968 "Oilwars" Official Thread — ok just tell us your favorite oil.
09-30-2010, 04:33 PM
#1
Team Owner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: one thousand, five hundred miles north of Ft. Lauderdale for the summer.
Posts: 28,705
Received 212 Likes
on
153 Posts
968 "Oilwars" Official Thread — ok just tell us your favorite oil.
we started out a little thin but a few weeks after we made the thread, we discovered Mobil 1
has been promoting their ultra high-tech 0w-50 Racing oil oozing with tons of the good stuff....
designed for Formula 1 and other race cars but,
you can toss your cat and run the "zero-fifty" in your car year round...
this stuff is 100 bucks for 6 quarts, but it's obviously the best oil money can buy.
http://www.mobil1racingstore.com/mo1ra0w.html
•It has boosted levels of anti-wear protection (zinc/phosphorous) well beyond those of ordinary automotive oils.
•Mobil 1 Racing 0W-50 provides exceptional high-temperature protection in high RPM engine operation,
even at temperatures up to 500°F (260°C).
•It is not recommended for everyday general street use where vehicles use catalytic exhaust converters.
original thread post:
i'm running my mobile 1 for like 15-18 k miles between changes. just changing filters. am i nuts ?
why ? because my car is fully broken in, 17 years old, and according to valid tests, for cars over 100 k miles Mobile 1 is supposed to be good for up to 18 k miles for engines that consume a slight amount of oil, even longer for cars that consume more... but with mobil 1, my car hardly consumes any oil at all.
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/mobil1.html
Mobil 1 currently enjoys the distinction of being the only readily available true PAO synthetic motor oil. You can get the stuff at Wal-Mart for Pete's sake! Perhaps because of its wide availability and comparatively low price, we entered this test with both hope and skepticism: hope that it would do well and vindicate millions of M1 users, and skepticism that it would pull it off. We were expecting it to look pretty beat up by 8,000 miles or so; to say we missed the mark would be polite understatement. Mobil 1 really delivered: 18,000 miles later, it was showing its age but was still hard at work protecting the engine.
As our first phase of the Synthetic Oil Life Study, it was as much a learning experience for the process as it was for the results. We changed some things along the way -- moved the filter change from a mileage-based rule to a performance-based rule, altered the tolerable limits for viscosity, learned a lot about TBN, and a few other things -- which set precedents for the remainder of the study.
But the big question is, what have we learned so far? Here are a few points to ponder, based on our experience with the Mobil 1 phase.
Getting just one oil analysis only tells a tiny piece of the picture. It essentially would serve only as a pass/fail mechanism; without a trend to monitor, the most interesting parts of the analysis would be impossible to see.
Total base number is a moving target. There are multiple methods for testing it, which makes comparisons between laboratories worthless, and none of the methods have repeatability rates worth getting excited about. While TBN is worth considering as part of the larger picture, as a singular measure it is too flawed to rely on.
Engine wear actually decreases as oil ages.
This has also been substantiated in testing conducted by Ford Motor Co. and ConocoPhillips, and reported in SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-3119. What this means is that compulsive oil changers are actually causing more engine wear than the people who let their engine's oil get some age on it.
Topping up the crankcase is a critical component of extended oil change intervals, and frequent filter changes are most likely the key to extreme-length intervals. The cumulative effect of even minor top-ups, let alone a filter change, substantially increases the longevity of the oil.
Based on the results we've got here, we'd recommend 8,000 miles between oil changes on an engine that uses no oil at all, perhaps 10,000 miles on an engine that uses some oil, and 15,000 miles or beyond with a filter change every 5,000 miles. This, of course, isn't any kind of guarantee, and you must evaluate for yourself what your engine requires. One thing we're pretty sure about though:
3,000-mile intervals is a huge waste of resources.
i hope you all read the link...
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/mobil1.html
the question remains.... top off with a thinner or thicker grade of synthetic ?
/
has been promoting their ultra high-tech 0w-50 Racing oil oozing with tons of the good stuff....
designed for Formula 1 and other race cars but,
you can toss your cat and run the "zero-fifty" in your car year round...
this stuff is 100 bucks for 6 quarts, but it's obviously the best oil money can buy.
http://www.mobil1racingstore.com/mo1ra0w.html
•It has boosted levels of anti-wear protection (zinc/phosphorous) well beyond those of ordinary automotive oils.
•Mobil 1 Racing 0W-50 provides exceptional high-temperature protection in high RPM engine operation,
even at temperatures up to 500°F (260°C).
•It is not recommended for everyday general street use where vehicles use catalytic exhaust converters.
original thread post:
i'm running my mobile 1 for like 15-18 k miles between changes. just changing filters. am i nuts ?
why ? because my car is fully broken in, 17 years old, and according to valid tests, for cars over 100 k miles Mobile 1 is supposed to be good for up to 18 k miles for engines that consume a slight amount of oil, even longer for cars that consume more... but with mobil 1, my car hardly consumes any oil at all.
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/mobil1.html
Mobil 1 currently enjoys the distinction of being the only readily available true PAO synthetic motor oil. You can get the stuff at Wal-Mart for Pete's sake! Perhaps because of its wide availability and comparatively low price, we entered this test with both hope and skepticism: hope that it would do well and vindicate millions of M1 users, and skepticism that it would pull it off. We were expecting it to look pretty beat up by 8,000 miles or so; to say we missed the mark would be polite understatement. Mobil 1 really delivered: 18,000 miles later, it was showing its age but was still hard at work protecting the engine.
As our first phase of the Synthetic Oil Life Study, it was as much a learning experience for the process as it was for the results. We changed some things along the way -- moved the filter change from a mileage-based rule to a performance-based rule, altered the tolerable limits for viscosity, learned a lot about TBN, and a few other things -- which set precedents for the remainder of the study.
But the big question is, what have we learned so far? Here are a few points to ponder, based on our experience with the Mobil 1 phase.
Getting just one oil analysis only tells a tiny piece of the picture. It essentially would serve only as a pass/fail mechanism; without a trend to monitor, the most interesting parts of the analysis would be impossible to see.
Total base number is a moving target. There are multiple methods for testing it, which makes comparisons between laboratories worthless, and none of the methods have repeatability rates worth getting excited about. While TBN is worth considering as part of the larger picture, as a singular measure it is too flawed to rely on.
Engine wear actually decreases as oil ages.
This has also been substantiated in testing conducted by Ford Motor Co. and ConocoPhillips, and reported in SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-3119. What this means is that compulsive oil changers are actually causing more engine wear than the people who let their engine's oil get some age on it.
Topping up the crankcase is a critical component of extended oil change intervals, and frequent filter changes are most likely the key to extreme-length intervals. The cumulative effect of even minor top-ups, let alone a filter change, substantially increases the longevity of the oil.
Based on the results we've got here, we'd recommend 8,000 miles between oil changes on an engine that uses no oil at all, perhaps 10,000 miles on an engine that uses some oil, and 15,000 miles or beyond with a filter change every 5,000 miles. This, of course, isn't any kind of guarantee, and you must evaluate for yourself what your engine requires. One thing we're pretty sure about though:
3,000-mile intervals is a huge waste of resources.
i hope you all read the link...
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/mobil1.html
the question remains.... top off with a thinner or thicker grade of synthetic ?
/
Last edited by odurandina; 12-05-2010 at 03:03 AM.
09-30-2010, 06:55 PM
#2
Drifting
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
10 Posts
I too believe in extended OCI, but some of your post is inaccurate.
For the record, I used to be a huge M1 fan. But my trend analysis on several of my engines has told me that it doesn't protect nearly as well as it once did. I still have some old stock of the PAO based M1 for my WK, but once that's gone it's time to switch. The stuff I use in the 951 is a semi-synthetic, but has better FALEX numbers than M1 did in its prime (actually, it was half of what the M1 scored), but didn't test as well in TFOUT.
And while I'm at it, I might as well mention that switching brands/series of oil at every oil change is bad. So is mixing different oils. Use one brand/series of oil, and top off with the same. Even different weights of the same brand/series can upset the additive package, so I do not recommend mixing weights.
- You can't base your OCI on how much oil your engine consumes.
- Other people's studies doesn't mean anything for your engine. Your driving style, condition of the engine, type/series of oil used and maintenance schedule will dictate what is needed to protect your engine. Even something as basic as what brand air filter can make a huge difference on how quickly your oil breaks down. And you can't tell by looking at it or rubbing it between your fingers. The ONLY way to know is to have a reputable lab do oil analysis on a regular basis to establish and maintain a baseline OCI. And you need to use the same lab every time.
- Dirty oil causing less wear is a misnomer. It's a bell curve and if you're not on top of it, you'll end up oblivious to the damage you're doing to your engine.
- Making the assumption that just because it's synthetic that it is better than a conventional is bad. There are plenty of synthetics/semi-synthetics on the market that fail FALEX and have poor TFOUT numbers. And what was good last year may not be as good today. For instance, you mentioned that M1 is PAO basestock, but they've been switching to a Group III basestock for some time. Unless you know what you're looking for, there's a very good chance that you're not running a true synthetic. The 5-quart jugs you're buying at Walmart for $22 is Group III.
For the record, I used to be a huge M1 fan. But my trend analysis on several of my engines has told me that it doesn't protect nearly as well as it once did. I still have some old stock of the PAO based M1 for my WK, but once that's gone it's time to switch. The stuff I use in the 951 is a semi-synthetic, but has better FALEX numbers than M1 did in its prime (actually, it was half of what the M1 scored), but didn't test as well in TFOUT.
And while I'm at it, I might as well mention that switching brands/series of oil at every oil change is bad. So is mixing different oils. Use one brand/series of oil, and top off with the same. Even different weights of the same brand/series can upset the additive package, so I do not recommend mixing weights.
10-01-2010, 12:58 AM
#4
Bannana Shine
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Rochester Hills, MI
Posts: 21,055
Likes: 0
Received 334 Likes
on
219 Posts
Which Mobil 1 are we talking about? My understanding was that Mobil 1 started out as all PAO-base oil, then after they lost the lawsuit they switched it all to hydrocracked dino oil, then they switched the 0W-40 back to all PAO, but not the others. Are they now changing that back, again, or are we just talking about the 15-W50?
10-01-2010, 04:43 PM
#5
Drifting
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
10 Posts
Way back when, M1 was the only PAO based oil you could get over the counter. When Castrol came out with their US spec syn, it was Group III and some of the other syn manufactures sued and lost. It has only been within the last 5 years that M1 has been changing their basestock on the oils.
BUT, and this is a BIG BUT - being a Group III doesn't automatically make it bad. PAO has low solubility and is already saturated which makes getting an additive package in suspension difficult. Those attributes are what makes it good at resisting oxidation and contamination, so there are some good points about it too. Getting an additive package in suspension in a Group III/V is a lot easier and it does a good job at keeping silicates in solution too where they're less prone to cause damage. The trade off is that it's more difficult to get them to let go of the contaminates so they don't filter out as easily which necessitates more frequent oil changes.
SO the only way to know how any given oil is performing in your conditions is to test, monitor and trend it. Most people I know aren't willing to do that, so a short OCI is called for. Guessing at an extended OCI is worse, IMO, than more frequent change intervals.
BUT, and this is a BIG BUT - being a Group III doesn't automatically make it bad. PAO has low solubility and is already saturated which makes getting an additive package in suspension difficult. Those attributes are what makes it good at resisting oxidation and contamination, so there are some good points about it too. Getting an additive package in suspension in a Group III/V is a lot easier and it does a good job at keeping silicates in solution too where they're less prone to cause damage. The trade off is that it's more difficult to get them to let go of the contaminates so they don't filter out as easily which necessitates more frequent oil changes.
SO the only way to know how any given oil is performing in your conditions is to test, monitor and trend it. Most people I know aren't willing to do that, so a short OCI is called for. Guessing at an extended OCI is worse, IMO, than more frequent change intervals.
10-01-2010, 08:01 PM
#6
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OP- While I believe in extended OCIs with a quality synthetic oil and UOA to monitor the oil's service life, a little bit of information gathered from several sources can be very dangerous if you don't already have the technical expertise to know how to interpret the information.
As an example an oil filter does not remove normal condensation build-up. A UOA can't tell you how the oil is actually lubricating the engine. No where have I ever seen any reputable automotive engineering source recommend only adding oil and never changing it - based on real world controlled scientific testing results.
Just some food for thought.
As an example an oil filter does not remove normal condensation build-up. A UOA can't tell you how the oil is actually lubricating the engine. No where have I ever seen any reputable automotive engineering source recommend only adding oil and never changing it - based on real world controlled scientific testing results.
Just some food for thought.
Trending Topics
10-02-2010, 07:43 AM
#8
Three Wheelin'
10-02-2010, 07:54 AM
#9
Three Wheelin'
A lot of people aren't aware that filters usually become more effective over their life, right up to the point that they bypass. This is because the buildup on the element acts as a filter itself. New filters and the process of changing filters can introduce particulate contamination into the system. Differential pressure gauges are common practice on industrial filters. We have online particle counting on our critical hydraulic systems, and frequently see an increase in particle count (say from 16/13/10 to 18/15/13) immediately following a filter change.
Summary: changing your filter too often can be counterproductive.
Summary: changing your filter too often can be counterproductive.
10-05-2010, 01:53 AM
#10
Team Owner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: one thousand, five hundred miles north of Ft. Lauderdale for the summer.
Posts: 28,705
Received 212 Likes
on
153 Posts
just to repeat: i'm officially on board ! 
mobile 1 0w-40 all year round....
if you're obsessed with running a thick oil, then try Mobil 1 5w-50.
yeah.... keep runing those thick mineral and racing oils. especially when it's cold outside.
but, you might consider reading this before the next time you start your cars...
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/cms/
i spent the night into the wee hours trying to find research to support his Bob's claims,
and the effort was met with success. really good stuff. if you're using the thick stuff for the street you should
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/cms/
Bob's favorites with *asterisk:
50 Grade:
Castrol Syntec 5W-50
Penn Platinum Synthetic 5W-50
Red Line 5W-50*
40 Grade:
Amsoil 0W-40
Castrol European Formula 0W-30 (a thicker 30 grade oil, almost a 40 grade oil)*
Mobil One 0W-40
Penn Ultra Synthetic 5W-40
Renewable Lubricants Inc. 5W-40*
30 Grade:
Mobil One 0W-30
Penn (Any) Synthetic 5W-30
Red Line 5W-20 (a thick 20 grade oil)*
Renewable Lubricants Inc. 0W-30*
now, somebody please find us a filter.
/
mobile 1 0w-40 all year round....
if you're obsessed with running a thick oil, then try Mobil 1 5w-50.
yeah.... keep runing those thick mineral and racing oils. especially when it's cold outside.
but, you might consider reading this before the next time you start your cars...
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/cms/
i spent the night into the wee hours trying to find research to support his Bob's claims,
and the effort was met with success. really good stuff. if you're using the thick stuff for the street you should
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/cms/
Bob's favorites with *asterisk:
50 Grade:
Castrol Syntec 5W-50
Penn Platinum Synthetic 5W-50
Red Line 5W-50*
40 Grade:
Amsoil 0W-40
Castrol European Formula 0W-30 (a thicker 30 grade oil, almost a 40 grade oil)*
Mobil One 0W-40
Penn Ultra Synthetic 5W-40
Renewable Lubricants Inc. 5W-40*
30 Grade:
Mobil One 0W-30
Penn (Any) Synthetic 5W-30
Red Line 5W-20 (a thick 20 grade oil)*
Renewable Lubricants Inc. 0W-30*
now, somebody please find us a filter.
/
Last edited by odurandina; 10-27-2010 at 05:28 PM.
10-05-2010, 01:56 AM
#11
Team Owner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: one thousand, five hundred miles north of Ft. Lauderdale for the summer.
Posts: 28,705
Received 212 Likes
on
153 Posts
People have often commented about my love/hate relationship with the inline 4 P-car engine.
and why i love the idea of running a V8...
in line 4 engines have good torque. but other than that, the 4 cylinder engine is a disaster.
two cylinders going up and two coming down. total disaster.
on the long highway drives i've made all summer i can never help but notice how loud the 4 cylinder engine is...
no... not talking about the exhaust note which is hard enough to remedy....
i'm talking just about the vibrations. the engine just turns the whole dam car into a low droning maraca.
a six cylinder engine is a disaster of a different flavor. so very little torque.
so Porsche makes these engines that spin at 5,000 rpm before they start making power.... okay that's great and all. but just ask all the Cayman and 996 owners who've expericenced engine failures to go along with all the great Porsche six engines.
the only designs that are any good are v8s, and v12s. auto manufacturers built them forever.
the american aftermarket fixed what Detroit never bothered to do - install aircraft quality parts inside the old ironblocks.
then GM decided about 18 years ago to build an aluminum V8 pushrod that wouldn't blow up.
they nailed it about 8 years ago with the Gen IV designs like the LS2 and LS3.
so, why not a 4.0 litre four cylinder engine ? it wouldn't be too much of a gas pig... and it would make decent power.... well, nobody ever built one because it would rip itself and all the accessory components apart, destroy mounts, seals, and vibrate like a harley davidson under your rump.
everything is a compromise - but, Porsche made a horrible design work pretty well.... well, still not enough torque for a performance car by today's standards.... just not enough power in the middle of the rpm range even for a 2,900 pound 944.
the people who rag on the v8/944 idea never drove the lightweight GM engine in such nimble car.
Tony G. speaks about this with very soft words. but he's really talking about a breakthrough car project....
the v8 hybrid guys are truly building one of the world's best cars.
now here's the point;
for all the work required to keep one of these sewing machines running, you can build a hybrid car that falls somewhere between a hotrod and a high performance sports car for just as much aggrivation over the long haul.
and the result is pretty amazing. the only reason i haven't done it is because my engine has so much life left in it.
but i'm running that thin, 0w-40 oil, so it sure won't be long right ?
oil,
most of the 944 engines are so damaged, the guys need the thick stuff.... but, it never had to be that way if the engines hadn't been lubricated using such lousy oil from the start. but 25 years ago, that's basically all they had.
so the conventional wisdome is to run thick oil because we're afraid of engine failures during spirited driving...
and this in turn, causes even more damage to our engines at start up.
in a perfect world, we'd begin with a new engine and run that nice 0w-40 oil which is REALLY GOOD at start-up.... but we can't because the space between the moving metal parts is now too big and our engines will burn up.
remember Bob running that 0w-20 oil in his Ferrari's and Lambos ?
just checking Mobil's website.
Mobil recommends running 0w-40 year round for the 968. there ya go.
these are the same son's of bitches who lubricate the champion F-1 racing team's cars.
today is my 1 year anniversary.
.
and why i love the idea of running a V8...
in line 4 engines have good torque. but other than that, the 4 cylinder engine is a disaster.
two cylinders going up and two coming down. total disaster.
on the long highway drives i've made all summer i can never help but notice how loud the 4 cylinder engine is...
no... not talking about the exhaust note which is hard enough to remedy....
i'm talking just about the vibrations. the engine just turns the whole dam car into a low droning maraca.
a six cylinder engine is a disaster of a different flavor. so very little torque.
so Porsche makes these engines that spin at 5,000 rpm before they start making power.... okay that's great and all. but just ask all the Cayman and 996 owners who've expericenced engine failures to go along with all the great Porsche six engines.
the only designs that are any good are v8s, and v12s. auto manufacturers built them forever.
the american aftermarket fixed what Detroit never bothered to do - install aircraft quality parts inside the old ironblocks.
then GM decided about 18 years ago to build an aluminum V8 pushrod that wouldn't blow up.
they nailed it about 8 years ago with the Gen IV designs like the LS2 and LS3.
so, why not a 4.0 litre four cylinder engine ? it wouldn't be too much of a gas pig... and it would make decent power.... well, nobody ever built one because it would rip itself and all the accessory components apart, destroy mounts, seals, and vibrate like a harley davidson under your rump.
everything is a compromise - but, Porsche made a horrible design work pretty well.... well, still not enough torque for a performance car by today's standards.... just not enough power in the middle of the rpm range even for a 2,900 pound 944.
the people who rag on the v8/944 idea never drove the lightweight GM engine in such nimble car.
Tony G. speaks about this with very soft words. but he's really talking about a breakthrough car project....
the v8 hybrid guys are truly building one of the world's best cars.
now here's the point;
for all the work required to keep one of these sewing machines running, you can build a hybrid car that falls somewhere between a hotrod and a high performance sports car for just as much aggrivation over the long haul.
and the result is pretty amazing. the only reason i haven't done it is because my engine has so much life left in it.
but i'm running that thin, 0w-40 oil, so it sure won't be long right ?
oil,
most of the 944 engines are so damaged, the guys need the thick stuff.... but, it never had to be that way if the engines hadn't been lubricated using such lousy oil from the start. but 25 years ago, that's basically all they had.
so the conventional wisdome is to run thick oil because we're afraid of engine failures during spirited driving...
and this in turn, causes even more damage to our engines at start up.
in a perfect world, we'd begin with a new engine and run that nice 0w-40 oil which is REALLY GOOD at start-up.... but we can't because the space between the moving metal parts is now too big and our engines will burn up.
remember Bob running that 0w-20 oil in his Ferrari's and Lambos ?
just checking Mobil's website.
Mobil recommends running 0w-40 year round for the 968. there ya go.
these are the same son's of bitches who lubricate the champion F-1 racing team's cars.
today is my 1 year anniversary.
.
10-06-2010, 05:30 PM
#12
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Again my 2 cents, I would never use M1 in my cars...
10-06-2010, 07:31 PM
#13
Team Owner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: one thousand, five hundred miles north of Ft. Lauderdale for the summer.
Posts: 28,705
Received 212 Likes
on
153 Posts
i like it cuz you can get 0w-40 and 5w-50 right at Walmart. 
i like Mobil 1 because it's synthetic and in theory, synthetic doesn't break down.
i thought F1 teams run it... or are we talking about the old Mobil 1 oils ?
i also noticed that "Bob the Oil Guy" chooses oils other than Mobil 1.
i like Mobil 1 because it's synthetic and in theory, synthetic doesn't break down.
i thought F1 teams run it... or are we talking about the old Mobil 1 oils ?
i also noticed that "Bob the Oil Guy" chooses oils other than Mobil 1.
10-06-2010, 09:41 PM
#14
Drifting
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Caraquet-- New-Brunswick-- Canada
Posts: 2,728
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
My excuses to the OP but I personnaly think that BS about oil is getting rediculous ,and agree with Rob that it migth steer peoples specially new guys coming on the forum in the wrong direction, my present car is the seventh Porsche that I've own since the 70s they were all kept alive without any mechanical issues by changing oil & filter every 5000k miles maximum the sixe one is still going strong after 27 years (never open up the motor on that one neither) oil use was 20W50 exclusively & planing to do the same with my 968.We can stand here & debate brand vs brand _viscosity vs viscosity but it all come down to one thing, if the oil you choose to run in your car years after years does the job stick with it.And to finish it off will like OD to realize one thing ,do you know how many time over a period of 27 years my 944 was started in warm & cold weather with 20w50 in it ? answer hundred of time yet like I said it still going strong with no mechanical issues.
