You claimed the little experiment showed that mobil 1 broke down "really easily"....and is "barely synthetic"

so prove it.

 

Bob is my oil guy too. Works over at Autozone I buy my Pennzoil from him......



sorry couldn't resist love the name of the site

 

Where did I say I was going to get RP? Nowhere. I also don't see how Mobil 0w30 being certified has ANYTHING to do with any other oil being certified. Lets continue:

-Oil doesn't wear down parts, it prevents it. (I'm sure that was just a misprint on your part)
-You will see oil failures during warranty and you will be able to compare to other oils (you don't think GM tests just one oil, do you?)
-GM has 5yr/100k engine warranty, you can get plenty of engine wear from a shitty oil in 100k miles. A lack of lubrication can kill components in less than an hour, I've seen it many times.

 

Not sure about barely synthetic considering its group, but its barely a 5w30 compared to Redline, Royal Purple, and GC.

 

uh....these are your OWN words....

while your digging for a clue....have yourself a read.
Conclusion by FRR

"Although we've provided criteria to pick and choose an oil, the stand-out to us appears to be AMSOIL, rating well in the viscosity and producing good horsepower.

"With the variety of grades, use this test as a guide but always follow the manufacturers recommendation. But if we were to stick our neck out in the anticipation of the law suits, from the information we gathered specific to the supplied oils in this test, we'd rate the oils in the following order:

#1 AMSOIL
#2 BP Visco 5000
#3 Mobil 1
#4 Mobil 1
#5 Hi-Tec HTO
#6 Shell Helix Ultra
#7 Royal Purple
#8 Castrol R
#9 Castrol SLX
#10 Torco"



http://www.worldsbestoil.ca/dyno-test.php

 

And do you know what that means/why it is important?

You do realize that there is more to an oil than just viscosity? right?

Pumping viscocity
foaming
phosphorus
sulfur
water
deposits
gelation
volatility
rust rating
material tests for different gasket/sealing materials
piston deposits
valvetrain wear
oil consumption
sludge
varnish
bearing weight loss

Those are some of the factors taken into consideration when determining an oil to use from GMs perspective. So, have your shade-tree engineers tested all of the above?

 

Must've been using the numpad for my work and couldn't use it right for 5w30, oops.

Secondly, didn't mean to start a flamewar, but if one blindly follows Mobil 1 due to what GM says, then blindly following GC due to what the enthusiasts say is no different.

 

I believe his arguement is because it is classified as group 3 and not a 4 or 4/5 like the others.

 

and yet mobil one beat quite a few group 4 oils in testing.

not bad for a "barely synthetic oil" that "breaks down easily"

 

Actually it is vastly different. Why?

Because GM does a hell of a lot more testing to come to the conclusion that Mobil 1 works.

Its not akin to one guy saying that red wine tastes better and another guy saying white wine tastes better. Mobil 1 has been proven to work long term w/o issue, GC hasn't. That doesn't mean it won't work, just that it hasn't been proven.

You can go with your oil that hasn't been validated, I will stick with what has passed validation.

I've read that and thought that people are assuming because a number is higher, that it is better. Kinda odd when people say something isn't synthetic because it came from something natural because really, humans arn't creating synthetic materials from nothing, they are creating them from something natural at some level. Kinda like all food is organic, yet people pay more for organic food.

 

Sadly I don't make much sense of the figures then their study, and it looked like it was inconclusive. http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/s.../oil-life.html

I'd really have to dig deep for these since no search is finding them easily. BUT I noticed they keep losing oil in their 5w30 mobil 1 tests.

Ah, found them. Called UOA's. http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums...Board=3&page=1 Suppose I'll google again later. I need lunch.

 

You are an idiot. Plain and simple.

You want to trust a bunch of enthusiasts then be my guest. I'd rather follow the knowledge, experience, and professionalism of paid GM engineers, you know, experts in their field. The same guys that designed and produced your engine...

I am just really sick of you posting your complete bullshit on here...

 

Yeah... I'll just use my Amsoil....

For one... the car seems to run better (maybe it's just me).
... plus I can do an oil change with Amsoil, cheaper than I can do a Mobil1 change.... love the dealer pricing!!!

 

I personally think your not going to go wrong with amsoil, RP, or M1.
but i cant stand people who nuthug a certain oil, and try and make up stories that the other oils are worse than putting water in your engine.

its ****** retarded

 

Yes, because their test procedures are not well defined enough. When GM (or any other make) tests oil it does so under extremely controlled conditions, trying to keep as much constant so their test results actually matter. These guys, while their tests are interesting and entertaining, cannot get the same degree of accuracy as a large company w/ lots of funding that has been in the business of design/building cars for almost 100 years.

 

Bearing in mind who is doing the name calling here...heh. Keep in mind those professionals are the ones who decided to get rid of the Cobalt name for Cruze...and make it based on a Daewoo instead of an Opel, which is questionable to everyone. I think the people who love the cars are more important than those who make the cars, sure.

And again just look up UOA's for the oils in question. If I'm doing all the research while you're doing all the name calling, it really does make a bad impression for CSS.net members.

 

You don't realize this, but you have been arguing with engineers in this thread. I'm not going to reveal who though...

And again, you are an idiot.

 

Interesting comparison between oils as well...I'm sure some of you have seen this site before.

Clicky.

 

Cars, yes. Motors, yes(although the Ecotec is actually Lotus/Opel/GM). Oils....I have never seen a GM branded oil. And you can't just test things in a controlled environment and assume it'll be the same in the real world. For example, this is why there were fuel cell test cars in three cities-to test feasibility.

If you just run a motor in a lab, and its acting like its running hot in a desert with the AC maxed out...it doesn't mean you are actually in a desert. And for the one said running water through the motor...um, sorry, 0w30 is actually oil.

Quickly found this thread about the Mobil 1 shearing quickly. But since I upset everyone by going against the flow and sharing something that no one knows about, I don't think there will be anyone clicking it: http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...php?p=22798360

From Bluesubie:
<<Check Blackstone for a report explanation.

M1 0W30 (<click for pdf ) is one I definitely would not use in a hard driven turbo. With it's low High Temp High Shear and low additive pack, it is designed more for fuel economy.

It's possible that you did get contamination. Si is high but not that bad, and copper is elevated. The oil cooler is copper. If you check bitog, it's becoming a more common occurance of M1 to show high Fe. Yes, low zinc and phosphorous for energy conserving and a cleaner cat.

Flash is low and if bulwnkl looks at this, he'll probably say there's much more fuel than Blackstone states (due to their testing method and the low flashpoint). What air/oil filter and what are your driving conditions? Short trips?

Smart move on the 0W40. It's Mobil's best 30 weight. As I mentioned in a previous post above, the starting viscosity to be a 30 weight is 9.3 cst's. I suppose with Blacktone saying that the "should be" viscosity starts at 8.8 they are expecting it to shear to a 20 grade.

TBN is actually good. Wow, only 3,400 miles? You'll probably be ok on the 0W40, but definitely do a uoa. It's better to see a trend instead of just one report.>>

Patman from LS1tech is also an engineer, and is the one that led up to this debate at LS1tech 6 years ago. And I'm no engineer, but I've never seen so many go from store to store to find it and even buy it at $8/qt. online just because "such and such" said so.

 

very interesting.
amsoils viscosity not so great long term huh.

one guy, tested one oilchange, on an uncontrolled test set...


uhhhh, werent you the guy throwing around the word "science" earlier?
wow.

 

AMSOIL! WHen I hit 1000 miles, im switching every fluid to amsoil and doing the brake and clutch fluid with castrol SRF.

 

I wouldn't touch the trans fluid without extensive research.

 

Well you need uncontrolled for an uncontrolled world. Its a bit like saying the GT-R will be the Z06 in every single way when you're just looking at magazines. Sorry to bring that up but thats exactly what this is like now. Nothing would make me more happy than to organize all this information into a wonderful little book for you to read. But since I can't, there is Google.

I'm sure there are some openminded engineers out there with proof s/he'd mail to you in a unmolested format that'd be completely undeniable. But if thats what it takes then I'm not doing it.

 

dude, there are many many controlled tests of oils, proving that your WRONG....
and you give me an example of 1 guy, on a ****** car forum, who tested his oil....

and then you try and tell me that thats a more "real" result.

your logic is baffling.

 

Why not? It's not like the F35 requires anything in particular. I don't think putting some better gear oil in it is gonna hurt