The "M-word"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: buster
Ashland ran multiple tests in their own approved lab. This was over a two year period. Every test failed with an average wear of 180 microns.

Ashland new they were going up against a giant and would NEVER have been so foolish to not have the "facts" to back up their claims. This is why XOM is silent.

IMO, there is really nothing more to it than that. Cheers.


That's how I see it. The whole thing was actually simple and painless for me. I emailed them, hoping I would get some really good, positive reassuring reply, I was disappointed in their reply and tone. I changed brands, simple really. XOM did a great job in their marketing because they still have a very loyal following. If this was two years in the making shame on XOM.

BTW- We're all entitled to our opinions so these threads really shouldn't turn into the Royal Rumble..Spend your money any way you please, just be happy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How about a group hug?
 
Originally Posted By: buster
Ashland ran multiple tests in their own approved lab. This was over a two year period. Every test failed with an average wear of 180 microns.

Ashland new they were going up against a giant and would NEVER have been so foolish to not have the "facts" to back up their claims. This is why XOM is silent.

IMO, there is really nothing more to it than that. Cheers.


That would never happen with other companies would it...
LOL.gif
Whatever...
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint


BTW- We're all entitled to our opinions so these threads really shouldn't turn into the Royal Rumble..Spend your money any way you please, just be happy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How about a group hug?


I agree completely!
 
As I've said many times, "It's just oil". Don't know about a group hug, but taking a deep breath and worrying about more important things in life would be appropriate.
 
Originally Posted By: buster
Ashland ran multiple tests in their own approved lab. This was over a two year period. Every test failed with an average wear of 180 microns.

Ashland new they were going up against a giant and would NEVER have been so foolish to not have the "facts" to back up their claims. This is why XOM is silent.

IMO, there is really nothing more to it than that. Cheers.


Buster, unless you are citing information from a source other than the Valvoline letters on Jobbersworld, I don't think it has ever been spelled out quite as clearly as you are stating above......

They state independent lab in the letters....... They make no mention of averages.
 
IMO there's almost zero chance of Valvoline publishing their claim against Exxon unless it was absolutely rock solid. Anything less and they'd surely be drowned in 20,000 leagues of litigation.

And their silence is indicative of something ... good for Valvoline for bringing this to attention - who else would? The media will not be collecting oil samples and conducting wear tests.
 
Let's assume for a minute that Fe ppm counts in UOA's are NOT related to actual iron/steel wear. Let's look at M1 UOA's over the last 6 years. Has anyone ever posted a satisfactory explanation why M1 is at best in the middle of the pack relative to other oils, and in reality having it's mean Fe number greater than the grand mean of all other oils?
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL


1. I never stated that YOU hated Mobil. Don't put words in my mouth.

2. I don't think I'm overly sensitive. I'm not crying here. I've made a thread about a subject that I think needs its own thread because it gets discussed a lot.


I only wrote it to clear the record. You didn't state it. You seem defensive. I don't think anyone needs to defend M1.


Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL


And where exactly did I state Mobil didn't have issues?


Somehow you may want to accept the Valvoline statements as truth. It's not gonna kill M1 or anything.

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
In pretty much every thread that has Mobil in it in this section and the UOA section where somebody thinks there is "high" iron.


I have seen the compilations. And we have seen no accounting as to why, but on average Fe ppm readings are higher on M1. I'm not saying it's wear. So don't go there. Just look at the numbers and come up with an answer.

Originally Posted By: Pablo
How bad over the years has Valvoline been bagged on?


Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
No clue, I've only been a member since April of 2008. But then, you should already know that.


If you think M1 is ragged and bagged on, Valvoline was fruckin spanked, shot, bled and thrown in the river after being tarred and feathered.

Originally Posted By: Pablo
Was this brought on because the talk about the Ashland "case"?


Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
…..the negative talk about Mobil 1 in the Ashland threads has indeed contributed to what caused me to make this thread.


Yeah it was negative - but put PP, RP, Redline, any oil you chose in place of M1. The negative talk may be even worse.


Originally Posted By: Pablo
Have you defended Royal Purple?


Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Yes. In the ATF section when recommending it as a PSF.


I was referring to motor oil and particular. It was an honest question Royal Purple has been savaged on this site, just curious if you were a defender.
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Somehow you may want to accept the Valvoline statements as truth. It's not gonna kill M1 or anything.


It's certainly going to put a bullet in this forum's reputation as a source for facts, not opinion.



.
 
Originally Posted By: buster
Ashland Q&A from JobbersWorld - It says "average" of 180 microns, and talks about "samples" not sample. The letter also says "over the past couple of years, Valvoline conducted a number of tests" not test.


So, what you're saying is that Ashland did not share the information with the API, did not share the information with ExxonMobil, and more importantly did not share the information with buyers of motor oil, sat on it for two years, and let thousands if not millions of car and truck owners suffer untold engine wear and damage?

And for that you trust Ashland?


.
 
If the higher Fe #'s generally found with Mobil 1 UOA's are not from wear what are they from? If its something in their mfg or packaging process and iron is harmful to an engine then why not remove it before bottling the product? Granted I'm no expert on UOA's. Maybe they can't determine how much an engine is wearing, still it is a number that a lot of people who do know how to read them seem to always point out. Pablo is correct in saying Mobil 1 seems to be in the middle of the pack, and for the price they charge they should be a leader of the pack in quality, not volume. To all members: Spend your money anyway you like after all it's your money.
 
Originally Posted By: Rolf
Originally Posted By: buster
Ashland Q&A from JobbersWorld - It says "average" of 180 microns, and talks about "samples" not sample. The letter also says "over the past couple of years, Valvoline conducted a number of tests" not test.


So, what you're saying is that Ashland did not share the information with the API, did not share the information with ExxonMobil, and more importantly did not share the information with buyers of motor oil, sat on it for two years, and let thousands if not millions of car and truck owners suffer untold engine wear and damage?

And for that you trust Ashland?


.


It takes YEARS to find labs, contract labs, set up the tests, test, research, test, research, compile the results, set up the proposed reports, pass it with the marketing teams, the law teams, the board of directors, ect. . . .

Ashland did not just blindly yell a statement. They did it the right way. They set there ducks up.

Props to Ashland.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

buster
Porsche Admits Trouble Ahead: “Our Business Model No Longer Works”
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
JHZR2
C
Oil formulation games. Opinions, facts, thoughts?
Replies
0
Views
243
Coffee 0W-40
F
My personal experience with MotorKote
2 3
Replies
40
Views
1K
cptbarkey
SOUNDMAN5000
Do you miss the days of Everything PTFE / Teflon? Any positive snake oil experiences?
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
4K
newtoncd8
J
Oil and Filter Data Overload. Direction needed/wanted for track car
Replies
6
Views
778
CarlB
Back
Top Bottom