Fwd: Re: Mobil 1 with SuperSyn (MEGO warning: Geek Content)

[Richard Beels]

 From another list....


>On Tue, 7 May 2002 15:25:45, Brian Berryhill said:
>
> >I've been reading up about Mobil1's reforumlated SuperSyn oil... it looks
> >like since they couldn't beat Castrol Syntec, they're now joining them,
> >using less PAO in their formula.
>
>{sigh}  Syntec is junk.
>
> >5w30 TriSynth with SuperSyn's pour point is UP to -54F
> >(http://www.mobil1.com/products/trisynth/index.jsp)
> >5w30 old TriSynth's pour point is -65F
> >(http://www.unofficialbmw.com/all/misc/all_oilfaq.html)
>
>Brian, last I checked, as long as it flowed at -40F, I'd be fine with it.
>I'm not aware of any vehicle manufacturers who require unaided starting
>below -40F, for that matter.  Even up here in Michigan, we don't see those
>kind of temperatures (okay, once in a blue moon up in da UP, eh? maybe) and
>have to resort to environmental chambers or really expensive road trips to
>Inuvik, Northern Territory, Canada in the middle of January to get those
>kind of temperatures.
>
> >I don't know about you guys, but I'm a little perturbed with Mobil1's
> >decision... and I'm going to start looking for other alternatives for
> >synthetic oil.  Do many autocrossers use M1, or do they use the expensive
> >stuff like Amsoil?
>
>I use Mobil 1 and will likely continue to do so as long as they haven't
>added any of the long-chain VIs that Castrol uses in Syntec -- and I don't
>think they have, being too smart to try to pull of a 5W50...
>
>It occurs to me that there may be another, regulatory reason for this
>change.  The PA0s that give such great low-temp flowability are also more
>volatile and could, therefore, increase the likelihood of evaporative HC
>emissions.  Since Mobil 1 is OEM-installed in several high-end makes
>(Mercedes-Benz AMG, Porsche, Corvette, etc.), particularly those sold in
>Europe where the very tight Euro III and Euro IV standards are, believe it
>or not, possibly even more strict than CARB's California standards on
>evaporative emissions (I don't have all the details, but based on some
>conversations I've had with suppliers of certain vehicle components, it
>sure sounds that way).  So removing some of the lighter PAOs, giving up
>some extremely low temp flowability (c'mon, on a real-world basis, a change
>from -65F to -54F isn't going to make one little jot's difference), but
>reducing the VOCs coming off the oil in a SHED test (evaporative emissions
>test that consists of sealing the car in a controlled-enviornment shed and
>literally measuring EVERYTHING coming off the car -- even from the interior
>plastics, weatherstripping, tires, etc.) is a trade that seems reasonable
>to me.
>
>(Evaporative emissions trivia:  My '65 Mustang, with its period fuel system
>and vinyl interior, emits more hydrocarbons sitting still than my '99
>Mustang Cobra emits while running.)
>
>The more I think about it, the more I think this is in fact what drove the
>change, Brian, not Syntec which really isn't a blip on Mobil's sales radar.
>
>Off to Mexico in the morning, so replies may be a few days away.
>
>Jim Crider
>autojim at att.net
>
>///  unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo at autox.team.net  or try
>///  http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
>///  http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
>///  Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
>///  Send list postings to autox at autox.team.net


Cheers!