Mobil Delvac 1 Launches New Synthetic Engine Oils

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: CleverUserName
Yes the performance of the old CJ-4 Delvac was legendary. It’s “overbuilt” qualities made it suitable for much more than just the HDEO market. It’s excellent properties made it widely used by Motorcycle, racing and automotive enthusiasts worldwide.

So is it unsuitable now for those non-HDEO markets? If so, what properties that those markets depended on are now deficient or missing from the new formulation? Are flash point and pour point related to those markets?
 
I have always taken “mixed fleet” to mean diesel or gasoline? ~ so at $22/gallon it went in my 5.3L GM …

Runs just fine …
 
Originally Posted By: CleverUserName
I doubt the old esp formula would need any additional tweaking to meet the new spec. My guess is EOM made a “Value engineering” decision to change the formulation to make it with cheaper materials and more competitive with the other oils available at Walmart.

I would agree they took an opportunity to save some input costs; the Walmart issue is separate, I'd think. Timing the reformulation with the change in spec is probably a lot more convenient (and more subtle) than doing a reformulation out of the blue. The ACEA specs and builder approvals, as far as I know, were stable for the life of the CJ-4 Delvac 1, so the need for reformulating then wasn't there, and no need to draw attention to oneself with a significantly changed data sheet out of the blue. Some can point to CK-4 being more robust than CJ-4, but Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40 in CJ-4 was already more robust than simple API CJ-4, having significant builder approvals and ACEA specs that go beyond CJ-4, and more builder approvals, too, than it possesses in CK-4.

kschachn: When a product is a bit of a ringer, some do mourn when some of the numbers aren't as good. In practical use, it won't matter. People do pay attention to numbers here and there, and specifications, too. Mobil was pushing it for high performance gasoline applications (that wording is still on the sheet, despite the spec change) What do you think would happen to Vette sales if they cut 100 horsepower and governed them to 90 mph because that's "good enough" for every highway in North America? When CK-4 is shown to be an improvement over CJ-4, one doesn't like to see a bunch of numbers get "worse" and builder approvals vanish. Technically, if one is really concerned with specifications, the gasoline spec is now gone from Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40. Delvac 1 LE 5w-30 is CJ-4/SN and E6, E7, E9, and, for whatever reason, hasn't been updated to CK-4, which matters little if it carries the current ACEA specifications and builder approvals, given its target market. But, that's a low phosphorus lube, for those who concern themselves with that.

Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40 CK-4 is certainly every bit as capable for almost every user out there as the CJ-4 version was, but it has lost some of its mystique.
 
I agree that the loss of certifications is most telling, but that also depends on which certification and why. I don't know enough to understand whether a gasoline specification is more or less relevant to the oil's performance than a diesel specification. Was Delvac 1 ESP ever really marketed to gasoline engines or just carried the specs because it as sold as a dual-rated oil?

I also doubt that ExxonMobil cares too much about Walmart sales for the oil, is that really their premier sales outlet for the brand? People like to assume that they cheap something out just to satisfy Walmart but I've never seen evidence of that. It does seem like a popular conspiracy theory however.

Originally Posted By: Garak
kschachn: When a product is a bit of a ringer, some do mourn when some of the numbers aren't as good. In practical use, it won't matter. People do pay attention to numbers here and there, and specifications, too. Mobil was pushing it for high performance gasoline applications (that wording is still on the sheet, despite the spec change) What do you think would happen to Vette sales if they cut 100 horsepower and governed them to 90 mph because that's "good enough" for every highway in North America? When CK-4 is shown to be an improvement over CJ-4, one doesn't like to see a bunch of numbers get "worse" and builder approvals vanish. Technically, if one is really concerned with specifications, the gasoline spec is now gone from Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40. Delvac 1 LE 5w-30 is CJ-4/SN and E6, E7, E9, and, for whatever reason, hasn't been updated to CK-4, which matters little if it carries the current ACEA specifications and builder approvals, given its target market. But, that's a low phosphorus lube, for those who concern themselves with that.

Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40 CK-4 is certainly every bit as capable for almost every user out there as the CJ-4 version was, but it has lost some of its mystique.
 
Yes I think you said it best. They took advantage of the change to cheapen the formula for the ck-4 rollout.

I bought a large quantity of Cj-4 esp back in 2015 when the had a rebate. I scored about 20 jugs and paid about $8 a gallon. That was the last time I got this oil and it was not sold at Walmart. I got it from Pep Boys as they had the best price and actually had it available.

Walmart now does sell esp, and that is why I correlate the formula change with Walmart sales pressures. It could also be a coincidence. However I’m glad I stocked up on “the good stuff” when the opportunity presented itself.

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: CleverUserName
I doubt the old esp formula would need any additional tweaking to meet the new spec. My guess is EOM made a “Value engineering” decision to change the formulation to make it with cheaper materials and more competitive with the other oils available at Walmart.

I would agree they took an opportunity to save some input costs; the Walmart issue is separate, I'd think. Timing the reformulation with the change in spec is probably a lot more convenient (and more subtle) than doing a reformulation out of the blue. The ACEA specs and builder approvals, as far as I know, were stable for the life of the CJ-4 Delvac 1, so the need for reformulating then wasn't there, and no need to draw attention to oneself with a significantly changed data sheet out of the blue. Some can point to CK-4 being more robust than CJ-4, but Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40 in CJ-4 was already more robust than simple API CJ-4, having significant builder approvals and ACEA specs that go beyond CJ-4, and more builder approvals, too, than it possesses in CK-4.

kschachn: When a product is a bit of a ringer, some do mourn when some of the numbers aren't as good. In practical use, it won't matter. People do pay attention to numbers here and there, and specifications, too. Mobil was pushing it for high performance gasoline applications (that wording is still on the sheet, despite the spec change) What do you think would happen to Vette sales if they cut 100 horsepower and governed them to 90 mph because that's "good enough" for every highway in North America? When CK-4 is shown to be an improvement over CJ-4, one doesn't like to see a bunch of numbers get "worse" and builder approvals vanish. Technically, if one is really concerned with specifications, the gasoline spec is now gone from Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40. Delvac 1 LE 5w-30 is CJ-4/SN and E6, E7, E9, and, for whatever reason, hasn't been updated to CK-4, which matters little if it carries the current ACEA specifications and builder approvals, given its target market. But, that's a low phosphorus lube, for those who concern themselves with that.

Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40 CK-4 is certainly every bit as capable for almost every user out there as the CJ-4 version was, but it has lost some of its mystique.
 
Oh, absolutely. I'm just talking about the "feeling" one gets from it all. For all I know, the certifications that disappeared are obsolete, or applied to so few customers it really didn't matter. The gasoline specification really wasn't terribly relevant. After all, how many vehicles out there called for, exactly, an oil in 5w-40 with an API rating of SM or newer? I can think of a couple Subaru examples from a couple years or so ago, maybe a couple other examples, but not a lot. The reasons for not bringing the new version out with SN in conjunction with the CK-4 probably have to do with the likelihood that the phosphorus exemption will eventually disappear for all grades holding the contemporary API gasoline specification, not just the so called ILSAC grades in HDEO, being 0w-30, 5w-30, and 10w-30. Personally, I'd still have no concern about using Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40 CK-4 in my G37. It didn't become a two stroke diesel engine oil or a marine lube overnight. E7, E9 are still there, and CK-4 is an evolution from CJ-4, not something totally off the wall. For those who have been using the product in CJ-4, the CK-4 product will be perfectly interchangeable. The only possible exceptions are those who have been made into nervous nellies thanks to Ford's CK-4 paranoia/phosphorus fetish and those who actually insist upon having an SM or SN on the jug.

The marketing of Delvac 1 for gasoline engines was mostly in fairly subtle ways, such as mention of mixed fleets on the sheet, the mention of high performance gasoline applications on the sheet, and the SM rating, of course. I doubt that it had huge traction in gasoline engines from an ordinary consumer perspective, with probably fewer than a dozen of us using it in gassers on the board. Maybe they had a moment of realization similar to what Shell did. Why cannibalise your A3/B4 sales with your synthetic HDEO sales?

As for Walmart, yes, I agree. The commercial customers are the big deal. I was getting Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40 in CJ-4 for about half the price that ordinary retail outlets were selling the product for. Big suppliers here (such as commercial implement builders) pay half of that again. While a distributor in Canada often provides better HDEO prices than a distributor in the States, I'm sure the big retailers on both sides of the border were neither struggling to pay for the product nor were they putting huge pressures on Exxon-Mobil for drastically reduced prices.

As much as it disappoints me in this case, if an oil company is able to meet its target specifications while spending fewer dollars, they certainly should. That's what running a company is about, after all, maximising profits. Additionally, things up here aren't like they used to be. HDEOs in Canada definitely used to be the poor man's A3/B4, back when M1 0w-40 and GC 0w-30 were the only options, and only in 1 litre bottles at an atrocious price, long before the jugs came out and other companies brought their offerings in as well. Buying an A3/B4 at a sensible price is fairly easy these days, so the big imperative for a gasoline rated HDEO, particularly one that's overbuilt, isn't what it used to be.

If you want to see hand wringing, just wait until the API phosphorus exemption disappears altogether, and things like M1 0w-40 and Castrol 0w-40 have to either get rid of the SN, or somehow find a way to revert to SL like GC 0w-30.
wink.gif
If that comes to pass, there will be no end of confusion here.
 
So tangentially relevant, but Chevron claims 50% reduction in wear with their new CK-4 lubes. The numbers we are reading for additives have shrunk, but somehow they manage a significant reduction in wear... I'm absolutely convinced it has to do with changes in chemistry and additives that are not being tested like organic calcium, etc...

There are facets of this business in formulating oils that we know nothing about and never will. There are trade secrets that they will never talk about - ever. Their chem labs are some of the best in the world. Why would any assume they make anything worse ...
 
Originally Posted By: BrocLuno
So tangentially relevant, but Chevron claims 50% reduction in wear with their new CK-4 lubes. The numbers we are reading for additives have shrunk, but somehow they manage a significant reduction in wear... I'm absolutely convinced it has to do with changes in chemistry and additives that are not being tested like organic calcium, etc...

There are facets of this business in formulating oils that we know nothing about and never will. There are trade secrets that they will never talk about - ever. Their chem labs are some of the best in the world. Why would any assume they make anything worse ...


Mobil also makes similar claims of improvements with the CK-4 changes, but only with their conventional oil. Delvac 1300 Super. No such claims of improvements are made on ESP or Extreme.

We compared our CK-4 Mobil Delvac™ 1300 Super engine oils to our CJ-4 Mobil Delvac 1300 Super engine oils. The test results showed that the CK-4 oils provided 20 percent improved wear protection,* 50 percent improved oxidation resistance† and 80 percent improved high-temperature viscosity control.† In addition, the PC-11 oils showed enhanced fuel economy potential (for FA-4 products only) and protection beyond original equipment manufacturer (OEM) ODIs.

https://www.mobil.com/en/mobil-delvac/ma...-11-engine-oils
 
5w40 Delo Syn CK-4 is supposed to be 69% better (wear) than the CJ-4 variant...is it...I dunno...yet. Bottom line, CK-4 oils are different...have very HD diesel tests to meet...many are new as some went obsolete. Some of the new additive packs are non metallic and their depletion won't show up in a typical TBN test. What I'm hearing...is the "typical" tests done on used HDEO are going to have to change to be relevant and the readings we look at for benchmarks will change as well. No one (Chevron or Polaris) will tell me exactly what will change...but that change in how we evaluate oil is coming. All Chevron would commit to telling me was the new CK-4 add pack is not very metallic in nature anymore....and that I didn't need to change my OCI.

As for you guys using HDEO's in your cars...my guess is by the time CL-4 or SO or SP comes around mixed fleet or dual ratings will be completely gone...and should be.
 
There still are things even in a cheap UOA that are useful for determining life remaining in a lubricant. As for dual rated lubricants, I had thought that, too, but it seems to me that in certain ways, FA-4 closed the gap, rather than the other way around.
 
That's hard to say. Is Delvac 1 ESP 0w-40 actually certified or just "recommended for" CJ-4 and/or CK-4, as the case may be? I guess the same question could be asked about the Petro-Canada offerings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top