M1 5-40 ?
Tech Resident
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,117
Likes: 3
From: Philly
Originally Posted by LS1MONSTER
I can understand not wanting to pay WS6 store for the oil...but if you think how much time and gas people waste driving around looking for GC...its not all that bad. Just click order and be done with the hassle. 
Tech Resident
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,117
Likes: 3
From: Philly
Originally Posted by Travis99LS1
dude no offense..but there is no excuse for having your low oil light come on. The low oil light is for people who know nothing about cars. There's really no excuse for going 4000 miles and not checking your oil..especially when your using a new oil for the first time and your not sure if your motor may consume this at a quicker rate than the oil you were previously using.
now do you understand the logic behind it?
Originally Posted by Travis99LS1
I think i would me more concerned with running my motor that low on oil, than worried about which synthetic is thicker than the other. Thats just my opinion though..i dont mean for this to sound like i'm hatin on ya or anything..its just seems weird to be that worried about what oil you put in your car..but than you let it get low enough for the low oil light to come on..
i believe the LOW OIL light comes on when you're 1 quart low. 1 quart low in over 4,000 miles isn't that bad and my oil pressure has been great the whole time. it's just the fact that it DID come on when the GC has gone longer several times with no LOW OIL light that shows mobil 1's greater likelihood to be consumed.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,231
Likes: 1
From: Just This Side of Damnation
Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369
you took my whole post out of context and made broad, sweeping generalizations that didn't encompass what i said. it didn't do much to my argument at all.
What you are saying is not correct. Your generalizations are not correct. Your analogies on not relative. M1, in the general pecking order, is not one of the thinner oils.
If you cling to your ingrained gernalizations, how can anybody take any of your other generalizations seriously? What does any of what you are saying aid the oil conversation in any way other than as an example of what not to believe?
Please, Choco, cast aside for a moment your preconceived notions of what M1 is and actually LOOK at the viscosity numbers of it and the oils around it. It really isn't all that thin. Plus, here's a thought: Consumption is not directly correlative to thinness. Thinness is not directly correlative to consumption. There are engines that don't consume M1. There are thin oils that aren't consumed as a matter of course.
GC is a good oil, but the pedestal it is on is not nearly as tall as your shortsightedness would lead you to believe. There are other oils that produce excellent numbers and don't have consumption problems. Pennzoil Platinum comes to mind, and it's about 10k times easier to acquire.
Get a grip, Man!
Tech Resident
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,117
Likes: 3
From: Philly
Originally Posted by Mr Incredible
I understand what you are saying. I answered you entirely in context. That you don't agree with me does not make me wrong.
What you are saying is not correct. Your generalizations are not correct. Your analogies on not relative. M1, in the general pecking order, is not one of the thinner oils.
What you are saying is not correct. Your generalizations are not correct. Your analogies on not relative. M1, in the general pecking order, is not one of the thinner oils.
Originally Posted by Mr Incredible
If you cling to your ingrained gernalizations, how can anybody take any of your other generalizations seriously? What does any of what you are saying aid the oil conversation in any way other than as an example of what not to believe?
Originally Posted by Mr Incredible
Please, Choco, cast aside for a moment your preconceived notions of what M1 is and actually LOOK at the viscosity numbers of it and the oils around it. It really isn't all that thin. Plus, here's a thought: Consumption is not directly correlative to thinness. Thinness is not directly correlative to consumption. There are engines that don't consume M1. There are thin oils that aren't consumed as a matter of course.
stop looking at your chart. start looking at reality. i have real results. you have a jpg file.
Originally Posted by Mr Incredible
GC is a good oil, but the pedestal it is on is not nearly as tall as your shortsightedness would lead you to believe. There are other oils that produce excellent numbers and don't have consumption problems. Pennzoil Platinum comes to mind, and it's about 10k times easier to acquire.
Get a grip, Man!
Get a grip, Man!
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,231
Likes: 1
From: Just This Side of Damnation
Well, Choco, I'm afraid there is nothing left to say. If it means nothing to you that others don't have consumption with M1, so be it. If it matters not that there are (according to the chart) at least 56 other 30wt oils that are thinner than M1, vs 15 that are thicker, oh well. If you can't grasp the idea that what you've figured out may not be the reason for what you saw, ok.
You have gathered around you all your prejudices and opinions and will entertain no other ideas. Best of luck to you. I won't argue any more about it since you are obviously here for the argument and not the exchange of information.
My time is better spent elsewhere. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
Cheers.
You have gathered around you all your prejudices and opinions and will entertain no other ideas. Best of luck to you. I won't argue any more about it since you are obviously here for the argument and not the exchange of information.
My time is better spent elsewhere. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
Cheers.
Tech Resident
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,117
Likes: 3
From: Philly
again:
1.) mobil 1 is thin. regardless if other oils are thinner or not, mobil 1 is still thin in all its varieties.
2.) most everyone i've ever talked to running a mobil 1 5W-30 or 10W-30 has consumption issues. i've gotten many people to switch over from mobil 1 to GC and their consumption issues stopped altogether or decreased dramatically. i switched from GC to a 40 weight mobil 1 - a much better oil than a 30 weight - and i still consumed more.
3.) i didn't come here for the argument. you did. you keep waving a useless chart in front of my face when i have real world effects in my corner. i don't care about a useless number, i care about how the oil actually performs. mobil 1 in EVERY weight is outperformed by other oils out there. it's mediocre and very overpriced for what you get.
i wish you would understand that i'm not arguing numbers. numbers are completely useless in this situation. this is all about results. you fail to acknowledge my real world experience because you have a chart with numbers on it. so be it.
1.) mobil 1 is thin. regardless if other oils are thinner or not, mobil 1 is still thin in all its varieties.
2.) most everyone i've ever talked to running a mobil 1 5W-30 or 10W-30 has consumption issues. i've gotten many people to switch over from mobil 1 to GC and their consumption issues stopped altogether or decreased dramatically. i switched from GC to a 40 weight mobil 1 - a much better oil than a 30 weight - and i still consumed more.
3.) i didn't come here for the argument. you did. you keep waving a useless chart in front of my face when i have real world effects in my corner. i don't care about a useless number, i care about how the oil actually performs. mobil 1 in EVERY weight is outperformed by other oils out there. it's mediocre and very overpriced for what you get.
i wish you would understand that i'm not arguing numbers. numbers are completely useless in this situation. this is all about results. you fail to acknowledge my real world experience because you have a chart with numbers on it. so be it.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,231
Likes: 1
From: Just This Side of Damnation
But before we go, please let me ask if I have your position correct, Choco, for the record. I don't want you to think that I wasn't paying attention to anything but that silly old chart...
You are saying M1 oils (all) are thin. They prove themselves thin by the simple fact that you, and others you have met in some way, have consumption problems?
And, that, regardless of M1's relative position on any old stinkin' chart, they are thin, Thin, THIN....regardless of any viscosity they may have or their position on the oil viscosity heirarchy?
And, finally, that the fact that your car (and others) consume M1, that there can be no other conclusion but that M1 is thin...regardless of its actual viscosity numbers?
Does that just about get it?
You are saying M1 oils (all) are thin. They prove themselves thin by the simple fact that you, and others you have met in some way, have consumption problems?
And, that, regardless of M1's relative position on any old stinkin' chart, they are thin, Thin, THIN....regardless of any viscosity they may have or their position on the oil viscosity heirarchy?
And, finally, that the fact that your car (and others) consume M1, that there can be no other conclusion but that M1 is thin...regardless of its actual viscosity numbers?
Does that just about get it?
Tech Resident
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,117
Likes: 3
From: Philly
Originally Posted by Mr Incredible
But before we go, please let me ask if I have your position correct, Choco, for the record. I don't want you to think that I wasn't paying attention to anything but that silly old chart...
You are saying M1 oils (all) are thin. They prove themselves thin by the simple fact that you, and others you have met in some way, have consumption problems?
You are saying M1 oils (all) are thin. They prove themselves thin by the simple fact that you, and others you have met in some way, have consumption problems?
Originally Posted by Mr Incredible
And, that, regardless of M1's relative position on any old stinkin' chart, they are thin, Thin, THIN....regardless of any viscosity they may have or their position on the oil viscosity heirarchy?
Originally Posted by Mr Incredible
And, finally, that the fact that your car (and others) consume M1, that there can be no other conclusion but that M1 is thin...regardless of its actual viscosity numbers?
Does that just about get it?
Does that just about get it?
why do i say that mobil 1 is a thin oil? because compared to conventional oils - the oil i base my opinions off of - it is pretty darn thin. it's very light compared to other synthetics like GC. it shears down a lot more easily, thinning it out even more and making it more easy to be devoured by my engine. the real world has showed me mobil 1 is just an inferior oil. it's not the worst out there for sure, but it's got a lot of catching up to do before it reaches GC standards.
FWIW, GC is on sale this week at autozone for $4.49. i'm thinking about trying to return my mobil 1 at another autozone and hoping they have GC in stock.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
I've been using 10w-40 Mobil 1 in my built LT1 since it was new, 80k miles now. Never burned an ounce. Zero Consumption. All components inside and out (out meaning valvetrain) look just like new after all these miles. The Pure Synthetic is great, before they came out with the 15k oil i usually went about 8k on 3k oil, and now with the 15k oil i only go about 12k on the change and everything always looks satisfactory... so I Vote M1 Synthetic 10w-40... Sometimes you can't find 40weight so I mix once in awhile...
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,231
Likes: 1
From: Just This Side of Damnation
But, wait...there's more.
Castrol lists density of 0w-30 Euro formula as .847 kg/litre. UK & German tech data sheets (TDS) list it as .838 kg/litre.
M1 lists 5w-30 on their TDS at .8 kg/litre.
That's a difference of only 5.5% at most, 4.4% at least. A few ounces. 7.05 lb/gallon vs 7.43 lb/gallon. That's hardly, "...mobil 1 weighs half that of a quart of GC..."
But it's only an unimportant number, huh?
Castrol lists density of 0w-30 Euro formula as .847 kg/litre. UK & German tech data sheets (TDS) list it as .838 kg/litre.
M1 lists 5w-30 on their TDS at .8 kg/litre.
That's a difference of only 5.5% at most, 4.4% at least. A few ounces. 7.05 lb/gallon vs 7.43 lb/gallon. That's hardly, "...mobil 1 weighs half that of a quart of GC..."
But it's only an unimportant number, huh?
Tech Resident
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,117
Likes: 3
From: Philly
Originally Posted by Mr Incredible
Yep, that's what I thought you were saying.
"My opinion carries greater weight than actual numbers."
Ok. We're done here.
"My opinion carries greater weight than actual numbers."
Ok. We're done here.
Tech Resident
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,117
Likes: 3
From: Philly
Originally Posted by Mr Incredible
But, wait...there's more.
Castrol lists density of 0w-30 Euro formula as .847 kg/litre. UK & German tech data sheets (TDS) list it as .838 kg/litre.
M1 lists 5w-30 on their TDS at .8 kg/litre.
That's a difference of only 5.5% at most, 4.4% at least. A few ounces. 7.05 lb/gallon vs 7.43 lb/gallon. That's hardly, "...mobil 1 weighs half that of a quart of GC..."
But it's only an unimportant number, huh?
Castrol lists density of 0w-30 Euro formula as .847 kg/litre. UK & German tech data sheets (TDS) list it as .838 kg/litre.
M1 lists 5w-30 on their TDS at .8 kg/litre.
That's a difference of only 5.5% at most, 4.4% at least. A few ounces. 7.05 lb/gallon vs 7.43 lb/gallon. That's hardly, "...mobil 1 weighs half that of a quart of GC..."
But it's only an unimportant number, huh?
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,231
Likes: 1
From: Just This Side of Damnation
I got a quart of M1 5w-30 on the way home. It's not much of a hardship since I can put it in one of the mowers. I weighed it on my postal scales. I weighed four of the bottles of GC out of my closest case.
Three of the GC bottles weighed 1lb 14.7oz. One weighed 1lb 14.9oz. The M1 bottle weighed 1lb 14.5oz.
The weight in grams was GC/871g, M1/864g. I don't consider 7g or .2 oz to be considerable, nor even noteworthy.
Looking at the Mobil website, I see the density of M1 0w-40 is .855 kg/litre. M1 5w-40 TD is .854. Again, GC is .838 and M1 5w-30 is .8.
I think the mistake is equating "heavier" weight oil as being literally so much heavier. Yes, perhaps it is, but on a much lesser scale than you are imagining. Consequently, the opposite is also being perpetrated by equating a "lighter" viscosity oil as being actually light, thin, or otherwise etheral. Such is not the case, and much of your opinion (which you state with the confidence of it being dead fact) is evidently based upon a very mis-calibrated scale. By stating the simple fact that M1 is known to be an oil that has consumption, it does not logically follow that it must, therefore, be a thin oil. Since there are many thinner oils that are not consumed in vehicles, do they then logically not exist?
Again, though GC may be thicker than M1, that doesn't make M1 thin. GC is almost the most viscous 30wt there is, and M1 5w-30 is greater than mid-pack in viscosity. But if it were only viscosity (thickness) that was important, there are many more viscous oils, and I don't hear anyone discussing them with the reverence they save for GC.
Three of the GC bottles weighed 1lb 14.7oz. One weighed 1lb 14.9oz. The M1 bottle weighed 1lb 14.5oz.
The weight in grams was GC/871g, M1/864g. I don't consider 7g or .2 oz to be considerable, nor even noteworthy.
Looking at the Mobil website, I see the density of M1 0w-40 is .855 kg/litre. M1 5w-40 TD is .854. Again, GC is .838 and M1 5w-30 is .8.
I think the mistake is equating "heavier" weight oil as being literally so much heavier. Yes, perhaps it is, but on a much lesser scale than you are imagining. Consequently, the opposite is also being perpetrated by equating a "lighter" viscosity oil as being actually light, thin, or otherwise etheral. Such is not the case, and much of your opinion (which you state with the confidence of it being dead fact) is evidently based upon a very mis-calibrated scale. By stating the simple fact that M1 is known to be an oil that has consumption, it does not logically follow that it must, therefore, be a thin oil. Since there are many thinner oils that are not consumed in vehicles, do they then logically not exist?
Again, though GC may be thicker than M1, that doesn't make M1 thin. GC is almost the most viscous 30wt there is, and M1 5w-30 is greater than mid-pack in viscosity. But if it were only viscosity (thickness) that was important, there are many more viscous oils, and I don't hear anyone discussing them with the reverence they save for GC.
Hey, let me jump into this pissin' match!
I'm switching to an M1 product, can't find GC any more around here. I drive less than 3000 miles per year, don't race, store in winter, change in spring (go ahead, jump on me about that), add if I need to. So I figure to have a good long life regardless.
That said, Choco - I've got a quart and a half of GC left on my workbench. I'll send it to you if you pay for shipping. If anyone in this world should have it, you should. Lemme know.
I'm switching to an M1 product, can't find GC any more around here. I drive less than 3000 miles per year, don't race, store in winter, change in spring (go ahead, jump on me about that), add if I need to. So I figure to have a good long life regardless.
That said, Choco - I've got a quart and a half of GC left on my workbench. I'll send it to you if you pay for shipping. If anyone in this world should have it, you should. Lemme know.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,415
Likes: 1
From: San Diego/Schertz,Texas
I used M1 up until my last oil change and always had to add oil. This past oil change I switched to German Castrol. After 4k miles, I havent had to add anything. The problem now is its time for an oil change and I am only able to find 4 qts. and Im not about to pay $50 for 6 qts online.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,415
Likes: 1
From: San Diego/Schertz,Texas
Originally Posted by gtarist
Hey, let me jump into this pissin' match!
I'm switching to an M1 product, can't find GC any more around here. I drive less than 3000 miles per year, don't race, store in winter, change in spring (go ahead, jump on me about that), add if I need to. So I figure to have a good long life regardless.
That said, Choco - I've got a quart and a half of GC left on my workbench. I'll send it to you if you pay for shipping. If anyone in this world should have it, you should. Lemme know.
I'm switching to an M1 product, can't find GC any more around here. I drive less than 3000 miles per year, don't race, store in winter, change in spring (go ahead, jump on me about that), add if I need to. So I figure to have a good long life regardless.
That said, Choco - I've got a quart and a half of GC left on my workbench. I'll send it to you if you pay for shipping. If anyone in this world should have it, you should. Lemme know.
