Mobil 1 UOAs showing more wear?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
1,291
Location
Texas
Have seen some claim Mobil 1 shows more relative wear metals in UOAs compared to others. Has anyone shown that to be true (maybe dnewton?) with any statistics from Blackstone? Just curious...topic has come up occasionally.
 
mbacfp, as much as I would like a chance to be able to say something against the Mobil 1 bandwagon, I'm afraid that in all likelihood the people who make these claims are making them on a single data point or ignoring other significant changes. If you have one or two data points, not much can truly be gained other than inferences, never absolute truth. For a statistically significant sample, you'd need at least 30 data points, and at Blackstone prices, that means at least $750 in analysis fees. I don't think I've seen anyone do that many UOAs on a single vehicle.

I've done the statistics on my 11 UOAs and 100k miles on a single vehicle, and they average out to within less than HALF of one PPM of iron over a thousand miles. That means the oil I chose, the weight I chose, the mileage the OCI went, the filter I used... all meant a maximum of 1 part per million per two thousand miles. Pick whatever oil makes your head happy and use it. It doesn't sound like it's with Mobil.
 
what viscosity and spec? Mobil 1 0w-40 fs have pretty good uoa compere to others 0w-40.
But i dont get it why 5w-30 does not have the acea a5 spec. Mobil 1 0w-30 Api sl has it in EU.
 
This old chestnut returns.
There was a time in the distant past when there may have been some indication that M1 produced more iron debris in the small particle sizes that the UOAs we all use can identify as compared to other oils used in similar engines.
It would have been incorrect to infer that M1 produced more wear given the limitations of the basic UOAs quoted as sources as well as a less than rigorous approach in selecting sample UOAs as references.
 
I figured as much. I have picked up on this theme over the years with people eluding to more wear in UOAs. Was curious if there was a legitimate study or post showing this trend. I figured it was small sample size observations...more of a curiosity on my part. Thanks for the responses.
 
Originally Posted By: FordCapriDriver
M1 for some reason tends to show more iron wear than other oils, it's also renown for making engines noisy.


And your data?

12.gif
 
You don't need any "data" to pull up enough comments and complaints regarding M1 and noise to give you an afternoon's worth of reading on this forum alone.

That said M1 AFE 0w30 is going in my Lincoln in 700 miles, and it will remain there for a full 10k whether it's noisy or not.
 
Originally Posted By: FordCapriDriver
M1 for some reason tends to show more iron wear than other oils, it's also renown for making engines noisy.


Add to your list.

1) Extremely clean engines.

2) Very long lasting engines.

3) Engines that show little wear even after hundreds of thousands of miles. Including timing chains and guides.

4) Engines, with all of the above performing at 10K and longer OCIs.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: mbacfp
Have seen some claim Mobil 1 shows more relative wear metals in UOAs compared to others. Has anyone shown that to be true (maybe dnewton?) with any statistics from Blackstone? Just curious...topic has come up occasionally.


I think making general statements are dangerous without proving any correlation and without providing any data from controlled experiments.
 
A look at M1 UOAs of the past decade or so shows the excess wear metal claim not to be the case.
I can tell you that M1 has never been loud in any grade I've used it in in a variety of engines.
The two cars we currently have on AFE 0W-20 still purr as both are well toward the end of their OCIs.
Unlike some here, I'm loyal to my wallet and not any brand of motor oil.
Having said that, I'll go on to say that I have no problems in running M1 in any engine in the appropriate grade.
 
When I first joined the site many years ago I was a die hard Mobil-1 user. I simply believed the hype, believed the advertising, the commercials, etc, but after lurking/posting for a while I began to see a trend of higher than average wear metal counts in Mobil UOAs.
I watched, read other's comments about it, read some more then decided, for the price I was paying for it (expensive!) I would go with a cheaper, but another well known oil in Pennzoil. The Pennzoil UOAS consistently received much better UOAs than what Mobil did, UOA after UOA, which still seems to be the case today.

Some will disagree with this as well, but after adding the Pennzoil to my vehicle (truck) it ran quieter, which I happened to think was a bonus and a bonus which may explain why higher wear metals were being found in Mobil UOAs. More friction=more noise.
21.gif


Mobil is the recommended oil choice for Corvette and Pennzoil is the recommended oil for Ferrari. Not sure if that means anything to anyone, but knowing the RPMS those Ferrari engines spin at, I would assume it is a pretty stout oil.




Not looking to get anyones panties in a bunch. These are my observations and my decision to run Pennzoil was based on those and what others were saying at the time, nothing more.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: mbacfp
Have seen some claim Mobil 1 shows more relative wear metals in UOAs compared to others. Has anyone shown that to be true (maybe dnewton?) with any statistics from Blackstone? Just curious...topic has come up occasionally.

This thread topic does not include Mobil-1 EP?..... or does it?
 
Thanks Irv. Appreciate your experiences. Would be cool if we could get some Blackstone UOA data and isolate brand and get some universal wear numbers on a per motor basis. Sure there would be plenty of data points to analyze.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top