Now you tell me:Mobile1
- Thread starter homebase1
- Start date
My theory:
In older engines the main and cam bearings have a looser tolerance and are
worn in differently than in a fresh engine. Mobil 1 even though it is
assigned a viscosity index, really does not flow like a dino oil with the
same viscosity. I do not think it fills the spaces between the crank and
bearing surfaces when under high RPM load enough to protect the bearings.
We don't spin bearings under normal load, it happens normally under high
RPM, heavy loads when the engine really needs the oil.
Remember all the discussions we have had about the apparently low oil
pressures? How many that have installed mobil 1, have lower oil pressures
at idle and high RPM? How many have gauges installed so they can tell?
I can't prove this but am leaning to think that installing mobil 1 in older
engines might not be a good idea. Have to do more research on it. Might be
only an opinion and I am wrong
>Hello
>Why is it I'm always the last to hear?
>change the oil on my coach 57 1/2 times
>
>So somebody tell me what the theory is on this one....
>
>Mike Beaton....formerly feeling pretty slick...in Antigonish, Nova
>Scotia
>
>
Tom & Marg Warner
Vernon Center NY
1976 palmbeach
"The beautiful Mohawk Vally"
In older engines the main and cam bearings have a looser tolerance and are
worn in differently than in a fresh engine. Mobil 1 even though it is
assigned a viscosity index, really does not flow like a dino oil with the
same viscosity. I do not think it fills the spaces between the crank and
bearing surfaces when under high RPM load enough to protect the bearings.
We don't spin bearings under normal load, it happens normally under high
RPM, heavy loads when the engine really needs the oil.
Remember all the discussions we have had about the apparently low oil
pressures? How many that have installed mobil 1, have lower oil pressures
at idle and high RPM? How many have gauges installed so they can tell?
I can't prove this but am leaning to think that installing mobil 1 in older
engines might not be a good idea. Have to do more research on it. Might be
only an opinion and I am wrong
>Hello
>Why is it I'm always the last to hear?
>change the oil on my coach 57 1/2 times
>
>So somebody tell me what the theory is on this one....
>
>Mike Beaton....formerly feeling pretty slick...in Antigonish, Nova
>Scotia
>
>
Tom & Marg Warner
Vernon Center NY
1976 palmbeach
"The beautiful Mohawk Vally"
I am a Mobile 1 fan but maybe for unscientific reasons. My rebuilt
engine with 7500 miles on it is of dubious origin. Previous owner had
it installed in Arizona where the cost for the long block with RV cam,
HV oil pump, Hyper pistons, roller chain weight matched for $1560. When
I bought it, I discounted the price by a new engine. It ran fine,
however it was leaking a quart of oil every 200 to 300 miles. THEN I
switched to Mobil 1 and coming back from California I got over 1200
miles before adding oil. Oil pressure went up about 10-15 pounds. I
have the stock gauge and a digi-panel. Now I have moved from being
afraid of my "unknown" engine to loving it. Was it the Mobile 1 or the
five cans of Alemite CD 2 stop leak that finally took ? This is how
myths get started.
I then put Mobile 1 in a 92 Suburban with 125,000 miles on it. Oil
pressure on stock gauge went up.
Just bought a 91 Ford Explorer. Yes, I changed to Mobile 1 and the oil
pressure did not change. Only 112,000 miles on it. Anyone ever tow
one of these?
Walter
78 Royale
Missing Emery in Santa Fe where it has rained almost every night for a
week.
engine with 7500 miles on it is of dubious origin. Previous owner had
it installed in Arizona where the cost for the long block with RV cam,
HV oil pump, Hyper pistons, roller chain weight matched for $1560. When
I bought it, I discounted the price by a new engine. It ran fine,
however it was leaking a quart of oil every 200 to 300 miles. THEN I
switched to Mobil 1 and coming back from California I got over 1200
miles before adding oil. Oil pressure went up about 10-15 pounds. I
have the stock gauge and a digi-panel. Now I have moved from being
afraid of my "unknown" engine to loving it. Was it the Mobile 1 or the
five cans of Alemite CD 2 stop leak that finally took ? This is how
myths get started.
I then put Mobile 1 in a 92 Suburban with 125,000 miles on it. Oil
pressure on stock gauge went up.
Just bought a 91 Ford Explorer. Yes, I changed to Mobile 1 and the oil
pressure did not change. Only 112,000 miles on it. Anyone ever tow
one of these?
Walter
78 Royale
Missing Emery in Santa Fe where it has rained almost every night for a
week.
>
> The seal swelling package in Mobile 1 is very good but I could not find
> numbers on that.
I hate posting "non-scientific" stuff in response to an excellent and
well-documented post, but take as an additional data point my
observations regarding my "new" '92 Jeep Cherokee. I bought this car
with 86,000 miles to use as a daily "beater" and toad for the GMC. The
oil had just been changed by a Q-lube franchise when I bought it. I
drove the car a couple thousand miles and then changed it to Mobil1
10W30. I noted before changing the oil that the car was leaving a
couple drops of oil on the garage floor overnight. After changing to
Mobil1, I had to add one quart at around 1500 miles. After that, oil
consumption ceased - period. No more drops on the floor. I can only
attribute that change to Mobil1.
Even less scientific, consider my fuel milage. When I first bought the
car, it consistently got 17mpg. After changing to Mobil1, the mileage
slowly improved to around 20 for my "normal" driving, but will drop back
down to 17 if I'm running over 70 on the interstate.
The change in fuel mileage may be attributable to my getting accustomed
to the car and adjusting my driving habits. Either way I'm pleased as
neither of these were reasons that I changed to Mobil1 in the first
place - they're just gravy.
Now if I could just figure out whether it's safe to use Mobil1 ATF in
the Jeep auto transmission. In the "Fluids" section of the owners
manual, it says "DexronIII/Mercon". In "Service" section, it says
"Mopar 7176". Can't seem to get a straight answer from anyone. I may
just buy Redline C+, which is made for the 7176 application and quit
worrying about it.
Patrick
> The seal swelling package in Mobile 1 is very good but I could not find
> numbers on that.
I hate posting "non-scientific" stuff in response to an excellent and
well-documented post, but take as an additional data point my
observations regarding my "new" '92 Jeep Cherokee. I bought this car
with 86,000 miles to use as a daily "beater" and toad for the GMC. The
oil had just been changed by a Q-lube franchise when I bought it. I
drove the car a couple thousand miles and then changed it to Mobil1
10W30. I noted before changing the oil that the car was leaving a
couple drops of oil on the garage floor overnight. After changing to
Mobil1, I had to add one quart at around 1500 miles. After that, oil
consumption ceased - period. No more drops on the floor. I can only
attribute that change to Mobil1.
Even less scientific, consider my fuel milage. When I first bought the
car, it consistently got 17mpg. After changing to Mobil1, the mileage
slowly improved to around 20 for my "normal" driving, but will drop back
down to 17 if I'm running over 70 on the interstate.
The change in fuel mileage may be attributable to my getting accustomed
to the car and adjusting my driving habits. Either way I'm pleased as
neither of these were reasons that I changed to Mobil1 in the first
place - they're just gravy.
Now if I could just figure out whether it's safe to use Mobil1 ATF in
the Jeep auto transmission. In the "Fluids" section of the owners
manual, it says "DexronIII/Mercon". In "Service" section, it says
"Mopar 7176". Can't seem to get a straight answer from anyone. I may
just buy Redline C+, which is made for the 7176 application and quit
worrying about it.
Patrick
I am a firm believer in mobil 1. Use it in all of my other cars and would
not switch. However with that said one has to realize that they have modern
engines with close tolerances and I think that this is the difference.
The olds 455 is a unique case in my opinion. Remember I am only stating an
opinion without a lot of facts to back it up, just a gut reaction and a lot
of experience in running these engines for a lot of miles on Dino oil. I
also believe that this only applies to original engines that have not been
torn apart and rebuilt. I believe that mobil 1 has one serious shortcoming
with this engine. Its ability to fill the space between the large crank
journals and the bearing shells when working hard under load and revving in
the 3K-4K range or above. The oil pump simply will not put out a high
enough volume of oil and 35-40PSI or so to keep the parts from contacting
physically.
Emory Stora 455 spun a bearing and I believe he had switched to mobil 1. Is
it a coincidence, maybe.
>I am sticking with the Mobile Uno for my GMC and Onan. Thanks, Arch, for the
>"numbers" to justify this. My 78,000 mile engine has taken to this stuff, and
>only asks for more about every 1200 miles, which I find acceptable......plus
>it looks great on the dipstick. Larry in MO, PB75
>
>
Tom & Marg Warner
Vernon Center NY
1976 palmbeach
"The beautiful Mohawk Vally"
not switch. However with that said one has to realize that they have modern
engines with close tolerances and I think that this is the difference.
The olds 455 is a unique case in my opinion. Remember I am only stating an
opinion without a lot of facts to back it up, just a gut reaction and a lot
of experience in running these engines for a lot of miles on Dino oil. I
also believe that this only applies to original engines that have not been
torn apart and rebuilt. I believe that mobil 1 has one serious shortcoming
with this engine. Its ability to fill the space between the large crank
journals and the bearing shells when working hard under load and revving in
the 3K-4K range or above. The oil pump simply will not put out a high
enough volume of oil and 35-40PSI or so to keep the parts from contacting
physically.
Emory Stora 455 spun a bearing and I believe he had switched to mobil 1. Is
it a coincidence, maybe.
>I am sticking with the Mobile Uno for my GMC and Onan. Thanks, Arch, for the
>"numbers" to justify this. My 78,000 mile engine has taken to this stuff, and
>only asks for more about every 1200 miles, which I find acceptable......plus
>it looks great on the dipstick. Larry in MO, PB75
>
>
Tom & Marg Warner
Vernon Center NY
1976 palmbeach
"The beautiful Mohawk Vally"
> Hello
> Why is it I'm always the last to hear?
> change the oil on my coach 57 1/2 times
>
> So somebody tell me what the theory is on this one....
>
> Mike Beaton....formerly feeling pretty slick...in Antigonish, Nova
> Scotia
Mike,
I wouldn't worry, based upon my experience with several high time engines
and opinions of several auto and aircraft mechanics I come in contact with
(a select few whose opinions I have learned to respect).
Probably 99% who switch to synthetic are happy. High time engines that soon
experience problems might have seen those same problems with any type oil.
Who knows, for this is difficult to prove or disprove.
It seems a more frequent problem is seen with freshly overhauled engines.
People sometimes switch to synthetics before fresh engines are fully broken
in. Modern dyno oil is very slick too, so proper ring seating can take
longer than one would expect.
Good oil is cheap, metal is expensive, and that's no myth.
Don Miller
75 project still in pieces
Shenandoah Valley of Virginia
> Why is it I'm always the last to hear?
> change the oil on my coach 57 1/2 times
>
> So somebody tell me what the theory is on this one....
>
> Mike Beaton....formerly feeling pretty slick...in Antigonish, Nova
> Scotia
Mike,
I wouldn't worry, based upon my experience with several high time engines
and opinions of several auto and aircraft mechanics I come in contact with
(a select few whose opinions I have learned to respect).
Probably 99% who switch to synthetic are happy. High time engines that soon
experience problems might have seen those same problems with any type oil.
Who knows, for this is difficult to prove or disprove.
It seems a more frequent problem is seen with freshly overhauled engines.
People sometimes switch to synthetics before fresh engines are fully broken
in. Modern dyno oil is very slick too, so proper ring seating can take
longer than one would expect.
Good oil is cheap, metal is expensive, and that's no myth.
Don Miller
75 project still in pieces
Shenandoah Valley of Virginia
Patrick sometimes its hard to find the truth with all of the hype we have
today from the companies. I use mobil 1 in my toyota and Corvette and got
immediate MPG improvements in both of them. both engines run quieter also.I
am nmot worried about these engines its the olds that worries me whenever I
think about changing it to mobil 1
My understanding is that you can safely substitute mobil 1 for Dexron2 or 3.
>>
>> The seal swelling package in Mobile 1 is very good but I could not find
>> numbers on that.
>
>I hate posting "non-scientific" stuff in response to an excellent and
>well-documented post, but take as an additional data point my
>observations regarding my "new" '92 Jeep Cherokee. I bought this car
>with 86,000 miles to use as a daily "beater" and toad for the GMC. The
>oil had just been changed by a Q-lube franchise when I bought it. I
>drove the car a couple thousand miles and then changed it to Mobil1
>10W30. I noted before changing the oil that the car was leaving a
>couple drops of oil on the garage floor overnight. After changing to
>Mobil1, I had to add one quart at around 1500 miles. After that, oil
>consumption ceased - period. No more drops on the floor. I can only
>attribute that change to Mobil1.
>
>Even less scientific, consider my fuel milage. When I first bought the
>car, it consistently got 17mpg. After changing to Mobil1, the mileage
>slowly improved to around 20 for my "normal" driving, but will drop back
>down to 17 if I'm running over 70 on the interstate.
>
>The change in fuel mileage may be attributable to my getting accustomed
>to the car and adjusting my driving habits. Either way I'm pleased as
>neither of these were reasons that I changed to Mobil1 in the first
>place - they're just gravy.
>
>Now if I could just figure out whether it's safe to use Mobil1 ATF in
>the Jeep auto transmission. In the "Fluids" section of the owners
>manual, it says "DexronIII/Mercon". In "Service" section, it says
>"Mopar 7176". Can't seem to get a straight answer from anyone. I may
>just buy Redline C+, which is made for the 7176 application and quit
>worrying about it.
>
>Patrick
>
>
Tom & Marg Warner
Vernon Center NY
1976 palmbeach
"The beautiful Mohawk Vally"
today from the companies. I use mobil 1 in my toyota and Corvette and got
immediate MPG improvements in both of them. both engines run quieter also.I
am nmot worried about these engines its the olds that worries me whenever I
think about changing it to mobil 1
My understanding is that you can safely substitute mobil 1 for Dexron2 or 3.
>>
>> The seal swelling package in Mobile 1 is very good but I could not find
>> numbers on that.
>
>I hate posting "non-scientific" stuff in response to an excellent and
>well-documented post, but take as an additional data point my
>observations regarding my "new" '92 Jeep Cherokee. I bought this car
>with 86,000 miles to use as a daily "beater" and toad for the GMC. The
>oil had just been changed by a Q-lube franchise when I bought it. I
>drove the car a couple thousand miles and then changed it to Mobil1
>10W30. I noted before changing the oil that the car was leaving a
>couple drops of oil on the garage floor overnight. After changing to
>Mobil1, I had to add one quart at around 1500 miles. After that, oil
>consumption ceased - period. No more drops on the floor. I can only
>attribute that change to Mobil1.
>
>Even less scientific, consider my fuel milage. When I first bought the
>car, it consistently got 17mpg. After changing to Mobil1, the mileage
>slowly improved to around 20 for my "normal" driving, but will drop back
>down to 17 if I'm running over 70 on the interstate.
>
>The change in fuel mileage may be attributable to my getting accustomed
>to the car and adjusting my driving habits. Either way I'm pleased as
>neither of these were reasons that I changed to Mobil1 in the first
>place - they're just gravy.
>
>Now if I could just figure out whether it's safe to use Mobil1 ATF in
>the Jeep auto transmission. In the "Fluids" section of the owners
>manual, it says "DexronIII/Mercon". In "Service" section, it says
>"Mopar 7176". Can't seem to get a straight answer from anyone. I may
>just buy Redline C+, which is made for the 7176 application and quit
>worrying about it.
>
>Patrick
>
>
Tom & Marg Warner
Vernon Center NY
1976 palmbeach
"The beautiful Mohawk Vally"
That's the easy part. What I can't seem to get cleared up is whether
the Jeep tranny is compatible with Dexron or is Mopar 7176 the only
acceptable fluid type.
Patrick
>
> My understanding is that you can safely substitute mobil 1 for Dexron2 or 3.
>
> >>
> >> The seal swelling package in Mobile 1 is very good but I could not find
> >> numbers on that.
> >
> >Now if I could just figure out whether it's safe to use Mobil1 ATF in
> >the Jeep auto transmission. In the "Fluids" section of the owners
> >manual, it says "DexronIII/Mercon". In "Service" section, it says
> >"Mopar 7176". Can't seem to get a straight answer from anyone. I may
> >just buy Redline C+, which is made for the 7176 application and quit
> >worrying about it.
the Jeep tranny is compatible with Dexron or is Mopar 7176 the only
acceptable fluid type.
Patrick
>
> My understanding is that you can safely substitute mobil 1 for Dexron2 or 3.
>
> >>
> >> The seal swelling package in Mobile 1 is very good but I could not find
> >> numbers on that.
> >
> >Now if I could just figure out whether it's safe to use Mobil1 ATF in
> >the Jeep auto transmission. In the "Fluids" section of the owners
> >manual, it says "DexronIII/Mercon". In "Service" section, it says
> >"Mopar 7176". Can't seem to get a straight answer from anyone. I may
> >just buy Redline C+, which is made for the 7176 application and quit
> >worrying about it.
