Mobil 1 EP and AP for 6-10k drains?

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: irv
Well, who wouldn't? I mean, it's not like the big companies would ever lie to us or not tell us the whole story, whereas independent, nothing to gain companies like to do that all the time as they have so much to gain from fabricating something up.

It's a popular sentiment to automatically disbelieve a claim as they are making, but honestly you have no real basis for doing so since you don't have any information to counter their claim. In the absence of anything opposing it just saying it's "fabricated" is unwarranted.

I worked as a research technologist for many years and I do know that there are ways of presenting experimental results that favor a conclusion, but to say that a claim by a well established company is fabricated is silly especially when the basis for it is only your cynical opinion (especially when that opinion is rooted in your belief that a UOA is more relevant for showing wear than a Sequence IVA engine wear test.)

On the other hand I personally have no illusions that one fully formulated oil will really have a meaningful difference in wear. Sure there may be a statistically valid difference that the Sequence IVA engine wear test will show, but I don't believe it will make any difference in longevity. One wonders if the "longevity" ship didn't sail a while ago.

 

[4WD]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: irv
Well, who wouldn't? I mean, it's not like the big companies would ever lie to us or not tell us the whole story, whereas independent, nothing to gain companies like to do that all the time as they have so much to gain from fabricating something up.

It's a popular sentiment to automatically disbelieve a claim as they are making, but honestly you have no real basis for doing so since you don't have any information to counter their claim. In the absence of anything opposing it just saying it's "fabricated" is unwarranted.

I worked as a research technologist for many years and I do know that there are ways of presenting experimental results that favor a conclusion, but to say that a claim by a well established company is fabricated is silly especially when the basis for it is only your cynical opinion (especially when that opinion is rooted in your belief that a UOA is more relevant for showing wear than a Sequence IVA engine wear test.)

On the other hand I personally have no illusions that one fully formulated oil will really have a meaningful difference in wear. Sure there may be a statistically valid difference that the Sequence IVA engine wear test will show, but I don't believe it will make any difference in longevity. One wonders if the "longevity" ship didn't sail a while ago.



Indeed … and I would add you can rest assured the big players buy and test (in advanced labs) each other’s products just looking for the day they can debunk a claim …

 

[andrewp1998]

Ok so what is the pao level of 0w30 afe, 40-50%? Ep 70%? much of a difference?

 

[irv]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: irv
Well, who wouldn't? I mean, it's not like the big companies would ever lie to us or not tell us the whole story, whereas independent, nothing to gain companies like to do that all the time as they have so much to gain from fabricating something up.

It's a popular sentiment to automatically disbelieve a claim as they are making, but honestly you have no real basis for doing so since you don't have any information to counter their claim. In the absence of anything opposing it just saying it's "fabricated" is unwarranted.

I worked as a research technologist for many years and I do know that there are ways of presenting experimental results that favor a conclusion, but to say that a claim by a well established company is fabricated is silly especially when the basis for it is only your cynical opinion (especially when that opinion is rooted in your belief that a UOA is more relevant for showing wear than a Sequence IVA engine wear test.)

On the other hand I personally have no illusions that one fully formulated oil will really have a meaningful difference in wear. Sure there may be a statistically valid difference that the Sequence IVA engine wear test will show, but I don't believe it will make any difference in longevity. One wonders if the "longevity" ship didn't sail a while ago.



And here I thought you were being sarcastic?

Well, it's not like the Big Companies have ever lied to us before, is it? I mean, unlike you, I like to put blind faith in all these companies because being truthful is likely priority one for them, or, maybe just under making a profit, but it is right up there, I'm sure?

Curious, have things improved with Mobil-1 oils since this test was first taken?
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/1480983/1
Looks like they originally failed but I would assume things have improved immensely since then despite what current UOAs show?

Just to jog your memory, did any of these make you second guess your faith you put into the Big Companies claims, or are you so certain/reassured Mobil would never lie or do anything remotely close to these types of things that you can just write them off as gibberish?
http://www.businessinsider.com/false-advertising-scandals-2016-3
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/companies-lied-to-you_n_5318940
https://listverse.com/2016/06/02/10-false-advertising-promises-that-cost-companies-millions/
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/...ergy-efficiency

Personally, I'll continue to trust independent, non bias companies over those that are trying to peddle something. I've learned some lessons over the years and as the saying goes, once bitten, twice shy.

 

[kschachn]

Okay sure. Unless there is a story in those links about ExxonMobil falsifying the results of a Sequence IVA engine wear test for AP then I'm going to just write that off as an unsubstantiated rant. I do remember that situation and that thread from 2009, but I don't extrapolate that into a global and unending condemnation of any claim they might make from that point on. But if you wish to do so (and also assume that these "independent, non bias companies" somehow provide evidence to the contrary) in regards to a proper wear test, then you are free to do so. Somehow I'm getting the idea you won't listen to anything else.

So you trust a Blackstone UOA over a Sequence IVA engine wear test? Or at least you're saying you trust that over ExxonMobil's claim that it is better?

 

[irv]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Okay sure. Unless there is a story in those links about ExxonMobil falsifying the results of a Sequence IVA engine wear test for AP then I'm going to just write that off as an unsubstantiated rant. I do remember that situation and that thread from 2009, but I don't extrapolate that into a global and unending condemnation of any claim they might make from that point on. But if you wish to do so (and also assume that these "independent, non bias companies" somehow provide evidence to the contrary) in regards to a proper wear test, then you are free to do so. Somehow I'm getting the idea you won't listen to anything else.

So you trust a Blackstone UOA over a Sequence IVA engine wear test? Or at least you're saying you trust that over ExxonMobil's claim that it is better?


What results are you referring to? Mobil "failed" the Sequence IVA wear test" and the UOAs from Blackstone and others have proven why, and that is, their oils do less than a stellar job of protecting against friction and that is why those independent, unbiased labs show higher levels of wear metals when they do UOAS on Mobil oils.

Are you saying Mobil now passed that test, and if so, where is the info on that? I see nothing about it, only silence from Mobil after that test was done.

"Rather than backing down, Valvoline is holding its ground, and turns up the heat.

Marketers say the received a letter from Valvoline providing additional information and data to support Valvoline SynPower's significant performance advantage versus Mobil 1. In addition, marketers say the letter turns the table on ExxonMobil's challenge and Valvoline is now challenging ExxonMobil's claim for its Mobil 1 5W-30.

According to the letter, Valvoline says the company conducted a number of tests and commissioned an independent laboratory to evaluate the performance of SynPower and Mobil 1 in the Sequence IVA wear test. Marketers were told the tests were run on a 5W-30 since it's the top selling grade.

Now for the interesting part...

According to a letter Valvoline marketers received, the result from Valvoline's testing indicate:

* Valvoline SynPower's 5W-30 wear performance is at least four times better than Mobil 1 5W-30
* Mobil 1 5W-30 does not meet minimum API SM or ILSAC GF-4 specification because of its inferior performance in the Sequence IVA wear test

The letter reportedly goes on to say that Valvoline notified ExxonMobil of the failed test results in September and that the company take appropriate action regarding their claim that Mobil 1 meets ILSAC GF-4 and API SM specifications, or provide substantiation that they in fact meet these specifications.

As of today, Valvoline told JobbersWorld, ExxonMobil has been silent."


https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1309856

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: Patman
Originally Posted By: volk06
No. What benefit do you expect to see at that interval? Is M1 AFE not keeping your engine clean?


Without taking off the valve cover, it's hard to say for sure but I figure that EP and AP must have better detergent packages in order to justify the higher price tag.
I had a better run with AFE versus EP in my 2010 FX4; all the way out to 17K miles. I would stick with AFE because I doubt you will see a difference except for your wallet.

 

[LeakySeals]

Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: Patman
Originally Posted By: volk06
No. What benefit do you expect to see at that interval? Is M1 AFE not keeping your engine clean?


Without taking off the valve cover, it's hard to say for sure but I figure that EP and AP must have better detergent packages in order to justify the higher price tag.
I had a better run with AFE versus EP in my 2010 FX4; all the way out to 17K miles. I would stick with AFE because I doubt you will see a difference except for your wallet.

Are there virgin oil samples on here that tell us what the difference is between the two?

 

[CT8]

Why do we assume that AP or AFE are better at 6,000 to 10,000 mile oil change intervals than the regular Mi flavor?

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: irv
What results are you referring to? Mobil "failed" the Sequence IVA wear test" and the UOAs from Blackstone and others have proven why, and that is, their oils do less than a stellar job of protecting against friction and that is why those independent, unbiased labs show higher levels of wear metals when they do UOAS on Mobil oils.

I am referring to the current claim by ExxonMobil for AP, I thought that was what this thread was about. AP was not on the market in 2009.

The rest of your stuff in the quote above is conjecture though. There is no evidence whatsoever that Mobil 1 does less than a "stellar job of protecting against friction", whatever that even means exactly. Despite using M1 for most of my vehicle's lives I am not in any way an unmovable advocate for their products. When M1 0W-40 lost Longlife-01 certification I walked five feet down the Walmart shelf to Castrol's product for my BMW. But am I in any way concerned that I've somehow used an inferior product in my vehicles all these miles due to M1 showing a 8ppm higher iron value in someone else's UOA? Absolutely not, that seems absurd. I realize that some relatively small "ppm" of an element is insignificant when it comes to actual wear on a component. What I look at instead is after 250K+ miles what is the increase in oil consumption I may have seen and what is the visual condition under the valve covers and in the oil pan. Both of which are excellent in all of my vehicles as has been shown here in pictures I've posted. I guess I have a hard time getting concerned about some value on a UOA that I struggle to find significant.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: irv
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Okay sure. Unless there is a story in those links about ExxonMobil falsifying the results of a Sequence IVA engine wear test for AP then I'm going to just write that off as an unsubstantiated rant. I do remember that situation and that thread from 2009, but I don't extrapolate that into a global and unending condemnation of any claim they might make from that point on. But if you wish to do so (and also assume that these "independent, non bias companies" somehow provide evidence to the contrary) in regards to a proper wear test, then you are free to do so. Somehow I'm getting the idea you won't listen to anything else.

So you trust a Blackstone UOA over a Sequence IVA engine wear test? Or at least you're saying you trust that over ExxonMobil's claim that it is better?


What results are you referring to? Mobil "failed" the Sequence IVA wear test" and the UOAs from Blackstone and others have proven why, and that is, their oils do less than a stellar job of protecting against friction and that is why those independent, unbiased labs show higher levels of wear metals when they do UOAS on Mobil oils.

Are you saying Mobil now passed that test, and if so, where is the info on that? I see nothing about it, only silence from Mobil after that test was done.

"Rather than backing down, Valvoline is holding its ground, and turns up the heat.

Marketers say the received a letter from Valvoline providing additional information and data to support Valvoline SynPower's significant performance advantage versus Mobil 1. In addition, marketers say the letter turns the table on ExxonMobil's challenge and Valvoline is now challenging ExxonMobil's claim for its Mobil 1 5W-30.

According to the letter, Valvoline says the company conducted a number of tests and commissioned an independent laboratory to evaluate the performance of SynPower and Mobil 1 in the Sequence IVA wear test. Marketers were told the tests were run on a 5W-30 since it's the top selling grade.

Now for the interesting part...

According to a letter Valvoline marketers received, the result from Valvoline's testing indicate:

* Valvoline SynPower's 5W-30 wear performance is at least four times better than Mobil 1 5W-30
* Mobil 1 5W-30 does not meet minimum API SM or ILSAC GF-4 specification because of its inferior performance in the Sequence IVA wear test

The letter reportedly goes on to say that Valvoline notified ExxonMobil of the failed test results in September and that the company take appropriate action regarding their claim that Mobil 1 meets ILSAC GF-4 and API SM specifications, or provide substantiation that they in fact meet these specifications.

As of today, Valvoline told JobbersWorld, ExxonMobil has been silent."


https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1309856




I have no dog in this fight, and FTR I no longer use Mobil 1. The link dates back to 2008, and we are currently using SN oils. A lot has changed since then.

For all we know XOM might see Valvoline as a pimple on its butt, a no big deal.

 

[4WD]

Plots, plots, lots of plots



(Similar time period)

 

[irv]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: irv
What results are you referring to? Mobil "failed" the Sequence IVA wear test" and the UOAs from Blackstone and others have proven why, and that is, their oils do less than a stellar job of protecting against friction and that is why those independent, unbiased labs show higher levels of wear metals when they do UOAS on Mobil oils.

I am referring to the current claim by ExxonMobil for AP, I thought that was what this thread was about. AP was not on the market in 2009.

The rest of your stuff in the quote above is conjecture though. There is no evidence whatsoever that Mobil 1 does less than a "stellar job of protecting against friction", whatever that even means exactly. Despite using M1 for most of my vehicle's lives I am not in any way an unmovable advocate for their products. When M1 0W-40 lost Longlife-01 certification I walked five feet down the Walmart shelf to Castrol's product for my BMW. But am I in any way concerned that I've somehow used an inferior product in my vehicles all these miles due to M1 showing a 8ppm higher iron value in someone else's UOA? Absolutely not, that seems absurd. I realize that some relatively small "ppm" of an element is insignificant when it comes to actual wear on a component. What I look at instead is after 250K+ miles what is the increase in oil consumption I may have seen and what is the visual condition under the valve covers and in the oil pan. Both of which are excellent in all of my vehicles as has been shown here in pictures I've posted. I guess I have a hard time getting concerned about some value on a UOA that I struggle to find significant.


Umm, sorry to say, but its not. It was a well documented test that was done years ago. From what I could find out about the test/procedure, it wasn't a very tough one to pass either, but unfortunately for Mobil, it failed miserably.

"Sequence IVA Wear Test (ASTM D6891), is referenced as the spec used to determine if a motor oil’s wear protection capability, is sufficient to meet the “wear protection portion” of the requirements to be awarded an API SN certification. At the time of this writing, the lowest performing oil on my Wear Protection Ranking List, that had an API SN certification, only produced 66,099 psi, and was ranked a pathetic 186th out of 214 oils tested at that point. That means 185 OTHER oils on my Wear Protection Ranking List provided BETTER wear protection than that API SN certified motor oil. So, the Industry Wear Protection Requirement to earn an API SN certification is NOT very strict at all.

 

[kschachn]

So you're saying that the AP product somehow fails the Sequence IVA wear test, or is inferior rather than superior as they claim?

And that quote you make does not help your argument at all. Coffee emoji or no coffee emoji, that dude knows nothing about testing oils nor reporting his results. There is nothing he says or does that is of any significance whatsoever. If you're hanging your hat on his "test" then that's even worse than a Blackstone UOA.

 

[kschachn]

Sorry duplicate post.

 

[irv]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: irv
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Okay sure. Unless there is a story in those links about ExxonMobil falsifying the results of a Sequence IVA engine wear test for AP then I'm going to just write that off as an unsubstantiated rant. I do remember that situation and that thread from 2009, but I don't extrapolate that into a global and unending condemnation of any claim they might make from that point on. But if you wish to do so (and also assume that these "independent, non bias companies" somehow provide evidence to the contrary) in regards to a proper wear test, then you are free to do so. Somehow I'm getting the idea you won't listen to anything else.

So you trust a Blackstone UOA over a Sequence IVA engine wear test? Or at least you're saying you trust that over ExxonMobil's claim that it is better?


What results are you referring to? Mobil "failed" the Sequence IVA wear test" and the UOAs from Blackstone and others have proven why, and that is, their oils do less than a stellar job of protecting against friction and that is why those independent, unbiased labs show higher levels of wear metals when they do UOAS on Mobil oils.

Are you saying Mobil now passed that test, and if so, where is the info on that? I see nothing about it, only silence from Mobil after that test was done.

"Rather than backing down, Valvoline is holding its ground, and turns up the heat.

Marketers say the received a letter from Valvoline providing additional information and data to support Valvoline SynPower's significant performance advantage versus Mobil 1. In addition, marketers say the letter turns the table on ExxonMobil's challenge and Valvoline is now challenging ExxonMobil's claim for its Mobil 1 5W-30.

According to the letter, Valvoline says the company conducted a number of tests and commissioned an independent laboratory to evaluate the performance of SynPower and Mobil 1 in the Sequence IVA wear test. Marketers were told the tests were run on a 5W-30 since it's the top selling grade.

Now for the interesting part...

According to a letter Valvoline marketers received, the result from Valvoline's testing indicate:

* Valvoline SynPower's 5W-30 wear performance is at least four times better than Mobil 1 5W-30
* Mobil 1 5W-30 does not meet minimum API SM or ILSAC GF-4 specification because of its inferior performance in the Sequence IVA wear test

The letter reportedly goes on to say that Valvoline notified ExxonMobil of the failed test results in September and that the company take appropriate action regarding their claim that Mobil 1 meets ILSAC GF-4 and API SM specifications, or provide substantiation that they in fact meet these specifications.

As of today, Valvoline told JobbersWorld, ExxonMobil has been silent."


https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1309856




I have no dog in this fight, and FTR I no longer use Mobil 1. The link dates back to 2008, and we are currently using SN oils. A lot has changed since then.

For all we know XOM might see Valvoline as a pimple on its butt, a no big deal.


I am aware of that and that is why I asked a few times if things have changed/improved since then? I couldn't find anything so I was curious where kschachn was getting his info from but I see now he is just going by what is written on the bottle or he sees in ads.

I will say one thing about Mobil, they sure know how to market and promote their oils.

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted By: irv


I will say one thing about Mobil, they sure know how to market and promote their oils.

People have had great results with their oil over many decades, and are factory fill on a lot of high end cars, those things alone gives me the confidence to continue running their oil in my cars.

I know that if I continue to run AFE I won't run into problems, and perhaps it might be overkill if I use EP or AP, however this is an oil message board, and I've considered myself a bit of an oil nut for a long time now, so I'm always searching for the latest info on possible better choices (even if they may not be 100% necessary for my situation)

 

[irv]

Originally Posted By: Patman
Originally Posted By: irv


I will say one thing about Mobil, they sure know how to market and promote their oils.

People have had great results with their oil over many decades, and are factory fill on a lot of high end cars, those things alone gives me the confidence to continue running their oil in my cars.

I know that if I continue to run AFE I won't run into problems, and perhaps it might be overkill if I use EP or AP, however this is an oil message board, and I've considered myself a bit of an oil nut for a long time now, so I'm always searching for the latest info on possible better choices (even if they may not be 100% necessary for my situation)


I am not saying your engine or anyone else's is going to grenade in 50,000 miles using Mobil oils, all I am saying is, there are far better oils out there for a lot less money that do an even better job at protecting than what Mobil-1 oils do.

Like you, I am also an oil nut, and maybe a little more frugal than the next guy, but that is why I switched from Mobil over to Pennzoil as it didn't sit well with me seeing UOA after UOA with higher than average wear metals in Mobil UOAS.

Personally, it is none of my business what anyone chooses to use, but I get my fur up when I read how great Mobil oil is when the fact of the matter is, it isn't anything like they claim it is.

 

[dlundblad]

I'd give their 0w40 a try.

It's a solid extended drain oil.

 

[slacktide_bitog]

No benefit for such an oil on a 6k OCI, unless you have a TGDI engine

Otherwise, even a dino can do 6k, or Smitty's syn blend at Kmart when it goes on sale for $7-8 a jug.

The real benefit to M1 EP/AP is very long OCI's over 10k, but even regular M1 and AFE can do 10k. And (especially for the price) the AP is pointless unless you really plan on approaching or exceeding 20k (pair it with a Fram Ultra)