Wow. the oil drop server. Congrats, you visit a forum. I'm on there too. Are you going to back up your claim with anything else? If it's so well known, there should be proof. You're a tool at this point if all you can do is link a forum.

Will

edit: btw, all the UOA's are in the oil analysis sticky. You might learn a thing or two if you actually read it.

 

You haven't even been on there very long. I have been on there for years. And I saw all the tests that showed Mobil 1 changed their formula. It no longer is as good as it use to be, and it isn't a PAO anymore.

You need to learn to stop calling people names, that is down right rude and against forum rules.

I rather trust what BITOG forum that has been around for years with tests, instead of someone on here that doesn't have a clue. Even all the tests on g35driver go against your claims.

 

Here Resolute, go to a recent topic and help correct all the people that are wrong.

http://g35driver.com/forums/showthre...=68844&page=10

 

I don't need to be on a forum very long to know the facts.

You being on there any longer than me means nothing. Does the fact that I've been on here longer than you mean anything? I know I'm right because tribology is a long time hobby of mine, not because I'm a member of BITOG.

What tests show that M1 isn't a PAO? Where are these tests?

I haven't called you a name. I've merely described you as a tool. As in, you allow yourself to be used. If you actually think for yourself rather than be used, then you would not be considered a tool.

If you have thought this out, then you would have some evidence to go by. Again, where are the tests that show that M1 does not use a PAO base stock? Where is this magical data?

You trust what on BITOG? Opinions? You made up your mind because of opinions, with no actual facts presented? That's called peer pressure.

G35 driver has tests that show that M1 is not a PAO based oil? Links to anything other than opinions?

Let me know if you really want to be proved wrong. I think you should figure it out on your own though. If you love BITOG that much, maybe you should start there. But there are unbiased sources as well. I'd be happy to clue you in if you want. If you are so narrow-minded as to defend an internet rumor with no fact, and I hope you're smarter than that, then I'd still describe you as a tool.

Will

 

There is nothing here that validates your claim that M1 does not use PAO base stocks.

Personally, I'm a little surprised that so many picked the M1 over Amsoil, but everyone's got an opinion. Nothing that proves M1 doesn't use a PAO, however, is in that thread.

Will

 

Means I have seen more tests than you, seen more results, etc. Yes it does mean something.

Glad it's a hobby, it is mine also, but I don't go around spouting that I know everything about it either. I like to see the facts. All I see is your opinion not backed up by anything. I see all the facts on g35driver for years, and bitog for years as well. Are you saying M1 is not a Group III and is a PAO? If so, you are plain wrong. PAO is Amsoil, Redline and a much higher quality synthetic. It isn't made out of base oils anymore. The evidence is on the forums I said above.

Don't deny you called me a name because you did and it's above. That against the forum rules.

 

You didnt' even read that thread. Many say stay away from M1. Unless it's 0w30.

 

interesting conversation. keep it civil.

resolute has evidence to back his claims. Solo, do you have anything other than opinions? if so please post them. If not, please give it a rest already.

 

I did post them I gave the links to where he can find them. He can do the search. He hasn't shown me where it shows M1 is still a PAO.

 

Solo, you can't be serious.

"Many say stay away from M1." That's it? That is not proof. That is opinion, personal preference, choice, etc...

You claimed that M1 does not use a PAO base stock. You said it uses G3, and Pennzoil Platinum is "better". I called BS, and asked for proof. You have not provided it.

I mean, right on the first page of BITOG PCMO forum is a thread about M1. This is from the site you mentioned you get your info from:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums...16#Post1031616

where you will find this little gem:
link to data on all M1 products-
http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/...duct_Guide.pdf

Notice they all say "fully synthetic."

You may argue that severely hydrocracked oils are considered synthetic, and I'd agree. So let's consider that XOM says that their M1 blends all use a PAO base stock:
http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/..._Question.aspx

You might say think that they are lying. Well, first off, they are a huge company with lots of money at stake in a lawsuit if they lie about this. But, there's also proof. Japan requires companies to divulge base stocks, so check out M1 Japan's site:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums...78#Post1029178

From the Japanese Mobil 1 Website:

15w-50 - PAO
0w-40 - PAO
0w-30 - PAO
0w-20 - PAO

5w-30 - PAO + Hydroprocessed
10w-30 - " "

Now consider that there are some threads on BITOG that have debated this until death. There has NEVER been any proof. Only speculation.

Also consider that M1 has several blends that are BMW LL01, LL04 and MB 229.3 and 229.5 certified. All four of these certifications specify a PAO or Ester base stock to meet their testing requirements.

There's more, but I'm still waiting to see your PROOF.

Will

 

Again, he can go search the sites to see the tests. It has been talked about for years. Ever since M1 went to M1 Tri-Formula, it was no longer a PAO based synthetic.

I will not continue because I won't argue with someone who refuses to look for himself and refuses to believe he is wrong.

 

All I will say, right in your first thread, that you linked, it is even said that it isn't a full synthetic. lol. Notice they all say in the thread and laugh that M1 is ripping people off saying Fully Synthetic.

I am done.

 

still looking for that proof. all I saw in that first link was peoples opinions. please link your HARD EVIDENCE and not opinions.

 

The hard evidence is on that forum if you search.

 

Please link it so you can enlighten everyone.

 

I'll keep it clean.

To Solo, calling you a tool was wrong. I do apologize. This is a huge subject among car guys that often has an elitist attitude. I often criticize others for this attitude, and it seems I am guilty of it here. I'm sorry and I hope you accept this apology.

As to the oil-
I'll wait to see what you come up with, but I have actual facts beyond what I've already posted, that XOM uses PAO base stocks in their M1 oil blends. How much of the base stock is a PAO, is up for speculation. Some of the formulations do use a hydroisomerized oil with the PAO, but they also alkylated napthalene which is a Group 5 base. Some also use Esters. There is no way to determine the exact amount of each that is in the formula. There is no need to.

If you have a UOA and the result is good, then the oil is a good choice for you. Knowing the chemistry can be fascinating if you're like me, but does not change the result.

There is no one single combination of oil base stocks and additives that produces the best result. Hence the need to test your oil if you really want to find out what works in your engine. If there was one magic combination, then we probably wouldn't have so many options. But, the industry is a liquid one (bad pun), and the demands on oil change. Hence, formulations are constantly changing to meet these needs. The reduction in ZDDP to meet ILSAC and SM specs is an example. The loss of ZDDP meant that some oils no longer offered the protection they used to, but are cleaner to burn. The new wave of low SAPS oil is changing this dynamic even more, and M1 is on the forefront. The blends will always change, but it doesn't matter if the results are good.

If you read the sticky I made, you'll see that M1 has some blends that perform better than others in the VQ. M1 0W-40 is factory fill on the new GT-R for a reason. Again, not because of any one consideration, but because it meets the new demands of oil while still offering good protection. I can guarantee that it is a PAO/AN/Ester base stock. But, if it didn't perform well in the VQ UOA results, I wouldn't recommend it.

There is more to an oil than the base stock. M1 is fine, and no better or worse than PP. Except PP is cheaper and for regular OCI's I'd use it over the M1 for that reason alone. But there is no proof that M1 does not use PAO base stocks.

But really, it shouldn't matter. What should matter is if it performs well.

Will

 

It has been talked about for years. It was a rumor. There was even this rumor that XOM sued Castrol and that's what started it. There is no proof that M1 does not use a PAO base stock. There is evidence that they do use it.

Yet this is exactly what you are doing, refusing to look for yourself and see that you are wrong. You have nothing to show for your claims except other people's opinions.

Will

 

It is said, by some members that don't think they use a PAO base stock. It is their opinion. If you checked that thread, that thread from the site you mentioned, then you would also see actual evidence beyond proof. And that is lightweight evidence that buster posted. There is so much going against your opinion on this.

Will

 

Thank you for the apology. I took defense on that and became kinda arrogant. I get like that when someone comes off like you did out of the blue.

Not all M1 is PAO based like (5w30,10w30) the ones you mentioned are PAO based. There were test results UOA that were posted a while back that I can not find again, that showed it wasn't. Reason why it's still talked about a lot and are a heavy discussion on forums.

You have your sticky, G35driver has theirs, and bitog has theirs. All of them conflict with each other on data and info. So who to believe?

 

You beleive the evidence, not opinions.

The 5W-30 and 10W-30 use PAO, all of them do. The only difference is going to be the amount. Again, the 5W-30 has PAO base stocks, some hydrockracked, some AN, etc...

UOA's don't test for base stocks, so I'm not sure what tests you mean. Wear tests only test for the presence of AW/EP additves, not base oil. Flash point tests aren't proof, but they're useful.

The evidence points to PAO base stocks because:
1. XOM says they all use it, whether you think they'd risk a lawsuit by a competitior for lying is up to you.
2. Their listed data from foriegn sites like the Japan corporate site list them all containing PAO base stocks.
3. The pour points combined with their flash points on the M1 oils cannot be acheived with hydroisomerized oils alone
4. The data spec sheets on the M1 oils all have qualities that line up with their Spectra-Syn PAO oils
5. XOM is the largest PAO and AN producer in the world.
6. The manufacturer specs that M1 meets require PAO or G5 base stocks to be used.

Will