Amsoil XL vs. Mobil 1 EP
- Thread starter The Critic
- Start date
Originally Posted By: slacktide_bitog
Amsoil XL is their cheap line. Most likely equivalent to Mobil Super Synthetic, QSUD, Magnatec, and house brands like Service Pro. Definitely NOT in the same league as M1 EP. *Maybe* regular M1, but not EP.
Only their Signature and higher oils are worth going thru the MLM for. Then you might get something better than EP.
Regular M1 is better that EP other than it doesn't last as long.
Amsoil XL is their cheap line. Most likely equivalent to Mobil Super Synthetic, QSUD, Magnatec, and house brands like Service Pro. Definitely NOT in the same league as M1 EP. *Maybe* regular M1, but not EP.
Only their Signature and higher oils are worth going thru the MLM for. Then you might get something better than EP.
Regular M1 is better that EP other than it doesn't last as long.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: CT8
Regular M1 is better that EP other than it doesn't last as long.
How so?
Regular M1 is not better than M1 EP.
M1 EP has more PAO than M1, which makes it better than M1. However, there is a caveat that M1 EP may have a little more ester as well (because it has more PAO), which would increase the wear slightly over regular M1.
M1 AP has the best base oil (least Group III+, either a lot of GTL or a lot of PAO). M1 EP has the second-best oil (more PAO than in M1). M1 has the worst base oil among the three (most Group III+).
The additive pack is probably the same among all three.
Originally Posted By: CT8
Regular M1 is better that EP other than it doesn't last as long.
How so?
Regular M1 is not better than M1 EP.
M1 EP has more PAO than M1, which makes it better than M1. However, there is a caveat that M1 EP may have a little more ester as well (because it has more PAO), which would increase the wear slightly over regular M1.
M1 AP has the best base oil (least Group III+, either a lot of GTL or a lot of PAO). M1 EP has the second-best oil (more PAO than in M1). M1 has the worst base oil among the three (most Group III+).
The additive pack is probably the same among all three.
A_Harman indexes (for 5W-30):
PPPP (94%) > Amsoil SS (93%) > Amsoil XL (91%) > M1 EP (87%) > M1 (86%)
I think PPPP (GTL) is more in line with M1 AP than anything else in terms of base-oil quality, therefore the OCI length. It should probably easily beat Amsoil XL, which I assume has a lot of Group III. Only a mostly PAO base oil can beat a fully GTL base oil.
PPPP (94%) > Amsoil SS (93%) > Amsoil XL (91%) > M1 EP (87%) > M1 (86%)
I think PPPP (GTL) is more in line with M1 AP than anything else in terms of base-oil quality, therefore the OCI length. It should probably easily beat Amsoil XL, which I assume has a lot of Group III. Only a mostly PAO base oil can beat a fully GTL base oil.
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
... Regular M1 is not better than M1 EP.
M1 EP has more PAO than M1, which makes it better than M1. However, there is a caveat that M1 EP may have a little more ester as well (because it has more PAO), which would increase the wear slightly over regular M1. ...
Not to change the subject ... just curious, I thought ester clings to metal better and provides better protection! At least that was my understanding based on some bitog posts that I recall!
... Regular M1 is not better than M1 EP.
M1 EP has more PAO than M1, which makes it better than M1. However, there is a caveat that M1 EP may have a little more ester as well (because it has more PAO), which would increase the wear slightly over regular M1. ...
Not to change the subject ... just curious, I thought ester clings to metal better and provides better protection! At least that was my understanding based on some bitog posts that I recall!
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: OilUzer
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
... Regular M1 is not better than M1 EP.
M1 EP has more PAO than M1, which makes it better than M1. However, there is a caveat that M1 EP may have a little more ester as well (because it has more PAO), which would increase the wear slightly over regular M1. ...
Not to change the subject ... just curious, I thought ester clings to metal better and provides better protection! At least that was my understanding based on some bitog posts that I recall!
Tom stated on this subject, when originally discussed in the other thread:
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
The only time esters interfere with ZDDP for camshaft wear is during break-in of a new or rebuilt engine, as is the case with the Sequence IVA test. A high dose of a highly polar ester during break-in can slow down the ZDDP's ability to lay down a protective coating. Once the ZDDP protection has been established, however, the esters do not lead to further wear.
The first approved synthetic oils were based 100% on esters and did not cause wear problems in the field, and several major brand oils used 10-20% ester formulations for many years without issue. In the real world engines are broken in with conventional oils. It was only in test engines with new parts, broken in with high ester oils, that cam wear was observed, and then only for the first few hours of the test, after which the wear stopped.
Back in those early days I was responsible for monitoring UOA reports on 100% ester oils from the field, and the only times I saw high iron it was directly correlated with high silicon (dirt) in extended drain situations due to poor maintenance. Beyond those few times the oils performed very well. I also formulated very high ester dose oils for my own cars and iron levels were always low.
I designed ester molecules, formulated them, and tested them for nearly four decades in numerous automotive, aviation, and industrial applications. In general they reduced wear, even in the presence of various anti-wear and EP additives. Initial break-in of automotive engines with ZDDP is the only interference I have observed.
The ExxonMobil data compares an ester containing oil with an AN containing oil in a IVA engine test with a new camshaft in a formulation that did not have any friction modifiers. I don't know what they were trying to prove, but I would not attempt to conclude from that that esters cause engine wear in real world use.
Which makes sense to me.
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
... Regular M1 is not better than M1 EP.
M1 EP has more PAO than M1, which makes it better than M1. However, there is a caveat that M1 EP may have a little more ester as well (because it has more PAO), which would increase the wear slightly over regular M1. ...
Not to change the subject ... just curious, I thought ester clings to metal better and provides better protection! At least that was my understanding based on some bitog posts that I recall!
Tom stated on this subject, when originally discussed in the other thread:
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
The only time esters interfere with ZDDP for camshaft wear is during break-in of a new or rebuilt engine, as is the case with the Sequence IVA test. A high dose of a highly polar ester during break-in can slow down the ZDDP's ability to lay down a protective coating. Once the ZDDP protection has been established, however, the esters do not lead to further wear.
The first approved synthetic oils were based 100% on esters and did not cause wear problems in the field, and several major brand oils used 10-20% ester formulations for many years without issue. In the real world engines are broken in with conventional oils. It was only in test engines with new parts, broken in with high ester oils, that cam wear was observed, and then only for the first few hours of the test, after which the wear stopped.
Back in those early days I was responsible for monitoring UOA reports on 100% ester oils from the field, and the only times I saw high iron it was directly correlated with high silicon (dirt) in extended drain situations due to poor maintenance. Beyond those few times the oils performed very well. I also formulated very high ester dose oils for my own cars and iron levels were always low.
I designed ester molecules, formulated them, and tested them for nearly four decades in numerous automotive, aviation, and industrial applications. In general they reduced wear, even in the presence of various anti-wear and EP additives. Initial break-in of automotive engines with ZDDP is the only interference I have observed.
The ExxonMobil data compares an ester containing oil with an AN containing oil in a IVA engine test with a new camshaft in a formulation that did not have any friction modifiers. I don't know what they were trying to prove, but I would not attempt to conclude from that that esters cause engine wear in real world use.
Which makes sense to me.
Anyone who has spent sometime on this forum must have understood that there is no such thing as the perfect oil or perfect base stock. Group I/dino, PAO, ester, Mobil 1, Pennzoil Platinum, German Castrol, Pennzoil Yellow Bottle, etc. are all superior in some ways and inferior in other ways. Don't expect the oil you buy, whichever brand it is, to outperform some other oil in all ways without being inferior in some other ways, no matter how expensive it is. This is because like everything in life, blending an oil is a compromise.
The primary goal of a synthetic oil is to extend the OCI and keep the engine clean. If there is a small compromise in wear while achieving that, this is entirely acceptable, as most people won't drive their cars 500,000 miles and can live with their car lasting 450,000 miles instead of 500,000 miles. Of course, if the compromise is not small, like what was seen with Mobil 1 UOAs ten years ago, then it matters.
Most recent M1 UOAs show good wear protection. If someone actually spent many hours and averaged all UOAs on BITOG, would M1 still show a statistically significant amount of more iron than other oils? Would M1 EP show a statistically significant amount of more iron than M1? Chances are that it could. However, do you really care if the overall wear rate is still highly acceptable? Do you really care about 15 ppm vs. 10 ppm iron?
The increased wear concerns by esters in nothing new. You can Google many sources. Here is an excerpt from ExxonMobil's 2013 syntehic-oil formulation guide:
This is from their 2017 synthetic-base-stock guide:
Springer Handbook of Petroleum Technology -- Chang Samuel Hsu and Paul R. Robinson (2017):
Synthetics, mineral oils, and bio-based lubricants -- chemistry and technology -- Leslie R. Rudnick -- second edition (2013):
Again, this is just nitpicking. This is exactly why people visit this site. Why do you think the OP bothered to ask the question whether he/she should use Amsoil XL or Mobil 1 EP? They are both good oils.
The primary goal of a synthetic oil is to extend the OCI and keep the engine clean. If there is a small compromise in wear while achieving that, this is entirely acceptable, as most people won't drive their cars 500,000 miles and can live with their car lasting 450,000 miles instead of 500,000 miles. Of course, if the compromise is not small, like what was seen with Mobil 1 UOAs ten years ago, then it matters.
Most recent M1 UOAs show good wear protection. If someone actually spent many hours and averaged all UOAs on BITOG, would M1 still show a statistically significant amount of more iron than other oils? Would M1 EP show a statistically significant amount of more iron than M1? Chances are that it could. However, do you really care if the overall wear rate is still highly acceptable? Do you really care about 15 ppm vs. 10 ppm iron?
The increased wear concerns by esters in nothing new. You can Google many sources. Here is an excerpt from ExxonMobil's 2013 syntehic-oil formulation guide:
This is from their 2017 synthetic-base-stock guide:
Springer Handbook of Petroleum Technology -- Chang Samuel Hsu and Paul R. Robinson (2017):
Synthetics, mineral oils, and bio-based lubricants -- chemistry and technology -- Leslie R. Rudnick -- second edition (2013):
Again, this is just nitpicking. This is exactly why people visit this site. Why do you think the OP bothered to ask the question whether he/she should use Amsoil XL or Mobil 1 EP? They are both good oils.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
If I were a service provider that had liability for my work I would be careful to use a product that had the certifications the manufacturer requires. For personal use it is one thing but if I had a business I'd think different.
That works both ways, if the M1 product didn't have the required certs I wouldn't use it either. But whatever the specific engine requirements are I'd make sure the oil has what's needed. If SN is all you need then both are listed on the API list.
So as a service provider you would recommend to your customers that they exceed the manufacturer's recommended OCI?
Of the vehicles that this discussion is applicable to, there are only 1-2 who are interested in exceeding the OEM service interval. About 1/3 of the drivers prefer 5K intervals, the remainder use the maximum drain interval recommended by the OEM or service indicator, which is usually 10K. Of the 19 vehicles, only 2 of them are in-warranty.
If I were a service provider that had liability for my work I would be careful to use a product that had the certifications the manufacturer requires. For personal use it is one thing but if I had a business I'd think different.
That works both ways, if the M1 product didn't have the required certs I wouldn't use it either. But whatever the specific engine requirements are I'd make sure the oil has what's needed. If SN is all you need then both are listed on the API list.
So as a service provider you would recommend to your customers that they exceed the manufacturer's recommended OCI?
Of the vehicles that this discussion is applicable to, there are only 1-2 who are interested in exceeding the OEM service interval. About 1/3 of the drivers prefer 5K intervals, the remainder use the maximum drain interval recommended by the OEM or service indicator, which is usually 10K. Of the 19 vehicles, only 2 of them are in-warranty.
Last edited:
"Better" might be subjective. Thus, I would strongly consider polling my customers. Let's start with the premise that either oil is adequate. The question then is do customers perceive Amsoil to be a more premium product. I don't know. My gut says many would. In any case, it would likely make your business stand out, which is always a good thing. Everyone offers M1, but I don't know the last time I've seen Amsoil offered.
All this being said, I want to ask has anyone here ever heard of an engine failing because it had the correct amount and weight/spec'd oil in it while being correctly changed at the intervals recommended by the automotive or oil manufacturers? I have not.
I mainly switch between Amsoil and Mobil 1 full synthetics often due to price. I have a 48-year-old vehicle with a 4 cylinder in it that God only knows what milage is on it. I purchased it used almost 12 years ago. I am running STP dino 20w50 in it, because it was easily accessible.
Less wear and longer protection, I am all in, but if we check the level of our oil and change the oil and the filter as described in the question I am asking, how many have personally known of a failure?
I mainly switch between Amsoil and Mobil 1 full synthetics often due to price. I have a 48-year-old vehicle with a 4 cylinder in it that God only knows what milage is on it. I purchased it used almost 12 years ago. I am running STP dino 20w50 in it, because it was easily accessible.
Less wear and longer protection, I am all in, but if we check the level of our oil and change the oil and the filter as described in the question I am asking, how many have personally known of a failure?
<<< bamboozled by the 4+ year old thread.
I know, but this oil comparison debate/discussion has been going on for decades and will continue.
I didn't renew my Amsoil preferred customer membership this year, but not because I don't like the products. Cost is the only reason. I have been putting less than 10,000 hard miles a year on these two particular daily drivers. Short trips and a lot of stop and go. One vehicle calls for synthetic and the other does not, but I run synthetic in both hoping I get better service from both vehicles. With the proper oil, I only have to change oil once a year. If I purchased a 55-gallon drum of Amsoil 0w-20 Signature Series at preferred customer prices ($55.20 for 5 quarts), I still couldn't beat the competition when it comes to price. I know Amsoil SS and Mobil 1 EP aren't apples to apples, but a 5 quart container of Mobile 1 EP is $39.99.
Like I asked earlier, has anyone ever heard of an engine failing because it had the correct amount and weight/spec'd oil in it while being correctly changed at the intervals recommended by the automotive or oil manufacturers? I have not.
I didn't renew my Amsoil preferred customer membership this year, but not because I don't like the products. Cost is the only reason. I have been putting less than 10,000 hard miles a year on these two particular daily drivers. Short trips and a lot of stop and go. One vehicle calls for synthetic and the other does not, but I run synthetic in both hoping I get better service from both vehicles. With the proper oil, I only have to change oil once a year. If I purchased a 55-gallon drum of Amsoil 0w-20 Signature Series at preferred customer prices ($55.20 for 5 quarts), I still couldn't beat the competition when it comes to price. I know Amsoil SS and Mobil 1 EP aren't apples to apples, but a 5 quart container of Mobile 1 EP is $39.99.
Like I asked earlier, has anyone ever heard of an engine failing because it had the correct amount and weight/spec'd oil in it while being correctly changed at the intervals recommended by the automotive or oil manufacturers? I have not.
Wait, you necrobumped a 4+ year old thread just to ask this question (in this thread)?
No, I am not trying to control this thread. I thought it was relative. I had to look up what the hell necrobumped meant!
verb: (internet) To revive a long dormant forum thread by adding a new post, thus bringing it to the top of the forum list. Often a tactic of trolls attempting to control a forum
What is the rule? So, I know not to reply to "old" threads. School me Ignatius.Similar threads
- Question
- Locked