Mobil 1 + Toyota engines: Still a good match?
- Thread starter VVTinme
- Start date
- Status
In my 07 Tacoma, after 600mi, I changed over to Mobil 1 5-30 T&SUV and ran it till 5k. I had a UOA done on that oil by Terry Dyson. I also used the dealer bought Toyota oil filter. This combination was less than ideal. I havn't posted the UOA yet and won't until I get my next one done. The numbers were to say the least disappointing. I do realize that break-in was still going on, but I am not using M-1 in this engine again.
I changed over to GC, 2004 vintage and a Amsoil EA 57 filter. It will be awile before I get 5k to do another UOA, but I am hoping for a better result from this combination.
I changed over to GC, 2004 vintage and a Amsoil EA 57 filter. It will be awile before I get 5k to do another UOA, but I am hoping for a better result from this combination.
lol i agree with Bill in Utah on this one.. dinos i would run and be very happy- penzoil, gtx and havoline.. i run synpower bc it was on sale in my tacoma. i only run 5k mile intervals bc these machines are bad for poor filtration so i dont spend anymore $ on full price synthetics. if i cant find one on sale i go with penzoil or gtx.
For all of the mindless Mobil1 bashing in this thread (and believe me, I've no love for the scum at the top of Exxon-Mobil), it's funny how Mobil1 was the first to meet an Acura spec when most other synthetic oils just don't...
I certainly wouldn't waste my money on certain flavors of M1, but I do believe at the very worst, it's still a blend of PAO/GrIII and some varieties are still surely mostly PAO based...
I certainly wouldn't waste my money on certain flavors of M1, but I do believe at the very worst, it's still a blend of PAO/GrIII and some varieties are still surely mostly PAO based...
the iron #'s compared to other oils is what killed M1 for me. no more in my motor for sure. i dont know about the gear oil though. i do use that..
I wonder how many of those high-iron UOAs were done with a vehicle that was having it's first run on M1?
Doesn't Redline claim that high wear numbers can come from their oil dissolving deposits and is only a problem for the first two or three runs?
I really don't know.
But I think there's an old thread around here showing dirty oil producing superior UOAs than clean oil, too...
In any case, I think read here or in another thread that somebody is going to post a lousy M1 UOA when it's on a vehicle with less than 5000 miles...
Doesn't Redline claim that high wear numbers can come from their oil dissolving deposits and is only a problem for the first two or three runs?
I really don't know.
But I think there's an old thread around here showing dirty oil producing superior UOAs than clean oil, too...
In any case, I think read here or in another thread that somebody is going to post a lousy M1 UOA when it's on a vehicle with less than 5000 miles...
Last edited:
OMG, what a horrible couple of posts in this thread. I'm disgusted to even be a fellow member with some of you people (toocrazy... and utah bill)
Nick.
Just change out Honda/Acura spec and insert Mobil.
And once the "spec"
Then Honda will come out with their (mobils) HTO-09 spec and we will go around again.
I went to the local Honda/Acura dealer and guess what. Not a drop of Mobil 1 or PP oil in the place. Wonder how they are going to change the oil with the proper oil?
They are going to use Syntec in the bottles. Their bulk is GTX in the hoses and Syntec in the bottles.
Take care, bill
Bill.
Then why was it stated that other oils were tested, and DID NOT meet the spec? That means that Mobil 1 is superior, even if it's only superior to an unnamed conventional oil in certain applications. PP is an excellent oil by all accounts. But I have a hard time believing that it's just a big M1 pay-off conspiracy just like I think the CAFE-conspiracy is about as likely as the 70-mpg carburetor. Yes, there may be some joint marketing going on. But that in no way means that Mobil1 is "lousy" or that other oil companies that are more-often-than-not uncritically praised here engage in some less than forthright marketing techniques - like AMSOIL seeding the internet or spurious horsepower increase claims by QS or Castrol using semantically guarded, claims that are meaningless and prove nothing. This in no way reflects negatively on the performance of their actual products, which are by-and-large excellent.
I don't think I need to explain the often severe disconnect between what some (often times smarmy) dealerships want to do in order to engorge their bottom-line, and what their instructed by "the factory" to perform maintenance wise. My Nissan dealer was using Citgo in their guns, and offered Mobil1 in bottles. Does that mean the Mobil1 is the greatest thing ever? Is anyone here clamoring to use Citgo oil? Doubtful! It only means that M1 is a sythetic with wide brand recognition to the layperson and most could care less what SM-rated oil goes in their vehicle (if they cared about the API spec at all), so the dealer can just use whatever distributor cuts them the best deal. But in that case, Nissan's luxury line was not making claims about spec's met only by specific motor oil or two, and then using an arch-rival brand synthetic that does not. I'd be pretty PO'd if I saw that whether I had an Acura or not! You should be! If they were using Platinum 5w30, fine. But their use of Castrol SYNTEC implies little as far as it meeting HT-06 spec is concerned, it just means that the local Castrol distribution and sales meet the $$$$FY-2007 spec.
Then why was it stated that other oils were tested, and DID NOT meet the spec? That means that Mobil 1 is superior, even if it's only superior to an unnamed conventional oil in certain applications. PP is an excellent oil by all accounts. But I have a hard time believing that it's just a big M1 pay-off conspiracy just like I think the CAFE-conspiracy is about as likely as the 70-mpg carburetor. Yes, there may be some joint marketing going on. But that in no way means that Mobil1 is "lousy" or that other oil companies that are more-often-than-not uncritically praised here engage in some less than forthright marketing techniques - like AMSOIL seeding the internet or spurious horsepower increase claims by QS or Castrol using semantically guarded, claims that are meaningless and prove nothing. This in no way reflects negatively on the performance of their actual products, which are by-and-large excellent.
I don't think I need to explain the often severe disconnect between what some (often times smarmy) dealerships want to do in order to engorge their bottom-line, and what their instructed by "the factory" to perform maintenance wise. My Nissan dealer was using Citgo in their guns, and offered Mobil1 in bottles. Does that mean the Mobil1 is the greatest thing ever? Is anyone here clamoring to use Citgo oil? Doubtful! It only means that M1 is a sythetic with wide brand recognition to the layperson and most could care less what SM-rated oil goes in their vehicle (if they cared about the API spec at all), so the dealer can just use whatever distributor cuts them the best deal. But in that case, Nissan's luxury line was not making claims about spec's met only by specific motor oil or two, and then using an arch-rival brand synthetic that does not. I'd be pretty PO'd if I saw that whether I had an Acura or not! You should be! If they were using Platinum 5w30, fine. But their use of Castrol SYNTEC implies little as far as it meeting HT-06 spec is concerned, it just means that the local Castrol distribution and sales meet the $$$$FY-2007 spec.
Last edited:
someone explain why M1 iron #'s are most of the time higher than others?? M1 is subpar from what it used to be.. save yourself the $ and iron and find a syn on sale bc most will show the same if not better #'s than M1
Funny mike5, but you posted in a Mobil1 UOA where the wear numbers were "average."
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...ge=3#Post983940
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...ge=3#Post983940
Agreed. The noise floor here has really come up. Lots of loud posts, not many facts. Too bad about that...
in comparison to the other oil used?? no its not! duh read the #'s... if you want to be fooled by the highest marketing spending oil then do it, but read the #'s and compare.. esp the iron#'s..
Microcorrosion? I don't know. It doesn't matter because there's much more to oil selection than what levels are of one element (iron in this case) are in UOAs. Ever use a magnet in an engine? They often collect some big steel/iron particles. Use that to determine relative iron wear levels in conjunction with UOAs. I think you will be surprised.
UOAs levels of chromium are what interest me for top end wear. Chromium rings don't rust like steel/iron parts do and they are hard so create small wear particles that are efficiently measured in UOAs.
UOAs levels of chromium are what interest me for top end wear. Chromium rings don't rust like steel/iron parts do and they are hard so create small wear particles that are efficiently measured in UOAs.
Whatever. I actually kind of hate EM. I'm not getting into a flame war over this. But a cursory view of the UOA section shows that indeed that M1 is at least as good a match to Toyota engines as any.
Sorry. But again, I don't know how Blackstone Labs advocating that leaving in M1 0W-40 for a 6000 OCI rather than the 5000 OCI that it was drained out of a Toyota 5.7L engine at is a horror of a UOA. And that was with a total of about 10K on the truck --still breaking in.
Yeah, Mobil1. The horror!
Sorry. But again, I don't know how Blackstone Labs advocating that leaving in M1 0W-40 for a 6000 OCI rather than the 5000 OCI that it was drained out of a Toyota 5.7L engine at is a horror of a UOA. And that was with a total of about 10K on the truck --still breaking in.
Yeah, Mobil1. The horror!
Last edited:
i believe we have the same transmission. i have a 1992 SC400 and its a 4-speed automatic. i'm almost certain its the same one you have. so which ATF are you using from Amsoil? when did you change it out? is it safe for me to change mine out if it hasn't been done before. the car has 135,000 KM on it (not miles).
Toyotas do very well with Mobil 1. You can't go wrong. Do your DD. Look through the UOAs and draw your own conclusion.
My post was satire, sorta. Go ahead, call Exxon, ask em the what their base oil is. They don't state GroupIII, they won't confirm PAO, it may be a blend, it may not be. Who knows? And what would make it wonderful for a Toyota? I'm sure it's fine and dandy except for the wear numbers and whatnot. And at these prices we shouldn't scrutinize these folks? I'm on topic, the question was about Mobil 1, so it's on topic. Bill was on topic. He's pointing out other options to Mobil 1, namely dino.
John B., you could get great wear numbers out of any similarly-rated oil for half the price. Or, in Bill's case, 1/4 the price.
Until Exxon Mobil does the fess up on the base oil, or adjusts the commercials which make the same claims as when they WERE a PAO base oil and not just some tiny percentage, well, they're open to these charges.
Fact is, they don't care even enough to put their gasolines to a Top Tier rating, and I can't get a straight answer out of them about their GL5 synthetic MTF, which of course goes hand in hand with their worming about the base oil. These are all facts, go on, try it for yourself. Make the inquiries. Regardless, it's on topic. Mobil 1 works, but so do all the other rated oils, some for longer intervals, but all for less money. Exxon has gotten a free ride for too long. Far as I'm concerned, they wrecked a great brand, as the large usually do when they gobble the competition.
They'll not suffer because we here have caught on, trust me.
John B., you could get great wear numbers out of any similarly-rated oil for half the price. Or, in Bill's case, 1/4 the price.
Until Exxon Mobil does the fess up on the base oil, or adjusts the commercials which make the same claims as when they WERE a PAO base oil and not just some tiny percentage, well, they're open to these charges.
Fact is, they don't care even enough to put their gasolines to a Top Tier rating, and I can't get a straight answer out of them about their GL5 synthetic MTF, which of course goes hand in hand with their worming about the base oil. These are all facts, go on, try it for yourself. Make the inquiries. Regardless, it's on topic. Mobil 1 works, but so do all the other rated oils, some for longer intervals, but all for less money. Exxon has gotten a free ride for too long. Far as I'm concerned, they wrecked a great brand, as the large usually do when they gobble the competition.
They'll not suffer because we here have caught on, trust me.
I don't understand everyones problem with M1's price tag.
Its 20$ for a 5 quart jug at wallmart just like every other "Synthetic".
Its 20$ for a 5 quart jug at wallmart just like every other "Synthetic".
I've got 60 quarts of PP in the stash for less than $60. No hassle and just as good as Mobil 1 if not better.
The real problem is in what most of us use for OCIs, Mobil 1 is not doing any better than the $10 a jug oil at Wal mart.
Most of us have engines that could care less if it runs brand M or brand whatever.
This mindset of if it costs $$$ it is better than "cheaper" oil is B S.
Some will learn this, others will drink the koolaid and continue with paying the $$.
Take care, bill
PS: Mobil 1 last month was almost $24 for a 5 qt jug while every one else was $20. Their EP oil (which is better
Last edited:
- Status
