slipstream444

90crvtec hit it on the head - I consistently read what seems to be a constant stream of posts from M1 users complaining about excessive oil burn.

M1 is really not any better than dino oil with the exception of low temp pumpability. It's not cheap, and really provides no advantage in wear protection. M1 consistently rates poorly in volitility tests, which is backed up by the high burn rates posted on this forum.

I use Amsoil and my S2000 uses less than a 0.25 quart in over 3,000 miles.
I started using Amsoil back in 1996 because it was the only synthetic at the time you could run in a rotary engine (RX-7) without destroying it. Mazda clearly states in all their manuals for rotary powered vehicles to not use synthetics. The reason for this: early, well intentioned RX-7 owners used Mobil 1 in their cars, which unfortunately destroyed a number of engines. Why? Rotary engines inject oil into the rotary housing which ultimately gets burned. M1 leaves behind a lot of difficult to remove carbon deposits when burned . These massive carbon deposits destroyed the internals of many rotary engines.
So why doesn't Amsoil cause the same problem? It takes longer to burn (much more stable), and ultimately burns clean - it doesn't leave behind deposits.

If you have an excessive burn rate and you use M1 - change to a different brand. Mobil 1 is not that good of an oil. My burn rates with Amsoil are less than 0.25 qts per 3,000+ miles. I know several Redline users that report less than 0.50 qts per 3,000 miles. Crank vents are fine, but why modify your car to solve a problem that can be fixed within two oil changes.

RACER

[QUOTE=Riceboi,Feb 4 2007, 09:24 PM]I had to add about 1 quart and a half of oil after about 1000 miles.

N/Apower

[QUOTE=slipstream444,Feb 8 2007, 02:26 AM] 90vrvtec hit it on the head - I consistently read what seems to be a constant stream of posts from M1 users complaining about excessive oil burn.

90crvtec

First off, its 'Mobil', not "Mobile". We aren't talking about mobile homes here.

Secondly, what makes it such a great oil? Is it because they have commercials on TV? Because they put their logo on F1 cars? Find me a shred of evidence that shows M1 is any better than Pennzoil Platinum or an equivalent synthetic that shares shelf space with M1. Slipstream444 is dead on, it has bad burn off rates. That's not a characteristic of a "great oil" if you ask me.

Finally, GC is made for German cars. I'm glad it works for all you F-body guys with big, loose V8s. But with a ~12.2 CST at operating temp you might as well run a 5w40 as spec'd in the manual for the S2000.

I appreciate all your comments about your 5.0. But that's like me going to a Corvette forum and telling people that I redline my car at 9000 RPM all day and I don't break anything. Therefore, they should be able to do the same with their Corvettes. Do you see the broken logic yet?

N/Apower

1. Mobile one, when you properly select the weight provides avg./above avg. wear numbers.
2. Pennzoil Platinum is a VERY good synthetic and I put it a step above M1. I never said M1 was the best, but just because it is not the best does not mean its crap either.
3. Burn off rates? What is that? The reason you see less on the dipstick is because it shears down and its thin already and a bit more gets past the valve seals/oil control rings/mists and is sucked out the PCV. M1 does shear a bit, but so do most other synthetics (Castrol, ect.)
4.Big loose V8's? The one thing about the LS1 motor is it has a short skirt piston and this can cause a bit of rock in the bore and a thicker oil helps the rings seal against the cylinder wall better. It is a trade-off situation. I gain 20whp, I use a tad of oil. We also have low-tension oil rings. The LS1 is a very tight motor (main bearing clearance, ect.) and if you have any specs on the S2000's main clearance/ring-gap, ect. I would love to see them. Not as a "mine is better" BS pissing contest, but just because I am curious about it. Also, the PCV system on the LS1 is pure crap. NO excuses or reasoning in the world can overshadow THAT.
5. I made reference to my 5.0 simply to state that the compression does not matter in relation to oil control. Compression tests valve seal and compression ring seal. NOT! oil-control ring seal.

90crvtec

So what you're saying is that Mobil is a great oil so long as you can't buy Pennzoil Platinum instead. That's not a great oil, that's a mediocre oil. For the price, M1 is at a disadvantage.

As for burning more oil because it's thinner, I'll call BS on a lot of that. If an engine is burning considerable amounts of oil just because the oil is starting to shear into a lower grade then there's a bigger problem in the engine than just oil shearing. Go read this and then tell me thin oil is a bad thing. Now I'm not saying using a thicker oil won't cure oil consumption problems because it can. But it's the wrong approach to take on a car that is consuming oil, it's merely masking a larger problem instead of providing a true fix. I'm of the opinion that the rate of flow of a thin lubricant can provide equivalent and/or better protection compared with a thicker lubricant that has less flow.

Burn off rates are very real, check out NOACK volatility tests. You might be surprised at how much is actually just "disappearing" inside your motor at high temps vs being burned. This causes deposits and as slipstream444 already mention, it has proved fatal in several rotary applications. The S2000 has oil jets that aid in cooling the under side of the pistons. I often wonder how many times these little jets are responsible for so many people seeing "L" on their dipstick when they use an oil with bad NOACK scores. Pennzoil Platinum 5w30 has a lower burn off rate than M1 10w30 (I'm using a figure that I found on Amsoil's test site , Mobil suspiciously doesn't publish their NOACK figures anymore....). I'm not trying whore Pennzoil out as a better oil I'm just citing another example of how M1 is, at best, mediocre in quality. If anyone here can find a current number published by Mobil citing NOACK scores better than what I've seen then I'll update my post.

I don't want to get into a pissing contest with you here either. The design specs for the LSx series of motors are tighter than those on the LT1. However, any current production engine with piston slap issues is going to be labeled "loose" by me. Sorry for the miscommunication.

slipstream444

One important point I didn't note earlier is that I was NOT talking about M1 Extended Performance. There is a huge difference between the performance of M1 Extended Performance and the standard formulation M1. It does this at a hefty price though.

The M1 EP actually outperforms a number of off-the-shelf synthetics in a number of areas, including standard M1.
However, while a number of the qualities of M1 EP are getting closer to the performance of Amsoil, it still falls well short.
M1 EP is still more volitile than several oils on the market - it was mid-pack in synthetics and close to a number of dino oils in the NOACK Volitility test (7.49%), and about 50% higher (MORE volitile) than Amsoil (5.44%). Pensoil Platinum faired better than M1 EP at 6.58%. *10W30 oils*

The volitility of the oil is not directly related to the shear stability of the oil. M1 EP is much more shear stable than M1 oils of past, however it's still relatively volitile.
A volitile oil does not have to shear down to burn off. M1 begins to burn off the second it warms up. As 90crvtech noted, when this happens, it leaves behind some really bad crap in your engine. If the volitile nature of your oil is building up deposits on or around your oil jets, you're spelling disaster my friend.

N/Apower

[QUOTE=90crvtec,Feb 8 2007, 10:51 AM] So what you're saying is that Mobil is a great oil so long as you can't buy Pennzoil Platinum instead. That's not a great oil, that's a mediocre oil. For the price, M1 is at a disadvantage.

As for burning more oil because it's thinner, I'll call BS on a lot of that. If an engine is burning considerable amounts of oil just because the oil is starting to shear into a lower grade then there's a bigger problem in the engine than just oil shearing. Go read this and then tell me thin oil is a bad thing. Now I'm not saying using a thicker oil won't cure oil consumption problems because it can. But it's the wrong approach to take on a car that is consuming oil, it's merely masking a larger problem instead of providing a true fix. I'm of the opinion that the rate of flow of a thin lubricant can provide equivalent and/or better protection compared with a thicker lubricant that has less flow.

Burn off rates are very real, check out NOACK volatility tests. You might be surprised at how much is actually just "disappearing" inside your motor at high temps vs being burned. This causes deposits and as slipstream444 already mention, it has proved fatal in several rotary applications. The S2000 has oil jets that aid in cooling the under side of the pistons. I often wonder how many times these little jets are responsible for so many people seeing "L" on their dipstick when they use an oil with bad NOACK scores. Pennzoil Platinum 5w30 has a lower burn off rate than M1 10w30 (I'm using a figure that I found on Amsoil's test site , Mobil suspiciously doesn't publish their NOACK figures anymore....). I'm not trying whore Pennzoil out as a better oil I'm just citing another example of how M1 is, at best, mediocre in quality. If anyone here can find a current number published by Mobil citing NOACK scores better than what I've seen then I'll update my post.

I don't want to get into a pissing contest with you here either. The design specs for the LSx series of motors are tighter than those on the LT1. However, any current production engine with piston slap issues is going to be labeled "loose" by me. Sorry for the miscommunication.

N/Apower

Here. Everything you could EVER want to know about LS1 clearances.

http://www.z06vette.com/forums/archive/ind...hp/t-75982.html

Does that look loose to you? (I am a domestic guy and I am asking you from an import guy's viewpoint. This is not me being an ass and being rhetorical. Does it?)

slipstream444

If you think F1 teams run down to the local Walmart and buy the same Mobil 1 that bubba throws in his favorite GM pickup - you're out of your mind.

The oil that goes into an F1 engine is as custom made as the engines themselves.

The technology that resides in an F1 engine is decades ahead of anything we'll ever see on our roads. We won't be using petrol powered cars long enough to see the technology applied.
The technology involved with the oil used in F1 engines is equally as advanced. It's not anything close to what you can buy.