breale01

Back to Mobil 1 15W50 (SM), from what I can tell (ref Mobil 1 Product Guide), it is neither ILSAC GF-4 approved (good thing), nor ACEA approved (not so good thing). I believe this means Exxon-Mobil simply hasn't submitted their oil for testing (yet?). I don't think API or ACEA go out and test any oil at their whim...they wait for a submission and $$$ first.

Edward

Gotcha. Thanks for that Pete!

...so I wonder (again, aloud ), does the aforementioned indep oil analysis of M1 15w/50, especially with regard to zinc content (which as I understand it is one of the chief components in oil contributing to longevity in our engines), thus suggest that the current formula of M1 has "the stuff" to protect our engines as it once did before? Perhaps someone could volunteer to do their own "study" and send a random sample of virgin M1 15/50 to blackstone or the like, and get the goods on what's in this stuff. Would that put the question, at least WRT M1 to rest??

Edward

Peter Zimmermann

Well, as my wife likes to say, "It depends." Mobil 1 even skirts the actual Zinc issue in the question/answer segment on their web site. They keep referring back to Phosphorus, they do mention ZDDP, but they do not mention Zinc. They also don't give a Sulphated Ash (SA) level, which might be a hint, nor do they give a Total Base Number (TBN). Therefore, I guess that it depends... Brad Penn and Kendall are not shy about putting their Zinc levels in print, I wonder what's up with Mobil 1?

Edward

Hmmm ...that Mobil doesn't make their claims clear "clearly" suggests something to me, as well. As always, thanks for your feedback, Pete!!

Edward

Antony.

Sorry to keep this going but I can get get this oil a little over a mile away from my house, I'm planning to change the oil and do the valves in the next few weeks and I seem to be able find little tidbits of info online that leads me to believe that the new 15W-50 does meet or exceed the 1200ppm threshold.

I found another oil analysis for Mobil1 15W-50, this one lists zinc at 1313ppm.

Sulfated ash is 1.21 from the Mobil1 site.

And it meets API rating SJ which from LNE's site seems to bode well.

Am I missing something (there's something in addition to zinc content we're not discussing in this particular thread ) or is everyone happy just going with Brad Penn and Kendall (which aren't available locally for me)?

I assume everyone was happy with Mobil1 before the formulation changed.

scottb

That isn't an analysis of virgin Mobil 1. Who knows what else was in that car's system....including residual "stuff" from the previous oil.

I'd like to see an independent analysis of virgin Mobil 1 15w-50.

RacingFlyer

Hello to all,

This is my first post, and I am not sure I'm using the right subject to do so (please don't shoot me! )... but as a new owner of a 1995 993 C4 Coupe, I have been reading all those threads about oil. I have just received some Brad Penn 20W-50 that I intend to use as soon as I have some time to perform an oil change. However, I can't find Brad Penn locally (Little Rock) so I have to have it shipped in from Nashville, TN. Therefore, I'm looking into Mobil 1 as a "locally available" alternative. I happened to be at my local Wally World yesterday and I looked at all the choices of Mobil 1 they have. I noticed that there is a Mobil 1 for "High Mileage Engines" 10W-40. It is SL rated, no sign of an SM rating or a GF-4 rating on the bottle (which I understand is good) and it is ACEA approved (even better).

Would that one be a good candidate for our engines?

84_Carrera

Uh, I would not go with Kendall, the GT1 is the stuff I was using, found out it's SM also.

I moved to Brad Penn, which as I understand it IS the OLD Kendall stuff, pre-Conoco buyout.

I'm not a big M1 fan anyway, after seeing the cam lobes completely dry of oil after an M1 engine sat for just 2 weeks a few years ago.

bgiere

There are VOA's of the M1 15w50 "silver cap" cap available on bobisthoilguy.com

It has an honest additive package and I'd use it with complete confidence.

Peter Zimmermann

Actually, regarding "SM", that's, if anything, OK. It's the ILSAC GF-4 approval that you don't want. The reason that I chose Kendall GT-1 20W/50 over Brad Penn is that (1) 20W/50 B-P is a semi-synthetic (the "true" original GT-1 never was), and (2) I feel that the ZDDP in Kendall (1080 ppm Phosphorus/1190 ppm Zinc) is acceptable to protect our wonderful engines.

bgiere

VOA
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums...20#Post1041220

There are many confusing issues with ZDDP lately...many people are caught up in the "turmoil" and alot of what we are seeing is just rumor and conjecture sprinkled with opinions...

Antony.

Thanks I just found that one as well. So three reports of high zinc makes a trend.

Edward

Whoooa, there, Pete. This is new to me (sorry). But I had "thought" (yeah, dangerous for me) that from the myriad of past oil threads the "passing" on Kendall was because of the "deletion" of the zinc (ZDDP). So are you saying that the new/readily available formula of the GT1 still has enough of the good stuff that you, personally, are ok with using it?

Keep in mind that I am thinking of BOTH my stock 993 (115K miles; and <1.5qt consumption/6K miles) as well as my Trackmeister SC, which is a rebuilt-to-stock spec 3.0, with the simple addition of a mild cam that works with the stock CIS. I'd love to pare down to just one oil, like the GT1 if you think it's still got "enough" of the ZDDP et.al. goodies that our engines need. Thanks!!

Edward

Peter Zimmermann

Edward: OK, here's the deal. In '94 Porsche switched to synthetic oil for the last of the 964s, and used the same 15W/50 syn. all through the 993 run. Because Mobil 1 doesn't seem to acknowledge Zinc on their product info sheets, or in their web site Q&A, and only want to talk about Phosphorus, I really don't know what to make of that. This thread has produced evidence that M1 15W/50 has a very satisfactory amount of Zinc, which would, on the surface, give reason to endorse it. Another plus in its favor is how heavily used it is at long distance races such as the Daytona 24-Hour (a good friend has spent considerable time in the pits at that contest and has witnessed its use). Your 993 should have synthetic oil, and if it were mine I would use 15W/50, but do additional research to address issues such as TBN, SA, etc. before choosing a brand. In Mobil 1's case I would want to hear from someone in their organization exactly why they prefer to talk about Phosphorus, not Zinc, and whether they can confirm the findings of individual tests regarding Zinc amounts.

Now, about your SC. As you know, I posted specific info regarding the Kendall/B-P debate regarding my high mileage SC, why I chose the Kendall, and why I'm very comfortable with that choice. I don't see any reason to switch to B-P 20W/50 (a semi-syn), and if I rebuilt my engine I would probably continue to use GT1 20W/50 after the rebuild.

I think that you should continue to use different oils in your two cars; a full synthetic 15W/50 in the 993, and good old 20W/50 Dino in the SC (in my case I do like the Kendall). I certainly hope this helps!

Edward

Pete,

As usual, you are a wealth of info ...thanks, brother!!!

I suppose there can always be something "better" out there, but maybe part of that is "the grass is greener on the other side" mentality; or maybe the engineer's version of this is that there is always some kind of trade off that one *doesn't* see on the face of things, eh? So thanks for clearing that up for me as I always value your opinion. I still have a pair of wally mart 5-qt jugs of M1 15/50 in my garage; I guess there's no reason not to use it, and until further evidence to the contrary not to discontinue using it.

And thanks also for the clarification on the Kendall for my Trackmeister. I "thought" I had recalled a unanimous abandonment ...guess I thought wrong (ha, umpteenth time today for me ). I will continue using the GT1 then, as it is relatively easy to get.

BTW, great avatar!! Take care!


Edward