Amsoil or Mobil?
Jul 18, 2007, 11:24 AM
#20
Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The question over whether or not Mobil 1 and other engine oils are truly synthetic revolves around what base stocks are used in their manufacture. The base stocks are essentially what the engine oil is manufactured and synthesized out of. The API (American Petroleum Institue) groups the base stocks according to different categories. Generally speaking, the higher the group number, the better, with group IV and V being the latest base stocks not produced from mineral oil. Basically, group IV base oils are chemically engineered synthetic base stock, while group III is made directly from mineral oil. Most regular engine oil is made from Group II base stocks, with some higher quality oil made from Group III, or a mix between the two.
Now here is the part that causes confusion - calling oil "Synthetic" has essentially become a marketing term and some manufacturing groups in North America have decided that the term "Synthetic" includes oils made from Group III stock as well as Group IV. (Even though the group III stock is not actually synthetic Polyalphaolefins) Now, there are purists and and others out there that do not believe that any engine oil made from Group III base stock can or should be called synthetic, and thats the main point of this issue. Mobil 1 is made from Group III base stocks. The thing is, the scientists and engineers will argue that the oil made from the highest quality Group III stock is equal to the performance of oil made from Group IV stock. Whether or not it is - I don't know - I am not an automotive lubrication engineer. However, I think that most people would agree that Mobil 1 is good stuff.
Hope that sheds some light on the subject.
Cheers.
Now here is the part that causes confusion - calling oil "Synthetic" has essentially become a marketing term and some manufacturing groups in North America have decided that the term "Synthetic" includes oils made from Group III stock as well as Group IV. (Even though the group III stock is not actually synthetic Polyalphaolefins) Now, there are purists and and others out there that do not believe that any engine oil made from Group III base stock can or should be called synthetic, and thats the main point of this issue. Mobil 1 is made from Group III base stocks. The thing is, the scientists and engineers will argue that the oil made from the highest quality Group III stock is equal to the performance of oil made from Group IV stock. Whether or not it is - I don't know - I am not an automotive lubrication engineer. However, I think that most people would agree that Mobil 1 is good stuff.
Hope that sheds some light on the subject.
Cheers.
Jul 18, 2007, 11:30 AM
#21
Evolving Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Winston Salem
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im have owned two Evos and in my first one I always ran Mobile 1 and I have been doing the same in my second. However, I just got some Amsoil last week and when Im up for my next oil change I will be using it. I got a good deal on it and its 10w-40 is that ok? or does it have to be 10w-30?
Jul 18, 2007, 11:43 AM
#22
Evolving Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Crude based oil stock used as a BASE is NOT a fully true synthetic lubricant.
AMSOIL is a Di-ester based true synthetic class 5 or group 5 base.
So as you can see the facts are straight, you may just be ignorant.
Jul 18, 2007, 11:48 AM
#23
Evolving Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The question over whether or not Mobil 1 and other engine oils are truly synthetic revolves around what base stocks are used in their manufacture. The base stocks are essentially what the engine oil is manufactured and synthesized out of. The API (American Petroleum Institue) groups the base stocks according to different categories. Generally speaking, the higher the group number, the better, with group IV and V being the latest base stocks not produced from mineral oil. Basically, group IV base oils are chemically engineered synthetic base stock, while group III is made directly from mineral oil. Most regular engine oil is made from Group II base stocks, with some higher quality oil made from Group III, or a mix between the two.
Now here is the part that causes confusion - calling oil "Synthetic" has essentially become a marketing term and some manufacturing groups in North America have decided that the term "Synthetic" includes oils made from Group III stock as well as Group IV. (Even though the group III stock is not actually synthetic Polyalphaolefins) Now, there are purists and and others out there that do not believe that any engine oil made from Group III base stock can or should be called synthetic, and thats the main point of this issue. Mobil 1 is made from Group III base stocks. The thing is, the scientists and engineers will argue that the oil made from the highest quality Group III stock is equal to the performance of oil made from Group IV stock. Whether or not it is - I don't know - I am not an automotive lubrication engineer. However, I think that most people would agree that Mobil 1 is good stuff.
Hope that sheds some light on the subject.
Cheers.
Now here is the part that causes confusion - calling oil "Synthetic" has essentially become a marketing term and some manufacturing groups in North America have decided that the term "Synthetic" includes oils made from Group III stock as well as Group IV. (Even though the group III stock is not actually synthetic Polyalphaolefins) Now, there are purists and and others out there that do not believe that any engine oil made from Group III base stock can or should be called synthetic, and thats the main point of this issue. Mobil 1 is made from Group III base stocks. The thing is, the scientists and engineers will argue that the oil made from the highest quality Group III stock is equal to the performance of oil made from Group IV stock. Whether or not it is - I don't know - I am not an automotive lubrication engineer. However, I think that most people would agree that Mobil 1 is good stuff.
Hope that sheds some light on the subject.
Cheers.
Hydrocracked and PAO are class 3 and 4 respectfully.
Synthetic Esters are considered group 5.
Jul 18, 2007, 12:00 PM
#25
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: ¯\(º_o)/¯
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Group V is just made with Diesters which supposedley better.
Jul 18, 2007, 12:09 PM
#26
Evolving Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mobil 1 has always been made with group 3 base stock. Im not sure where you are getting this UNconclusive info.. but its is incorrect.
On top of that you shouldn't tell someone they are talking out of their *** when you don't even have your thoeretical information correct.
AGAIN a crude based derivative is not FULLY synthetic. Its very simple to understand.
On top of that you shouldn't tell someone they are talking out of their *** when you don't even have your thoeretical information correct.
AGAIN a crude based derivative is not FULLY synthetic. Its very simple to understand.
Jul 18, 2007, 12:27 PM
#27
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: ¯\(º_o)/¯
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Firstly, the word is INCONCLUSIVE.
Here is some information I found about Mobil VS Castol
Now none of this information posted by you or me or anyone cant be deemed credible because none of us know truely what the oils are made of. So take the info you read on the LS1 forums or wherever, and when somoene finds information from truly credible source then we ll know.
Here is some information I found about Mobil VS Castol
Mobil 1 uses a 100% completely synthetic PAO (Poly Alpha Olephin) Group-V base stock. Mobil invented this technology back in the fifties, and they have always used the 'true' synthetic formula.
Castrol 'Syntec', as originally sold in America back in the late eighties/early nineties, was NOT a true synthetic, even though it was advertised as such.
The Castrol product used a group-III/IV base stock which is derived from natural petroleum/crude oil sources.
The lawsuit brought by Mobil against Castrol resulted in the decision that Castrol was indeed allowed to call thier product 'full synthetic' based on the fact that Castrol claimed it's base stocks recieved further refining processes, at the molecular level, than did 'normal' conventional base stocks.
This very, very refined base stock very closely approched the performance of a full PAO synthetic, so the courts decided that "If it does the same thing, whats the difference"?, and allowed Castrol to call it synthetic.
The European government does not allow Castrol to sell this product as synthetic there...it carries a different name.
In ExxonMobil in-house tests, the Castrol product is very close to the Mobil 1 product in all areas except:
1)Phosphorous and Sulfer content, which are the main contributors to sludge formation. It comes from the crude oil, and is extremely difficult to remove completely. Mobil 1 has ZERO of these components, making it almost 100% resistant to sludge formation.
2)Mineral-oil is very susceptibale to high-temperature oxidation, creating...sludge and varnish. It also reatins heat and reduces lubricity. Mobil's PAO technology is almost 100% resistant to high-temperature oxidation. Once again, no sludge formation...with better gas mileage to boot!
3) Mobil 1 uses less additives overall (by percentage), meaning more actual oil 'in the mix', creating a cooler running engine, and producing better gas mileage.
Castrol does not, and never has operated a refinery, a blending or a packaging facility.They are simply a bottler of product.
They buy their base stocks from an outside vendor or vendors, two of which are or have been 'Louisiana Specialty Lubricants" and 'Coastal/Unilube'. There are, of course others.
They order their custom-blended additive package from a seperate additive manufacturer. In the past they used Texaco, but the Texaco Additive and research facility in the Catskills has since been closed. In fact, today, 'Texaco' is nothing more than a brand name. I don't know where Castrol gets their additives today, but I suspect it is from Chevron or one of its many subsidiaries.
This is then all put together in bottles with a label by a packager, and drop-shipped to their warehouse facility.
Amsoil has quite an interesting story behind it: In the fifties, military-man Al Amatuzio was quite impressed with the performance of the synthetic grease used in landing gear of carrier-bound aircraft.
Mobil corp was commissioned by the US to come up with a grease that would not freeze at the extreme temperatures encountered by aircraft landing gear, and Mobil came up with synthetic grease. Made it only for the military, as they felt no consumer would be willing to pay the exorbitant price for synthetic lubricants for their cars and trucks.
After leaving the military, Amatuzio contracted Mobil to manufacture synthetic motor oil base stocks for his new company, 'Amzoil'(original spelling).
Having his own additive package installed, he marketed this as the 'World's first synthetic motor oil' in 1971(maybe 1972).
The following year, Mobil introduced thier Mobil 1 product, made with their own additive package.
The difference is that Mobil had (and still has) the ability to make thier additive packages in any fashion they please.
Amatuzio was limited to buying his 'off the shelf' additives from one of the industrial additive marketers. Not a bad thing, just not 'exclusive'.
Amatuzio, quite the entrepreneur, still runs the company. He is also the same guy who started AAMCO transmissions, MAACO paint and body, and several other lesser-known companies. Quite a brilliant business man, actually.
Flash-forward to today: Amsoil (current spelling) no longer buys their base stocks from Mobil, but that doesn't mean they get them from the same place as Castrol.
Interestingly, Amsoil, who used to buy their base stocks exclusively from Mobil, now buys their base stocks from the lowest bidder, and are consequently now using G-III/IV base stocks in their 'synthetic' oil. Group-III/IV base stocks, are a step below group V PAO base stocks used by Mobil 1. They claim they perform the same. I disagree, and so do most other non-partial lubricant engineers.
Castrol 'Syntec', as originally sold in America back in the late eighties/early nineties, was NOT a true synthetic, even though it was advertised as such.
The Castrol product used a group-III/IV base stock which is derived from natural petroleum/crude oil sources.
The lawsuit brought by Mobil against Castrol resulted in the decision that Castrol was indeed allowed to call thier product 'full synthetic' based on the fact that Castrol claimed it's base stocks recieved further refining processes, at the molecular level, than did 'normal' conventional base stocks.
This very, very refined base stock very closely approched the performance of a full PAO synthetic, so the courts decided that "If it does the same thing, whats the difference"?, and allowed Castrol to call it synthetic.
The European government does not allow Castrol to sell this product as synthetic there...it carries a different name.
In ExxonMobil in-house tests, the Castrol product is very close to the Mobil 1 product in all areas except:
1)Phosphorous and Sulfer content, which are the main contributors to sludge formation. It comes from the crude oil, and is extremely difficult to remove completely. Mobil 1 has ZERO of these components, making it almost 100% resistant to sludge formation.
2)Mineral-oil is very susceptibale to high-temperature oxidation, creating...sludge and varnish. It also reatins heat and reduces lubricity. Mobil's PAO technology is almost 100% resistant to high-temperature oxidation. Once again, no sludge formation...with better gas mileage to boot!
3) Mobil 1 uses less additives overall (by percentage), meaning more actual oil 'in the mix', creating a cooler running engine, and producing better gas mileage.
Castrol does not, and never has operated a refinery, a blending or a packaging facility.They are simply a bottler of product.
They buy their base stocks from an outside vendor or vendors, two of which are or have been 'Louisiana Specialty Lubricants" and 'Coastal/Unilube'. There are, of course others.
They order their custom-blended additive package from a seperate additive manufacturer. In the past they used Texaco, but the Texaco Additive and research facility in the Catskills has since been closed. In fact, today, 'Texaco' is nothing more than a brand name. I don't know where Castrol gets their additives today, but I suspect it is from Chevron or one of its many subsidiaries.
This is then all put together in bottles with a label by a packager, and drop-shipped to their warehouse facility.
Amsoil has quite an interesting story behind it: In the fifties, military-man Al Amatuzio was quite impressed with the performance of the synthetic grease used in landing gear of carrier-bound aircraft.
Mobil corp was commissioned by the US to come up with a grease that would not freeze at the extreme temperatures encountered by aircraft landing gear, and Mobil came up with synthetic grease. Made it only for the military, as they felt no consumer would be willing to pay the exorbitant price for synthetic lubricants for their cars and trucks.
After leaving the military, Amatuzio contracted Mobil to manufacture synthetic motor oil base stocks for his new company, 'Amzoil'(original spelling).
Having his own additive package installed, he marketed this as the 'World's first synthetic motor oil' in 1971(maybe 1972).
The following year, Mobil introduced thier Mobil 1 product, made with their own additive package.
The difference is that Mobil had (and still has) the ability to make thier additive packages in any fashion they please.
Amatuzio was limited to buying his 'off the shelf' additives from one of the industrial additive marketers. Not a bad thing, just not 'exclusive'.
Amatuzio, quite the entrepreneur, still runs the company. He is also the same guy who started AAMCO transmissions, MAACO paint and body, and several other lesser-known companies. Quite a brilliant business man, actually.
Flash-forward to today: Amsoil (current spelling) no longer buys their base stocks from Mobil, but that doesn't mean they get them from the same place as Castrol.
Interestingly, Amsoil, who used to buy their base stocks exclusively from Mobil, now buys their base stocks from the lowest bidder, and are consequently now using G-III/IV base stocks in their 'synthetic' oil. Group-III/IV base stocks, are a step below group V PAO base stocks used by Mobil 1. They claim they perform the same. I disagree, and so do most other non-partial lubricant engineers.
Last edited by Ph3n1x; Jul 18, 2007 at 12:32 PM.
Jul 18, 2007, 12:39 PM
#28
Evolving Member
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: KY
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mobil 1 has always been made with group 3 base stock. Im not sure where you are getting this UNconclusive info.. but its is incorrect.
On top of that you shouldn't tell someone they are talking out of their *** when you don't even have your thoeretical information correct.
AGAIN a crude based derivative is not FULLY synthetic. Its very simple to understand.
On top of that you shouldn't tell someone they are talking out of their *** when you don't even have your thoeretical information correct.
AGAIN a crude based derivative is not FULLY synthetic. Its very simple to understand.
Last edited by Skim003; Jul 18, 2007 at 12:43 PM.
Jul 18, 2007, 01:06 PM
#29
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: ¯\(º_o)/¯
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree totally. Mobil started everything....They have everything to lose and nothing more to gain. Smaller companies like Amsoil are just trying to descredit Mobil to gain market share.