Mobil 1 filters

[StevieC]

Are they a quality build filter? sure. Can you get better for the same price or less? Absolutely.

It's more for the consumer to pick an off the shelf filter that will work well in extended drain intervals or that is brand loyal and wants to use the same filter as the oil they are using.

 

[Whimsey]

Most likely both the Mobil 1 and the Fram Ultra will serve just fine for the specified 20,000 miles. I've used both for extended and multiple OCI's and never was given any reason to be concerned. I know it's not scientific. All of our vehicles have been bought new and very well maintained so I don't worry about sludge. One thing I did notice is that the Fram Ultra will tend to rust over a multi year period of use. Where as the Mobil 1 filter does not. I guess it has a better paint job. I live in a rust belt. For me it comes down to price really. At regular price the Mobil 1 is $1 more than the Fram Ultra at Walmart. But with the Mobil 1 rebates and Mobil 1 oil/filter deals at AAP & AZ the Mobil 1 oil filter costs no more than $5 and many times less.

Whimsey

 

[camryrolla]

I find M1 filters are overall cheaper than Fram Ultra after MIR. You can pick up a regular one in Wallyworld for around $10 and pay final cost of $5 after $5 M1 MIR.
But I still like and use Fram XG for its best filtering efficiency in all my cars.

 

[Ablebody]

Originally Posted by wdn
I laugh at the constant pimping for Fram Ultra in this forum. The zealotry is hilarious. To the original poster: The Mobil 1 product is an excellent top shelf product that Champion Labs warrants for one year or 20,000 miles in service when used with a full synthetic motor oil designed for your oil change interval. If it damages your engine in that period Champion Labs warrants to restore your engine to what it was before the failure, or pay you the value of the vehicle, whichever is less. Fram on the other hand warrants it entire product line "free from defects in material and workmanship for the duration of the original equipment recommended change interval". Not extended oil changes -- Fram warranty is the recommended change interval in your car owner's manual which is maybe 7,500 miles not 20,000. Does their "top shelf" product the Fram Ultra get it's own special warranty treatment for let's say ... 20,000 miles like it says on the box? No, it does not.

Thats marketing at its finest. "Good for up to 20k miles" but don't call us if it fails after the manufacturers recommend fci. Yep I agree, too many FU pimps around here lol.

 

[Ablebody]

Originally Posted by goodtimes
Originally Posted by wdn
I laugh at the constant pimping for Fram Ultra in this forum. The zealotry is hilarious. To the original poster: The Mobil 1 product is an excellent top shelf product that Champion Labs warrants for one year or 20,000 miles in service when used with a full synthetic motor oil designed for your oil change interval. If it damages your engine in that period Champion Labs warrants to restore your engine to what it was before the failure, or pay you the value of the vehicle, whichever is less. Fram on the other hand warrants it entire product line "free from defects in material and workmanship for the duration of the original equipment recommended change interval". Not extended oil changes -- Fram warranty is the recommended change interval in your car owner's manual which is maybe 7,500 miles not 20,000. Does their "top shelf" product the Fram Ultra get it's own special warranty treatment for let's say ... 20,000 miles like it says on the box? No, it does not.


"+1"

Mobil 1 is made by Champ Labs to the specs of the Exxon Mobil R&D dept. They have a unique media, per Motorking. That's enough for most people to use them. Different strokes for different folks, some people are humble enough to trust experts and scientists, some people think they know more than everyone in the history of the world. Plenty of Fram defects shown on here, including many rattling Ultras and not so hot cleanliness code and particle count numbers on the Ultras. EG's take the prize for wide pleats. Doesn't matter, brand loyalty makes excuses for it all. The strong yellers for Fram have pretty much ruined this oil filter board. Try to disagree with them, point out defects, then stand back.

I learned that in a quick way. There will be drool around their snarling teeth with name calling and accusations and every attempt to have you banned from the forum.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by Ablebody
I learned that in a quick way. There will be drool around their snarling teeth with name calling and accusations and every attempt to have you banned from the forum.

I guess that's a bit different than what I see. What I've seen is a couple of posters giving actual and verifiable test data on filter performance, with a couple other posters constantly posting irrelevant nonsense in response. Maybe we've been looking at different threads.

How would you know that people have been attempting to get posters banned?

 

[jongies3]

You're paying for a name more than a filter. It's just a syn blend cellulose media. You get a lot more in a Fram Ultra for less! Dual layer synthetic media, wire backed, center tube holes instead of louvers, and overall solid construction. Plus the SureGrip coating makes it all the more handy! I think the Ultra is the most efficient filter on the market but not completely sure.

 

[jongies3]

Originally Posted by wdn
I laugh at the constant pimping for Fram Ultra in this forum. The zealotry is hilarious. To the original poster: The Mobil 1 product is an excellent top shelf product that Champion Labs warrants for one year or 20,000 miles in service when used with a full synthetic motor oil designed for your oil change interval. If it damages your engine in that period Champion Labs warrants to restore your engine to what it was before the failure, or pay you the value of the vehicle, whichever is less. Fram on the other hand warrants it entire product line "free from defects in material and workmanship for the duration of the original equipment recommended change interval". Not extended oil changes -- Fram warranty is the recommended change interval in your car owner's manual which is maybe 7,500 miles not 20,000. Does their "top shelf" product the Fram Ultra get it's own special warranty treatment for let's say ... 20,000 miles like it says on the box? No, it does not.

I don't see how recommending a better filter for less money is pimping but keep living in your small state of mind! Also, did you read the fine print in the warranty info on the M1 filter? I'm almost certain it says in there somewhere that the warranty only applies if you're within the factory recommended OCI interval. As does all the M1 extended drain oils. I have a hard time believing their filter would be any different.
In today's lawsuit at the drop of a hat happy world we live in, it would be reckless not to have a fallback like that in your warranty to keep you covered.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by Ablebody
I learned that in a quick way. There will be drool around their snarling teeth with name calling and accusations and every attempt to have you banned from the forum.

I guess that's a bit different than what I see. What I've seen is a couple of posters giving actual and verifiable test data on filter performance, with a couple other posters constantly posting irrelevant nonsense in response. Maybe we've been looking at different threads.

How would you know that people have been attempting to get posters banned?


It's the people who don't want to hear about facts and have a lot of misconceptions in their minds that become the name callers ... and are the the ones who get vacations and eventually permanent bannings. Those who have been sent to Disneyland for such actions should get a clue on their behavior.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by wdn
I laugh at the constant pimping for Fram Ultra in this forum. The zealotry is hilarious. To the original poster: The Mobil 1 product is an excellent top shelf product that Champion Labs warrants for one year or 20,000 miles in service when used with a full synthetic motor oil designed for your oil change interval. If it damages your engine in that period Champion Labs warrants to restore your engine to what it was before the failure, or pay you the value of the vehicle, whichever is less. Fram on the other hand warrants it entire product line "free from defects in material and workmanship for the duration of the original equipment recommended change interval". Not extended oil changes -- Fram warranty is the recommended change interval in your car owner's manual which is maybe 7,500 miles not 20,000. Does their "top shelf" product the Fram Ultra get it's own special warranty treatment for let's say ... 20,000 miles like it says on the box? No, it does not.


Need to read the Mobil 1 oil filter warranty a bit more carefully. Pay particular attention to item d) ... it's really no different than any other oil filter warranty.

https://mobiloil.com/en/article/war...extended-performance-oil-filter-warranty

This warranty does not cover any filter that: a) has been subject to misuse, neglect, negligence, accident or casualty; b) has been improperly installed; c) has been installed into an engine which is not referenced as a conforming to the purchaser's vehicle requirements; or d) has remained in service beyond the original equipment recommended change interval.

So if the OEM oil and filter change interval is 7500 miles or 1 year (what ever comes first), and you use the Mobil 1 filter beyond that then they will not cover any engine damage by their warranty.

 

[Ablebody]

Originally Posted by jongies3
You're paying for a name more than a filter. It's just a syn blend cellulose media. You get a lot more in a Fram Ultra for less! Dual layer synthetic media, wire backed, center tube holes instead of louvers, and overall solid construction. Plus the SureGrip coating makes it all the more handy! I think the Ultra is the most efficient filter on the market but not completely sure.

Louvers actually flow better. Research that for your self. The wire backing in synthetic filters is there because the synthetic media needs it to keep it's form. M1 media doesn't need to be wire backed.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by Ablebody
Louvers actually flow better.


Unless they look like this. Yes, it happens.

 

[goodtimes]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by Ablebody
I learned that in a quick way. There will be drool around their snarling teeth with name calling and accusations and every attempt to have you banned from the forum.

I guess that's a bit different than what I see. What I've seen is a couple of posters giving actual and verifiable test data on filter performance, with a couple other posters constantly posting irrelevant nonsense in response. Maybe we've been looking at different threads.

How would you know that people have been attempting to get posters banned?


It's the people who don't want to hear about facts and have a lot of misconceptions in their minds that become the name callers ... and are the the ones who get vacations and eventually permanent bannings. Those who have been sent to Disneyland for such actions should get a clue on their behavior.


The truth however is someone said the particle test showing the Ultra the loser doesn't even exist, when they were part of the discussion and know well it exists. Then when someone else called them out for that deception, the first someone reports it to the moderator. Has nothing to do with misconceptions or right or wrong opinions. Bullying people to suppress their opinions is all too common these days.
The M! filter is a special blend of cellulose and synthetic, per Motorking, and I would trust Exxon R&D. They have been showing some assembly woes from Champ Labs like other USA made oil filters, including Fram. The Ultra is also a nice filter, but what about the rattlers, the missing pleats, etc . Why is all that ignored while a single example of another filter is used to ban the whole lot of them?
I posted pictures of my defective TG, and there is no better fact than a picture of a defect. Doesn't matter, if it is Fram it is ignored here.

 

[Ablebody]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Ablebody
Louvers actually flow better.


Unless they look like this. Yes, it happens.

Of course that's not the norm. It doesn't look like a Mobil 1 either. Let's pull up all the cases of failed frams
I have another to share soon
Definate fail. Crushed fram cartridge because apparently its too long. That's 2 fails Out a 3 I used simultaneously in 3 cars. I'm just not impressed.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by goodtimes
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by Ablebody
I learned that in a quick way. There will be drool around their snarling teeth with name calling and accusations and every attempt to have you banned from the forum.

I guess that's a bit different than what I see. What I've seen is a couple of posters giving actual and verifiable test data on filter performance, with a couple other posters constantly posting irrelevant nonsense in response. Maybe we've been looking at different threads.
How would you know that people have been attempting to get posters banned?

It's the people who don't want to hear about facts and have a lot of misconceptions in their minds that become the name callers ... and are the the ones who get vacations and eventually permanent bannings. Those who have been sent to Disneyland for such actions should get a clue on their behavior.

The truth however is someone said the particle test showing the Ultra the loser doesn't even exist, when they were part of the discussion and know well it exists. Then when someone else called them out for that deception, the first someone reports it to the moderator. Has nothing to do with misconceptions or right or wrong opinions. Bullying people to suppress their opinions is all too common these days.
The M! filter is a special blend of cellulose and synthetic, per Motorking, and I would trust Exxon R&D. They have been showing some assembly woes from Champ Labs like other USA made oil filters, including Fram. The Ultra is also a nice filter, but what about the rattlers, the missing pleats, etc . Why is all that ignored while a single example of another filter is used to ban the whole lot of them?
I posted pictures of my defective TG, and there is no better fact than a picture of a defect. Doesn't matter, if it is Fram it is ignored here.


There was no "deception" (only in your mind) - I didn't say it didn't exist. I said please post it up since you referenced it about every other day. And sorry dude, but I guess I can't remember every thread I've posted in over that last 8+ years. So are you going to go down that slander road again? Thought your last reprimand for such action would have curbed your accusations a bit, but I guess not.

As said before, IMO that PC was a fluke. Here's another one that is way better, and there's a TG with a very low debris PC. So this "bad PC" is a classic example of how a misconception is formed by latching on to the one an only fluke data point, and then try to pass it off as the most valid data point in history.

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4753215/Toyota_2GR-FE_TGMO_with_Partic

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4107645/Honda_NC700X_Red_Line_10W30

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by Ablebody
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Ablebody
Louvers actually flow better.

Unless they look like this. Yes, it happens.

Of course that's not the norm. It doesn't look like a Mobil 1 either.


It's not a Mobil 1 ... never said or implied it was.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by Ablebody
I have another to share soon
Definate fail. Crushed fram cartridge because apparently its too long. That's 2 fails Out a 3 I used simultaneously in 3 cars. I'm just not impressed.


BTW ... lots of different brand cartridge filters "crush down" from being installed ... it's not unique to any one brand.

 

[Ablebody]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Ablebody
I have another to share soon
Definate fail. Crushed fram cartridge because apparently its too long. That's 2 fails Out a 3 I used simultaneously in 3 cars. I'm just not impressed.


BTW ... lots of different brand cartridge filters "crush down" from being installed ... it's not unique to any one brand.

So we can include fram in on that list of defective cartridge filters. Just because it's not the only ones that do it doesn't make it ok.
By the way Ive put about 170k on that car.change oil and filter on average about every 6k . So that's about 28 filters. I've used several different filters from man, Purolator, m1, and motorcraft, several cheap jobber champion made ones and this is the first one that was crushed. 1 out of 28 was crushed.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by Ablebody
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Ablebody
I have another to share soon
Definate fail. Crushed fram cartridge because apparently its too long. That's 2 fails Out a 3 I used simultaneously in 3 cars. I'm just not impressed.

BTW ... lots of different brand cartridge filters "crush down" from being installed ... it's not unique to any one brand.

So we can include fram in on that list of defective cartridge filters. Just because it's not the only ones that do it doesn't make it ok..


Never said Fram wasn't on the list. It's always about "brand reading between the lines" it seems with you.

And besides, who says a little crush on a cartridge filter is actualky detrimental? Would you rather have a cartridge filter thats too short and posdibly leaks some dirty oil past the ends? Some spin-on filters get wavy pleats during use, and it really doesn't cause any problems. Wavy pleats in cartridge filters could be from moisture absorbtion during use too - not from being too long. Some things to consider.

 

[Triple_Se7en]

Nothing wrong with wavy pleats, especially since 90% of used oil filters are removed prior to 50% contamination. All we need is basic filtering to reach 300K and still view a relatively clean engine on both the dipstick and inside the five quart oil bucket at OCI-time.