Mobil 1 EP 5W-30, 4975 Miles, 2019 Mazda CX 5 2.5L Turbo

[DwightFrye]

I just received my Blackstone Labs report for my 2019 Mazda CX 5 GT Reserve with the 2.5L Turbocharged Skyactiv engine. The car was four years old at the beginning of June and this oil was in the car for 14 months and 4975 miles. I am retired so make a lot of short trips and have only put 20,000 miles on the car in those four years.

I chose the Mobil 1 EP in 5W-30 weight which is one of their "extended protection" formulas supposedly good for up to 20,000 miles even though my usual OCI's are only 5000 miles. The filter was the OEM Mazda PY8W-14-302. As I make a lot of short trips I asked them to check for fuel dilution and as I also have some concern about the reported problem with blown head gaskets and coolant leaks in some CX 5's with the 2.5L turbo engines in my VIN range I also asked them to check for coolant contamination. I keep a close eye on the coolant level and so far it has remained at or very near the max level line.

I am a bit surprised though at the viscosity reading but they said it isn't a problem. Overall it looks like the readily available and moderately priced Mobil 1 EP oil is a good match for the Skyactiv 2.5 liter turbo engine.

 

[dnewton3]

Wear is good. Fuel is getting in the lube for sure; hence the lower FP and vis. Don't put all your faith in their "fuel%" value; their test method isn't as accurate as other methods.

 

[kschachn]

Wear is good. Fuel is getting in the lube for sure; hence the lower FP and vis. Don't put all your faith in their "fuel%" value; their test method isn't as accurate as other methods.

Yes it’s often wildly inaccurate.

 

[fantastic]

This analysis looks good for a low mileage engine. It appears there isn't any indication of gasket failure which is always a relief. From what I collect on BITOG is the test method, or lack thereof, isn't accurate. However, We all need to keep in mind that the new resource conserving oils are lower viscosity than they were in the past. That's how they save fuel. The low visc may be just that "Resource conserving" but to be sure would require a better testing lab for fuel delusion.

 

[kschachn]

This analysis looks good for a low mileage engine. It appears there isn't any indication of gasket failure which is always a relief. From what I collect on BITOG is the test method, or lack thereof, isn't accurate. However, We all need to keep in mind that the new resource conserving oils are lower viscosity than they were in the past. That's how they save fuel. The low visc may be just that "Resource conserving" but to be sure would require a better testing lab for fuel delusion.

A resource conserving oil wouldn’t have a viscosity out of bounds for the grade, would it?

 

[MalibuRam65]

Might have to give M1 ESP 5w30 a try it’s little thicker also

 

[fantastic]

A resource conserving oil wouldn’t have a viscosity out of bounds for the grade, would it?

We would need a VOA to make any reasonable answer. If it came back out of grade what else would you say it was from?

 

[kschachn]

We would need a VOA to make any reasonable answer. If it came back out of grade what else would you say it was from?

This engine? My guess would be dilution all day long as dnewton3 indicates.

But on the other hand I don’t trust Blackstone’s ability to measure viscosity either. But that may just be me.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

This analysis looks good for a low mileage engine. It appears there isn't any indication of gasket failure which is always a relief. From what I collect on BITOG is the test method, or lack thereof, isn't accurate. However, We all need to keep in mind that the new resource conserving oils are lower viscosity than they were in the past. That's how they save fuel. The low visc may be just that "Resource conserving" but to be sure would require a better testing lab for fuel delusion.

“Fuel delusion”… typo, but apropos to describe Blackstone’s results

 

[fantastic]

“Fuel delusion”… typo, but apropos to describe Blackstone’s results

I always screw that word up! I've stated on here or on the Ford forum that one of my biggest peeves is Cummings instead of Cummins. That always riles me up!