*Mobil 1 AP Noack
- Thread starter buster
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by sloinker
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Noack under 9.0% for a 0W-20? That's PAO talking! Even for Amsoil SS, it's 10.0%.
The trio of Mobil 1 AFE 0W-16, Mobil 1 EP 0W-20, and Mobil AP 0W-20: the best base-oil quality of all off-the-shelves oils out there, if not all oils out there, period!
What are you waiting for? Go to Walmart and get them!
If those outstanding Noack numbers for those three types/viscosities of Mobil 1 are correct, don't you think Mobil would publish them? If I was marketing director for that company i would be screaming from the rooftops over my superiority. The fact they aren't published or publicized makes me think they aren't as low as we are being led to believe. If I'm wrong I apologize, but I would still like to see some independent evidence.
Yes, they are correct!
We have known forever from the MSDSs that this trio is fully PAO-based. (All non-ESP and non-FS Mobil 1 oils also have AN according to the FTIR data.) This is not a surprise to us. Aso, the half-PAO-based (according to the MSDS) Mobil 1 AFE 0W-20 has Noack as low as ~ 10% according to the PQIA, which is consistent with the new data for the fully PAO-based Mobil 1 AP 0W-20.
Most companies don't publish their Noack values, as it indirectly discloses their base-oil type. For example if Mobil 1 published the Noack for this trio, they would have to publish the Noack for their other oils, which would disclose that their other oils are not PAO-based. Likewise if Shell published the Noack for both the Pennzoil Platinum and Quaker State Ultimate Durability, they would have disclosed that both oils use the same PurePlus GTL base-oil, even though only Pennzoil Platinum markets it.
What I would really like to have is the CCS value as well so that I can estimate the actual base-oil quality.
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Noack under 9.0% for a 0W-20? That's PAO talking! Even for Amsoil SS, it's 10.0%.
The trio of Mobil 1 AFE 0W-16, Mobil 1 EP 0W-20, and Mobil AP 0W-20: the best base-oil quality of all off-the-shelves oils out there, if not all oils out there, period!
What are you waiting for? Go to Walmart and get them!
If those outstanding Noack numbers for those three types/viscosities of Mobil 1 are correct, don't you think Mobil would publish them? If I was marketing director for that company i would be screaming from the rooftops over my superiority. The fact they aren't published or publicized makes me think they aren't as low as we are being led to believe. If I'm wrong I apologize, but I would still like to see some independent evidence.
Yes, they are correct!
We have known forever from the MSDSs that this trio is fully PAO-based. (All non-ESP and non-FS Mobil 1 oils also have AN according to the FTIR data.) This is not a surprise to us. Aso, the half-PAO-based (according to the MSDS) Mobil 1 AFE 0W-20 has Noack as low as ~ 10% according to the PQIA, which is consistent with the new data for the fully PAO-based Mobil 1 AP 0W-20.
Most companies don't publish their Noack values, as it indirectly discloses their base-oil type. For example if Mobil 1 published the Noack for this trio, they would have to publish the Noack for their other oils, which would disclose that their other oils are not PAO-based. Likewise if Shell published the Noack for both the Pennzoil Platinum and Quaker State Ultimate Durability, they would have disclosed that both oils use the same PurePlus GTL base-oil, even though only Pennzoil Platinum markets it.
What I would really like to have is the CCS value as well so that I can estimate the actual base-oil quality.
Originally Posted by buster
Mobil is considering publishing the Noack I was told in the email. Wouldn't be a bad idea.
The Noack is correct. The original tech reached out to someone higher up. It also matches the Amsoil Noack testing they did on 5w20's.
Thank you, buster! You have done a lot communicating with Mobil 1!
Mobil is considering publishing the Noack I was told in the email. Wouldn't be a bad idea.
The Noack is correct. The original tech reached out to someone higher up. It also matches the Amsoil Noack testing they did on 5w20's.
Thank you, buster! You have done a lot communicating with Mobil 1!
Originally Posted by PimTac
Ravenol DFE is close to $13 a liter. It had better be good at that price.
Yeah but when the transmission shoots craps at 150,000 miles, that motor will be looking sweet at Pick A Part!
Ravenol DFE is close to $13 a liter. It had better be good at that price.
Yeah but when the transmission shoots craps at 150,000 miles, that motor will be looking sweet at Pick A Part!
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by sloinker
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Noack under 9.0% for a 0W-20? That's PAO talking! Even for Amsoil SS, it's 10.0%.
The trio of Mobil 1 AFE 0W-16, Mobil 1 EP 0W-20, and Mobil AP 0W-20: the best base-oil quality of all off-the-shelves oils out there, if not all oils out there, period!
What are you waiting for? Go to Walmart and get them!
If those outstanding Noack numbers for those three types/viscosities of Mobil 1 are correct, don't you think Mobil would publish them? If I was marketing director for that company i would be screaming from the rooftops over my superiority. The fact they aren't published or publicized makes me think they aren't as low as we are being led to believe. If I'm wrong I apologize, but I would still like to see some independent evidence.
Yes, they are correct!
We have known forever from the MSDSs that this trio is fully PAO-based. (All non-ESP and non-FS Mobil 1 oils also have AN according to the FTIR data.) This is not a surprise to us. Aso, the half-PAO-based (according to the MSDS) Mobil 1 AFE 0W-20 has Noack as low as ~ 10% according to the PQIA, which is consistent with the new data for the fully PAO-based Mobil 1 AP 0W-20.
Most companies don't publish their Noack values, as it indirectly discloses their base-oil type. For example if Mobil 1 published the Noack for this trio, they would have to publish the Noack for their other oils, which would disclose that their other oils are not PAO-based. Likewise if Shell published the Noack for both the Pennzoil Platinum and Quaker State Ultimate Durability, they would have disclosed that both oils use the same PurePlus GTL base-oil, even though only Pennzoil Platinum markets it.
What I would really like to have is the CCS value as well so that I can estimate the actual base-oil quality.
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have and indeed may justify the low claimed Noack number. Sort of curious what the remaining 30-40% of the base oil(s) are. If it was Ravenol or Red Line I would suspect polyols or maybe di-ester's, but I'm not as convinced with the Mobil 1. What do you think the rest of the base oil configuration may be given the available data Gokhan?
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%. I see now where publishing some of these specifications may be a double edged sword.
Originally Posted by sloinker
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Noack under 9.0% for a 0W-20? That's PAO talking! Even for Amsoil SS, it's 10.0%.
The trio of Mobil 1 AFE 0W-16, Mobil 1 EP 0W-20, and Mobil AP 0W-20: the best base-oil quality of all off-the-shelves oils out there, if not all oils out there, period!
What are you waiting for? Go to Walmart and get them!
If those outstanding Noack numbers for those three types/viscosities of Mobil 1 are correct, don't you think Mobil would publish them? If I was marketing director for that company i would be screaming from the rooftops over my superiority. The fact they aren't published or publicized makes me think they aren't as low as we are being led to believe. If I'm wrong I apologize, but I would still like to see some independent evidence.
Yes, they are correct!
We have known forever from the MSDSs that this trio is fully PAO-based. (All non-ESP and non-FS Mobil 1 oils also have AN according to the FTIR data.) This is not a surprise to us. Aso, the half-PAO-based (according to the MSDS) Mobil 1 AFE 0W-20 has Noack as low as ~ 10% according to the PQIA, which is consistent with the new data for the fully PAO-based Mobil 1 AP 0W-20.
Most companies don't publish their Noack values, as it indirectly discloses their base-oil type. For example if Mobil 1 published the Noack for this trio, they would have to publish the Noack for their other oils, which would disclose that their other oils are not PAO-based. Likewise if Shell published the Noack for both the Pennzoil Platinum and Quaker State Ultimate Durability, they would have disclosed that both oils use the same PurePlus GTL base-oil, even though only Pennzoil Platinum markets it.
What I would really like to have is the CCS value as well so that I can estimate the actual base-oil quality.
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have and indeed may justify the low claimed Noack number. Sort of curious what the remaining 30-40% of the base oil(s) are. If it was Ravenol or Red Line I would suspect polyols or maybe di-ester's, but I'm not as convinced with the Mobil 1. What do you think the rest of the base oil configuration may be given the available data Gokhan?
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%. I see now where publishing some of these specifications may be a double edged sword.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by sloinker
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by sloinker
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Noack under 9.0% for a 0W-20? That's PAO talking! Even for Amsoil SS, it's 10.0%.
The trio of Mobil 1 AFE 0W-16, Mobil 1 EP 0W-20, and Mobil AP 0W-20: the best base-oil quality of all off-the-shelves oils out there, if not all oils out there, period!
What are you waiting for? Go to Walmart and get them!
If those outstanding Noack numbers for those three types/viscosities of Mobil 1 are correct, don't you think Mobil would publish them? If I was marketing director for that company i would be screaming from the rooftops over my superiority. The fact they aren't published or publicized makes me think they aren't as low as we are being led to believe. If I'm wrong I apologize, but I would still like to see some independent evidence.
Yes, they are correct!
We have known forever from the MSDSs that this trio is fully PAO-based. (All non-ESP and non-FS Mobil 1 oils also have AN according to the FTIR data.) This is not a surprise to us. Aso, the half-PAO-based (according to the MSDS) Mobil 1 AFE 0W-20 has Noack as low as ~ 10% according to the PQIA, which is consistent with the new data for the fully PAO-based Mobil 1 AP 0W-20.
Most companies don't publish their Noack values, as it indirectly discloses their base-oil type. For example if Mobil 1 published the Noack for this trio, they would have to publish the Noack for their other oils, which would disclose that their other oils are not PAO-based. Likewise if Shell published the Noack for both the Pennzoil Platinum and Quaker State Ultimate Durability, they would have disclosed that both oils use the same PurePlus GTL base-oil, even though only Pennzoil Platinum markets it.
What I would really like to have is the CCS value as well so that I can estimate the actual base-oil quality.
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have and indeed may justify the low claimed Noack number. Sort of curious what the remaining 30-40% of the base oil(s) are. If it was Ravenol or Red Line I would suspect polyols or maybe di-ester's, but I'm not as convinced with the Mobil 1. What do you think the rest of the base oil configuration may be given the available data Gokhan?
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%. I see now where publishing some of these specifications may be a double edged sword.
Remember that the additive package and VII treat are on top of that 60-70%, so I think you'll find that the remaining percentage of base oil that's not PAO would be exceedingly small.
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by sloinker
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Noack under 9.0% for a 0W-20? That's PAO talking! Even for Amsoil SS, it's 10.0%.
The trio of Mobil 1 AFE 0W-16, Mobil 1 EP 0W-20, and Mobil AP 0W-20: the best base-oil quality of all off-the-shelves oils out there, if not all oils out there, period!
What are you waiting for? Go to Walmart and get them!
If those outstanding Noack numbers for those three types/viscosities of Mobil 1 are correct, don't you think Mobil would publish them? If I was marketing director for that company i would be screaming from the rooftops over my superiority. The fact they aren't published or publicized makes me think they aren't as low as we are being led to believe. If I'm wrong I apologize, but I would still like to see some independent evidence.
Yes, they are correct!
We have known forever from the MSDSs that this trio is fully PAO-based. (All non-ESP and non-FS Mobil 1 oils also have AN according to the FTIR data.) This is not a surprise to us. Aso, the half-PAO-based (according to the MSDS) Mobil 1 AFE 0W-20 has Noack as low as ~ 10% according to the PQIA, which is consistent with the new data for the fully PAO-based Mobil 1 AP 0W-20.
Most companies don't publish their Noack values, as it indirectly discloses their base-oil type. For example if Mobil 1 published the Noack for this trio, they would have to publish the Noack for their other oils, which would disclose that their other oils are not PAO-based. Likewise if Shell published the Noack for both the Pennzoil Platinum and Quaker State Ultimate Durability, they would have disclosed that both oils use the same PurePlus GTL base-oil, even though only Pennzoil Platinum markets it.
What I would really like to have is the CCS value as well so that I can estimate the actual base-oil quality.
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have and indeed may justify the low claimed Noack number. Sort of curious what the remaining 30-40% of the base oil(s) are. If it was Ravenol or Red Line I would suspect polyols or maybe di-ester's, but I'm not as convinced with the Mobil 1. What do you think the rest of the base oil configuration may be given the available data Gokhan?
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%. I see now where publishing some of these specifications may be a double edged sword.
Remember that the additive package and VII treat are on top of that 60-70%, so I think you'll find that the remaining percentage of base oil that's not PAO would be exceedingly small.
Originally Posted by sloinker
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have and indeed may justify the low claimed Noack number. Sort of curious what the remaining 30-40% of the base oil(s) are. If it was Ravenol or Red Line I would suspect polyols or maybe di-ester's, but I'm not as convinced with the Mobil 1. What do you think the rest of the base oil configuration may be given the available data Gokhan?
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%. I see now where publishing some of these specifications may be a double edged sword.
The percentage is for the whole oil, not the base oil. The detergent - dispersant - inhibitor (DDI) pack would be about 15 - 20%. For this oil the VII is about 4%. All non-ESP and non-FS Mobil 1 oils have AN and no POE. All ESP and FS Mobil 1 oils have POE and no AN.
Therefore, the estimated composition for the Mobil 1 EP 0W-20 and Mobil 1 AP 0W-20 would be:
PAO: ~ 60 - 70%
AN: ~ 10 - 15%
Group III: ~ 0 - 10%
DDI pack: ~ 15 - 20%
VII (polymer dissolved Group I or Group II base-oil solvent): ~ 5%
The DDI pack may also include Group I or Group II base-oil solvent.
AN and POE are never reported in the MSDS because they are not hazardous.
Mobil 1 usually doesn't report non-GTL Group III in the MSDS, but they report GTL.
They have updated the MSDS for the M1 AFE 0W-16, and it has 10 - 20% GTL, the actual number probably being ~ 10%. In that case the PAO must be on the low side of the 70 - 80% stated, with little room left for the AN after the DDI and VII. The values given in the MSDSs are probably not very accurate, and it wouldn't be surprising if the actual value fell outside the given range.
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have and indeed may justify the low claimed Noack number. Sort of curious what the remaining 30-40% of the base oil(s) are. If it was Ravenol or Red Line I would suspect polyols or maybe di-ester's, but I'm not as convinced with the Mobil 1. What do you think the rest of the base oil configuration may be given the available data Gokhan?
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%. I see now where publishing some of these specifications may be a double edged sword.
The percentage is for the whole oil, not the base oil. The detergent - dispersant - inhibitor (DDI) pack would be about 15 - 20%. For this oil the VII is about 4%. All non-ESP and non-FS Mobil 1 oils have AN and no POE. All ESP and FS Mobil 1 oils have POE and no AN.
Therefore, the estimated composition for the Mobil 1 EP 0W-20 and Mobil 1 AP 0W-20 would be:
PAO: ~ 60 - 70%
AN: ~ 10 - 15%
Group III: ~ 0 - 10%
DDI pack: ~ 15 - 20%
VII (polymer dissolved Group I or Group II base-oil solvent): ~ 5%
The DDI pack may also include Group I or Group II base-oil solvent.
AN and POE are never reported in the MSDS because they are not hazardous.
Mobil 1 usually doesn't report non-GTL Group III in the MSDS, but they report GTL.
They have updated the MSDS for the M1 AFE 0W-16, and it has 10 - 20% GTL, the actual number probably being ~ 10%. In that case the PAO must be on the low side of the 70 - 80% stated, with little room left for the AN after the DDI and VII. The values given in the MSDSs are probably not very accurate, and it wouldn't be surprising if the actual value fell outside the given range.
Originally Posted by buster
Mobil is considering publishing the Noack I was told in the email. Wouldn't be a bad idea.
The Noack is correct. The original tech reached out to someone higher up. It also matches the Amsoil Noack testing they did on 5w20's.
Very good job buster...
I think if Mobil put up the noack values would be good because it does verify standards being met. . . Like Dexos being 13 percent or less... Or MB 229.5 being 10 percent or less...
Mobil is considering publishing the Noack I was told in the email. Wouldn't be a bad idea.
The Noack is correct. The original tech reached out to someone higher up. It also matches the Amsoil Noack testing they did on 5w20's.
Very good job buster...
I think if Mobil put up the noack values would be good because it does verify standards being met. . . Like Dexos being 13 percent or less... Or MB 229.5 being 10 percent or less...
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted by Gokhan
What matters for the base-oil quality is the CCS times the Noack, and the CCS for a 5W-20 is a lot higher; therefore, you would need a Noack around 5 - 6% to have a comparable base-oil quality for a 5W-20.
Huh? Please tell me what kind of useful, meaningful engineering units come from the multiplication of these two things, and what it means physically.
It makes zero sense.
What matters for the base-oil quality is the CCS times the Noack, and the CCS for a 5W-20 is a lot higher; therefore, you would need a Noack around 5 - 6% to have a comparable base-oil quality for a 5W-20.
Huh? Please tell me what kind of useful, meaningful engineering units come from the multiplication of these two things, and what it means physically.
It makes zero sense.
Originally Posted by JHZR2
Originally Posted by Gokhan
What matters for the base-oil quality is the CCS times the Noack, and the CCS for a 5W-20 is a lot higher; therefore, you would need a Noack around 5 - 6% to have a comparable base-oil quality for a 5W-20.
Huh? Please tell me what kind of useful, meaningful engineering units come from the multiplication of these two things, and what it means physically.
It makes zero sense.
This is well known in the industry. As CCS × Noack decreases, the base-oil quality increases from Group IIIa to IIIb, IIIc, IIId, IIIe, GTL, and PAO in a uniform manner:
![[Linked Image from lh3.googleusercontent.com]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/sMl-dmHQs4r7fxh0RjTsvK78YnL084NW_zbvAcPtJQlRf11PnCe8QcB6lr8y_Cjb9_C4xCfowSdtBoyecujaogv81Jaxu-4ef52Lg2pLiID2UZpb_i6K-6n_iqPA6PWOPytUWYNzO5aU4AJ5rIrDZiIGoRlz7jj7ILQmftMbTl2qP39nNCigR7eeElNj8ueHQEgag-3OBAKPNHTBGcrFZe7PZmyaHLAoJrTwnHd1TGeCqhv_kUJ6D2tYqZFPBX4jbDbhLHJf2jeI33sKe47NUV89Rqd3pKttoddDTeVSiIpBfKwrxGb066PiuEYSFVneaHdIZqw4dtXDAUkl-RMo__vLnNuGw9Etj7e1bXVznYnvPHxzVA2aKukM-nDadH5wRbOCflW-8NOQDHZdEBarYO_dASky6_mSB-H9N2paA9txs-cWsntjIJjOzilRuvfXS0WZdBYFQh_4AvoLLclZUoxG98c4ZgoIdt5uz5M5Yqd4f-rDE6xMlLSq0Va2XXIXFaU5vYvm6Xq_Sv1jgHWtHwRmDnpiHdRPL8hynTxKCDLt7IKNCECLrqgYQL2IoYhmPTW9ZsVRzIjjpr5vOsAWiBcC6NE0a-baUUJlCyfF=w2880-h2160-no?.png "[Linked Image from lh3.googleusercontent.com]")
![[Linked Image from lh3.googleusercontent.com]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/9wce0ZYZMrwAFSzjVZ-R7IfoVk3ST81Z2d49XtKmdHniPo_ZZ4zxYqTo0zdu7stFPLyYn75oQiE83T3Q-8rJfAsBk1BYeRzBH6ZPaN-xwoFQYBIudgSsU3G6R_Vmqa-ttsMIOgCpkDNErTTPOYJ-i79-KDtJwIcqJdFOS0a4utvhYBO5FWJsIa6MEnrLCZ4l2CBThxxi8krbc7CVoPfpG_buCbYXG78wBuw7YHQ3w-Iswspp8WiXEv6NceWqBDfzNR_8h0JpeqtvqgMjz1adoz59oEP7wQVVuVh7zxTF3p776YbYGYq4alIkT1NQX8C7pdF7mooAFtibGqNqlbHEoqnGrLMFqlz56A3oSXhS9rIx4f0soQAWjNalnxv0cvN5wUu3zLZCuo0uOHyVlgWZSgKXg2R7FYH-eTwjisYtoh1QAlKHplcencr1bpS9YT5CUnp6UjkZoMK1RI5DedaFivoQqlr4xAU7uwXEb19x-jpvBrkC61o_J6OLSJ5CcbrotnndFp4_Neqg7kGM3H7fPr7ECQxDM16Ab7Z62QVF2s3LnnP8STuaRk4EKQ6fmmjDLmIwgQpNWD-KzzMpHrUUiE3vzZ7qbEpOgAulpwl7_tI5XtjKuJLXdlYYG5LoOb6TkZlDDM7rZ1xL9_-b43oDq9FbvruInH4n=w350-h268-no?.png "[Linked Image from lh3.googleusercontent.com]")
![[Linked Image from encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com]](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcRpD8oMtG97YZRK5BhqisJuV6dL3v_neOp7Djrw9vjbjhj9wxgQ&usqp=CAU?.png "[Linked Image from encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com]")
![[Linked Image from lh3.googleusercontent.com]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/eEkNOa82UvDXt7-cE8xDCBKdiVePLRpRUFvmBmp8SXIYvk64tA1gzz16TU_Q8EIKTY5hqnzgxuS5vBNDZpmU04QFohjOgbXSsE_F6ihaUjcrBk13zB18iJPvcs0gI8HAreCDIaxiqwqBnpmwruLmRtlo7iR2V1RoDqmGDskP07a-Wtg8AhO9dBtNsAAYX18ex4AQNb3qZVz2GxzHzWWyvhqpnwWQ9c587XswrHSO7151QtadPk2o2BGdjFwb10roEWt8L7560waqTiZPfNSxbBX-Ao7CUPbHGntgh7fbcfB3FGxA63n-58rivFmnaWOfrJXPuRezjwZB3vqsaogKGxtlvcjglN2CGFIjq8m-vjuAdmkBf11S89IfbIZTuSzC7KLBd3q-c7LsPq6NjjN4hMjJQhT5dT3h2Xi3_rFyY3jcAFCvsZdoC4lGroqFoYPc6GPxKyPInlLDzH7sjvrw5OkZd6uxH6WJ3lbKCSxwnm05uyCG_e82-Zs-dNwc4e-xybQ19Fsh5Q8v-uy2Ix4-cxm9VgQIC7GXq7j0ESezWcjCKHc_0mLEYI7bFWcm0YL3fPuzv6V-86DY77VF7VwBhT0q3kR-2iiqhDMhchNixbyQZXtV_tz_hsdNQ_v4p2K1uylm_zozr9TSxXw9EGqBK6kvL-kQ8OVr=w800?.png "[Linked Image from lh3.googleusercontent.com]")
![[Linked Image from lh3.googleusercontent.com]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/7wjizUKDabxunPyqbDdEoEjwRTRGzTU6HDUGI-FOwRh0Dj94ltoeXcltxJDRtLFDkBUsd-8AwS22CAbE4sLRhIbALF7aMaujZPinWNGS_367jKGU86iCzBKKOKSyno6TmPT8w3vg7DiDCsM1l1T-CbKhSp6OiLwfvByfGaHQnCIRlaQuEPHPwhiv-dz2Evb70yoHBhDnD1foFbq4xo3CImY6UjbOrey0iPrpDOF6rfFIfowST6QeakuBSrJNbhbFiPxolfIWZEF8ZdCnxqSIbzNiqbbPB0ia_-12Bpm8RHujrn9V0qBNmvCU9eVyfqVzdRZZsnd0oplcfI7Knl8uF07BGD4VN3RHT1gw50_jQZIcswCyiJmpli2A0XLrEmRKsknMd_3WdPQyMDAAvN3idaFOmSrovhLXtei7dqQehCSqjvIMExdFf9ydOi3V6i4ZW4w-qwhi91yS_NAw6nJpIaCNAbdffJSxEUXJk1qPpPkYmbIEw_vROi9o5CnHzCp0dUzUZ9IOuEGCymgMfHixyrHxydqm45oEJLWDNE_wdYdBCBpHyTQQeq7I8azF2xUG5fuM7oxx04kMLzYq-MjCLAs9npi0HuK8a7UWrBHF=w2880-h2160-no?.png "[Linked Image from lh3.googleusercontent.com]")
![[Linked Image from lh3.googleusercontent.com]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/gHxYcRA_ee1bcM5XPwtUn28XRoqf_fHkTvqJvXUWgSnoIG7A45EMa9oxXTweVp3fcL9B1AG6Cha1mY4o5W1VezlOb88-xO8FHGrBrAX1rRSHY2y5Kk7y9uU2eu9ChWOE70uqsv8t6_a6IxVBaGxGsIh99cmfnQDxnfKMdRIrv7uW2nG000r8AxvvffrqZIHimsByOH2HjHH3ta3N78SVbgDLZWmwe79zFFAJlfagxjUSK6LrPtM8z44QhsU4phpeb7X3k8cXEmiN1Gnc9WPBDazPPx28QvBnVII0-tCkEnCjYFKE5h0YjvKF0pCQXE2A6UkoRxPfCVisdQltVSLn6k-WE70BptQyw0aq_kqpEW_orqfl48iMeiyNYkJ3atkm1k3WdLz8uZnfiBF47-iPpmNsltwRqhMXQwATyqRMa86eepqwNKDQ24bb9PdehS3N5GJomrknCR1fSW_HywX4kw-oX0y_DW-a5MO5oYDOm38SvUcdK8UVV5VrJhYKUXSTi3k2jNjU4WrMHqc4agC04nnJXl9RI7SEBCG4VodfVpj4VghgaFi2CZDVk9HXwYVRSlxHGfuhOC3-txXC0uuoSAS35F8dcTve67UuKR5H=w1600-h1200-no?.png "[Linked Image from lh3.googleusercontent.com]")
Originally Posted by Gokhan
What matters for the base-oil quality is the CCS times the Noack, and the CCS for a 5W-20 is a lot higher; therefore, you would need a Noack around 5 - 6% to have a comparable base-oil quality for a 5W-20.
Huh? Please tell me what kind of useful, meaningful engineering units come from the multiplication of these two things, and what it means physically.
It makes zero sense.
This is well known in the industry. As CCS × Noack decreases, the base-oil quality increases from Group IIIa to IIIb, IIIc, IIId, IIIe, GTL, and PAO in a uniform manner:
Originally Posted by sloinker
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%.
Regardless of the PAO amount, these are superior products that will protect your engine exceptionally - -
and that is really where the rubber meets the road. Use any Mobil 1 product with full confidence.
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%.
Regardless of the PAO amount, these are superior products that will protect your engine exceptionally - -
and that is really where the rubber meets the road. Use any Mobil 1 product with full confidence.
Originally Posted by Linctex
Originally Posted by sloinker
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%.
Regardless of the PAO amount, these are superior products that will protect your engine exceptionally - -
and that is really where the rubber meets the road. Use any Mobil 1 product with full confidence.
If you bothered to pay attention, the conversation is linking Noack with base oils. I never said, nor do I think that M1 AP oils are inferior products as compared to their peers. I do believe they are inferior only in raw specification numbers compared to some much pricier boutique brands.
Originally Posted by sloinker
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%.
Regardless of the PAO amount, these are superior products that will protect your engine exceptionally - -
and that is really where the rubber meets the road. Use any Mobil 1 product with full confidence.
If you bothered to pay attention, the conversation is linking Noack with base oils. I never said, nor do I think that M1 AP oils are inferior products as compared to their peers. I do believe they are inferior only in raw specification numbers compared to some much pricier boutique brands.
Originally Posted by sloinker
Originally Posted by Linctex
Originally Posted by sloinker
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%.
Regardless of the PAO amount, these are superior products that will protect your engine exceptionally - -
and that is really where the rubber meets the road. Use any Mobil 1 product with full confidence.
If you bothered to pay attention, the conversation is linking Noack with base oils. I never said, nor do I think that M1 AP oils are inferior products as compared to their peers. I do believe they are inferior only in raw specification numbers compared to some much pricier boutique brands.
He didn't say you did say that. Looked like just a general statement, to me. This has been a pretty interesting discussion so far, so let's not turn it into an argument, please.
Originally Posted by Linctex
Originally Posted by sloinker
I looked at the 0W20 AP and it's msds states 60-70% PAO which is indeed more than I thought it would have
I also looked at the other two M1 annual protection products and their PAO ranges from 5-20%.
Regardless of the PAO amount, these are superior products that will protect your engine exceptionally - -
and that is really where the rubber meets the road. Use any Mobil 1 product with full confidence.
If you bothered to pay attention, the conversation is linking Noack with base oils. I never said, nor do I think that M1 AP oils are inferior products as compared to their peers. I do believe they are inferior only in raw specification numbers compared to some much pricier boutique brands.
He didn't say you did say that. Looked like just a general statement, to me. This has been a pretty interesting discussion so far, so let's not turn it into an argument, please.
Last edited:
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
We covered the PAO when M1 AP first came out and therefore I'd always assumed Noack was under 10.
Sitting on a big stash of this along with a bit of VME and RGT from the clearance sales.
So think about that in the context of this debate … how many folks gave a rats tail about any of this?
Not many or how else did I gather it up for so cheap …
Sitting on a big stash of this along with a bit of VME and RGT from the clearance sales.
So think about that in the context of this debate … how many folks gave a rats tail about any of this?
Not many or how else did I gather it up for so cheap …
I appreciate the knowledge gained in this thread and the wisdom of the many posters (Gokhan in particular).
My dilemma is that my 2014' Focus 2.0 GDI Duratech (but no turbo) turns it's oil dark much quicker than my 2016 Escape with
the 2.5 non GDI Duratech….so....can I still go 10K on Mobil1 EP or AP in the GDI?
A better way of putting this is.....Would I be better off doing more frequent OCI's with 'lesser' (priced) synthetics....for instance, 7K on Supertech or QSUD rather than 10K+
on EP or AP? My main concern is IVD....
My dilemma is that my 2014' Focus 2.0 GDI Duratech (but no turbo) turns it's oil dark much quicker than my 2016 Escape with
the 2.5 non GDI Duratech….so....can I still go 10K on Mobil1 EP or AP in the GDI?
A better way of putting this is.....Would I be better off doing more frequent OCI's with 'lesser' (priced) synthetics....for instance, 7K on Supertech or QSUD rather than 10K+
on EP or AP? My main concern is IVD....
Originally Posted by pbm
I appreciate the knowledge gained in this thread and the wisdom of the many posters (Gokhan in particular).
My dilemma is that my 2014' Focus 2.0 GDI Duratech (but no turbo) turns it's oil dark much quicker than my 2016 Escape with
the 2.5 non GDI Duratech….so....can I still go 10K on Mobil1 EP or AP in the GDI?
A better way of putting this is.....Would I be better off doing more frequent OCI's with 'lesser' (priced) synthetics....for instance, 7K on Supertech or QSUD rather than 10K+
on EP or AP? My main concern is IVD....
Hard to really say. Mobil EP at 5-7k intervals would be conservative.
Yes, Gokhan has provided a lot of valuable information to the site.
I appreciate the knowledge gained in this thread and the wisdom of the many posters (Gokhan in particular).
My dilemma is that my 2014' Focus 2.0 GDI Duratech (but no turbo) turns it's oil dark much quicker than my 2016 Escape with
the 2.5 non GDI Duratech….so....can I still go 10K on Mobil1 EP or AP in the GDI?
A better way of putting this is.....Would I be better off doing more frequent OCI's with 'lesser' (priced) synthetics....for instance, 7K on Supertech or QSUD rather than 10K+
on EP or AP? My main concern is IVD....
Hard to really say. Mobil EP at 5-7k intervals would be conservative.
Yes, Gokhan has provided a lot of valuable information to the site.
Originally Posted by 4WD
We covered the PAO when M1 AP first came out and therefore I'd always assumed Noack was under 10.
Sitting on a big stash of this along with a bit of VME and RGT from the clearance sales.
So think about that in the context of this debate … how many folks gave a rats tail about any of this?
Not many or how else did I gather it up for so cheap …
We covered the PAO when M1 AP first came out and therefore I'd always assumed Noack was under 10.
Sitting on a big stash of this along with a bit of VME and RGT from the clearance sales.
So think about that in the context of this debate … how many folks gave a rats tail about any of this?
Not many or how else did I gather it up for so cheap …
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Noack under 9.0% for a 0W-20? That's PAO talking! Even for Amsoil SS, it's 10.0%.
The trio of Mobil 1 AFE 0W-16, Mobil 1 EP 0W-20, and Mobil AP 0W-20: the best base-oil quality of all off-the-shelves oils out there, if not all oils out there, period!
What are you waiting for? Go to Walmart and get them!
PS: The Noack for their 5W-20 is actually not that good. What matters for the base-oil quality is the CCS times the Noack, and the CCS for a 5W-20 is a lot higher; therefore, you would need a Noack around 5 - 6% to have a comparable base-oil quality for a 5W-20.
What would do you think the Noack on the Mobil 1 0w16 would be?
Noack under 9.0% for a 0W-20? That's PAO talking! Even for Amsoil SS, it's 10.0%.
The trio of Mobil 1 AFE 0W-16, Mobil 1 EP 0W-20, and Mobil AP 0W-20: the best base-oil quality of all off-the-shelves oils out there, if not all oils out there, period!
What are you waiting for? Go to Walmart and get them!
PS: The Noack for their 5W-20 is actually not that good. What matters for the base-oil quality is the CCS times the Noack, and the CCS for a 5W-20 is a lot higher; therefore, you would need a Noack around 5 - 6% to have a comparable base-oil quality for a 5W-20.
What would do you think the Noack on the Mobil 1 0w16 would be?
- Status
Similar threads
