Driven Auto Detail
New member
I'll add that for anybody looking to learn more about oil, visit the BobIsTheOilGuy.com forum. Lots of great info (& debate, sometimes heated) about oil and all things maintenance for your vehicle.
What oil do you use and why?
- Thread starter enog24
- Start date
cajunfirehawk
New member
Yeah, based on what I read at BITOG, I was a long time M1 user but just changed to Pennzoil Platinum 5w30 a lil cheaper too at W/M and Pepboys had 5qts with a filter for $19.99 not too long ago. 
Driven Auto Detail
New member
^^ Same here cajun. I had good luck with M1, but after reading the latest rumors of formulation changes, continued high prices, and seeing un-inspiring UOA's I couldn't justify using it anymore. Especially, considering Platinum was so much cheaper and was showing outstanding UOA's.
RTexasF
Pay Attention Boy...
If you are planning on extended drain intervals Penzoil Platinum is turning in a superb showing and is available everywhere. If not then Motorcraft is the way to go.
I use Mobil 1 API SL 0W20 because I bought a ton of it prior to the formulation change to SM. 7500 mile intervals or annually depending on which occurs first. It is suspected (but not proven) that the current M1 SM oil is no longer a "true" synthetic in the strictist terms.
Why synthetic? I believe it works better for me and use it in all equipment including lawnmower and 2 stroke synth for the weedeater & blower.
BITOG member #409
I use Mobil 1 API SL 0W20 because I bought a ton of it prior to the formulation change to SM. 7500 mile intervals or annually depending on which occurs first. It is suspected (but not proven) that the current M1 SM oil is no longer a "true" synthetic in the strictist terms.
Why synthetic? I believe it works better for me and use it in all equipment including lawnmower and 2 stroke synth for the weedeater & blower.
BITOG member #409
mshu7 said:
Its quotes like this why I decided I'm going to switch to Penzoil Platinum. I'm going to get a UOA done on the M1 I'm running now, then again after Penzoil and see how they compare. I haven't had problems with M1 mind you but it is a little on the thin side, and if I can get less engine wear with another oil then thats the way to go.
Driven Auto Detail
New member
2KLS1 - I'd suggest doing your Platinum UOA after your 2nd run of that oil. That will decrease the chance of "left over" M1 being in the sample. Good luck w/it!
topnotchtouch
New member
I am not one to discourage used oil analysis but there is little value in trying to compare one oil to another based on a single used oil analysis of each for judging wear. Used oil analysis is best used over time and multiple reports to see trends. A single report doesn't really mean anything and most likely you will not see much of a difference between the two oils if you are doing typical 3K to 5K oil change intervals as even the cheapest conventional these days should not have any problems lasting that long.
Personally I don't run regular Mobil 1 (Red Cap) myself since API went to SM as it calls for huge reductions in zinc and phosphorus which are the primary anti-wear additives in just about every oil out there. Evidently zinc and phosphorus can build up and clog catalytic converters in engines that burn oil.
I run Mobil 1 Extended Performance (Gold Cap) which has the old levels of zinc and phosphorus. I also run Mobil 1 Racing oil which also has higher levels of anti-wear additives. Neither wears the API badge but they meet every other test in the API certification.
Personally I don't run regular Mobil 1 (Red Cap) myself since API went to SM as it calls for huge reductions in zinc and phosphorus which are the primary anti-wear additives in just about every oil out there. Evidently zinc and phosphorus can build up and clog catalytic converters in engines that burn oil.
I run Mobil 1 Extended Performance (Gold Cap) which has the old levels of zinc and phosphorus. I also run Mobil 1 Racing oil which also has higher levels of anti-wear additives. Neither wears the API badge but they meet every other test in the API certification.
topnotchtouch
New member
I am not one to discourage used oil analysis but there is little value in trying to compare one oil to another based on a single used oil analysis of each for judging wear. Used oil analysis is best used over time and multiple reports to see trends. A single report doesn't really mean anything and most likely you will not see much of a difference between the two oils if you are doing typical 3K to 5K oil change intervals as even the cheapest conventional these days should not have any problems lasting that long.
Personally I don't run regular Mobil 1 (Red Cap) myself since API went to SM as it calls for huge reductions in zinc and phosphorus which are some of the primary anti-wear additives in just about every oil out there. Evidently zinc and phosphorus can build up and clog catalytic converters in engines that burn oil. Any oil that wears the API SM badge has the lower levels of zinc and phosphorus.
I run Mobil 1 Extended Performance (Gold Cap) which has the old levels of zinc and phosphorus. I also run Mobil 1 Racing oil which also has higher levels of anti-wear additives. Neither wears the API badge but they meet every other test in the API certification.
For you BITOG fans I am sure there are plenty of threads on API SM but if you are not a member just do a Google search for "API SM" and maybe throw in "zinc phosphorus".
Mobil 1 Extended Performance
Personally I don't run regular Mobil 1 (Red Cap) myself since API went to SM as it calls for huge reductions in zinc and phosphorus which are some of the primary anti-wear additives in just about every oil out there. Evidently zinc and phosphorus can build up and clog catalytic converters in engines that burn oil. Any oil that wears the API SM badge has the lower levels of zinc and phosphorus.
I run Mobil 1 Extended Performance (Gold Cap) which has the old levels of zinc and phosphorus. I also run Mobil 1 Racing oil which also has higher levels of anti-wear additives. Neither wears the API badge but they meet every other test in the API certification.
For you BITOG fans I am sure there are plenty of threads on API SM but if you are not a member just do a Google search for "API SM" and maybe throw in "zinc phosphorus".
Mobil 1 Extended Performance
topnotchtouch
New member
I am not one to discourage used oil analysis but there is little value in trying to compare one oil to another based on a single used oil analysis of each for judging wear. Used oil analysis is best used over time and multiple reports to see trends. A single report doesn't really mean anything and most likely you will not see much of a difference between the two oils if you are doing typical 3K to 5K oil change intervals as even the cheapest conventional these days should not have any problems lasting that long.
Personally I don't run regular Mobil 1 (Red Cap) myself since API went to SM as it calls for huge reductions in zinc and phosphorus which are some of the primary anti-wear additives in just about every oil out there. Evidently zinc and phosphorus can build up and clog catalytic converters in engines that burn oil. Any oil that wears the API SM badge has the lower levels of zinc and phosphorus.
I run Mobil 1 Extended Performance (Gold Cap) which has the old levels of zinc and phosphorus. I also run Mobil 1 Racing oil which also has higher levels of anti-wear additives. Neither wears the API badge but they meet every other test in the API certification.
For you BITOG fans I am sure there are plenty of threads on API SM but if you are not a member just do a Google search for "API SM" and maybe throw in "zinc phosphorus".
Mobil 1 Extended Performance
Personally I don't run regular Mobil 1 (Red Cap) myself since API went to SM as it calls for huge reductions in zinc and phosphorus which are some of the primary anti-wear additives in just about every oil out there. Evidently zinc and phosphorus can build up and clog catalytic converters in engines that burn oil. Any oil that wears the API SM badge has the lower levels of zinc and phosphorus.
I run Mobil 1 Extended Performance (Gold Cap) which has the old levels of zinc and phosphorus. I also run Mobil 1 Racing oil which also has higher levels of anti-wear additives. Neither wears the API badge but they meet every other test in the API certification.
For you BITOG fans I am sure there are plenty of threads on API SM but if you are not a member just do a Google search for "API SM" and maybe throw in "zinc phosphorus".
Mobil 1 Extended Performance
netspec
New member
Motorcraft 5W-20 for me also!
currently in the grand cherokee I6 is Q torque power synthetic because it's synthetic(I'm assuming group IV base stock if ferrari endorses them) but also it was $.95 at advanced auto parts they were closing it out so I cleaned out the entire store. after I finally get rid of all that? rotella 5w 40 synthetic, uoa's on bob is the oil guy have shown it to be great for engines with flat tappet lifters.
Setec Astronomy
Well-known member
RTexasF said:
Last time I spent some time at the M1 site mulling over the specs, it appeared that the 0W SM's might still be the "true" synthetic based on, IIRC, the low-temp numbers. Unfortunately, finding the 0W's is difficult and way more expensive than the 5 qt. jugs at W-M.
Setec Astronomy
Well-known member
reaper34 said:
Well...back some years ago Mobil realized that their standard M1 (full synthetic) would meet the 0W spec in most of their grades, and thought that it might give them a marketing edge when Castrol was allowed to label their Syntec as a synthetic, even though it was technically a different chemistry than the M1. I remember talking to M1 tech support on the phone (can you even still do that?) and they told me they were going to phase out all the 5W and 10W oils because the 0W encompassed the spec of those oils, and they were going to market it on the improved cold start up and fuel economy, yada yada.
The public didn't understand and was frightened by the 0W designation and it was a flop, so I guess they decided if they couldn't beat Castrol they would join them. The BITOG guys can explain it...I think M1 used to be a Grp. IV, now it's a Grp. III, like the Syntec, or something like that.
But anyway, the 0W's aren't new, they had 0W-20, 0W-30, 0W-40. When they went SM they dropped the 0W-20 for a while, but it's back, that may be the green cap one you saw.
thats probably it because the display was all about fuel economy and exceeding oem 5w and 10w standards. I knew 0w wasn't new but as far as I knew the german castrol was really the only one with any mainstream success or being marketed, either way I don't know a whole lot about 0w oils or their history, I'm sure you have far more info than me about it. it was just a big new display and thought I'd share. on a sidenote does the group III basestock contain paraffin or another. and do you know what basestock the new Q oils are? btw thanks for the back story, good to know :xyxthumbs
Setec Astronomy
Well-known member
Q oils? Heck, I don't even know what I'm talking about with the Groups...I'll just back out of this by saying that at one time M1 used to be all PAO (polyalphaolefin, a synthetic hydrocarbon) except for the additive carrier oil. The Syntec is a....I dunno, modified hydrocarbon...what do they call it? Severely hydrocracked? But it's made from petroleum, but a modified petroleum molecule, rather than an artificially created (synthetic) molecule. I guess the speculation is that today's M1 is less than fully PAO, the difference made up by a "syntec"-like oil. And at this point I'll stop before putting the oil can any further into my mouth.
you'll have to pull it out of mine before you can put in yours:rofl
just pulled from wikipedia, hope it explains something:
Synthetic Base Stocks
Synthetic motor oils have been made from the following classes of lubricants:
* Polyalphaolefin (PAO) = American Petroleum Institute (API) Group IV base oil
* Synthetic esters, etc = API Group V base oils (non-PAO synthetics, including diesters, polyolesters, alklylated napthlenes, alkyklated benzenes, etc.)
* Hydrocracked/Hydroisomerized = API Group III base oils. Chevron, Shell, and other petrochemical companies developed processes involving catalytic conversion of feed stocks under pressure in the presence of hydrogen into high quality mineral lubricating oil. In 2005 production of GTL (Gas-to-liquid) Group III base stocks began. The best of these perform much like polyalphaolefin. Group III base stocks are considered synthetic motor oil in North America.[2]
just pulled from wikipedia, hope it explains something:
Synthetic Base Stocks
Synthetic motor oils have been made from the following classes of lubricants:
* Polyalphaolefin (PAO) = American Petroleum Institute (API) Group IV base oil
* Synthetic esters, etc = API Group V base oils (non-PAO synthetics, including diesters, polyolesters, alklylated napthlenes, alkyklated benzenes, etc.)
* Hydrocracked/Hydroisomerized = API Group III base oils. Chevron, Shell, and other petrochemical companies developed processes involving catalytic conversion of feed stocks under pressure in the presence of hydrogen into high quality mineral lubricating oil. In 2005 production of GTL (Gas-to-liquid) Group III base stocks began. The best of these perform much like polyalphaolefin. Group III base stocks are considered synthetic motor oil in North America.[2]
topnotchtouch
New member
Setec Astronomy said:
I think you are getting closer to the latest BITOG conspiracy theories here Setec
The speculation is that the carrier oil for the additive package is Group III. There is no basis in fact for the speculation and as happens even here sometimes, repeat something enough times whether it is true or not and people will start to take it as a fact. It all started when Mobil lost the suit with Castrol, people just assumed Mobil would start using Group III and the rumors just took a life of their own from there...Also just as happens here, people get way too wrapped up trying to figure out what is in the product rather than just accepting the results they achieve with it. I have been running Mobil 1 in my vehicles for 20 years with great results backed up by many years of used oil analysis. The Mustang has never seen anything but Mobil 1 and she is still purring like a kitten at 105K...
topnotchtouch
New member
Setec Astronomy said:
I think you are getting closer to the latest BITOG conspiracy theories here Setec
The speculation is that the carrier oil for the additive package is Group III. There is no basis in fact for the speculation and as happens even here sometimes, repeat something enough whether it is true or not and people will start to take it as a fact. It all started when Mobil lost the suit with Castrol, people just assumed Mobil would start using Group III and the rumors just took on a life of their own from there...Also just as can happen here sometimes, people can get way too wrapped up trying to figure out what is in the product rather than just accepting the results they achieve with it. I have been running Mobil 1 in my vehicles for 20 years with great results backed up by many years of used oil analysis. The Mustang has never seen anything but Mobil 1 and she is still purring like a kitten at 105K...
Setec Astronomy
Well-known member
Hey, I've got 20 years of M1 use under my belt, too. I just don't trust any big-company CEO's anymore, and last night I was looking at the M1 website data sheets and they use a different low-temp number (MRV at -40°F vs. pour point) for the 0W oils and the 5W/10W so you can't compare them anymore...hmm. I did a spreadsheet last October, and the 0W-30 had a much lower pour point than the 5W-30 (which would make sense except for what I was told years ago that the 0W was really the 5W run through the 0W test), and the 0W was recommended for extended drain, while the 5W was not. They've updated the 0W data sheet now and I don't see anything about extended drain.
There's a certain logic in believing that the the 0W's have a higher PAO content...from this spreadsheet data, as well as the Wal-Mart pricing...not to mention my MBA-CEO conspiracy theories which would just about mandate changing M1 to a Grp. III without lowering the price and keeping the change as a bonus!
There's a certain logic in believing that the the 0W's have a higher PAO content...from this spreadsheet data, as well as the Wal-Mart pricing...not to mention my MBA-CEO conspiracy theories which would just about mandate changing M1 to a Grp. III without lowering the price and keeping the change as a bonus!