Which Synthetic oil to use in my new Acura RDX?
- Thread starter Mau
- Start date
- Status
Nick, agree 100%. XOM can meet the demand/volume needed. All I was saying is that M1 looks to be superior to any "shelf brand" in preventing deposits in turbos other than maybe PP. Wear, noise, oil consumption etd. are all other issues M1 still has.
I'm just sayin... I'm definitely NOT an XOM guy! My feelings on Mobil1 are very mixed and every time I guy it, it's the last time!
I have to admit that they've won me back a bit with the return of the pour points and more detailed specs on their website. I think it's safe to say that most of their oils contain a significant amount of PAOs.
Suffice, I think any good quality synthetic will meet this spec eventually. But if I owned a Honda calling for the spec, I'd stick to M1 or PP for the time being...
Suffice, I think any good quality synthetic will meet this spec eventually. But if I owned a Honda calling for the spec, I'd stick to M1 or PP for the time being...
0w-40
I can't believe that I'm going to say this, but if it came to the choices of PP, M1, or Amsoil for this engine...Amsoil would be my choice hands down.
So they don't list this particular spec at the present time, but IMHO, their base stocks and additive formulations are better than PP or M1 (bash away, I know you all will). UOA's have been very good from their products, and they are keeping up with the times in their product selection, in fact, it is a better overall selection tham most OTC oils have on the shelves for automobiles, ATV's, watercraft... whatever has an engine on it that requires lubrication.
The problem here is simple...$$$$. How much is protection of your investment worth to you?
So they don't list this particular spec at the present time, but IMHO, their base stocks and additive formulations are better than PP or M1 (bash away, I know you all will). UOA's have been very good from their products, and they are keeping up with the times in their product selection, in fact, it is a better overall selection tham most OTC oils have on the shelves for automobiles, ATV's, watercraft... whatever has an engine on it that requires lubrication.
The problem here is simple...$$$$. How much is protection of your investment worth to you?
And to add, we don't know the oils that failed. Like was said earlier, it may have been Home Despot 5W30 that failed to make another oil look good. Not being approved and failing a test can be much different. This applies to all oils. Duh.
Spoke to a contact at Mobil. Honda did all the testing and chose what were claimed to be the "leading" synthetic oils off the shelf. There is no marketing tactic here. It was based on performance only.
I'm sure some on here would run conventional oil in it or skimp out and buy the cheapest oil they could find. Yeah that makes sense.....
I'm sure some on here would run conventional oil in it or skimp out and buy the cheapest oil they could find. Yeah that makes sense.....
I have no doubt Mobil 1 passed the tests that Honda put it thru. But if you think Honda is putting "Mobil 1" on the oil caps and in the owners manuals, and in all those adverts without getting any compensation from XOM you are sadly deluded.
OEM endorsements are like gold for Mobil 1 and XOM paid handsomely for it, you can be sure.
G, I don't disagree at all. That part is marketing clearly. Point I was making is Honda chose Mobil 1, not the other way around.
And we often here how M1 isn't better than conventional oil etc etc (in most cases it's not bc the conditions dont' demand it)....but these types of turbo engines and certain other environments (extreme cold/long drains) show the superiority of a good synthetic oil like Mobil 1. I'd like to know what oil Bill from Utah would run in this vehicle?
Wear metals on a ppm basis in a Toyota Corolla drained at 5k miles won't show why Mobil 1 is as good as it is.
And we often here how M1 isn't better than conventional oil etc etc (in most cases it's not bc the conditions dont' demand it)....but these types of turbo engines and certain other environments (extreme cold/long drains) show the superiority of a good synthetic oil like Mobil 1. I'd like to know what oil Bill from Utah would run in this vehicle?
Wear metals on a ppm basis in a Toyota Corolla drained at 5k miles won't show why Mobil 1 is as good as it is.
Buster,
*if* I had a honda that needed this spec, I'd run whatever passed the spec and was on sale. If its PP than thats what it would be.
If I had to pay full price, it would be PP or something else than Mobil 1 because I'm not impressed with Mobil.
As far as Mobil 1 having worst performance in a 5k OCI over a conventional oil for the same OCI, I guess you'll pay the $$$ over the life of the engine using Mobil 1 and I'll just run (damage) my engine to 300k plus using conventional oils.
So do you really think that having more wear metals in a certain time frame (like 5k miles) in a UOA is better than a lower number?
Oh, I forgot..
(unless its showing your engine/oil/type to performing low metals...)
Remember, I've taken many engines well past 200k with never an issue. And all I've ever run is cheap trash oil (trash since its not $5 plus a quart).
I'll pocket the $$$ that others spend. I KNOW what works and what is hype.
For normal motors, Syn is not needed. Wanted is another thing. But don't think that its some magic for your engine.
Its magic for oil companies.
I've had engines sit outside in well below zero. Started everytime. My 315k plus VW had 10w-30 SG/sh conventional oil in it for a long time before 5w-30 came out. Its made over 300k and still running fine. Passes smog and never had the injectors off, never had a single problem.
How does it run?
This is the major reason why once I'm done with my prepaid UOA kits, I'm done posting them here.
Its obvious I'm clueless.
I don't want the best and don't want my engines to last..
Who needs the hassle.
Bill
PS: And I just changed my oil in my Corolla with PP today. Why PP and a Syn? Cause it was the only oil on sale at the time I bought it. See, I'll run syn. Not because its syn, because its cheap.
PPS: And I'm going to do a UOA. And post it here. (so I guess when its wear metals is lower than Mobil 1, we better come up with a reason...)
Here is a more likely scenario: Honda tested several different oils. Two or three passed the test. They went to the oil companies whose oil passed and said "Your synthetic passed out latest battery of tests for our new spec. If you would like us to endorse your product for "Approved Service Fill" status, and use your product as the factory fill oil, let's talk." And XOM talked the most $$$. And in the deal XOM struck, they had it where Honda in the advertising would only list Mobil and the oils that failed the test in the "comparison" literature. Thus the advertising is totally accurate, and totally misleading.
Atleast someone gets it!
Sounds like there are 2 camps: the conspiracy theorists, and those who think their OEM knows more than they do. Either way, our engines aren't blowing up.
If it were a highest bidder scenario, don't you think everyone else would be tripping over each other to outbid Mobil? Most have likely consistently and significantly outspent Mobil over the years with their advertising (Mobil has only recently started to advertise decently). Competition is trying like mad to buy market share (BOGO, $0.99/qt, etc.) as oil performance is trending towards only synthetics come 2014 (only 7 years away).
But if it was a performance-based choice, no amount of bidding money would likely persuade an OEM to select a lesser oil (from their point of view - which likely includes but is not limited to UOA) to risk their own reputation.
According to Mobil (and their legal department), over 1/2 the NASCAR teams use Mobil 1 - and they only give free oil to 2 cars - everybody else buys it. There's no rule that says you must use the brand you are paid to advertise.
I seriously do NOT believe this...
Hammer
Well, that's what their ad said. We don't have to believe it.
As controlling as NASCAR can be, I'd think they'd have a serious bone to pick with XOM if this were not true. Mobil's got deep pockets to protect as well; they don't strike me as a very risky company.
As controlling as NASCAR can be, I'd think they'd have a serious bone to pick with XOM if this were not true. Mobil's got deep pockets to protect as well; they don't strike me as a very risky company.
Absolute conjecture.
- Status