1 is still a very good selling synthetic, and as such, there are many M1 UOAs on BITOG. I don't remember a single one where the ZDDP add pack was lacking.
 
Quote:

theory? At least I have taken the time and money to test the stuff unlike many that just have faith or believe advertising. I personally believe (contrary to many) that Mobil One is one of the best automotive lubricants that money can buy if not THE BEST. I use it in my CTS-V because it is specified by GM but I would not use it in my GNX because I have 99.9% certainty that it has NO phosp. ie. no ZDDP. I was totally surprised to find it devoid of this important additive that is so important for older cars. There are a couple possible reasons. I have carefully read the documents that define the tests and standards for oil ratings/classifications. There is no quantity limit for zinc but there is for phosp. If I remember it is min.06/max.08 BUT that requirement is footnoted as a non-critical spec and elsewhere there are explanations for how a product could get around this. First is that since it is a non-critical spec there is something called a "provisional acceptance" that allows a product to pass as long as all the critical specs are met. The other possibility? The spec is intended to provide protection for one of the actual engine tests and perhaps they have some other ingredient that performs the same job. Both of these are reasonable considerations. Of course I have no way to know but I do know that both Mobil One 10w30 and Valvoline 10w-30 did not have ANY phosp in them as of Sep 07. Of course there could be other reasons like someone in the production facility forgot to add it and the QC dept didn't check it but I am extremely doubtful of that. Just as doubtful as I am confident in the test results have posted.

Click to expand...


I think you need to go back and have your analysis rechecked. Not only is it a requirement of the SM spec, but the original chart posted is directly from Mobil 1's page and lists the amount of Phosphorous in each oil. You don't say which 10w-30 you test, but Per Mobil their SM rated oil has .08% phosphorous, and they offer oils with up to .13# phosphorous.

Are you now going to claim that Mobil is also lying?
 
Some earlier made comment about min zddp/p specs being fine in the new SM's, however, if you look at the Mobil pdf linked in the first post the only FLAT TAPPET recommended oil is the 15w50. So whats that tell you? If the SM XwXX with .1% p/zn is not flat tappet recommended, then somethings fishy in my books. Castol has pretty much put the same thing in writing, suggesting in their case that 20w50 is flat tappet safe.

That brings me to something I want to address to any oil people reading this:
JUST BECUASE I HAVE A FLAT TAPPET CAM DOES NOT MEAN I WANT TO USE 15/20W50 (Hello Castrol, Hello Mobil 1). I drive in the winter, I don't need honey in the crankcase. Man up and put something out there in a 10w30 or 5w30 that you will stand behind as being flat tappet safe.

Alex.
 
Quote:

Man up and put something out there in a 10w30 or 5w30 that you will stand behind as being flat tappet safe.

Click to expand...


Well they did put M1 Nascar oil out there for a little while. They sold about 1 qt of it and yanked it.

I think you'll be seeing some lower viscosity racing oils sometime from a popular boutique brand.
 
send a sample to HERGUTH in Vallejo and or a sample to ANALYSTS INC. in oakland and see what they get or send sample to me I will pay for it perhaps sample is NOT "clean" or lab is NOT calibrated or some other problem I do not know that lab but would trust the above 100% and they are local to visit. Bye the way SM has a Minimium spec which Mobil would meet so it sounds fishy to me.

bruce
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
Will VR1 kill the Cat in my '87 911?
Replies
19
Views
1K
930.engineering
R
Mobil Delvac 1 5W30 Advanced Synthetic
Replies
3
Views
2K
fantastic
garageman402
Amsoil SS vs Z-ROD
2 3
Replies
53
Views
6K
ZeeOSix
M
Which oil for breaking in 2024 F250 7.3?
3 4 5
Replies
83
Views
5K
facility1
A
5W-20, 0W-20 or 5W-30 for 3.6L Pentastar (Jeep)
2 3
Replies
42
Views
12K
CarbonSteel
Back
Top