Current formula Mobil 1 Racing 4T Zinc > 1700ppm

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
5,294
I thought they reduced the Zinc content with the formula change to Mobil 1 racing 4T 10W40 in 2010, but apparently its still up there:

http://www.mobil1racing.com/Oils.aspx

Question is, if you're leaving the catalytic converter on the motorcycle, how long before this much zinc starts to effect it? It also begs the question, what did they change in the formula from the black bottle pre-2010 stuff?
 
I believe the new formula is still PAO. I downloaded the Synthetic Lubricant Basestocks Formulation Guide from Exxon Mobile Chemical. This is a guideline for blenders and customers of their base oils. In the guide they cover synthetic 4 stroke small engine (motorcycle) oil formulations and the only basestocks shown are their Esterex line of Esters, Synesstic 5 Akylated Naphthalene product, and their line of SpectraSyn PAO stocks. The only group III product ever mentioned in the guidebook is Yubase4 from SK Petroleum and shown as one of several option for some 0W30 automotive oils (add'l options there showed use of their SpectraSyn PAO in the other auto 0W30 and 0W40 examples). The point being that if XOM is promoting their Group IV and Group V synthetics in the formulation guidebook intended for blender/finisher customers, why would they turn around and use group III's in their own products-- they would then be fielding a lower quality product than those examples they recommend in their guidebook to blenders whom they ultimately may be in competition with on the retail market?

You have to register for free but you can download the guidebook

http://www.exxonmobilchemical.com/Chem-E...tion-guide.aspx
 
Most all of XOM lubricants have changed to adding VISOM to the base including ACEA 0w40 and the motorbike 4T. There was a big jump in the "wrong"++ direction on cold flow spec on the 4T at this time.

++ IDK why sub zero cold flow would be a "common" concern on a motorbike.
 
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Oil is prob not Group iv/v syn anymore. The older formula was a great oil - one of Xom best.


Based on what? Please provide proof for your statement.
 
Originally Posted By: Doog
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Oil is prob not Group iv/v syn anymore. The older formula was a great oil - one of Xom best.


Based on what?

Re-read what he wrote. He explained it, IMO.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Doog
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Oil is prob not Group iv/v syn anymore. The older formula was a great oil - one of Xom best.


Based on what?

Re-read what he wrote. He explained it, IMO.


Please provide proof for your statement
 
I have some older M1, and some new stuff. From time to time, I place it in my chest freezer at about -10F. Just to see if there is any significant difference. So far, they all seem to be thick at that temperature. But they still pour out of the bottle without trouble.

As unscientific as it gets. However, if I were to notice a big difference, I'd suspect Group III.

M1 10W-40 motorcycle oil is capable of flowing at -10, without trouble.
 
M1 racing 4T won't be going in my Ducati then. VISOM indeed.

Thanks for this info. I had hoped it wasn't true for the 4T but looks like it is.

Done with XOM forever.
 
Originally Posted By: LoneRanger
M1 racing 4T won't be going in my Ducati then. VISOM indeed.

Thanks for this info. I had hoped it wasn't true for the 4T but looks like it is.

Done with XOM forever.


Really? M1's performance remains beyond excellent. Maybe this matters not, and the unknown performance of boutique oils will make people feel better?

What do you plan on using that you can confirm is better than M1?
 
Originally Posted By: LoneRanger
...... The only group III product ever mentioned in the guidebook is Yubase4 from SK Petroleum and shown as one of several option for some 0W30 automotive oils (add'l options there showed use of their SpectraSyn PAO in the other auto 0W30 and 0W40 examples). The point being that if XOM is promoting their Group IV and Group V synthetics in the formulation guidebook intended for blender/finisher customers, why would they turn around and use group III's in their own products-- they would then be fielding a lower quality product than those examples they recommend in their guidebook to blenders whom they ultimately may be in competition with on the retail market?....


Hi Loneranger....

XOM remains a major supplier of base stocks to many synthetic oil companies worldwide. They promote them heavily due to PROFIT. They make good money creating and selling these products. Before I retired from the syn-oil business, the economy had not been near-destroyed, and the attitudes of suppliers was very different.

As far as the Group III introduction/replacement in many products goes, again it is all about PROFIT. Nothing wrong with that -- good for the stock holders. But many suppliers have done this, at the sacrifice of Group IV benefits in the lubricant products. But as long as we are aware of it, we can compensate. Oil-centric bikers are creative people and many are making their own blends with various products to suit their own desires.

The good news is that the quality of Group III products has increased as new manufacturing methods have been developed and others improved. High-end Group III products perform almost as good as Group IV PAOs at lower cost to the user. I biker-bud has a friend at Shell who recommends a 50-50 blend of Rotella T6 and T. He adds the T to mitigate cold temp noise he gets with pure T6 in his bike -- not uncommon. Just an example.

Sorry for the long answer
grin2.gif
but there is reasoning behind what XOM is doing and probably others as well. I converted over to Rotellas (T6, and sometimes added T) and all is well. We have many choices and ways to go. Being an ole oil junkie, its kinda fun.

Cheers --- Bob
grin.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Originally Posted By: LoneRanger
M1 racing 4T won't be going in my Ducati then. VISOM indeed.

Thanks for this info. I had hoped it wasn't true for the 4T but looks like it is.

Done with XOM forever.


Really? M1's performance remains beyond excellent. Maybe this matters not, and the unknown performance of boutique oils will make people feel better?

What do you plan on using that you can confirm is better than M1?





I can confirm that my shared sump bikes run much quieter with rotella than M1,and shifting is much less notchy with rotella as well.
Mobil makes a market comparable product. It does not standout in any way shape or form and is far from "best" in my vast experience using it,as well as many other products in various engines.
The 0w-40 is something special though.
 
Originally Posted By: LoneRanger
Originally Posted By: Cujet
What do you plan on using that you can confirm is better than M1?





I am going to use a full PAO motorcycle oil from Elf (Total Group). Elf Moto 4 XT 10W50. API SG, JASO MA.

http://www.lubadmin.com/upload/produit/FichePDF/lang_1/174.pdf



Looks like an excellent oil. I wonder if it can be proven that it will protect your engine better? Or that an engine will last longer with it, vs. M1 10W-40, both with sufficient oil change intervals.

The reason I say this, is that very highly stressed, road race, turbocharged automotive engines perform, and survive incredibly well on M1 motorcycle oils. Where other oils don't do as well. It's been a "racers secret" for a good while now. Turbos hold up perfectly too, with zero coking.
 
Last edited:
As it turns out, the Elf was not PAO. Its on a FedEx truck headed back to the vendor, who provided A+ customer service and paid for return shipping.

I have an email from Mobil 1 tech that says Mobil 1 Racing 4T 10W40 motorcycle oil (JASO MA) is PAO "based" (quotations by me), which in my opinion (value = $0.02 worth) means that while it might contain some III+ (VISOM) base oil it has PAO as well. Given that Mobil is using Alkylated Naphthalene (Group V) as their additive carrier this would make it a III+/IV/V blend with exceptional additive adhesion since AN doesn't compete with additives for surface space on the metal as much as ester does. Not bad I guess.
 
I would not be comfortable running any 10W40 for Ducati's new 7500 mile service interval, however, due to being a wet clutch shared sump engine (Testastretta 11 degree) I would be concerned for sheer to a 30 weight well before the 7500. The answer to this would be to draw a sample for analysis around 2500 or 3000 miles to see where the vis is at, if a tube can be gotten past the clutch pack.
 
Originally Posted By: LoneRanger
As it turns out, the Elf was not PAO. Its on a FedEx truck headed back to the vendor, who provided A+ customer service and paid for return shipping.

I have an email from Mobil 1 tech that says Mobil 1 Racing 4T 10W40 motorcycle oil (JASO MA) is PAO "based" (quotations by me), which in my opinion (value = $0.02 worth) means that while it might contain some III+ (VISOM) base oil it has PAO as well. Given that Mobil is using Alkylated Naphthalene (Group V) as their additive carrier this would make it a III+/IV/V blend with exceptional additive adhesion since AN doesn't compete with additives for surface space on the metal as much as ester does. Not bad I guess.



Very interesting! You actually sent it back... I can't recall anyone ever doing that.

Anyway, the M1 is an excellent oil, with the best real world results of any regularly available oil.

I'm not a fan of extended oil change intervals in anything, regardless of oil type. If shear is a problem, change even more often. If not, then I typically use OCI's of about 25 to 50% of manuf OCI's.

I also like M1 5W-40 TDT oil. It works very well.

As a side note, Royal Purple derives it's name from the fact that PAO's turn purple with certain additives. In years past, there was a way to use certain industrial solvents to test if there were any PAO's in the oil, as it would turn purple. Today, those solvents are no longer included in the cleaning chemicals I use, so the "test" no longer works. I do wish I knew which solvent it was.
 
Last edited:
I wish you could remember the name of that solvent, too! That would be an interesting test.

Sent it back because I'm a tough customer.
24.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top