Porsche Approved Oil: replacement of A40 with C40 oil
- Thread starter 95892A
- Start date
- Status
Oh, there were instances in the past, around 10 years ago, where Mobil oils lacked the HTHS number in their data sheets as well.
LM, AFAIK, involving C40 specification oil, does provide all the necessary information.
TBH, I didn't pay much attention. I wonder why they would omit such information. As I mentioned before, one can compare different brands and make a decision based on personal preferences. When comparing Motul, Mobil, and Ravenol, I fail to find any valid reason to favor Mobil.
If I recall correctly, I came across a discussion on this forum stating that a higher TBN and a lower SA are desirable. These specifications may vary among different brands, so having this information included in the data sheet is beneficial.
Are you implying that all approved oils possess identical characteristics?
Mobil1 and Porsche have long decades behind in cooperation. What really matters is whether oil blender has a statement from Porsche about whether their oil is approved. Whether Porsche will add them or not is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is the approval statement that blender gets. Motul is very transparent about which approvals are obtained and for which vehicles oil is just recommended. The whole point of approvals is for the customer to get into a gas station, see approval, a buy the correct oil. Vehicle manufacturers never wanted customers asking for approval list bcs. it is insane to expect from average driver to ask that, but it is perfectly fine to expect to check the manual and buy oil somewhere at a gas station etc. So, the approval list is really not a high priority.
We discussed here a lot what exactly means "better oil?" Approvals are a minimum standard, and some companies use different approach bcs. different reason. But again, approvals are there so that there is a minimum set standard. All oils with Porsche A40 are really good. The rest of the discussion is about splitting hairs etc. Is Motul X-Cess I use in BMW best? I do not think so. But I have 50qt I got for free, and it is approved for the toughest approvals, and there you go.
Well you're in a quandary then. You're unhappy with everything about Mobil yet you state the dealers won't utilize any other brand. Sounds like you're stuck.
I have to say however, that your really baseless agitation towards Mobil is a little over the top. Just because you don't see a typical HT/HS or SA value on the PDS is hardly a reason to reject some brand especially when you do know the minimum value that must be achieved through the approval. HT/HS for example is not going to be appreciably higher since it's also constrained by the grade.
Your complaint isn't unusual however. If it isn't ExxonMobil today, it's Castrol tomorrow or some other brand the next day. Sometimes I think these complaints are offered just for complaint sake since there's nothing of real substance behind them. If somehow you discovered that the Mobil product didn't meet the approval requirements or was deficient then you might have something. But no PDS of typical values (or worse, value requirements like some PDS) will ever show non-compliance with an approval. Neither will they show a significant improvement over the approval, whatever that might be.
i have never used mobil oil . but mobil is one of the best companies in oil industry ,very respectful .and i have to admit that as far as pds concern they are very clear..they still lack hths for some of their oils. the important thing is that if you apply a request they will send it to you..castrol and shell don't bother..so mobil tries at least to take care of customers. .any other argument ?Oh, there were instances in the past, around 10 years ago, where Mobil oils lacked the HTHS number in their data sheets as well.
LM, AFAIK, involving C40 specification oil, does provide all the necessary information.
you just noticed the one thing that sometimes is missing ,you didn't say anything about all the other specs that i mentioned..hths is not the first important thing presenting a pds. approvals ,api requirements and recommendations and then specs..bcs. i can buy an oil that i can see its approvals ,to see if its suitable for my car.majority doesn't even know and don't want to learn what hths is.
its simple as that.
i guess you are not a mobil lover . its ok, there other members who are stuck to some brands and don't like other brands. whatever argument to say to you ,i can't change your mind being a hater.
Last edited:
Certainly, and that's where the financial aspect becomes significant. If we observe BMW, for example, today they may endorse Castrol, but tomorrow it could be (and is) Shell. While I don't object to a manufacturer recommending a specific brand, I do find the inconsistency in approval lists concerning. Having owned BMWs for 20 years, I have never encountered a situation like this. In my opinion, the purpose of approvals is to ensure that other brands meet the manufacturer's requirements, while recommendations guide customers towards the recommended oil choice when in a gas station. The existence of approvals from a greater number of brands provides owners with a diverse array of available oils, which I find to be a positive aspect. When only one brand is suggested, it can give the impression of a monopoly-like situation ...
Last edited:
I'm afraid you got it all wrong. I have nothing against Mobil (but I may sense you are favoring it on this forum - based on this few posts). None of this posts would exists if European approval list would match the US approval. That's the reason I brought this all up.
If anyone here is to blame it's the manufacturer having different approvals for each continent yet they're publishing specific worldwide validity dates.
Once again, I'm not a hater, where did you get that? Please read the post above to see why this debate has started. Hint: different manufacturer approvals. Owning a sportscar and using it on the track naturally compels you to select the best possible oil. It is peculiar that while US customers have the luxury of choosing between 16 brands, European customers do not have the same range of options. I hope this clarifies the situation. I have nothing against Mobil but based on specifications I would personally opt for Motul or Ravenol. If I consider the opinions of owners whose second choice often involves other brands that report lower engine temperatures, I find such a decision even more credible.i have never used mobil oil . but mobil is one of the best companies in oil industry ,very respectful .and i have to admit that as far as pds concern they are very clear..they still lack hths for some of their oils. the important thing is that if you apply a request they will send it to you..castrol and shell don't bother..so mobil tries at least to take care of customers. .any other argument ?
you just noticed the one thing that sometimes is missing ,you didn't say anything about all the other specs that i mentioned..hths is not the first important thing presenting a pds. approvals ,api requirements and recommendations and then specs..bcs. i can buy an oil that i can see its approvals ,to see if its suitable for my car.majority doesn't even know and don't want to learn what hths is.
its simple as that.
i guess you are not a mobil lover . its ok, there other members who are stuck to some brands and don't like other brands. whatever argument to say to you ,i can't change your mind being a hater.
Last edited:
I am not sure what you are saying here. BMW suppliers do not have anything to do with what BMW approves. BMW uses Castrol as a supplier in NA, while in some parts of the world, it is still Shell.
There is no monopoly-like situation. BMW can choose whoever they want as a supplier or Porsche. HOWEVER, customer protection laws in the EU, US etc. do not allow them to get into those shenanigans, and I am not sure how did you come to that conclusion.
How could I not? The manufacturer does not allow European customers to use any other brand than Mobil. This may be due to legal reasons but it seems other manufacturers are not subject to the same restrictions.
Another aspect that concerns me is the dealers failure to provide a satisfactory explanation. Instead of addressing additional inquiries, such as the use of alternative oils within the permissible range stated in the user manual, they simply reiterate the manufacturer's recommendations and ignore other questions.
Given that they are not extending previously valid approvals, it appears that they may be enforcing exclusive use of a single brand. If you possess any additional explanations, please do share them with us.
This entire thread is complete nonsense based on a silly premise. I think it only exists to create contention.
dnewton3
Staff member
This has run its course.
We're done here.
We're done here.
- Status
Similar threads
