It is ambiguous to me.And that is to be expected.Besides,an oil warrantee is probably totally useless.Does anyone think Mobil will buy them a new motor?Does anyone use Mobil-1 for every oil change,keep every receipt,and perfect records of mileages?A few might,but I'm sure Mobil is willing to take that miniscule risk.Plus you gotta go to court and beat their high-powered attorneys.
When I insured my car the first time after immigrating, I was astonished by ambiguity of the policy. The first impression was that I am dealing with something fraudulent.
However, my friend explained, and later I read somewhere, that in America any ambiguity in insurance policy is treated in favour of cutomer, not insurance company. This is both tradition, and either law, or possibly case law.
The FAQ on Mobil-1 WEB-site is not an insurance policy. I would expect the law to be less clear in this case.
Does anyone have data through analysis, etc. indicating if Mobil 1 5W will maintain 30W viscosity equally with 10W? It is my understanding that both are said to maintain 30W when heated. Just curious if the 5W will lose viscosity faster. Thanks!
I have not done analysis, but theoretically the 5w/30 needs more viscosity improver than the 10w/30 does to "avoid thinning any more than a 30 wt oil would at high temp". The viscosity improver is the weak point in the motor oil, the less you have the better. The main benefit anyway is faster flow at COLD startup, I am talking VERY COLD start, during the summer, cold starts is not an issue at all. Maybe someone else has done the analysis?
You are right that you would have to fight and it is difficult to fight coporate attorneys. However, they also have a reputation to maintain ans someone goes highly public on you, there is no court case that will vindicate you. For example, does anyone think OJ is really innocent even though he won the court case?
BTW, yes, I am keeping all of my receipts but only since I learned of this gaurantee. I am trusting these guys at this point. I realize that's risky but dino guys don't even state this kind of gaurantee. Besides, the Mobil1 is cheaper on my wallet.
The problem with maintaining a rep,is that the info has to be widely disseminated.It's hard to get press coverage on a blown motor.It's harder to PROVE the oil CAUSED the failure.
Doesn't Quaker State have a 250,000 mile warranty....even on dino!?
As with Amsoil " in a mechanically sound engine" is their out. If you have a failure then the engine was not mechanically sound. They claim the only way their warranty can pay off is when the oil was formulated incorrectly at the factory. All else is mechanical failure, not oil failure.
Love to know how some of these toyota claims went with Amsoil users. Amsoil claimed the engines have a design problem (the sludge issue) and toyota insists the engine is fine if oil changed as recommended.. Who will win this one in court. Amsoil refuses to inform its customers that if sludge develops in a Toyota that they consider it a mechanical failure, not the oils. If they would only be honest but in today's world, no one is.
The dino says nothing about a guarantee. It also has a 10 year limit. I don't remember Mobil1 having a mileage or time limit but like you said, you do have to show that the failure was oil related. I will double check those limits on Mobil1.
"Amsoil claimed the engines have a design problem (the sludge issue) and toyota insists the engine is fine if oil changed as recommended.."
There are quite a few owners on the Toyota Sienna sludge board that have documented evidence of oil change interval compliance and Toyota has denied warranty claims. In fact a lot of the warranty claims denied were at Toyota dealer ships that actually did and documented the the oil change interval!!!!!!
So if you backward fault find, evidently in the engine where the oil circulates there are areas that exceed conventional oils flash point (lower than synthetics flash point), ie areas that vaporize oil.
(in Mobil Ones synthetics case that is app 455 degrees F)
Being as how conventional oil has a higher ash % than Mobil One synthetic for example, the residual is called "sludge"
So yes there is a design deficiency that lets certain areas get hotter than a specified conventional oils heat range can handle.
Site referenced above for QS does not provide any info on what is required to keep the warranty in effect. How does one prove they used QS over the years and at say a failure at 200,000 miles????
Remember, Amsoil is one year or 25,000 miles (whichever comes first) with a filter change mandatory at 6 months. In reality, as few people go 25,000 miles in one year it really is 12,000-18,000 miles a year with a filter at six months. Very low risk involved on their part for a synthetic.
Again, they have never had a claim paid. Wonder whey? Oil that good or warranty worthless? Devils advocate. I use the stuff just hate the hype!
More importantly what are the ash % 's ? So obviously they have to redesign those portions that heat up the oil is much lower than the flash points of conventional and synthetic oil.
You are right frule. After digging further, I verified that it is for dino's too. However, it also states that oil changes must be done every 4000 miles/ 4 months. As someone has stated here before, any oil should not have a problem if you change that often. You don't give the oil time to build up dirt and contaminants at that interval. Mobil1's and probably Amsoil's warranty is for twice that change interval with no limit in mileage or time.
is not carried on their higher mileage oil. Obvious since to qualify for the program you have to have under 36K, and less than 4 years in age. You also have to register.
They obviously want you to come into their lube shops every 4 months or 4K.
Sounds like good business to me.
My last analysis was with QState after 7 months and 3,000 city miles. The only thing that was high in the metals was copper. According to Blackstone, a common additive in Qstate. TBN was 3 instead of the original 7, so it was just right to change.
My point here is that analysis proved that the longer time was not harming my vehicle. I am completely comfortable extending the time, but of course they want you to come in frequently.
At least they conceded enough to allow 4K changes. 1,000 miles below severe conditions. At least with my vehicles the time element is acurate for severe service.
I'm absolutely sure that you will have to prove that it is the fault of the oil in order to recover. How many people take the car out to 250k?
Clearly the motive behind the guarantee is profit, and since it is below manufacturers recommendations, guaranteed to ensure that they don't have to pay a claim.
The guarantee is interesting in that you will have to prove with the necessary "oil analysis" that the oil was mis formulated at the factory and if you can prove that, why did you put a mis formulated oil in your crankcase? (giving YOU responsibility for being so negligent.) It should be obvious that most folks will never see the results of the "guarantee."
In addition, the real reason why the oil manufacturer gives a new vehicle gurantee is because if it fails during this time it is usually due to the manufacturing process of the engine, not the oil! This further constricts the exposure to warranty liability. Again, impossible to slim and none are the chances.
Didn't a couple folks report here a while back that they thought Valvoline had moved away from PAO and into "Castrolville" with their Synpower formulation? Or maybe that was Quaker State with their synthetic. I thought one of the big-name brands had quietly switched their formula to the dark side, but I don't remember which.
The question of whether Valvoline AND Mobil-1 moved to "Castrolville" was posed earlier.It seemed to have some credence,especially in light of Mobil-1 taking so long to meet the SL standards.
Has anyone PROVEN that these oils are really "full PAOs" as we used to know them?Or is it only being assumed?
It also appears that Chevron Supreme SL,Citgo SL,and Pennzoil SL are in "Castrolville".In either case,the gap has narrowed considerably(anyone who has compared SJ to SL standards knows this is true).Now the argument about the differences are taking a different bent."Yes,the flashpoints are now the same,BUT.....".This is what I am seeing from synth users.
Also,how good is Castrolville?Maybe everyone is "practically" there already.Time will tell!
There will probably be a "GREAT BIG NEW TECHNOLOGY BREAKTHROUGH!!!!!" and there will be a NEW generation of synthetic motor oil,,,probably say that the PAO is a NEW breed of tough synthetic oil and is better than older technology synthetics...(Castrolville) and of course, as usual, it will be even more expensive. Know what I mean? I bet the marketing folks have the next 10 years all mapped out! see y'all Rando
I called their technical # and was told directly that there are no hydroprocessed stocks in the new formula. The guy indicated that the differences between the old and new was basically the addition of the Supersyn.
If they'd mix in some polyol esters, they might have a product worth calling synthetic.
Mobil takes little molecules and links them together to make them just the right length. Chevron breaks very big molecules with hydrogen to make them just the right length. The end result is essentially the same. Chevron sells the just right brew for a buck a quart, Mobil sells theirs for four bucks a quart.
All PAO based syns have esters to equalize seal shrinkage and dissolve additive package. Esters are marginally better than PAO's dute to slightly better lubrication properties and high temp. They are inferior in terms of water retention, seal wear, and mixing with conventional oils. On balance the difference is small (IMHO) If I thought esters were better I'd gladly pay a couple of bucks extra. Don't really trust the RedLine for seals and extended oil changes. Just no proof of its long term benefits or risks.
I really don't know what to make of Valvoline Syn oil anymore. I'm actually using it in one car right now and like it. But I've grown increasingly skepticle about it being a PAO-based synthetic. In March I emailed Val & they said yes, its PAO. But they don't use the word PAO anywhere else in their documentation or marketing. Their data sheet says "synthetic base oil" and the msds says "petroleum hydrocarbon". Given synthetics history, why wouldn't they take advantage of the PAO term in their marketing like Mobil, Schaffer or Amsoil? But then they don't mention that MaxLife contains some synthetic oil even though the ML msds uses the term "synthetic lubricating oil" to describe it. Seems to me like they are passing up a great opportunity with a consumer market that is growing better informed around automotive oils.
Lately I came across this alleged Valvoline tech support response on a Volkswagon club site to someone else who emailed them about the PAO issue:
Here is some info I got from Valvoline concerning their "synthetic". I was asking them to tell me what their base stock consists of.....
"Valvoline uses a mixture of various base oils designed to provide the maximum performance for our SynPower line. All of the base fluids used in SynPower are synthetic.
Some synthetic fluids are produced through a synthesis process that takes very small molecules and assembles them into larger designer molecules with premium lubricating properties. Others may be produced through a synthesis process that takes very large molecules, breaks them apart and re-arranges them to produce designer molecules with premium lubricating properties. In either case the end products are base fluids with extremely good lubricating properties. However, all of them also carry with them certain inherent disadvantages.
By carefully selecting the right combination of synthetic fluids and their right combination of premium chemical additives, Valvoline is able to take advantage of all the benefits of the different components and their combinations while overcoming any inherent disadvantages that a specific component may have. The end result is full synthetic motor oil second to none."
Granted, 3 months ago I knew nothing about PAO oil. Today I'm better informed and know next to nothing. But if that response really came from Valvoline, it don't read like a PAO-based oil to me.
I think what you are reading is the difference between the marketing definition of synthetic, ala the "Castrol" court ruling of synthetic vs a very specific "old defintion " of synthetic, i.e. PAO. A PAO can rightly be categorized synthetic, but not all "synthetic" is PAO. They probably for a very good reason do not call it PAO for it probably in fact, is not. BUT, in fact by definition of the Castrol court case can be defensible as "synthetic" Are we clear as mud yet?
What are the current beliefs re: basic formulation of these 2 oils? Last I remember, Quaker State was a well-regarded PAO synthetic but Pennzoil was a hydrocracked type, a la Castrol Syntec.
frule indicated on a different board that Pennzoil SL seems to use hydrocracked base stocks. If that is the case, I wonder how much difference exists between Pennzoil's $4 a quart synthetic and its $1.50 a quart conventional.
Back in 1986 I bought a brand new Harley-Davidson Softail Custom (FXSTC), the first year of that factory custom. After 2000 break in miles, as instructed by Harley, I then switched to Redline 20W-50. I kept the bike for 8 years, and accumulated 10K miles on it, and then sold it for more money than I paid for it. I never had one bit of lubrication related engine trouble-- ever. No seal trouble, nor any of the other "short comings" that have ever been suggested might exist when using polyol ester motor oil. That is my imperical, personal evidence. My thought is, if Redline will work superbly in a Harley, it will work anywhere else just as well.
PAO synthesizing and hydrocracking honestly give the same (great) result. I will let Mobil and Chevron duke that one out in the market place. Oh yeah... I should mention: I don't use ester based (true synthetic oil) any more, finding the current pricing not reasonable, in the face of the availability of superb mineral based oils of many brands that go on sale continuously at under a dollar per quart, including hydrocracked SL grade.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Chevron SL rated conventional oil is a standup and standout performer! In fact, it sets a high standard!
Most folks could care less if they use a PAO vs hydrocracked base stock.
The only real question that needs to be evident in my mind is: does it keep its useful life as long as a Mobil One synthetic and can it go 15k-23k miles per oil interval. For three to 4 dollars a quart less, this has to be a no brainer.
Given: high sustain heat conditons, Great flow at low temps, less internal breakdown, low to immeasurable ash %'s (greater or lesser tendency to form sludge) great stability (higher or lower tendency to burn off)
Hi, For the past year and a half, I've been using Mobil 1 Synthetic for my 2000 Maxima. I've noticed upon starting my car, there is blue smoke coming from the exhaust. The car has 40,000 miles and I change the oil every 2,300 miles. I bought the car when it had 23,000 miles. I've also noticed blue smoke coming from my 98 k2500 upon start up (only once). Does this sound familiar?
Prior to using synthetic oil, I used convention oil and changed it at 2,300 mile internval for a chev. corsica. After 134,000 miles, the car only consumed between 1/4 and 1/2 quart of oil at 2,300 miles and never had blue smoke emit from the exhaust at startup.
The only thought I have is the valve seals are affected by the use of synthetic oil. I find it hard to believe that both of my vechicles are experience valve seal problems when the mileage is low and the oil is changed far sooner than it has to be.
As I've asked several times in this topic, what makes Chevron's SL any different, or better than any other brand of dino SL? This question hasn't been answered yet.
Funny how the only real thing said is that it is a buck or so a quart where Mobil One SL is 3.67-4.81 a quart! But I think in the last analysis it has to come down to the six things you buy an oil for!
It has been explained earlier why people like Chevron SL.Look back through the posts and you will find it.You continue to "bait the hook" and I'm tired of it.
See the link in 3935.Go there and you may be surprised to find what is in your Sooper Tech Really Synthetic ain't what you think(or maybe you already know).
In any case,the guys on that board would like to have fun with some of your preposterous claims.Bye.
Frankly, I don't give hoot what you're tired of! I'm getting tired of all these false claims that these SL dinos are just as good as syns, cause they aren't. Like I said, I'll put any syn up against any dino, in any type of comparison you want to make, and the syn will come out on top. Put up or shut up!
I also asked a fairly straightforward question, "Does Chevron SL meet the GM SPEC 4718 M? And the follow on comparison that Mobil One synthetic does. This standard is basically a better performance requirement in high temp/high shear environments,and require a lower oxidation rate, in engines generating high oil temperatures. Synthetic is called for because petro based oils cannot meet the higher requirements. A wrong yes or no could cost me a 10-15k engine on my nickel if it can be shown that I blew the engine because I used an oil that didnt meet this GM 4718 spec.
10K isn't really a lot of miles even for a bike. Even if you didn't change the oil in 8 years I don't really see anything here. I'm not really slamming-I'm just not impressed. Now 100K on a Harley and I'm impressed.
lobstahWho knows how the Max was treated for the first 23K??
I also had a '92 Corsica which I got rid of at 128K. It has used Mobil 1 for 8 years with 8-10K oil changes with Mobil 1. At the time I got rid of it, it used maybe 8 oz. oil every 10K. If I were U though if you are changing Mobil 1 at 2,300 miles you definitely should use dino oil.
See my reply under "Oil,Filters".FYI,I NEVER said Chevron SL is SUPERIOR to true synthetic oils.And you won't be able to find a quote where I did.But waste your time looking!
After you read my post and CAN'T give the same info for YOUR SUPER TECH SYNTHETIC,give it a rest.Bye.
but believe that Bottgers is now yanking our crank. You can't debate him using facts. I find peace in thinking that because the oil companies overcharge so much for synthetic, the price of conventional oil remains low. Let the synthetic users keep overpaying and subsidize us.
I had the same blue smoke problem at start up with a 96 Max. But I never used synthetic oil in that car. Developed after 50K miles. Never too worried cause it used less than a 1/2 quart every 5K, or so. Bought that car new. Now my 01 Max (like u, bought used) seems to be developing the same problem after 35K miles...I think. Have used Mobil 1 and Val Syn in it. Not too worried as the 01 doesn't use a drop in 5K miles, but still wonder why. Awe heck, it's probably just the driver!
You crack me up! What do those numbers mean in the real world? Now your saying Chevron is better because nobody has been able to get the data sheet for the SuperTech? How do you know it wouldn't have numbers as good as Mobil 1? Here's what ya do. Run your Chevron, do an oil analysis at 5K, then one at 10K. Then do the same with the SuperTech syn. See which one looks better then.
I never said that you said Chevron was better than syns. There have been people claiming that it's just as good, and they're also saying people are wasting their money buying syns. I wish someone would prove this. I'd much rather pay $1 per quart than $3-$5 per quart. Please prove me wrong!
I thought someone posted SuperTech syn. specs. I (and others) had requested a spec. sheet from Pz/QS and gotten only a sheet for the dino. I think there's a good chance that the SuperTech synthetic is not made by the PZ/QS Shreveport subsidiary. My suspicion is that since Wal-Mart owns the trademark, they can use it on any oil they want to. Maybe Bottgers or another interested party can contact Wal-Mart directly rather than PZ/QS.
Smoke on startup (not white which is usually head gasket/head leak) is usually valve guides. I would switch to 10W (Mobil 1/Amsoil). I bet the problem goes away. The problem will only get worse.
On Bob's site for about a week. I don't have much to add to the conversation there (like here) as I am still trying to digest a lot of the information. It seems that there are a lot of people with racing applications posting there, which are interesting but not relevant to my uses. There are some posters who seem as though they may have conflicts of interest (auto-rx?), unlike Bob, who went out of his way not to seem like a vendor here. In any case, I will continue to surf there as there is a lot of info being posted.
Comments
However, my friend explained, and later I read somewhere, that in America any ambiguity in insurance policy is treated in favour of cutomer, not insurance company. This is both tradition, and either law, or possibly case law.
The FAQ on Mobil-1 WEB-site is not an insurance policy. I would expect the law to be less clear in this case.
The main benefit anyway is faster flow at COLD startup, I am talking VERY COLD start, during the summer, cold starts is not an issue at all.
Maybe someone else has done the analysis?
BTW, yes, I am keeping all of my receipts but only since I learned of this gaurantee. I am trusting these guys at this point. I realize that's risky but dino guys don't even state this kind of gaurantee. Besides, the Mobil1 is cheaper on my wallet.
Doesn't Quaker State have a 250,000 mile warranty....even on dino!?
BTW,gbo!
Love to know how some of these toyota claims went with Amsoil users. Amsoil claimed the engines have a design problem (the sludge issue) and toyota insists the engine is fine if oil changed as recommended.. Who will win this one in court. Amsoil refuses to inform its customers that if sludge develops in a Toyota that they consider it a mechanical failure, not the oils. If they would only be honest but in today's world, no one is.
http://www.quakerstate.com/pages/products/oil_fullsynthetic.asp
The dino says nothing about a guarantee. It also has a 10 year limit. I don't remember Mobil1 having a mileage or time limit but like you said, you do have to show that the failure was oil related. I will double check those limits on Mobil1.
"Amsoil claimed the engines have a design problem (the sludge issue) and toyota insists the engine is fine if oil changed as recommended.."
There are quite a few owners on the Toyota Sienna sludge board that have documented evidence of oil change interval compliance and Toyota has denied warranty claims. In fact a lot of the warranty claims denied were at Toyota dealer ships that actually did and documented the the oil change interval!!!!!!
So if you backward fault find, evidently in the engine where the oil circulates there are areas that exceed conventional oils flash point (lower than synthetics flash point), ie areas that vaporize oil.
(in Mobil Ones synthetics case that is app 455 degrees F)
Being as how conventional oil has a higher ash % than Mobil One synthetic for example, the residual is called "sludge"
So yes there is a design deficiency that lets certain areas get hotter than a specified conventional oils heat range can handle.
Remember, Amsoil is one year or 25,000 miles (whichever comes first) with a filter change mandatory at 6 months. In reality, as few people go 25,000 miles in one year it really is 12,000-18,000 miles a year with a filter at six months. Very low risk involved on their part for a synthetic.
Again, they have never had a claim paid. Wonder whey? Oil that good or warranty worthless?
Devils advocate. I use the stuff just hate the hype!
ruking;some flashpoints:Mobil-1 SuperSyn(10W30)=455;Chevron Sl(10W30) dino=453;Quaker State synthetic(10W30)=428.QS(syn) 5W30=410.
More importantly what are the ash % 's ? So obviously they have to redesign those portions that heat up the oil is much lower than the flash points of conventional and synthetic oil.
They obviously want you to come into their lube shops every 4 months or 4K.
Sounds like good business to me.
My last analysis was with QState after 7 months and 3,000 city miles. The only thing that was high in the metals was copper. According to Blackstone, a common additive in Qstate. TBN was 3 instead of the original 7, so it was just right to change.
My point here is that analysis proved that the longer time was not harming my vehicle. I am completely comfortable extending the time, but of course they want you to come in frequently.
At least they conceded enough to allow 4K changes. 1,000 miles below severe conditions. At least with my vehicles the time element is acurate for severe service.
I'm absolutely sure that you will have to prove that it is the fault of the oil in order to recover. How many people take the car out to 250k?
Clearly the motive behind the guarantee is profit, and since it is below manufacturers recommendations, guaranteed to ensure that they don't have to pay a claim.
The guarantee is interesting in that you will have to prove with the necessary "oil analysis" that the oil was mis formulated at the factory and if you can prove that, why did you put a mis formulated oil in your crankcase? (giving YOU responsibility for being so negligent.)
In addition, the real reason why the oil manufacturer gives a new vehicle gurantee is because if it fails during this time it is usually due to the manufacturing process of the engine, not the oil! This further constricts the exposure to warranty liability. Again, impossible to slim and none are the chances.
Has anyone PROVEN that these oils are really "full PAOs" as we used to know them?Or is it only being assumed?
It also appears that Chevron Supreme SL,Citgo SL,and Pennzoil SL are in "Castrolville".In either case,the gap has narrowed considerably(anyone who has compared SJ to SL standards knows this is true).Now the argument about the differences are taking a different bent."Yes,the flashpoints are now the same,BUT.....".This is what I am seeing from synth users.
Also,how good is Castrolville?Maybe everyone is "practically" there already.Time will tell!
"GREAT BIG NEW TECHNOLOGY BREAKTHROUGH!!!!!"
and there will be a NEW generation of synthetic motor oil,,,probably say that the PAO is a NEW breed of tough synthetic oil and is better than older technology synthetics...(Castrolville)
and of course, as usual, it will be even more expensive.
Know what I mean? I bet the marketing folks have the next 10 years all mapped out!
see y'all
Rando
Mobil takes little molecules and links them together to make them just the right length. Chevron breaks very big molecules with hydrogen to make them just the right length. The end result is essentially the same. Chevron sells the just right brew for a buck a quart, Mobil sells theirs for four bucks a quart.
I just changed oil, but will try an analysis at next change to see the results of Valvoline vs Quaker State.
Lately I came across this alleged Valvoline tech support response on a Volkswagon club site to someone else who emailed them about the PAO issue:
Here is some info I got from Valvoline concerning their "synthetic". I was asking them to tell me what their base stock consists of.....
"Valvoline uses a mixture of various base oils designed to provide the maximum performance for our SynPower line. All of the base fluids used in
SynPower are synthetic.
Some synthetic fluids are produced through a synthesis process that takes very small molecules and assembles them into larger designer molecules with premium lubricating properties. Others may be produced through a synthesis process that takes very large molecules, breaks them apart and re-arranges them to produce designer molecules with premium lubricating properties. In either case the end products are base fluids with extremely good lubricating properties. However, all of them also carry with them certain
inherent disadvantages.
By carefully selecting the right combination of synthetic fluids and their right combination of premium chemical additives, Valvoline is able to take advantage of all the benefits of the different components and their combinations while overcoming any inherent disadvantages that a specific component may have. The end result is full synthetic motor oil second to
none."
Granted, 3 months ago I knew nothing about PAO oil. Today I'm better informed and know next to nothing. But if that response really came from Valvoline, it don't read like a PAO-based oil to me.
I think what you are reading is the difference between the marketing definition of synthetic, ala the "Castrol" court ruling of synthetic vs a very specific "old defintion " of synthetic, i.e. PAO. A PAO can rightly be categorized synthetic, but not all "synthetic" is PAO. They probably for a very good reason do not call it PAO for it probably in fact, is not. BUT, in fact by definition of the Castrol court case can be defensible as "synthetic" Are we clear as mud yet?
frule indicated on a different board that Pennzoil SL seems to use hydrocracked base stocks. If that is the case, I wonder how much difference exists between Pennzoil's $4 a quart synthetic and its $1.50 a quart conventional.
PAO synthesizing and hydrocracking honestly give the same (great) result. I will let Mobil and Chevron duke that one out in the market place. Oh yeah... I should mention: I don't use ester based (true synthetic oil) any more, finding the current pricing not reasonable, in the face of the availability of superb mineral based oils of many brands that go on sale continuously at under a dollar per quart, including hydrocracked SL grade.
Most folks could care less if they use a PAO vs hydrocracked base stock.
The only real question that needs to be evident in my mind is: does it keep its useful life as long as a Mobil One synthetic and can it go 15k-23k miles per oil interval. For three to 4 dollars a quart less, this has to be a no brainer.
Given: high sustain heat conditons, Great flow at low temps, less internal breakdown, low to immeasurable ash %'s (greater or lesser tendency to form sludge) great stability (higher or lower tendency to burn off)
For the past year and a half, I've been using Mobil 1 Synthetic for my 2000 Maxima. I've noticed upon starting my car, there is blue smoke coming from the exhaust. The car has 40,000 miles and I change the oil every 2,300 miles. I bought the car when it had 23,000 miles. I've also noticed blue smoke coming from my 98 k2500 upon start up (only once).
Does this sound familiar?
Prior to using synthetic oil, I used convention oil and changed it at 2,300 mile internval for a chev. corsica. After 134,000 miles, the car only consumed between 1/4 and 1/2 quart of oil at 2,300 miles and never had blue smoke emit from the exhaust at startup.
The only thought I have is the valve seals are affected by the use of synthetic oil. I find it hard to believe that both of my vechicles are experience valve seal problems when the mileage is low and the oil is changed far sooner than it has to be.
Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Lobstah...
In fact,check out Bob's site.There are some guys that work for oil companies and do oil analysis posting there.Great site!!!
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000042
Funny how the only real thing said is that it is a buck or so a quart where Mobil One SL is 3.67-4.81 a quart! But I think in the last analysis it has to come down to the six things you buy an oil for!
See the link in 3935.Go there and you may be surprised to find what is in your Sooper Tech Really Synthetic ain't what you think(or maybe you already know).
In any case,the guys on that board would like to have fun with some of your preposterous claims.Bye.
lobstahWho knows how the Max was treated for the first 23K??
I also had a '92 Corsica which I got rid of at 128K. It has used Mobil 1 for 8 years with 8-10K oil changes with Mobil 1. At the time I got rid of it, it used maybe 8 oz. oil every 10K. If I were U though if you are changing Mobil 1 at 2,300 miles you definitely should use dino oil.
After you read my post and CAN'T give the same info for YOUR SUPER TECH SYNTHETIC,give it a rest.Bye.
http://www.amsoil.com/faqs/faq2.htm
I never said that you said Chevron was better than syns. There have been people claiming that it's just as good, and they're also saying people are wasting their money buying syns. I wish someone would prove this. I'd much rather pay $1 per quart than $3-$5 per quart. Please prove me wrong!