Mobil Super Synthetic - Any Info or UOA's?

[fdcg27]

My conclusions are objectively no more wild and wacky than are your own.
We are both expressing opinions based upon what we can glean of the observed specs and performance of the two oils.
I have my doubts about the degree to which MSS can cut into SOPUS sales. MSS is simply not as widely available as is QSUD, and SOPUS has spent freely on product promotion, while XOM has offered only tepid MIRs in promoting MSS.
QSUD is also Dexos approved, while MSS isn't, so owners of newer GM vehicles would use MSS only at peril to their warranties.
Were I to recommend an oil to a friend, acquaintance or co-worker between the two, I think you know what it'd be.
SOPUS has presented a stronger challenge to XOM in the synthetic oil market that has anyone else in this market.
SOPUS does make a full range of syns suitable for any requirement, although the Euro spec ones are hard to find, while M1 0W-40 is everywhere.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Okay, Overkill, let's say I buy all of your points that Product Data Sheets, UOAs and VOAs give only a vague picture of any oil's performance.
Let's instead focus on certifications, since you state that oils meeting the same certifications are likely to yield similar performance.
QSUD and MSS are both API SN, ILSAC GF-5 energy conserving oils, as is M1, all in the 5W-30 grade.
In comparing the 5W-30 grades, QSUD meets two fairly tough high temperature standards, Honda HTO-6 and GM 4718M, as does M1.
MSS meets neither.
QSUD is Dexos 1 approved, as is M1.
MSS isn't.
The QSUD 5W-30 has a viscosity index of 172, as does M1, while MSS has VI of 162.
QSUD also has considerably better low temperature performance than does MSS, if you believe the numbers from XOM and SOPUS.
Overall, QSUD appears to be far more comparable to M1 then MSS is to QSUD, judging only by the certification criteria you site as being more meaningful than PDSs, VOAs and UOAs.



Those are fantastic qualifiers and a I applaud you for taking the effort to look them up. And these things, the certifications, support the claims you made regarding QSUD being superior to MSS using REAL data.

I didn't say you were wrong. I simply didn't support the data you were using to arrive at your conclusion, which I didn't feel was any more sound than the data you were criticizing the others for using

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
My conclusions are objectively no more wild and wacky than are your own.
We are both expressing opinions based upon what we can glean of the observed specs and performance of the two oils.
I have my doubts about the degree to which MSS can cut into SOPUS sales. MSS is simply not as widely available as is QSUD, and SOPUS has spent freely on product promotion, while XOM has offered only tepid MIRs in promoting MSS.
QSUD is also Dexos approved, while MSS isn't, so owners of newer GM vehicles would use MSS only at peril to their warranties.
Were I to recommend an oil to a friend, acquaintance or co-worker between the two, I think you know what it'd be.
SOPUS has presented a stronger challenge to XOM in the synthetic oil market that has anyone else in this market.
SOPUS does make a full range of syns suitable for any requirement, although the Euro spec ones are hard to find, while M1 0W-40 is everywhere.


But I didn't draw any conclusions, I simply questioned the basis for your own

You have since gone back and brought forth what I would consider solid data in the way of certifications to back your claims. I accept those as a valid way of supporting the point you were making. Certainly they are of more value than what we can assume we are able to extract from a PDS.

 

[fdcg27]

You are comparing apples to oranges.
The current CJ-4 standard, with its necessarily low TBN, is a requirement of the emissions control systems that have resulted from the emissions standards now required of diesel vehicles.
That these oils work with low TBNs is only possible due to the ULSD standard now enforced, with pump diesel having notably lower sulfur content than US pump gasoline.
This is why TBN matters in a gas engine, while it can now be lower for a diesel.
Not sure what you meant in your reference to Doug Hillary, though.
I wasn't at the 'ring that day.
Were you?
I shop specs in choosing oil.
An oil with impressive specs at a lower price is good value.
You seem to shop M1 in choosing oil.
Nothing wrong with M1, and I've used plenty of it myself, as recently as last summer in my old BMW, but there are equally good or maybe better oils out there at similar or lower price points.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
You are comparing apples to oranges.
The current CJ-4 standard, with its necessarily low TBN, is a requirement of the emissions control systems that have resulted from the emissions standards now required of diesel vehicles.
That these oils work with low TBNs is only possible due to the ULSD standard now enforced, with pump diesel having notably lower sulfur content than US pump gasoline.


Except that there have been numerous cases of these newer, lower TBN oils holding up as long, if not longer, than their CI-4+ counterparts in the same engines.

I remember the discussion and condemnation about the "evil" CJ-4 standard on here quite well. However, it brought with it a significant change in how diesel oils were additivized and that took some adoption.

Quote:
This is why TBN matters in a gas engine, while it can now be lower for a diesel.


Why? Expand on this please. Because there have been numerous cases (again) where an oil with a lower starting TBN ended up having better TBN retention than another with a higher starting TBN. It isn't just about the numbers.

Quote:
Not sure what you meant in your reference to Doug Hillary, though.
I wasn't at the 'ring that day.
Were you?


No, and I'm not sure if that was meant as a personal stab or not, and if it was for shame, as I was hoping to keep this civil.

My reference to Doug's point was quite clear: Any oil that meets a set of certifications set by the manufacturer is likely to perform very similarly to another lubricant meeting the same set of standards. Worded differently, if a host of different oils all have the same group of certifications, they are all going to perform similarly in application.

Quote:
I shop specs in choosing oil.
An oil with impressive specs at a lower price is good value.
You seem to shop M1 in choosing oil.
Nothing wrong with M1, and I've used plenty of it myself, as recently as last summer in my old BMW, but there are equally good or maybe better oils out there at similar or lower price points.


Again, certifications come into play here. Show me another oil that meets all the same spec's as Mobil 1 0w40 at the same or lower price. There isn't one. Show me an oil with a lower NOACK that costs less.

And I DID mention my tendency to consider MRV and NOACK. Show me oils that beat the AFE family of oils in MRV @ -40C that are available for less money and also meet the same groups of certifications.

And yes, I usually do end up using Mobil 1. But it isn't because I don't check out what the competition is offering.

 

[fdcg27]

The lower TBN oils hold up in diesels only because ULSD diesel is all that's available or legal for on-road diesels in the US.
Lower sulfur fuel equals lower acid production and thus works fine in concert with a lower TBN oil.
WRT starting TBN versus TBN retention, I'm not arguing that they are the same thing.
I would argue that TBN retention can only be measured by UOAs, and that SOPUS synthetic oils have shown good TBN retention, if you believe the figures presented in the UOA forum here.
I regret that you found my comment regarding Doug Hillary and the 'ring to be uncivil, since you state that you were hoping to remain civil.
Civility is in the eye of the beholder, and I did not find your earlier post calling my conclusions "wild and wacky" to be particularly civil.
I can't find a thirty grade oil with better MRV @ -40 specs than AFE 0W-30 either, but then we never see -40C/F (they're the same) in this area.
WRT Euro oils, GC meets all but the Porsche specs covered by M1 0W-40, but is usually no less expensive.
My understanding is that this is because Porsche no longer approves any thirty grade oil for its engines.
QHP 5W-40 met all of the approvals that M1 0W-40 meets, as does Ultra 5W-40. I've only seen the QHP offered at a closeout chain, however. It was priced at $3.99/qt.
Since neither oil is readily available I can't claim that they cost less than M1 0W-40, which you can find pretty easily, although both SOPUS products meet the same certifications as M1 0W-40.
I'll close by saying that there is nothing wrong with any M1 oil. I used M1 0W-30 AFE in the newer of the two old Accords last winter and used M1 15W-50 in my old BMW last summer. I'm sure that you consider M1 a good choice based upon your favorable experience over the years, as does tig.
Nothing wrong with using what you've found to work well, especially since most flavors of M1 appear to offer specs as good as anything else available at a similar price point.
MSS is a much less impressive oil compared to other oils at the price point at which it's offered.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
The lower TBN oils hold up in diesels only because ULSD diesel is all that's available or legal for on-road diesels in the US.


I would agree except that there were cases that I recall of the same engine, being run on what I can only assume to be the same fuel and in the move from CI-4+ to a lower TBN CJ-4 oil, holding up as long or better in the TBN department. It (the CJ-4) whilst having a lower starting TBN, had better retention. I'm curious as to whether this was due to the organic additives in use? That was the speculation anyway.

Quote:
Lower sulfur fuel equals lower acid production and thus works fine in concert with a lower TBN oil.
WRT starting TBN versus TBN retention, I'm not arguing that they are the same thing.
I would argue that TBN retention can only be measured by UOAs, and that SOPUS synthetic oils have shown good TBN retention, if you believe the figures presented in the UOA forum here.


I do, and I agree. But so do many other oils. And some, with lower starting TBN's, appear to have better retention than others with higher starting TBN's. I find it quite interesting and subsequently don't just assume an oil with a higher starting TBN is going to last longer. Hence the value of UOA's here

Quote:
I regret that you found my comment regarding Doug Hillary and the 'ring to be uncivil, since you state that you were hoping to remain civil.
Civility is in the eye of the beholder, and I did not find your earlier post calling my conclusions "wild and wacky" to be particularly civil.


I had stated that the basis for your conclusions (VOA's) were "wild and wacky" in the context of the condemnation of the data those you were arguing with were using, but this was not meant to be an attack on your credibility and I felt was in step with the theme of the discussion occurring at the time. Whilst I found your remark regarding my mention of the Benz/Porsche engineers as a valid data point regarding lubricant performance to be an attack on mine.


Quote:
I can't find a thirty grade oil with better MRV @ -40 specs than AFE 0W-30 either, but then we never see -40C/F (they're the same) in this area.


I use Celcius because I'm Canadian BTW, in case you misunderstood why I used that as a reference point (which you appear to have based on that remark, ie "they're the same").

Quote:
WRT Euro oils, GC meets all but the Porsche specs covered by M1 0W-40, but is usually no less expensive.
My understanding is that this is because Porsche no longer approves any thirty grade oil for its engines.
QHP 5W-40 met all of the approvals that M1 0W-40 meets, as does Ultra 5W-40. I've only seen the QHP offered at a closeout chain, however. It was priced at $3.99/qt.
Since neither oil is readily available I can't claim that they cost less than M1 0W-40, which you can find pretty easily, although both SOPUS products meet the same certifications as M1 0W-40.


That's not accurate.

Mobil 1 0w40 has:

Nissan GT-R
FIAT FIAT 9.55535 - M2
FIAT FIAT 9.55535 - N2
OPEL Long Life Service Fill GM-LL-A-025
OPEL Diesel Service Fill GM-LL-B-025
SAAB

That the SOPUS products don't meet. (Though SOPUS has Ferrari).

And on top of the above:

FIAT FIAT 9.55535 - Z2

That GC doesn't meet.


Quote:
I'll close by saying that there is nothing wrong with any M1 oil. I used M1 0W-30 AFE in the newer of the two old Accords last winter and used M1 15W-50 in my old BMW last summer. I'm sure that you consider M1 a good choice based upon your favorable experience over the years, as does tig.
Nothing wrong with using what you've found to work well, especially since most flavors of M1 appear to offer specs as good as anything else available at a similar price point.
MSS is a much less impressive oil compared to other oils at the price point at which it's offered.


I can agree with that

 

[fdcg27]

I focused on the MB, BMW and Porsche specs, since they are probably more stringent than those of Fiat, SAAB or Opel, and the Fiat diesel spec is irrelevant to almost any North American user.
I did notice that those approvals were claimed for M1 0W-40 and not for the SOPUS oils I cited, but I think that an oil meeting the BMW, VW and MB certifications would likely qualify for the others as well.
You note that SOPUS has Ferrari, and they have the companion brand Maserati as well.
No doubt that M1 0W-40 would also work well in these engines, although Dr. Haas would probably use M1 AFE.
I did not mean to be critical of your use of Celcius versus Farenheit as a temperature scale, either.
I was merely noting that at -40, both scales have the same value.
I think you're right, though, in stating that oils meeting similar certifications will have similar performance.
I also think that you're right in claiming that non-metallic adds that we don't typically see identified in either VOAs/UOAs or PDSs have an important influence upon oil performance in use.

 

[zerosoma]

easy fellas,

it's just oil.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
QSUD is also Dexos approved, while MSS isn't, so owners of newer GM vehicles would use MSS only at peril to their warranties.


That's an important point, but there could be several reasons for that. M1 already has dexos1 certification for M1 5w-30 and M1 EP 5w-30 (if I'm not mistaken). What would be the point of cannibalising one's own sales? If XOM can get GM owners to buy more expensive M1 and M1 EP, why not? Would certifying MSS steal customers from PP and QSUD, or would it cannibalise customers from M1 and M1 EP?

SOPUS has decided to plaster dexos1 on everything in their lineup that can meet the specification. If they weren't satisfied with PU's sales, they should have, perhaps, just had PU as dexos1 certified, and perhaps left QSUD dexos1 certified to please the Quaker State fans.

Lacking certification, too, doesn't mean it cannot be certified. Many good oil companies out there have said they wouldn't bother with dexos. Some claim they meet it but are unwilling to pay.

I do agree with your point, though - lacking certification could indicate a "lesser" performance. However, because of XOM's extensive product lines, it's not exactly the same as one company with one major line, claiming it meets dexos1 but isn't certified, or not bothering with the issue at all.

 

[CATERHAM]

Not impressed with their 5W-20, 5W-30 and 10W-30 as syn oil. If you can get it for a dino price then it's worth considering.

Their 0W-20 is interesting with the same viscosity spec's as M1 other than MRV and I assume the HTHSV is likely 2.6cP.
For none extreme temp's it's worth considering especially if it's cheap.

 

[zerosoma]

Originally Posted By: ChrisD46
I bought 20 qrts. of MSS when on introductory sale at O'Reillys ($3.49 per qrt.) My experience with the MSS 5W20 is it is just ok. In my Hyundai Elantra and Kia Sedona the engines sound "buzzy" with the MSS inside . I run it 6K miles / 6 months and then dump it . When I use up my stash I will not renew with MSS , instead I will go with QSUD or PP .


I have noticed my Prius is a little "buzzier" sounding with this recent MSS fill.

Not sure why. It seems to be doing a good job of lubricating and making things run smooth though.

 

[theaveng]

It's a Prius. "Buzz" would make it more interesting to drive.

Mobil Super Synthetic can't be all bad. It passes GM's Dexos requirement, and I will be recommending it to my dad for his new Chevy wagon since he won't be willing to spend $8/quart for Mobil 1, but I want to protect the car (it's my future inheritance). I can convince him to buy the SuperSyn.

 

[meb]

I'm new to the technical commentary, but to my way of thinking, a comprehensive UOA, repeated for a given engine, driving venue and oil might begin to prove something. Then repeating with the same engine, driving venue but a different oil and so on. After this exhaustive, repeatable experiment, and hoping that formulations don't change, a clearer picture comes into view.

We really need more UOAs and more complete UOAs.