Quote:
Originally Posted by MTUpower
Can you verify that the oil giant Mobil chooses to NOT pay a fee for the proper industry standard rating? That smells fishy. Can you also verify that the MB ratings also include the diesels of old or diesels period? Diesel oil has to have soot dispersants which gasoline oil does not. I don't know of any diesel engine manufacturer which recommends an oil that is not diesel rated- but in the last ten years oil approval is a hot topic and I could be mistaken.
|
Well to start, because the API states that a CF rating is obsolete, which is something that you can see from their literature if you dont believe me:
http://www.api.org/certifications/engineoil/categories/upload/motor_oil_guide_2010_120210.pdf
And from them specifically:
Quote:
CF: OBSOLETE Introduced in 1994. For off-road, indirect-injected and other diesel engines including those using fuel with over 0.5% weight sulfur. Can be used in place of CD oils.
CF-4: OBSOLETE Introduced in 1990. For high-speed, four-stroke, naturally aspirated and turbocharged engines. Can be used in place of CD and CE oils.
|
Now, pull down the API licensing agreement, part C. In there, section 6, youll find:
Quote:
|
6. Licensee agrees to pay to API an annual minimum royalty fee [two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) for API members; three thousand dollars ($3,000) for non- members] plus $0.0030 per gallon of licensed motor oil after the first million gallons of production. This minimum royalty may be revised annually if deemed necessary by API to cover the costs of administration and enforcement of the program. Licensee agrees to submit the necessary annual volume of sales data and the minimum royalty fee to API within the time frame specified by API. All fees are payable in U.S. dollars.
|
So explain to me exactly why Mobil would pay a licensing fee for an API spec that is obsolete and has no relevance to anything in use in any application?
If you have an application that is diesel and want to use that oil, it holds other diesel-specific specifications. ACEA B3, B4, which the oil officially holds are passenger car diesel specs. The oil holds a Dexos 2 rating (not stated on the PDS), which is an oil spec for GM diesel engines. All of the MB 229.x specs utilize a diesel engine for diesel-specific tests (OM 646 DE22 LA (CEC SG-L-099)), as well as map also to some VW TDI tests and the VW 502 spec itself. VW uses the 505 spec for diesels, and it too is listed on the M1 oil.
Now, M1 0w-40 does claim to meet CF, but note the crafty wording:
Quote:
|
According to ExxonMobil, Mobil 1 0W40 is of the following quality:
|
It claims to meet the old GM-LL-B diesel spec this way too.
So in other words, M1 0w-40 holds diesel specs and is a lube design for diesel engines for which it fits, namely newer diesels that utilize their manufacturers or the ACEA diesel specifications and do not have so much emissions equipment that they need a low SAPS oil to protect it.
But how much of the discussion on here is for the high pressure direct injection common rail modern passenger car diesels that these specs are all written to? Maybe a few on here run CDI engines and this will work, but most on here as far as I can see run old IDI engines that load a lot more soot.
I love M1 0w-40 oil, and I also love synthetic oils in general. Its all I run in my vehicles. But would I use that oil in any w115/116/123/124/126/210? Nope.
Why? Because the current diesel specifications for HD diesel engines align to the modern API Commercial C specifications, and these oils hold lube designs really optimized for diesel engines and their needs and requirements, including the more severe soot loading, TBN loss, etc. So they will do a better job in those areas.
Will M1 passenger car oil work? Ill bet it will just fine.
But when I can utilize a lube with an add pack better optimized for my application, why wouldnt I?
But back to the original question - Mobil IS paying for certs that are of relevance to its intended operation in gas AND diesel engines. M1 0w-40 does hold some modern diesel specs. It is not holding active certification for an obsolete commercial diesel spec, because no diesel operator on the commercial side is going to be running that oil in their engine when there are far better options available for their diesels. Mobil pays for the specs required to maintain warranty coverage of engines and vehicles that they have a customer base with that need. Paying to show an obsolete spec that nobody is going to buy on is just a waste of money.
Also for your other question, all MB 229 specs have to be tested on the engine I cited above and pass for varying characteristics for the following tests:
Cam wear inlet (avg. max. wear 8 cams)
Cam wear outlet (avg. max. wear 8 cams)
Cylinder wear (avg. 4 cylinder)
Bore polishing (13 mm) - max. value of 4 cyl. Piston cleanliness (avg. 4 pistons)
Engine sludge avg.
Ring sticking
Tappet wear inlet (avg. max. wear 8 cams)
Tappet wear outlet (avg. max. wear 8 cams)
Bearing wear main / con rod bearing
Piston ring wear axial @ ring 1 (4)
Piston ring wear axial @ ring 2 (4)
Piston ring wear axial @ ring 3 (4)
Piston ring wear radial @ ring 1 (4)
Piston ring wear radial @ ring 2 (4)
Piston ring wear radial @ ring 3 (4)
Timing chain wear (elongation)
Oil consumption
Soot
Viscosity increase at 100°C
FWIW, since the HDEOs that I advocate all carry MB 228.x specs, those oils too must meet the basic MB requirements as well as diesel specific wear and other tests on the OM646 engine I mentioned above, and then those oils also have to be tested on an OM 501 LA Euro 5 (CEC-SG-L-101) as well.