Question: Mobli 1

[crumps]

I have a 2012 GS Coupe with 1400 miles. It is my understanding all engines are bench run forty hours prior to installation. My question is when do I get my first Mobil 1 oil change. I have had a variety of answers: 1) at 1500 miles or 3 months 2) at 3000 miles 3) at normal 7500 miles. Which is correct?
Thank you in advance for your comments.

 

[Hib Halverson]

I have a 2012 GS Coupe with 1400 miles. It is my understanding all engines are bench run forty hours prior to installation.

No production GM engine is bench run for 40 hours prior to installation. The dry sump LS3s, LS7s and LS9s are cold tested for a short period then hot tested just long enough to fine adjust engine balance. The other LS3s are cold tested but not hot tested.

My question is when do I get my first Mobil 1 oil change. I have had a variety of answers: 1) at 1500 miles or 3 months 2) at 3000 miles 3) at normal 7500 miles. Which is correct?

None of those.

For warranty purposes, it is acceptable to change the oil per the Service or Owner's Manuals so you can simply change the oil and filter when the oil life monitor turns on the "change oil" light.

That said, for better durability, do your first oil/filter change at about 1000 miles and, also, switch to Mobil 1 10W30 or, even better, one of the ester-based, "type IV" synthetic oils.

On the '12 that my Wife and I just bought, we did the first oil/filter change at a little over 1000 miles. We switched the engine to Red Line Synthetic 10W30. Beyond that we'll change the filter every 4000 miles or so and change the oil according to the oil life monitor.

Enjoy that new GS!

 

[crumps]

Oil Change

Thank you for your valuable information

 

[Blue260]

switch to Mobil 1 10W30 or, even better, one of the ester-based, "type IV" synthetic oils.

Can you explain (why and what) is different between Mobil 1 and a "type IV" synthetic oil.

Also, why go to a 10w30 vs the recommended 5w30 viscosity.

Thanks,
chris

 

[Hib Halverson]

Can you explain (why and what) is different between Mobil 1 and a "type IV" synthetic oil.

First let me say that I made a typographical error in my previous post. I should have said...

That said, for better durability, do your first oil/filter change at about 1000 miles and, also, switch to Mobil 1 10W30 or, even better, one of the ester-based, "type V" synthetic oils.

I apologize any confusion that caused.

The difference between type IV oils and type V oils is their base stocks. Type IV oils typically use either synthesized hydrocarbon or poly-alpha-olefin (PAO) base stocks. Type V oils are ester-based. Both the Mobil 1, currently factory-fill in LS3 dry sump, LS7 and LS9 engines, and the engine oil which is factory fill in wet sump LS3s are Type IV oils.

The simple answer is that the difference between Type IV and Type V engine oils is a question of "better" or "best" along with a question of cost. Type IV engine oils will be adequate for use in any Corvette engine and, of the Type IVs, Mobil 1 10W30 is an excellent choice.

Type V engine oils will provide an added margin of performance and durability especially in a high-performance and/or hot weaather duty cycle. Admittedly, the majority of engines don't need them, but those which are subjected to that kind of severe duty may experience improved performance and will likely experience better durability when lubricated with them.

Also, why go to a 10w30 vs the recommended 5w30 viscosity.

My opinion is that, while both are an SAE 30 at 212°F, at higher oil temperatures, because the 10W30 has less viscosity index improvers than does the 5W30, there might be a reliability/durability advantage. GM specifies 5W30 because it improves fuel economy as well as providing adequate lubrication but the only engines which really need a 5W30 are those operated regularly in cold weather.

I've never used a 5W30 for an extended period in any of my engines. One of my first upgrades is to change to Red Line 10W30 which is a Type V, ester-based product.

Hope that helps.

 

[catbert]

On the other hand, I've used syn Pennzoil 5W- 30 in my C5s and C6s with great results. I drove track weekends and drag weekends in the toasty summer Phoenix environs with no issues other than driver error. But that was then, and now that I'm a cruiser, not a racer, there's no stress on me, or the oil.

 

[Tuna]

Beyond that we'll change the filter every 4000 miles or so and change the oil according to the oil life monitor.

I've been doing this with all my cars (except the Volt) for years and years and I also use 10w30. I started doing the oil filter only changes on my '92 Vette a year or so after I got it (around 1994). Changed the oil every third filter or about 12,000 miles.
I drove the '92 Vette for 11 years and then had the motor torn down to add power. At the dealership where the work was performed, the inside of the engine looked brand new. None of the bearing surfaces showed any wear. New "standard" bearing and rings were installed and the cylinder walls burnished to allow the new rings to seat.

During that 11 years, the old '92 was autocrossed in Oklahoma and south Texas, used in "open road runs" and generally driven hard and put away wet regularly.

The oil used in all my cars is Mobil 1.

 

[Blue260]

One of my first upgrades is to change to Red Line 10W30 which is a Type V, ester-based product.

Are there other type V ester based oils that are more commercially available, ie. Pennzoil or Quaker State?

thanks,
chris

 

[Hib Halverson]

Are there other type V ester based oils that are more commercially available, ie. Pennzoil or Quaker State?

thanks,
chris

To my knowledge, none of the mass-marketed engine oil brands sell an ester-based synthetic. The brands which I believe sell ester-based engine oils are:

Red Line Synthetic Oil Corp.
Motul
NEO
Amszoil
Royal Purple

...and there might be others.

I know all Red Line products except its coolant additives are ester-based. I'm not sure if that is true with the other brands listed so, if those brands interest you, I'd research their products before I buy to make sure they're ester-based.

 

[1analguy]

...Type V engine oils will provide an added margin of performance and durability especially in a high-performance and/or hot weaather duty cycle. Admittedly, the majority of engines don't need them, but those which are subjected to that kind of severe duty may experience improved performance and will likely experience better durability when lubricated with them.My opinion is that, while both are an SAE 30 at 212°F, at higher oil temperatures, because the 10W30 has less viscosity index improvers than does the 5W30, there might be a reliability/durability advantage. GM specifies 5W30 because it improves fuel economy as well as providing adequate lubrication but the only engines which really need a 5W30 are those operated regularly in cold weather...

I saw a statement by a Mobil engineer on one of the other forums that 0W-40 Mobil 1 has the most stable additive package of any of the Mobil 1 oils. Why this would be true is beyond me, but apparently these things don't always follow conventional logic regarding viscosity spread...

 

[catbert]

I saw a statement by a Mobil engineer on one of the other forums that 0W-40 Mobil 1 has the most stable additive package of any of the Mobil 1 oils. Why this would be true is beyond me, but apparently these things don't always follow conventional logic regarding viscosity spread...

You read it on the Internet - it must be true.

 

[1analguy]

It was on a Dodge SRT engineering session. They occasionally have the SRT engineers doing a Q & A session with the forum members, and the Mobil engineer was sitting in since 0W-40 Mobil 1 is the factory fill on all SRT vehicles. Somebody asked him about the process for choosing the grade of Mobil 1 for the 6.1L, and the additive package comment just came out while he was discussing that process. So, yes...I tend to believe someone with credentials who is in a position to actually know and was directly involved in that decision, over someone with a "woody" for some other brand/type/viscosity of oil just because they've had good luck with it. The fact is that there are all kinds of synthetics on the market, many (most?) of which will do absolute wonders in any modern engine, even in severe-duty usage. I don't doubt that Red Line, Amzoil, etc. are all great oils, too. I was just pointing out that a blanket statement that a narrower viscosity range makes for a more stable oil is not always accurate...

 

[catbert]

It was on a Dodge SRT engineering session. They occasionally have the SRT engineers doing a Q & A session with the forum members, and the Mobil engineer was sitting in since 0W-40 Mobil 1 is the factory fill on all SRT vehicles. Somebody asked him about the process for choosing the grade of Mobil 1 for the 6.1L, and the additive package comment just came out while he was discussing that process. So, yes...I tend to believe someone with credentials who is in a position to actually know and was directly involved in that decision, over someone with a "woody" for some other brand/type/viscosity of oil just because they've had good luck with it. The fact is that there are all kinds of synthetics on the market, many (most?) of which will do absolute wonders in any modern engine, even in severe-duty usage. I don't doubt that Red Line, Amzoil, etc. are all great oils, too. I was just pointing out that a blanket statement that a narrower viscosity range makes for a more stable oil is not always accurate...

I absolutely agree with your conclusion, if not how you got there. I too think that any one of many modern synthetics are plenty good for any circumstances we are ever likely to see, and most of what we won't ever see. If teams run Mobil1 or Castrol syns for 24 hours at Daytona or LeMans, they will perform well in a Vette that lives on the streets and only infrequently visit a track - even though I don't buy those brands.

 

[Hib Halverson]

I saw a statement by a Mobil engineer on one of the other forums that 0W-40 Mobil 1 has the most stable additive package of any of the Mobil 1 oils. Why this would be true is beyond me, but apparently these things don't always follow conventional logic regarding viscosity spread...

In the context of my earlier comment, the comparative stability of the additive package in Mobil 1 0W40 oil (or any other Mobil 1 product, for that matter) is not related to the amount of viscosity index improvers.

For the synthetic base stock used in the M1 0W40 sold in North America to have that wide a viscosity range, it must use a fair amount of VI improvers.

VI improvers are not "oil" in that they have no lubrication function or ability. They are chemicals added to the base stock to give it the viscosity of an SAE0-weight oil in cold weather and an SAE40-weight in hot weather. So, in effect, a 0-40 is "less oil" than is a 10W30 formulated from the same base stock.

No one operating a Corvette in the U.S., other than northern Alaska in the winter, needs an SAE0W oil and very few need an SAE5W. Nevertheless, the refining industry is selling wider and wider multi-vis oils because consumers (most of whom don't know much about oil) are under the impression that the wider the vis range the better the product. The wider vis ranges like 0W40 or 10W60 makes them seem more "sexy" to the less technically astute mass market.
What a crock!

One quality of a premium ester-based synthetic is that the ester base stock has a limited "natural" multi-vis property. For example, Red Line 10W30 is formulated with no Vi improvers. Mobil 1, which is not ester based, requires them even for its 10W30 formulation and the wider the range (ie: 5W30, 0W30, 0W40 and etc) the more the VI improvers are needed. Additionally, type IV oils (M1) need more VI improvers than do type V oils (Red Line, Amzoil, NEO, etc).

Bottom line:
For a given viscosity range, the less VI improvers in the oil, the better the oil.

 

[1analguy]

...Bottom line:
For a given viscosity range, the less VI improvers in the oil, the better the oil.

Why? You're implying that those evil VI improvers in Mobil 1 are somehow detracting from its performance, as an oil, when compared to one of your boutique ester-based brands with, ostensibly, fewer VI improvers. Even if this was true, most here have already agreed that "VI-improver-infested" Mobil 1 is way more oil than we will ever really put to any kind of ultimate test, so why are we picking fly specks out of pepper? I mean come on, what kind of punishment are you inflicting on your engine (on the street or on the track) that our daily drivers, or the C6Rs that are running at Le Mans, are not seeing?

For the sake of quelling an argument, I will concede that it is possible that, way out on the far edges of the oil-performance/longevity envelope, there may be ester-based oils that will "out-perform" Mobil 1 in some way. Having said that though, I also have to say that, given engines in sound condition, I have never met (and will never meet) anyone who had (or will have) cause to regret using Mobil 1...and that's without considering the cost/convenience factor. The cost/benefit consideration for ester-based oils is a lose/lose. I get my Mobil 1 at the local farm supply outlet for $6/quart. Whenever I look for Amsoil or Red Line...well, I have to look for Amsoil or Red Line and, unless I'm willing to drive for more than an hour or buy it online and pay shipping on top of the almost-double price of the oil, it isn't even readily available to me.

My time and money are both finite resources, yet I would gladly spend them both to obtain and use ester-based oil if it would in some way benefit my car to switch away from Mobil 1...but since it won't, I don't. You may live near an Amsoil or Red Line distributor...if so, availability is no issue for you. That leaves the issue of cost...and if you're flush, that's no issue either and I'm happy for you. By all means, enjoy using Red Line or Amsoil. They're terrific oils, but so is Mobil 1...and you can find it almost anywhere, and at far less cost.

 

[catbert]

Just curious - has anyone had an oil related engine failure?

 

[Hib Halverson]

Why? You're implying that those evil VI improvers in Mobil 1 are somehow detracting from its performance, as an oil,

(snip)

In what seems to be typical, you're grossly distorting what I've said.

But, yes, in an incremental manner, M1 0W40 has more VI improvers and is less of an oil than is M1 10W30. In a more substantial manner, M1 0W40 and 5W30 and to a somewhat lesser extent M1 10W30, are inferior products to Red Line 10W30 because 1) the ester base stock is a better choice for an engine oil and 2) most ester-based 10W30s have no VI improvers at all.

As for all the stuff about "VI improver infested oil", people who "regret" using M1 and other foolishness, that's all your way of distorting the issue.

I will agree what given a "normal duty cycle", Mobil 1 5W30 will meet warranty requirements and in the vast majority of engines, will meet GM's durability targets.

Mobil 1 is way more oil than we will ever really put to any kind of ultimate test,

I'd say Mobil 1 has an adequate margin of durability in an "ultimate" test as long as the duty cycle remains normal.
Mobil 1 5W30 comes up short if the duty cycle is altered such that you run a few track day events in the summer at high oil temperature.

 

[catbert]

(snip) I'd say Mobil 1 has an adequate margin of durability in an "ultimate" test as long as the duty cycle remains normal.
Mobil 1 5W30 comes up short if the duty cycle is altered such that you run a few track day events in the summer at high oil temperature.

I'd like some empirical back-up for that conclusion. Although, I was never one of them, most of the street car track days participants in and around Phoenix were/are Mobil 1 users, and didn't/don't seem to suffer any ill effects of running Mobil 5-30. We are talking ambient temps of 105 to 115 degrees for 8-10 hours ...pretty severe service. I usually ran Royal Purple back when I was serious about it, and Pennzoil after I wasn't. I never had any problem, including "using" oil, one way or another. If I was going to make a blanket statement without scientific back-up it would be any that modern syn should be good for anything other than an endurance race. But that's just an opinion. I really think all of us are picking nits, cuz' there hasn't been any demonstration that any of the oils in question are problematic in any truly demonstrable way.

 

[Huskerman]

Racing oil tests by Amzoil......

Amsoil Dealer Reviews Comparative Motor Oil Test Results - Amsoil, Castrol, Mobil, Valvoline, and Penzoil


Hmmmm....might be switching to Royal Purple......

http://www.animegame.com/cars/Oil Tests.pdf


Some oil facts.....

Fil's Auto Corner: Oil Facts v1.2


I think if you change your oil and filter every 5K or so for regular type driving Mobil 1 is fine. I have 90K on my C5 and it uses about 1/2 qt between changes. It has had Mobil 1 since day one.

 

[1analguy]

(snip)

In what seems to be typical, you're grossly distorting what I've said.

But, yes, in an incremental manner, M1 0W40 has more VI improvers and is less of an oil than is M1 10W30. In a more substantial manner, M1 0W40 and 5W30 and to a somewhat lesser extent M1 10W30, are inferior products to Red Line 10W30 because 1) the ester base stock is a better choice for an engine oil and 2) most ester-based 10W30s have no VI improvers at all.

As for all the stuff about "VI improver infested oil", people who "regret" using M1 and other foolishness, that's all your way of distorting the issue.

I will agree what given a "normal duty cycle", Mobil 1 5W30 will meet warranty requirements and in the vast majority of engines, will meet GM's durability targets.

I'd say Mobil 1 has an adequate margin of durability in an "ultimate" test as long as the duty cycle remains normal.
Mobil 1 5W30 comes up short if the duty cycle is altered such that you run a few track day events in the summer at high oil temperature.

My intent was not to "grossly distort" what you said, and I don't believe that I did. Here you've made the same assertions again...that M1 is inferior to Red Line because M1 contains VI improvers (by the way, what kinds of additives are used in the esters that are not contained in M1, and why don't those additives detract from ester performance?), and that ester base stock is just somehow, nebulously "better". As to my "VI-improver-infested" and "regret" comments, they were a round-about way of trying to make a point that catbert made even better and more directly:

I'd like some empirical back-up for that conclusion. Although, I was never one of them, most of the street car track days participants in and around Phoenix were/are Mobil 1 users, and didn't/don't seem to suffer any ill effects of running Mobil 5-30. We are talking ambient temps of 105 to 115 degrees for 8-10 hours ...pretty severe service. I usually ran Royal Purple back when I was serious about it, and Pennzoil after I wasn't. I never had any problem, including "using" oil, one way or another. If I was going to make a blanket statement without scientific back-up it would be any that modern syn should be good for anything other than an endurance race. But that's just an opinion. I really think all of us are picking nits, cuz' there hasn't been any demonstration that any of the oils in question are problematic in any truly demonstrable way.

:thanks: I agree, with one caveat: that, IMHO, the boutique esters are problematic...but only in the sense that they're way too exclusive and expensive when there are (functionally) equally capable, more affordable, and readily-available alternatives (type IV synthetics)...

Esters can only be considered "better" than Mobil 1 if they offer some kind of functional advantage, but since the demands of conventional automotive engines are well within the capability envelope of M1, there is no advantage/superiority to esters in that application. There may well be other applications (space program, etc.) where the different characteristics of esters do indeed prove to be desirable or necessary, but those applications are not what we were discussing...