The Myth of the Mobil 1 v Castrol lawsuit

[Gremil]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

GREMIL i dont see you becoming a full member!

---

Well, you'd be wrong. I made him a full member earlier today.

---

Thanks G-Man! And thanks to all who gave me a hearty welcome.

I hope to avoid the spirited debates in the future. I don't see much of this in the auto forums.

Here's a link to a page for an oil made by Castrol that I'm only familiar with through some German auto repair shops and service centers:
Castrol SLX (BMW)

I'm told this motor oil is Group IV and European. Imported to satisfy the warranty requirements of certain German cars such as BMW and Volkswagen. It this correct?

This is the reason why I was giving Group IV top billing because some of the synthetics in Group IV seem to be for a higher level of performance. Granted, I understand the argument that additive selection plays a part too.

 

[salesrep]

Glad you are back.

 

[lazaro]

Quote:

---

I've posted several times about this, but the notion that there was some sort of lawsuit regarding the use of the term synthetic still persists and is attaining "urban legend" status.

There was not and never has been any suit AT LAW regarding the use of the term "synthetic" for Group III base oil, and no court or ALJ has made a ruling on this matter. Mobil simply filed a complaint with the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau in the US claiming that Castrol was engaging in false advertising by calling Syntec "full synthetic" since it was now being made with Group III base oil. Castrol was able to present enough "evidence" to convince the NAD that Group III base oil could legitimately be called synthetic, so they rulled in Castrol's favor. This ruling has no "legal" standing. It merely means that as far as the NAD is concerned, an oil company is not falsely advertising an oil as "full synthetic" if that oil is made from Group III base oil.

The NAD is merely a self-regulatory arm of the BBB and has no legal standing whatsoever in the U.S. Hence, their ruling in this matter does not make it "legal" to claim that a Group III oil is "synthetic." It merely means that for any entity willing to abide by the NAD's guidelines, a Group III oil can be ADVERTISED under those guidelines as a synthetic.

---

Quote:

---

This ruling has no "legal" standing. It merely means that as far as the NAD is concerned, an oil company is not falsely advertising an oil as "full synthetic" if that oil is made from Group III base oil.

---

does that also mean 100% synthetic oil also?
what was the technical term used for turbine engine oil in 1985? or 1995? how come it took so long for the oil companies to use the term SYNTHETIC in their advertising?
why did it all of the sudden every crude oil company flood the market with SYNTHETIC OIL after the Mobil/Castrol incedent?

 

[bruce381]

""Group III motor oils are not as thermally stable - volatility (NOACK % loss) favors the Group IV.""

True But Not by much

""Pour points are not at as cold a temperature for the Group III oils compared to the Group IV oil despite the fact that the Group IV oil have little or no VI additives.""

True and wrong GPIV need VII's just NOT as much as GPII
But Not by much
""Viscosity index always favors the Group IV.""

True sometime depends on GPIII source.

""Fire point always favors the Group IV.""

True But Not by much

""4 Ball wear test tends to favor the Group IV.""

Not true

""Shear stability favors the Group IV."

Not True

""If I were comparing Group III to Group II, the differences would have been obvious. Group III are a lot better. But not up to the Group IV oils."'

I Agree

""Also, the statement saying that PAO base stocks are made from varying viscosities flies in the face of fact. Where did that information come from? I don't doubt this is done, but by whom and where? I know for a fact the PAO base oils are made to a viscosity. Why o why would anyone feel it necessary to mix several to get a "average?"""

Wrong when blending whatever grade oil high and low vis base oils are used to balance out the PP and VII's needed aswell as HTHS and NOACK. Most ALL PCMO's are a blend of diferent vis base oils and even GP types.

bruce

 

[Gremil]

Regularly I come across people who have misinterpreted the warranty requirements of German cars such as Mercedes, BMW and especially Volkswagen. I know the fact that Group III and Group IV came into play in this argument, but actually, there are a lot of Group IV oils that do not have the certification required by these manufacturers for these new autos. In fact, clearly the blame falls on the auto owner since the Dealer has explained this to the owner probably and the owner's manual has all of this outlined in great detail.

What has been happening, and it's a matter of the car owner paying close attention to details, is the car owner takes his car in to have scheduled maintenance which includes an oil change. He feels he is charged a lot for the motor oil which many times has the name "Castrol" on it. To save money he buys Castrol Syntec or another synthetic which he or she feels is appropriate. What the auto owner does not know is the synthetic motor oil the Dealer is installing in his or her car is a European synthetic not easily found in retail outlets.

Granted, some of these people get confused from knowing what to do and then later selectively remembering the word "synthetic" and then buying an oil that does not have the certification required by the manufacturer.

I don't know all of the facts, but some mechanics claim that some engines suffer sludging and engine damage in the valve train despite using the appropriate motor oil and no one knows for sure why. Others claim that only those using the wrong motor oils suffer engine damage. No matter what is the truth, if a customer is using an motor oil that is not certified then they may be forced to pay for repairs out of their own pocket.

I have read on certain VW forums that have owners claiming some VW Dealers have mistakenly installed the wrong motor oil on some of these cars thinking the term "synthetic" was the most important thing to look for. Once again, this is hear say and I don't know for sure that something like this has ever actually happened. I do know this for a fact. I've talked to VW mechanics who are certified to work on the Volkswagen cars for warranty work and they were confused on the VW specifications. They did not realize some synthetics do not have the VW 505.01 specification. In other words, they were themselves part of the problem for the car owner. Always they are grateful for me pointing this out to them. But I have only talked to a few repair shops in my corner of Texas. I can only imagine how often this sort of thing is occuring nationwide.

I thought originally making a distinction between Group III synthetic and Group IV would have helped. But in the case of these German cars most Group IV synthetics in the U.S. market do not carry the latest certifications for the German cars, so I guess that would not help. I guess it's up to the customer and the service personnel to get it right somehow.

 

[Syntec-Man]

gremil you think the german car makers are stupid? i mean they design there cars for the usa market all the cars are sold in the usa market!!!!!

 

[lazaro]

Quote:

---

gremil you think the german car makers are stupid? i mean they design there cars for the usa market all the cars are sold in the usa market!!!!!

---

Quote:

---

Oil change intervals recommended by U.S. vehicle manufacturers have been increasing for a number of years, and European change intervals are higher still, with the average in Europe about 10,000 miles – more than double that of the United States. Moreover, Europe’s top-tier products – which include Mobil 1 – provide protection up to 20,000 miles

---

Im sorry but people rather beleive to the T everything the auto manufacture recommends on oil changes, the truth be told, that the auto Manufacture are simply lying about the true ability of oils to last many times longer than the regular maintenance they promote, total hogwash from car makers.

Quote:

---

GM evaluated a large number of oil samples from vehicles equipped with its system and found many cases where the oil had clocked more than 10,000 miles, a few with more than 14,000 miles and at least one with greater than 16,000 miles when the dashboard alert came on, according to GM Senior Project Engineer Robert Stockwell. These all were instances of oils using regular mineral oil base stocks, and in all cases when the alert appeared to “Change Oil,” the remaining oil life was within the expected “safety factor,” he said.

---

that is some interresting news but here is what ford has to say about the same issue, no real testing involved just opinion buusheeat

Quote:

---

Product Engineer Mike Riley at Ford Motor Co. in Canton, Mich., stated, “The oil change interval for gasoline-powered vehicles is 5,000 miles/6 months for normal service and 3,000 miles/3 months for severe service which includes trailer towing, extensive idling such as taxi use, dusty conditions and off-road operations.”

Riley added, “Oil drain intervals should not be extended because repairs may not be covered by warranty. Ford recommends the same change interval for mineral and synthetic oil use.”

---

so consumers in the end will rather trust their owners manual and not the back of a oil bottle all because the car manufacture recommends lots of oil changes for pure profit gains not consumer best intrest, I sure dont have time to waste at a dealer every 3 months or 3000 miles for fear of my warranty being voided. total horse manure

http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article000351473.cfm?x=b16kqbNJ,b16kqbNJ,w

Quote:

---

To buy Amsoil, please contact BITOG Amsoil Site Sponsors: Pablo, Don Stefanik, or Gary Allan.

---

these guys care and know more about oil performance than any auto manufacture can print in an owners manual

 

[Auto-Union]

The problem with self-serviced/selected oils in German cars is usually they are to thin. In turbo cars, dinos will sludge, but 30 weights get so hot they thin and as for the rest of the engine just are not appropriate visc-wise. Now if BMW owners brought in and used 15w-40, 10w-40 Blend or Hi-Mi and then changed it at a NORMAL interval, they would have no problem lacking in "syntheticness". The term synthetic seem to grab attention so much that people miss the VISCOSITY requirements.

 

[Gremil]

Quote:

---

gremil you think the german car makers are stupid? i mean they design there cars for the usa market all the cars are sold in the usa market!!!!!

---

Actually, all of the German car manufacturers except for maybe Opel, have complained about problems with sludging in the U.S. market in the past claiming (note this word "claiming") that the problem did not exist in Europe with those same engines. There is some controversy about this fact, but most agree that while the problem may exist in Europe as well, it's not so wide spread. Recently Toyota has made similar claims and has settled a lawsuit involving engines that sludged. In the settlement Toyota will extend the warranties of the affected vehicles and repair them provided the customer can provide proof the vehicle was properly maintained.

What you are seeing with BMW, Mercedes and VW are these companies lashing back at what they feel are poor oil standards in the U.S. market by requiring special oil requirements for the warranty on these cars. Yet, engines continue to sludge despite this fact. Could it be that the owner of the car just might be to blame? I've always suspected that when an owner claims to have properly maintained an auto he or she might not be telling the truth or has forgotten what maintenance has or has not been done on these cars. Toyota seems to be settling their problems by requiring proof of proper maintenance before making themselves liable for engine damage. I actually applaud them for this.

On many of these German cars there is an extended oil drain. If the customer has not used the proper motor oil and does go the 12,000 to 20,000 miles between oil changes this can explain the problem. After all, who would want to use bargain motor oil and then go for an extended oil drain? Plus, there are many variables. What is the oil had been changed and the owner did not know? I've actually seen wives or husbands change the oil on the spouse's car without telling them. Also I've seen a car go in for repair and the oil be changed. If the oil going into those motors was not the right motor oil and they continued to drive for the extended period, they could sludge badly.

Quote:

---

The problem with self-serviced/selected oils in German cars is usually they are to thin. In turbo cars, dinos will sludge, but 30 weights get so hot they thin and as for the rest of the engine just are not appropriate visc-wise. Now if BMW owners brought in and used 15w-40, 10w-40 Blend or Hi-Mi and then changed it at a NORMAL interval, they would have no problem lacking in "syntheticness". The term synthetic seem to grab attention so much that people miss the VISCOSITY requirements.

---

Some of the BMW synthetic viscosity requirements are in the 10W-60 viscosity range. Not all of the German oil standards are the same for all engines. Some require 5W-40 while others are more flexible on the viscosity in favor or the manufacturer's certification. You just can't say they are all going too thin on viscosity.

 

[Auto-Union]

Nope, go into a Quickie Lube with a BMW and the oil they use will be TOO THIN, be it synthetic or not.

When you say SOME BMWs take 10w-60, you should have said ONE BMW takes it.

If you are going to nit-pick, expect it in return.

 

[ccs v2.0]

Quote:

---

When you say SOME BMWs take 10w-60, you should have said ONE BMW takes it.

---

Going OT a bit, but I thought the E39 M5, the E60/E63 M5/M6 and the E46 M3 Coupe/Roadster, all called for 10w60. Am I way off?

 

[tripleM]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

When you say SOME BMWs take 10w-60, you should have said ONE BMW takes it.

---

Going OT a bit, but I thought the E39 M5, the E60/E63 M5/M6 and the E46 M3 Coupe/Roadster, all called for 10w60. Am I way off?

---

Yes they all do in your list.

 

[Gremil]

Quote:

---

Nope, go into a Quickie Lube with a BMW and the oil they use will be TOO THIN, be it synthetic or not.

When you say SOME BMWs take 10w-60, you should have said ONE BMW takes it.

If you are going to nit-pick, expect it in return.

---

The word I used was "some" if you'll check. I wasn't nit-picking. Sorry you took offense. Was not intended, I just wanted to point out that detail.

 

[Auto-Union]

My post wasn't just about visc, it was about substitution of a 15w-40 over synth A3 BMW 5w-30. Jiffy Lube seens "5w-30" in their application guide and uses bulk oil, not realizing the slight degree of greater thickness the MW 5w-30 has. That's part of the problem, but I'm also saying shorter dino HDEO intervals are even preferable to the stupidly extended BMW synth services.

It's a double whammy squared. People let Bulky-Lube put their 5w-30 in and then they run it to full oci.

As for BMW's Castrol RS 10w-60, I meant it is speced for a single application, M cars. Bulky-Lube oil is still too thin.

 

[zonestar]

This is a good thread; I just read all 4 pages and enjoyed the discussion. Couple of things came to mind while reading it and thinking the majority of members are submitting UOA with 4K to 5K oci why use a Group IV/V oil? I fall into that crowd using a Group III with good UOA. I would not take my lawn mower to one of those quick oil change outlets let alone a BMW, if I had one.

 

[Gremil]

Quote:

---

This is a good thread; I just read all 4 pages and enjoyed the discussion. Couple of things came to mind while reading it and thinking the majority of members are submitting UOA with 4K to 5K oci why use a Group IV/V oil? I fall into that crowd using a Group III with good UOA. I would not take my lawn mower to one of those quick oil change outlets let alone a BMW, if I had one.

---

You make a good point. Many customers are misinterpreting the warranty requirements concerning motor oil. I've talked to the lube center operators and they claim to be telling the customer that they do not have the oil in stock for their vehicle. If that is true, someone is taking an awful chance with their warranty putting in the wrong motor oil. Something tells me that the lube center operator/employees aren't really making this very clear.

To me it always seems to come back to the car owner. The owner of the car will pay for it it something goes wrong and has to pay for it out of his or her own pocket. Maybe it's then they begin to blame someone else. If the truth be known, many of these people were trying to get by cheap and weren't willing to pay for the oil specified for their car.

Anyone else have an opinion on this? How else can you explain two identical cars supposedly using the same motor oil and changing it at the same interval. One is clean and mechanically sound. Yet the other is sludged over and has valve train damage. Somewhere someone is either not owning up to something or they genuinely were unlucky!

 

[MolaKule]

I think there is more to consider in the Mobil vs Castrol marketing question.

As Dr. Gresham, a contributor to Tribology and Lubrication Technology has stated, Group I, II and III are simply more sophisticated levels the refining of crude oils and I tend to agree.

In addition, he says that "synthetic base oils are generally specific polymers produced from controlled polymerization. These polermerization reactions begin with specific small pieces called monomers and start from very basic building blocks like ethylene, propylene, butenes, their oxides and similar small molecules. The resultant base oils are polymers of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen...most commonly the polyalphaolefins, dibasic esters, polyol esters and polyalkylene glycols...they dont' have wax [and other compounds] contaminants."

Another definition of synthetic is: produced by synthesis, especially not of natural origin, made from basic building blocks not part of the resultant sythesis, and historically, this has been used as a definition for Group IV and V base oils.

As I have stated before, I think Mobil made a mistake by bringing the issue to a marketing association such as the BBB. What were they thinking? Most issues such as these are fought in the technical world of peer reviewed journals and with the army of scientists/chemists Mobil had, they should have been able to cast a great shadow of doubt over Castrol's claims.

I think the real sad issue here is that the marketing and sales community, instead of the scientific community, is defining lubricant chemistry.

Now with all that being said, we see that the highly refined Group III formulations are showing great performance results in both PCMO, gear lubes, and hydraulic oils.

And the same can be said about HOBS and other renewable lubricants.

Additive chemistry has advanced to the point where we no longer should be concerned about additive solubility or other additive interactions with either Group III OR Renewable lubricants.

Simply put, Mobil made the mistake of bringing this issue to a marketing group and lost to Castrol. Mobil is only to blame for their own, in my opinion, miscalculations.

The oils made by both companies are the result of lots of expensive research and development and will show their merit in used oil analysis results and field trials.

 

[HondaMan]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I look stupid for posting him not becoming a full member

welcome to the club

---

It appears he hasn't been back since I made him a full member.

---

Just a question of a pattern I am noticing .... what is with the "Contact Amsoil Man 1, 2 and 3" is some of these sigs.... and if he is such a newbie, how would he have so quickly added the same tag that another famous Amsoil sig master whom was banned used?

BTW: I was another who thought there was an actual lawsuit. Heck I think I've told the story once or twice. (I helped it grow

)

MolaKule,

Thanks for your post. Anytime I see that you've posted anything, I read your whole post word for word.

 

[MolaKule]

Thanks.

Just for the record, while G-MAN and I may disagree on minor or salient points about GIII etc, he has my utmost respect, is an excellent mod, and is a very standup person.

I applaud him for presenting a clarification of the Mobil vs Castrol situation.

 

[G-MAN]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I look stupid for posting him not becoming a full member

welcome to the club

---

It appears he hasn't been back since I made him a full member.

---

Just a question of a pattern I am noticing .... what is with the "Contact Amsoil Man 1, 2 and 3" is some of these sigs.... and if he is such a newbie, how would he have so quickly added the same tag that another famous Amsoil sig master whom was banned used?

---

The minute we become aware that a member is an Amsoil dealer they get the sig. And if we find out they are soliciting sales thru PMs on BITOG they get banned.