Who uses the new 15W-50 M1?
11-03-2007, 01:04 PM
#31
Burning Brakes
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So based on this the EP would still seem to be a better product?
From the M1 site
What is the difference between Mobil 1® Extended Performance and Mobil 1?
Mobil 1 Extended Performance formulas are designed specifically for today's longer service intervals and are guaranteed to protect for up to 15,000 miles or one year.
Mobil 1 Extended Performance has a unique formulation with a boosted level of protection and performance. Mobil 1 Extended Performance, with the Advanced SuperSyn System, contains 50 percent more SuperSyn than Mobil 1. (Updated March 2006)
From the M1 site
What is the difference between Mobil 1® Extended Performance and Mobil 1?
Mobil 1 Extended Performance formulas are designed specifically for today's longer service intervals and are guaranteed to protect for up to 15,000 miles or one year.
Mobil 1 Extended Performance has a unique formulation with a boosted level of protection and performance. Mobil 1 Extended Performance, with the Advanced SuperSyn System, contains 50 percent more SuperSyn than Mobil 1. (Updated March 2006)
11-03-2007, 02:41 PM
#32
Couple of years back I attended a tech presentation by Mobil on oils. In essence I think I understood that their "supersyn" labeled oils consists of 20% "supersyn" additives, 15% synthetic esters and 65% base stock. The "supersyn" additives has a patented anti-wear molecular structure, in that it reacts with the metal to form a protective fluid film at all times. So should be much more durable than a non-supersyn oil. I have since used their 5W-50 Supersyn Racing Formula and am very pleased with it. Only strange thing about Mobil is that they restrict certain products (example; the 5W-50) in different markets.
11-03-2007, 05:36 PM
#33
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Airlie Beach, Australia
Posts: 870
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
pmotts - I purposely left the content details out of Post No 20 in order to avoid confusion.
John has kindly provided some data for other products - your input is always so valuable
Less than .08% is "today's" base or minimum. This takes on board the broad matrix of new and existing engine families. Some lubricants being developed use around .02% and some have none. The ZDDP group has been enlarged over time and now embraces about 34 items of which around 20 are suitable for use in engine lubricants
Expect to see lubricants without any of the ZDDP group as we know them now and within a short period of time too. Some will work very well in flat tappet and race engines. They are already doing so in race development engines and in road field trials
The two M1 15w-50 products - the subject of this Thread - are at .12% - the high end! This is of course as well as using other very advanced AW additives and an excellent Group 4 basis in "SuperSyn"
M1 5w-40 Turbo Diesel Truck (Delvac 1 5w-40) has .13%, has a >20% complex ester content and is a complex Group4/5 product
Much above .15% ZDDP content and you start to INCREASE wear due to the SA levels and etc!
If you wish to run a SAE50 lubricant use either of the M1 15w-50 products in a 928 without a worry! They will perform much better than a 20w-50 lubricant in a 928 engine
Enzo - it is always a problem when starting a new (rebuilt) engine. This is due to the risk of prolonged boundary lubrication. Common practice was to always coat the cams with a durable ingredient for start up and first run purposes. Many "run in" lubricant products do an excellent job without any fortification
Many new engines have a special Factory "first fill" and many new cars should NOT have their lubricant changed until the prescribed first change period. The special first fill lubricant is formulated to enable a rapid bedding in and protection in this process.
Many owners of new vehicles change their oil early thinking this is best - this can lead to oil consumption issues that at the worst case scenario may require a "teardown/rebuild"
Kolbjorn - a Dane? Mobil are not the best Marketers around thats for sure. M1 5w-50 is supposed to be a World Wide product and sadly its not - farvel
Regards
pmotts - I purposely left the content details out of Post No 20 in order to avoid confusion.
John has kindly provided some data for other products - your input is always so valuable
Less than .08% is "today's" base or minimum. This takes on board the broad matrix of new and existing engine families. Some lubricants being developed use around .02% and some have none. The ZDDP group has been enlarged over time and now embraces about 34 items of which around 20 are suitable for use in engine lubricants
Expect to see lubricants without any of the ZDDP group as we know them now and within a short period of time too. Some will work very well in flat tappet and race engines. They are already doing so in race development engines and in road field trials
The two M1 15w-50 products - the subject of this Thread - are at .12% - the high end! This is of course as well as using other very advanced AW additives and an excellent Group 4 basis in "SuperSyn"
M1 5w-40 Turbo Diesel Truck (Delvac 1 5w-40) has .13%, has a >20% complex ester content and is a complex Group4/5 product
Much above .15% ZDDP content and you start to INCREASE wear due to the SA levels and etc!
If you wish to run a SAE50 lubricant use either of the M1 15w-50 products in a 928 without a worry! They will perform much better than a 20w-50 lubricant in a 928 engine
Enzo - it is always a problem when starting a new (rebuilt) engine. This is due to the risk of prolonged boundary lubrication. Common practice was to always coat the cams with a durable ingredient for start up and first run purposes. Many "run in" lubricant products do an excellent job without any fortification
Many new engines have a special Factory "first fill" and many new cars should NOT have their lubricant changed until the prescribed first change period. The special first fill lubricant is formulated to enable a rapid bedding in and protection in this process.
Many owners of new vehicles change their oil early thinking this is best - this can lead to oil consumption issues that at the worst case scenario may require a "teardown/rebuild"
Kolbjorn - a Dane? Mobil are not the best Marketers around thats for sure. M1 5w-50 is supposed to be a World Wide product and sadly its not - farvel
Regards
Last edited by Doug Hillary; 11-04-2007 at 01:00 AM. Reason: An error with my decimal points! Sorry!!
11-04-2007, 12:50 AM
#35
Under the Lift
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
When you reach 186K miles with many 100s of miles at over 145MPH in 50 mile stretches at a time and many of those miles dead flat out at 165-170 and still have 195 PSI compression all around, call me. M1, baby!
Last edited by Bill Ball; 11-05-2007 at 05:55 AM.
11-04-2007, 06:44 PM
#37
Actually the oil companies are just trying to produce a product to the new SM specification.
The new SM spec. allows a max . of 08% ZDDP. The older SL was around .1%.
Race engines and older flat tappet engines perform well with .12%-.18% ZDDP.
Seems like the oil companies are just boosting ZDDP in their top of the line oils for older cars and haven't done so in their conventional lines.
Valvoline and Castrol have products with a ZDDP boost, but in very limited viscosity. The Valvoline race (states not for street use) and Castol Syntec 20w-50.
The new AW, like Doug stated, works well, but it appears they haven't been formulated enough for some of the very old flat tappet engines.
The new SM spec. allows a max . of 08% ZDDP. The older SL was around .1%.
Race engines and older flat tappet engines perform well with .12%-.18% ZDDP.
Seems like the oil companies are just boosting ZDDP in their top of the line oils for older cars and haven't done so in their conventional lines.
Valvoline and Castrol have products with a ZDDP boost, but in very limited viscosity. The Valvoline race (states not for street use) and Castol Syntec 20w-50.
The new AW, like Doug stated, works well, but it appears they haven't been formulated enough for some of the very old flat tappet engines.
I think you can include 911s in with those ''flat tappet engines'' and also 928 GTs are notorious for wearing cam lobes. These then would be engines requiring extra protection.
11-04-2007, 09:58 PM
#38
Instructor
First, thank you all for very useful information.
Using M1 5W-50 now this summer, but, still seems like the oil gets a little thin when very hot.
I can see this by the oil pressure dropping, still >5 bar >3-4K RPM, but the 'behaviour' of the oil pressure vs rpm changes significantly.
Wish my 928 had oil temp gauge, so that oil temp could be monitored.
May be due to check the oil temostat, as stated above (or somewhere else in here..).
Thing is, from the information collected here, I understand this choice of oil is very good for my use, still, I suspect it gets thin when hot.
This does not happen during 'normal' driving, but typically when climbing one of our excellent mountain passes, with numerous hairpins and climbs with sections above 1000 height meters difference.
This driving is a lot of low speed and high load driving pushing the heavy shark up the mountain, mostly in 2. and 3. gear, and occasionally 1. gear through very tight turns, all the time with a huge grin, of course.
I am concerned about the oil getting to hot and thin, causing problems at high rpm's and high g's in turns.
Next season the car wil most likely see some track time too, where the engine load can be expected to be at least similar, and g-forces a lot more sustained and higher.
So, can it be that either the oil gets too thin due to temperature (wrong oil), or, is it actually the oil temperature that gets too high, caused by insufficient cooling?
Most important - can this eventuelly lead to failures like those who track their cars experience?
Using M1 5W-50 now this summer, but, still seems like the oil gets a little thin when very hot.
I can see this by the oil pressure dropping, still >5 bar >3-4K RPM, but the 'behaviour' of the oil pressure vs rpm changes significantly.
Wish my 928 had oil temp gauge, so that oil temp could be monitored.
May be due to check the oil temostat, as stated above (or somewhere else in here..).
Thing is, from the information collected here, I understand this choice of oil is very good for my use, still, I suspect it gets thin when hot.
This does not happen during 'normal' driving, but typically when climbing one of our excellent mountain passes, with numerous hairpins and climbs with sections above 1000 height meters difference.
This driving is a lot of low speed and high load driving pushing the heavy shark up the mountain, mostly in 2. and 3. gear, and occasionally 1. gear through very tight turns, all the time with a huge grin, of course.
I am concerned about the oil getting to hot and thin, causing problems at high rpm's and high g's in turns.
Next season the car wil most likely see some track time too, where the engine load can be expected to be at least similar, and g-forces a lot more sustained and higher.
So, can it be that either the oil gets too thin due to temperature (wrong oil), or, is it actually the oil temperature that gets too high, caused by insufficient cooling?
Most important - can this eventuelly lead to failures like those who track their cars experience?
11-04-2007, 10:43 PM
#39
Nordschleife Master
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Not close enough to VIR.
Posts: 9,429
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
The HTHS spec for Mobil 1 is often better than thicker oils. Even within Mobil 1 products there are variations. Mobil 1 5W30 has better HTHS specs than 10W30 which traditionally would not be true.
11-05-2007, 12:15 AM
#40
Rennlist Member
I love that 4 ball wear test!
actually seriously, ive always been suspicous with the performance i have seen as far as oil pressure with mobil one in race conditions. (or high temps)
why are GF4 lubricants unsuitable for a 928?
funny, but if loving it is wrong, i dont want to be right!
I have too long of a streak running. 93 race days, its like 93 racing hours. all 4500rpm to 6500rpm continously, with high g forces. sorry Bill, even with your road racing events, its no were near the max hp rpm levels i run, nor the G forces., but that is a good record too!
my old motor was 175,000miles, 30,000miles was commited to the race seasons.
sorry for the light, humorus interuption. back to the serious discussion.
IN that light, is the new oil better from a protection standpoint?
carry-on!
Mk
actually seriously, ive always been suspicous with the performance i have seen as far as oil pressure with mobil one in race conditions. (or high temps)
why are GF4 lubricants unsuitable for a 928?
funny, but if loving it is wrong, i dont want to be right!
I have too long of a streak running. 93 race days, its like 93 racing hours. all 4500rpm to 6500rpm continously, with high g forces. sorry Bill, even with your road racing events, its no were near the max hp rpm levels i run, nor the G forces., but that is a good record too!
my old motor was 175,000miles, 30,000miles was commited to the race seasons.
sorry for the light, humorus interuption. back to the serious discussion.
IN that light, is the new oil better from a protection standpoint?
carry-on!
Mk
Hi,
Mark - it is nice to have a light moment or two but this was a genuine question or two about M1 and Amsoil really has nothing to do with the comments. They make their own GF4 lubricants of course that are unsuitable for a 928 and using some of ExxonMobil's vital components
I can say though that in 1941 the German Engineers who were developing some of the Esters etc that make up the modern synthetic oils threw out the 4 ball test used by Amsoil as meaningless and developed their own. It is still used in a modified form today!
Would it be better perhaps if you started up an Amsoil thread so that the M1 users can participate - and I don't think your $72 is wasted if it gives you pleasure - just enjoy!
Regards
Mark - it is nice to have a light moment or two but this was a genuine question or two about M1 and Amsoil really has nothing to do with the comments. They make their own GF4 lubricants of course that are unsuitable for a 928 and using some of ExxonMobil's vital components
I can say though that in 1941 the German Engineers who were developing some of the Esters etc that make up the modern synthetic oils threw out the 4 ball test used by Amsoil as meaningless and developed their own. It is still used in a modified form today!
Would it be better perhaps if you started up an Amsoil thread so that the M1 users can participate - and I don't think your $72 is wasted if it gives you pleasure - just enjoy!
Regards
11-05-2007, 07:52 AM
#41
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Airlie Beach, Australia
Posts: 870
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
Mark - 4 *****.......................yes, the mind boggles!
The GF4 specification is similar to the ACEA A1 standard - the HTHS viscosity is way below the Porsche minimum of 3.5cSt. In short its "film strength" at high temperature is simply insufficient!
On whether the new M1 15-50 offers "....better protection...." a subjective answer to your question would be meaningless and I am not in the business of promoting one lubricant or another - but it probably will - it will not provide less!!!!
John V and Matt have contributed great information and one must always be aware of the laws of Physics and Fluid dynamics - and the "mysteries" (for some) of pressure and flow
In the recent survey of hot idle oil pressure M1 15w-50 was an outstanding performer with its average hot idle OP of 2.5bar. 25% of M1 15w-50 users saw 5bar OP (hot) at 2000rpm!
At hot idle, 69% of all engines showed between 1.5 and 2.5bar. The breakdown showed that 9% were between 1.5 and 2bar, 28% were right on 2bar and 32% were between 2 and 2.5bar!
Regards
Mark - 4 *****.......................yes, the mind boggles!
The GF4 specification is similar to the ACEA A1 standard - the HTHS viscosity is way below the Porsche minimum of 3.5cSt. In short its "film strength" at high temperature is simply insufficient!
On whether the new M1 15-50 offers "....better protection...." a subjective answer to your question would be meaningless and I am not in the business of promoting one lubricant or another - but it probably will - it will not provide less!!!!
John V and Matt have contributed great information and one must always be aware of the laws of Physics and Fluid dynamics - and the "mysteries" (for some) of pressure and flow
In the recent survey of hot idle oil pressure M1 15w-50 was an outstanding performer with its average hot idle OP of 2.5bar. 25% of M1 15w-50 users saw 5bar OP (hot) at 2000rpm!
At hot idle, 69% of all engines showed between 1.5 and 2.5bar. The breakdown showed that 9% were between 1.5 and 2bar, 28% were right on 2bar and 32% were between 2 and 2.5bar!
Regards
