Though I am running Mobil 1 we read not only the UOA problem with iron, but also the start up tick, oil burning, valve noise etc. So that makes me think how could this be a good oil with all these problems? Real life I have none of these problems but why bother ?Other oils are just as good. The UOA might not be the best, but hardly do you see PP in trouble. Mobil now that is another story. So UOA might not be the best for everyting , atleast it can give you a pretty overall picture of how a oil performs. Yes I agree XOM should atleast address this website if they sponsor it.

Mobil 1 0W40 and 15W50 I`ve read to be grp IV/V.

On the UOA topic,dinos always seem to produce less wear metals than synths,and you also never hear any reports of excessive engine noise with dinos. In my experience,my engine runs MUCH smoother with dinos,but,the manual tranny and read diff perform night and day difference better with synths. That made me believe the Timken test definitely applies to gears and not engines.

Use Redline, no speculation here,Its a group 5 and its the real deal and costs 1 dollar more! Its a no brainer!!

This is what i use..

In 20+ years now of using M1, I've never had ANY of those problems.

There will be no talking bad about M1 or face the consequences...

M1 10W30 High Mileage also has a pour point of -60 (actually the chart says -54 degrees Centigrade). Don't forget that there are about 20 different formulations and weights of M1, as there are formulations of Amsoil.

I will ask my question over and over until I get the answer that I want to hear!

Redline is the ONLY company that will unequivocally answer questions about base stocks. Their customer service is the best in the business. These two indisputable facts alone make their products worth the money to me. Mobil 1 absolutely leaves everyone else choking on their dust when it comes to marketing a product that was at one time among the very best. However, their obfuscation and evasiveness regarding wear issues (re:TomNJ post) and base stocks would make most politicians blush.

Buster, please elaborate.

Even though I've used M1 oils for 31 years, don't you idi---, I mean guys use it. It will clog up your valve train and cause noise and produce rod knocks. I have to scrape out the sludge every year and that's with 3000 mile OCIs. 50,000 miles is the longest I've gone before an overhaul is required. Boy I'm glad I finally got that off my mind!

I will repeat again as I have said in other threads... WHO CARES WHAT BASE STOCK AN OIL FORMULATOR USES, IT IS REAL WORLD PERFORMANCE THAT COUNTS! ... M1 seems to have countless testimonials and proof of this!

Waiting for Art_Vandelay to jump on this one.

See my above testimonial above.

Hard to say unless we take up a collection like we did with German Castrol and have it tested and then have Terry and the other offical Tribologists and Chemist take a look at the results! Short of that we are all just guessing. For M1 being junk they sure do get a lot of OEM and Racing Endorsements! Funny how Honda could have chosen anyone for their Turbo oil requirement yet they ended up only recommending Mobil-1? Same thing for Corvette and many other high end engines!!! Notice I am not saying M-1 is as good today as it was in years past but I do not think it is junk though. In fact I think it is still better then it's competition on the shelf at major retail stores. It also seems to come out in pretty good shape when Amsoil does it's test's and put's the results up! In fact last I checked M-1 always comes out as being second only to Amsoil over all.

For the most part until you get into ester's PAO is only slightly cleaner then group II+ and group III base stock oils. You have to keep in mind that it was not that long ago that dino oils had no or very little G-II or G-II+ in them. So the diffrence between dino and a 100% PAO product was huge. Once G-II+ and G-III's came into the market the difference in cleanliness was very very close. The big thing was that synthetics had additive packages that could easily go 25K miles. M-1 was advertised at first as being a 25K mile oil back when it was only available in 5W20this is going back to my Dad's generation. Ester's on the other hand still have a huge huge gap in how much cleaner they can keep an engine and all of it's parts. As for the actual performance of the oil in normal driving a G-III can today perform just as well as an all PAO product if they have identical additive packages. The problem is that for the most part anyone going to use a G-III to meet a price point is not going to use more additives then the product needs because they are trying to keep cost down and profits high.

Now if you where to talk about hard core racing and simalar abuse say mining operations, jet aviation, space craft etc... then you would be able to see the difference in product base stocks and their additive packages very clearly. The old frying pan test works well still. If you did an all ester product like NEO then did a combo product like PP you would easily be able to see the difference in what is left inthe frying pan and how easy it is to remove which one had the better base stocks and additives.


As far as not hearing from EM on the higher Iron trend I do not see it as a big deal. We are talking a few digits increased nothing major. In fact I have not even seen this higher iron trend in my vehicles so I do not see the concern. I could see if we where talking about someones iron going from 7ppm to 100ppm or something major but in most case we are talking about a 10ppm change or less which is not a cause for alarm.