OEM standards often include OEM specific standards that don't neccessarily equate to out-right engine performance.they often include specific specs like color, foaming performance, oil seal compatibility etc.
Some the additives in high performance lube oils may not meet these specs, so they can't carry that specific standard on the can.
Oil formulation is often about comprimise, For example high level of detergent and dispersant can have an impact on the oil seals. Just chucking lots additives in to the lube oil formulation is not the answer.

 

Once again GM4718M is a punk std and a poor selling point IMO . There is simply more to it than that spec .

The new Mobil Extended Performance would exceed the std had Mobil chose to place it on the bottle .

To you guys who don't think any of Mobil's synthetics were long drain capable I'd like to point out their oil thru the 70's was capble of 30k miles but limited by engine deisigns of the era , mostly due to carbs setting on top manifolds with poor cold start systems " chokes " .

I can list quite a few 10-15k analysis's of Mobils Tri-Synthetic made in the late 80's thru the 90's with can filters and 30k and over mile intervals using bypass filters and one 18k SuperSyn interval from a LS1 .....Amsoil did not make it that far in the same engine and the Amsoil pricing was 2 dollars more per quart . Also that engine was still breaking in early on in the Mobil test while the Amsoil had the luxury of running in that engine's sweetspot of life/mileage .

Price vs performance no-one beats Mobil in my view based on analysis's I've reviewed so no wonder GM , MB , Porsche , Viper and more chooses Mobil synthetic as their factory fill .

This is just the first time Mobil has marketed their oils as long drain capable and the new products have shaken the industry up a bit . This oil is simply outstanding and is still the only true synthetic that is offered over the counter . Speaking of :

They have a new Clean 7500 Synthetic Blend with a 7500 mile performance guarantee that is selling for $2.18 per quart . It's PAO/groupIII which qualifies to be as much of a synthetic as other non real pao/ester oils with " synthetic " on the label such as the group III Amsoil , the new Pennzoil which uses a GTL process , Valvoline , Castrol and more at 1/2 the price .

Back to Mobil's synthetics . They are using newer multiple cutting edge additives in all their oils that work synergysticly together with some of the finest true synthetic base oils on earth while Walmart can still sell 5 quart jugs for 23 bucks .. saying Mobil is an efficient company selling in a competitive market . A top tier product at lower price than lesser oils that have not changed their basic formulation approach in over a decade .

Go Mobil !

 

My uncle had a 70 Ford LTD with a 429 I think he changed the oil every 3,000 and the car went 400,000 miles without major wipe out. Valve job and a timing chain as I remember. Buick with 300,000+ and a Honda with 250,000 + then it was totaled. Hard to beat.

 

Ask Lycoming about how Mobil goes......

 

Aren't aviation piston engines desgned with quite loose tolerances? If so that wouldn't be a good Mobil 1 application. I don't think it would be good for any application that sacrafices oil like 2 cycle piston or Wankel engines. I know my RX7 specifically stated that you should not use synthetic as oil was sacraficed for the seals.

Mobil 1 states that it isn't reccomemnded:


"Mobil 1 is not recommended for 2-cycle or aviation engines, unless specifically approved by the manufacturer."

Just as an aside I see that The GM "Corvette" spec is now on 0w-30 5w-30 and 10w-30 Mobil 1. I was under the impression that it used to be only on 5w-30.

 

Back in the old days, Mobil-1 was sponsoring the airshow act that I taught aerobatics for. Every year we took two airplanes back to Williamsport to get the Mobil-1 treated engines rebuilt -- some of them with 200 hours (that's 55 mph x 200 = 11,00 miles) on them -- all at less than 2,500 rpms, all the time.

Couple of links to read:

http://www.prime-mover.org/Aviation/...ins/sl229.html

and

http://www.avweb.com/news/profiles/182855-1.html

"What was your first clue that something was wrong with Mobil 1?

We were seeing Mobil 1 engines that would have real good wear metal profiles, and then all of a sudden things would start up -- no particular break in the profile, just everything would start up -- and we believe that's when those engines started to develop sludge. But that was a short-lived situation. Mobil bit the bullet on that right quick. "

 

We are not flying air cooled engines

 

It's just a 30wt volatility spec " Noack " that even some synthetic blends can meet . No biggie because any group III formulated synthetic can meet it and Sequence IIIE .

In the Corvette owners manual if that spec oil is not available in other countries plain Xw-30wt dino is allowed .

And yep , the Corvette does not use Lycomings in them and it ain't still 1994 either

EHS ,
Aviation oils are formulated in stark contrast to passenger car engine oils . Difference is nite and day in the add packs .

What happened when Chevron's LL 100 had a dose of Jet A accidently dumped in a load since this is now a airplane thread ?

Mobil delivers . But so does Synergyn 3w-30 and 5w-30 . The latter brand does a better job though

 

Mountain,
Not sure if that is really true. In response to a query to Mobil about their new Mobil 1 Extended Performance 5w30 meeting GM Standard 4718M, Mobil responded, and I quote:

"Mobil 1 EP does not meet GM4718M."

So if this spec is "no biggie because any group III formulated synethic can meet it", then why doesn't Mobil Extended Performance meet it? And if it does, then why do they say it doesn't?

As I've said before, I honestly don't know what GM Standard 4718M is, but I do know my owners manual says to use an oil that meets it. So as a supporting vendor, I'm going to do my best to keep my recommendations in line with that GM Standard.

If you ever find out why the new and supposedly better Mobil 1 EP doesn't meet the standard for the Corvette, I'd be interested in knowing. Thanks.

 

Subdriver it's as simple as this .

4718 dates back to API SG . Then API SJ and SL and now the current API SM .

All that 4718 has to do is meet those API specs "and " the current sequence protocol testing , like Sequence IIIE , IIIG .

The max Noack allowed for API SL dino was 15 . 4718 had to be 13 or lower AND meet whatever the current API phosforus cap limit .

The phos cap for the 2005 API SM is lower than API SL which ran from 2001 thru April 2005 . Phos cap means max allowable phos used in formulation .

The new Mobil Extended Performance has phos amounts more inline with what API SL had . Noack is the same or even better than SL Supersyn was so since Mobil plays by the book they do not list the new oil as meeting 4718 since the phos additive " anti-wear" is higher than allowed for API SM .

I would not scrutinize the Mobil oil and what they say their oil does or does not meet as much as I would the Amsoil you sell because Amsoil does not submit their pao oils for API lisensing , period.

To conclude , if any of those 30wt Amsoils has more than .08 percent phos they cannot meet current API SM-4718M in my view .

 

Correct me if I'm wrong please, I think you referred to a Porsche as over priced and you would only buy one If you didn't compare numbers. Well, I'm a fortunate guy as I own both. I'm a memeber of one of the largest vette clubs and track, drive my coupe HARD, and participate in lots vette functions. Wife has Vert and it's cream puff stock, but real driver is a 911 Porsche. When I gotta go somewhere far like across country I'll only consider my Porsche. Thousand reasons, like much quiter, better ride, faster, smooother, easier to drive FAST. I organize the Fastest event I know of each and every year, well this past yr.My coupes ECU gave some probs night before run. Choose the Porsche, mostly same run as yr before but I reached 160 mph safely on same road as I did max of 153 mph (GPS) with my hot rod C-5 coupe which didn't "feel" as safe. I certainly don't want to argue vettes excellence, just wanted to enlighten someone about the wonders of the Porsche. C

 

Mountainmotor,
Thanks for the info. I appreciate it.

One minor comment though. The new Mobil Extended Performance is not API licensed either... likely for the same reason the AMSOIL PAO synthetics are not API licensed.

 

So what is your point , other than to show your lack of sensory perception?

 

But you're driving Mobil 1.

 

I'm not an expert on oil, but like this thread, I've read a variety of posts on oil over the years. First, I believe that modified, higher output engines are going to produce more blow-by, so GM's oil change algorithms, based on driving conditions, isn't going take this increased rate of contaminant into account. Also, while synthetic oil's viscosity usually isn't going to breakdown within 15K+ miles, the risk to the engine will come from the increasing levels of acid, again from the blow-by. This too could be voodoo, but it makes sense to me.

-Sean