so why are so many ripped at Mobil?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: endeavor to persevere
Originally Posted By: Rolf
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
But it would seem as though my opinion on Mobil is not welcome on this forum. I actually like their products.


There is a contingent of ExxonMobil bashers here.

None of them are professionals in the lubrication or automotive fields.




Go figure.


I am not an expert. I have worked in engineering for General Electric Co in the 70s. I have been a manufacturing manager for a tier 1 GM supplier. On the side I restored automobiles for over 20 years. I am not an expert.

Have a very pleasant evening,

Don





Don:

Look back through Doug Hillary (he's done fleet testing for ExxonMobil) and MolaKule's (Tribologist) posts. It seems the only people who are condemning the product are the non-experts. The experts, with extensive experience, are not.

m1.gif



What has happened in the past has no reflection on what is happening in the present.

Don
 
Originally Posted By: endeavor to persevere
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: endeavor to persevere
Originally Posted By: Rolf
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
But it would seem as though my opinion on Mobil is not welcome on this forum. I actually like their products.


There is a contingent of ExxonMobil bashers here.

None of them are professionals in the lubrication or automotive fields.




Go figure.


I am not an expert. I have worked in engineering for General Electric Co in the 70s. I have been a manufacturing manager for a tier 1 GM supplier. On the side I restored automobiles for over 20 years. I am not an expert.

Have a very pleasant evening,

Don





Don:

Look back through Doug Hillary (he's done fleet testing for ExxonMobil) and MolaKule's (Tribologist) posts. It seems the only people who are condemning the product are the non-experts. The experts, with extensive experience, are not.

m1.gif



What has happened in the past has no reflection on what is happening in the present.

Don


Does it not? Does history not repeat itself? Are we not doomed to repeat our own mistakes if we do not remember them?

It would seem the last time Mobil had a genuine API certification issue, they pulled the logo from their bottles.

Yet they have not......

I do not see GM freaking out over the 5w30 in the ZL1 'vette. If it was sub-par, would they not?

GM does EXTENSIVE in-house lubricant testing. If there was an issue, do you not think they would have identified it themselves?

Honda, again, does EXTENSIVE in-house testing. If there was an issue, do you not think they would have identified it themselves?

Both these companies make extensive use of the very grade being condemned here; the 5w30.

m1.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: endeavor to persevere
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: endeavor to persevere
Originally Posted By: Rolf
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
But it would seem as though my opinion on Mobil is not welcome on this forum. I actually like their products.


There is a contingent of ExxonMobil bashers here.

None of them are professionals in the lubrication or automotive fields.




Go figure.


I am not an expert. I have worked in engineering for General Electric Co in the 70s. I have been a manufacturing manager for a tier 1 GM supplier. On the side I restored automobiles for over 20 years. I am not an expert.

Have a very pleasant evening,

Don





Don:

Look back through Doug Hillary (he's done fleet testing for ExxonMobil) and MolaKule's (Tribologist) posts. It seems the only people who are condemning the product are the non-experts. The experts, with extensive experience, are not.

m1.gif



What has happened in the past has no reflection on what is happening in the present.

Don


Does it not? Does history not repeat itself? Are we not doomed to repeat our own mistakes if we do not remember them?

It would seem the last time Mobil had a genuine API certification issue, they pulled the logo from their bottles.

Yet they have not......

I do not see GM freaking out over the 5w30 in the ZL1 'vette. If it was sub-par, would they not?

GM does EXTENSIVE in-house lubricant testing. If there was an issue, do you not think they would have identified it themselves?

Honda, again, does EXTENSIVE in-house testing. If there was an issue, do you not think they would have identified it themselves?

Both these companies make extensive use of the very grade being condemned here; the 5w30.

m1.gif



I believe GM has much bigger fish to fry. With trying to stay in business, this oil fiasco is at the bottom of their list.

I guess I am just not a fan-boy,

Sorry,

Don
 
Originally Posted By: endeavor to persevere
I believe Ashland had an independent lab conduct the test. After finding that Mobil 1 5W30 failed one if the test required for API/SM, they sent Exxon/Mobil a letter stating what they had discovered.


I don't see that in their ads.

I don't see the name and address of the lab (are they an API certifying lab?).

I don't know which of the three North American formulas they tested.

I don't know the date of manufacture or source of the sample.

I don't know that ExxonMobil did not respond in any way.

I don't understand why API wasn't notified since they can lift the API license.

Originally Posted By: endeavor to persevere
The ball is now in Exxon/Mobil's court. XOM refuses to put the ball into play.


It looks like the ball is in Ashland's court to back up these allegations.

Originally Posted By: endeavor to persevere
Fairly simple to me. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, I would say its a duck.


Right.

If the API investigates and tells me that some Mobil 1 fails to meet API licensing requirements, I'll accept that.

Until then, if it bears the API starburst, it meets API specs.



.
 
Originally Posted By: endeavor to persevere
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: endeavor to persevere
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: endeavor to persevere
Originally Posted By: Rolf
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
But it would seem as though my opinion on Mobil is not welcome on this forum. I actually like their products.


There is a contingent of ExxonMobil bashers here.

None of them are professionals in the lubrication or automotive fields.




Go figure.


I am not an expert. I have worked in engineering for General Electric Co in the 70s. I have been a manufacturing manager for a tier 1 GM supplier. On the side I restored automobiles for over 20 years. I am not an expert.

Have a very pleasant evening,

Don





Don:

Look back through Doug Hillary (he's done fleet testing for ExxonMobil) and MolaKule's (Tribologist) posts. It seems the only people who are condemning the product are the non-experts. The experts, with extensive experience, are not.

m1.gif



What has happened in the past has no reflection on what is happening in the present.

Don


Does it not? Does history not repeat itself? Are we not doomed to repeat our own mistakes if we do not remember them?

It would seem the last time Mobil had a genuine API certification issue, they pulled the logo from their bottles.

Yet they have not......

I do not see GM freaking out over the 5w30 in the ZL1 'vette. If it was sub-par, would they not?

GM does EXTENSIVE in-house lubricant testing. If there was an issue, do you not think they would have identified it themselves?

Honda, again, does EXTENSIVE in-house testing. If there was an issue, do you not think they would have identified it themselves?

Both these companies make extensive use of the very grade being condemned here; the 5w30.

m1.gif



I believe GM has much bigger fish to fry. With trying to stay in business, this oil fiasco is at the bottom of their list.

I guess I am just not a fan-boy,

Sorry,

Don


Maybe. But Honda doesn't, and the 5w30 is the factory oil for the turbocharged RDX......

There's a difference between being a fanboy, neutral, and jumping to conclusions. Most seem to fall into the latter category.

I'm angry ExxonMobil has not responded with anything more than the generic replies we seem to be getting. But I'm not going to condemn them until I feel there is enough evidence to do so. If that makes me a fanboy? well then I don't know.

m1.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally Posted By: Rolf
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
But it would seem as though my opinion on Mobil is not welcome on this forum. I actually like their products.


There is a contingent of ExxonMobil bashers here.

None of them are professionals in the lubrication or automotive fields.

Go figure.



.



The people I've spoken with are "professionals".
 
If your field of expertise is ducks, Then you know ducts. In this case we are talking oil,and a companies reputation which happens to be the worlds largest oil company and their products. Everything I see here is speculation against XM. If their lawyers are building a case against Valvoline it may take many months to complete. In the meantime for the greater good of their case they just couldn't speak out about this. Their oils are outstanding as many automotive enginers believe, GM MB etc. So lets here from all the lub enginers on this forum.
 
Originally Posted By: buster
The people I've spoken with are very much "professionals".


Did they post here?

If not, did they post somewhere else where we might read them?

If not, will they post here soon with some actual facts?

If not, it's yet another unsupported allegation.



.
 
It amazes me how many people act as if XOM has divine power and can not be touched. Large market cap means nothing to me.
 
Originally Posted By: buster
It amazes me how many people act as if XOM has divine power and can not be touched. How lame.


I suppose it's asking too much to have some facts?



.
 
Originally Posted By: buster
It amazes me how many people act as if XOM has divine power and can not be touched. Large market cap means nothing to me.


I don't believe they ever tried to "hide" or "ignore" the Exxon Valdez disaster though..... Which people seem to be claiming they are doing about the Valvoline "issue", which, other than Ashland's own claimed data, has no supporting evidence.

m1.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That was on a world wide stage. I do not think even they could cover that up. Im not saying they are covering this up or not but to make the comparison between the two is definitely apples to oranges to say the least.
 
We all know XOM is a leader in the industry and is more than capable of making superior oils but whether they do or not is another story. It's still a business and money matters.

The ball is in Ashland's court unless things are going on behind the scenes in court.
 
Originally Posted By: mcrn
Im not saying they are covering this up or not but to make the comparison between the two is definitely apples to oranges to say the least.


Right.

The Group III hoopla a couple of years ago is completely irrelevant.

The Exxon Valdez is irrelevant.

All that's relevant is when and if Ashland is going to back up the allegation with facts, verifiable, uncontestable, unexplainable, non-biased facts.

Not an allegation, not a hunch, not an unnamed lab, not an impression or a dare - but real hard facts.



.
 
Originally Posted By: Rolf
Originally Posted By: buster
The people I've spoken with are very much "professionals".


Did they post here?

If not, did they post somewhere else where we might read them?

If not, will they post here soon with some actual facts?

If not, it's yet another unsupported allegation.



.





Yes they post here.
 
Originally Posted By: Rolf
Originally Posted By: mcrn
Im not saying they are covering this up or not but to make the comparison between the two is definitely apples to oranges to say the least.


Right.

The Group III hoopla a couple of years ago is completely irrelevant.

The Exxon Valdez is irrelevant.

All that's relevant is when and if Ashland is going to back up the allegation with facts, verifiable, uncontestable, unexplainable, non-biased facts.

Not an allegation, not a hunch, not an unnamed lab, not an impression or a dare - but real hard facts.



.


It sounds like you can't handle facts.

The facts were presented by Ashland. It's now XOM's turn to refute them....I'm waiting...
 
Quote:
The Group III hoopla a couple of years ago is completely irrelevant.


It is and it isn't. Kind of suggests to me that they are cutting costs and cheapening the product a bit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
Why isn't High Mileage oil the "standard" oil?
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
6K
OVERKILL
Patman
Why so few extended life 0w30s?
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
3K
gasman556
R
Costco drop Mobil 1?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
4K
Bryanccfshr
R
Mobil 1 ESP 5w-30 or Mobil 1 ESP 0w-30 | 3.5 EcoBoost
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
icecoldak
MetalSlug
Can my Lexus 2016 NX 200t 2.0l turbo using Mobil 1 ESP 0w-20 ?
Replies
14
Views
1K
DirectRejection
Back
Top Bottom