Mobil1 20k Road Trip Results are In - Graphs, Pictures

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

oil_film_movies

Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
4,666
Location
MN
The results are in. There was a previous thread ( https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4785725/1 ) on it.
Now they have put on some results we can argue about:

https://mobiloil.com/en/article/why-the-mobil-advantage/mobil-1-performance/20k-road-trip

I'm still looking at the TAN, TBN, iron, oxidation, etc. graphs they have, and am already wondering why there are no values given, only trends.
Also, at the risk of being cynical, I see they are hiding their pistons (black!) like they always do in their marketing website presentations. Before, on the 120k dyno tests, it took a tour by the Engineering Explained guy to find those missing pistons, and they looked awful.
 
36.gif
Oh this should be interesting... Thanks for posting.
thumbsup2.gif
 
Quote
After the road trip was over, we sent additional oil samples to four independent labs to provide their own analysis.


I'm sure many will have issues with this because that's human nature, but I will say no other oil brand/company comes close to providing this much analysis and testing for the public eye to see. The results look great. Piston shots would have been nice to see.
 
Originally Posted by CT8
I love the valve cover sludge ratings.

The Equinox valve cover accrued a disturbing amount of varnish and deposits over a single 20K drain. I would hate to see how the valve cover and the piston rings look after 5-10 drains at this interval.
 
So, the oil held up, but obviously the Equinox is a more demanding application. That's apparent in all the graphs and doubly apparent in the valve cover picture with all the new varnish.

Like with the recent "graphs" from Ravenol, no scale on the Y axis conveys the advertising focus rather than one of scientific rigour.
 
They used ACTUAL road trip testing. They did simulation testing. They did tear down testing. They allowed Engineering Explained to visit and see how they developed the oil. They did ICP, TAN/TBN, Viscosity/Oxidation testing. Used four independent labs. The oils ACTUALLY meet the latest API SN Plus and dexos 1 G2 specifications. LOL. What more do people expect? Especially for the general public that doesn't know anything about oil?

Name one competitor brand that will do half of what they just provided.

All I ever see are claims made, timken tests and other useless PDS numbers.

All in all this was well done.

*More numbers are graphs would have been beneficial and so would piston pics. Likley omitted because they may not have looked that great. Viscosity was extremely stable. Varnish on Equinox was not great and clearly that was the tougher engine. (GM LOL). But hey, they at least provided the picture!
 
Originally Posted by The Critic
Originally Posted by CT8
I love the valve cover sludge ratings.

The Equinox valve cover accrued a disturbing amount of varnish and deposits over a single 20K drain. I would hate to see how the valve cover and the piston rings look after 5-10 drains at this interval.

This came up quite a lot in the early '80's when people were complaining about their engines turning "yellow". Mobile responded that it was normal and WAS NOT varnish.

Yea, I would have liked to see some numbers in the graphs but it looks like, while you could go the full 20k, 10k would be the sweet spot for an OCI. Still overpriced when I could probably go 10k with the plain vanilla.
 
I would also liked to have seen the other wear metals as well as just the Iron, but I agree with Buster. They did a lot to prove their claim.
thumbsup2.gif
 
Last edited:
A road trip? That's the easiest use of the oil. How about a daily commute in stop and go traffic and a bunch of driving for Uber - plus not only do they not publish ANY numbers, they also don't mention make-up oil when pulling the samples every 5K plus normal consumption.
 
Originally Posted by buster
They used ACTUAL road trip testing. They did simulation testing. They did tear down testing. They allowed Engineering Explained to visit and see how they developed the oil. They did ICP, TAN/TBN, Viscosity/Oxidation testing. Used four independent labs. The oils ACTUALLY meet the latest API SN Plus and dexos 1 G2 specifications. LOL. What more do people expect? Especially for the general public that doesn't know anything about oil?

Name one competitor brand that will do have of what they just provided.

All I ever see are claims made, timken tests and other useless PDS numbers.

All in all this was well done.

*More numbers are graphs would have been beneficial and so would piston pics. Likley omitted because they may not have looked that great.


I would agree on the merits of the testing itself, certainly. My critique primarily lies in the conveyance of the results via graphs with no scale on the Y-axis. I also question the rating on the valve cover from the Equinox.

One of the unspoken conclusions one can draw from this is the amount of variability between applications. The obstacle for performance presented by the Equinox is clearly much greater than that of the Ford.
 
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
So, the oil held up, but obviously the Equinox is a more demanding application. That's apparent in all the graphs and doubly apparent in the valve cover picture with all the new varnish.

Sludge ratings got better at the end of the test. I do see some extra baked-on junk, which might be what you saw.

Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Like with the recent "graphs" from Ravenol, no scale on the Y axis conveys the advertising focus rather than one of scientific rigour.
Actually, scientifically (statistically), when presenting such a small sample size, actual values are not useful. ..And, qualitative scales on merit need only represent "good ranges" as 1.5 standard deviations of the acceptable spread, with confidence....
For some hard numbers, see the EricTheCarGuy video I cited above. Or any of a number of UOAs on this site of course. Many look OK.
Originally Posted by buster
*More numbers are graphs would have been beneficial and so would piston pics. Likley omitted because they may not have looked that great. Viscosity was extremely stable. Varnish on Equinox was not great and clearly that was the tougher engine. (GM LOL). But hey, they at least provided the picture!

I think the Equinox was DI (not turbo though). Ford was port injection.
 
Last edited:
So when Mobil puts out a study everyone gushes over it but other companies are trashed with the assumption of cherry picking stats or graphs that are misleading?
 
Originally Posted by oil_film_movies
Actually, scientifically (statistically), when presenting such a small sample size, actual values are not useful. ..And, qualitative scales on merit need only represent "good ranges" as 1.5 standard deviations of the acceptable spread, with confidence....


I would have liked to have seen numbers for TBN/TAN even if they aren't valuable in terms of the overall end result.

Originally Posted by oil_film_movies
I think the Equinox was DI (not turbo though). Ford was port injection.

Which reinforces the critique of DI engines being significantly harder on oil.
 
Originally Posted by PimTac
So when Mobil puts out a study everyone gushes over it but other companies are trashed with the assumption of cherry picking stats or graphs that are misleading?


I don't see any gushing? I see some critique taking place here, similar to the critique that took place in the other thread.

Mobil has presented significantly more data here with their bit of advertising. But it is still a sample of two and it is still an advert.
 
Any mention of Make-Up oil added during the run? Surely there was some. That would help the final result.
I see TBN went up all of a sudden at the 15k point of the Fusion. That must mean a fresh quart was put in.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by oil_film_movies
Any mention of Make-Up oil added during the run? Surely there was some. That would help the final result.
I see TBN went up all of a sudden at the 15k point of the Fusion. That must mean a fresh quart was put in.


thumbsup2.gif
Was thinking the same thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O
  • Locked
Mobil1 Ann Prot 20K Road Trip-Test Results Coming
3 4 5
Replies
89
Views
19K
Patman
wwillson
  • Locked
Answers - Pennzoil Technology behind "Made From Natural Gas" and Vehicle maintenance while driving less Q&A
Replies
5
Views
31K
RateNate
AEHaas
  • Locked
Thin vs Thick Discussion Chapter 1
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
21K
OVERKILL
J
South America Road Trip Completed
Replies
19
Views
2K
earlyre
A
Mobil1 Synthetic vs Mystik JT8 Semi Synthetic, run cooler? My test r
2 3
Replies
48
Views
9K
Kawiguy454
Back
Top