Honda V6 engines and synthetic oil

discussed this before. "uses" is not "made of". when reading "uses
high-performance fluids, including polyalphaolefins" note "fluids"
plural, and "including". canned tuna "includes" fats, proteins, ddt and
mercury, but what are the proportions?

legally speaking, that's at best imprecise and more typically, "open to
interpretation". i'm not an attorney, but i spend a lot of time reading
and working with contracts. language like that in a contract would be
laughed out of any court if subject to dispute. if you think the
contents of mobil's web site has /not/ been thoroughly reviewed by their
legal counsel, think again.

 

snip

If this is so how can you confuse..........
POLYOFEFIN POLYAMINE SUCCINIMIDE, POLYOL with
poly alpha olefins ?

If this is so how can you confuse............
That only thee chemicals are listed and their percentages
only add to 7% ?

If this is so how can you confuse...........
The fact that msds will only list the hazardous chemicals, therefore
93% of Mobil 1 is not referenced.

If this is so how can you confuse...........
The obvious that poly alpha olefin is part of that 93% ?

 

The best thing you can do for the longevity of your engine is QUIT using
quick-lube places. Its only a matter of time until they do something
stupid- like forget to drain the old oil and add 5 quarts new on top of
it, leave off a drain plug, not change the filter for 10 oil changes in
a row, or worst of all- suck the oil out the dipstick instead of
properly drain it.

 

'K. I just checked your post in sci.materials.

One reply, and that one saying "ofefin" is a typo.

 

and that reply is from uncle al. it's a typo.

 

because:

1. it's a typo.
2. poly alpha olefin is generic
3. polyolefin polyamine succinimide [pps] is merely a [more] specific
subset of possible olefin compounds
4. pps is /still/ generic in that it's not iupac nomenclature!

er, see above. the whole point is that "pao" is a minor constituent,
not base as you have been suckered into believing.

that's not true - you're not required to list "proprietary" or trade
secret compounds, simply provide emergency contact details so emergency
services can call in the event of accident. the intent of the msds
system is to provide the information, but the loophole exists for
"commercial reasons".

i must be nuts arguing with someone that doesn't know their chemistry.
or legal language.

polyolefin is just a generic term for a class of chemicals like
polystyrene or polyethylene. and "ofefin" is a typo.

 

I'll go with that. It's a typo.

I just had a read of Uncle Al's stuff. I like it. Good writer.

 

he's a rude, obnoxious, opinionated mfsob, but organic chemistry? he
knows a thing or two!

 

Ofefin is a mistake, purely and simply. Olefins are hydrocarbons which have
an unsaturated
bond arrangement, or -at least -one double bond.

Propene or propylene (both being similar although two common isomers exist)
are just one part of
a series of compounds which can be classified as olefins.

Poly(alphaolefins) (my son gives me hell for this terminology..In the newer
chemistry language,
we might call these poly(1-alkenes) , are compounds which may be composed
of a multitude of
chemical building blocks, not just propenes or propylenes.

PAO's are good lubricating agents, as are some other organic materials.

OFEFIN is NOT a substance.. It is an error.

 

Ok. Next question.

Is POLYOLEFIN POLYAMINE SUCCINIMIDE, POLYOL the same as
Poly(alphaolefins)?

 

yes.

the olefin is the backbone of the molecule.

=/\/\/\/\

we have no idea of the length of the chain.

the amines and succinimide are just radicals that substitute for
hydrogens at whatever position on the chain. again, without iupac
nomenclature, we have no idea where. likewise the "ols".

"alpha" just means the c=c bond is at the front end of the chain.

 

POLYOLEFIN POLYAMINE SUCCINIMIDE, POLYOL is only a part
of the PAO content. PAO's are the base stock of Mobil 1 10w-30.
This base stock is well over 50%. Mobil 1 will not divulge the exact
formulation of their oils. All you have to do to confirm this is call

Product and Technical Information:
Lubricants and Specialties: 800-662-4525 800-443-9966

 

hang on a minute.
on 5/7/07, 1:37am, you wrote:
"POLYOFEFIN POLYAMINE SUCCINIMIDE is not poly alpha olefin"
what's changed?

cite a credible reference that confirms that. all i see in writing is a
minority [5%] component, not majority base.

hang on again.
on 5/6/07, 9:11am, you wrote:
"Mobil1 motor oils are still 100% synthetic motor oils and do not
use conventional basestocks in the formulation."

on 5/6/07, 9:54am, you wrote:
"even if you went out of your way to interpret the data in a negative
way against Mobil 1, then you would still get between 80%-90% synthetic
oil."

on 5/6/07, 1:00pm, you wrote:
"Mobil 1's base stock (POA) is a least 80%."

now it's only 50%??? where do you get this "information"?

why could that /possibly/ be??? it's not to somehow fool the chemists
in their competitor's labs - because they couldn't /possibly/ figure out
the composition. no siree bob.

so who else could they /possibly/ be seeking to withhold that
information from??? the /paying/ customer? that's paying a premium for
something they know nothing about??? no - say it could never be so!

tell you what, /you/ call them and get them to put that in writing -
something that *unequivocally* states that pao's *are* the base content,
not that they /could/ be or /might/ be. then post it here. or better
yet, get them to send you some literature that unequivocally confirms it
and email the pdf's or scans to tegger. all you've brought to this
debate so far is naivety, ignorance, and a changing story.

 

And you were right in your assumption that "POLYOFEFIN POLYAMINE
SUCCINIMIDE is the total content of PAO? Remember the base argument.
It wasn't about a typo. It was about your assertion that PAO in Mobil
is only 5%. You derived that from misinterpreting a MSDS. I said the
PAO was much higher.

As far a nothing changing. You are correct. You are still
ignoring the truth.

Even one of Mobil 1's competitors rates Mobil's TOTAL content of PAO
lower than theirs because they guesstimate Mobil's total PAO content
to only be 80%-90% If you look hard enough you can find this
information yourself.

You are referencing a quote. The above is true if speaking of
basestocks

One of Mobil's competitors did the above. Look it up.

Since Mobil rightfully will not divulge their recipe. The above was
taken from Mobil's competitor. Look it up.

Your credibility is nil with this statement. You are giving yourself
away. I didn't say 50%. I said well over 50% because Mobil will not
divulge the exact number.

Its' a conspiracy.

The astronauts did not land on the moon either. Hush...It was all done
on a sound stage.

Call them. Let us know what you learn. Ask them if you read that
specific msds correct. Ask them if PAO is only 5% based on your
reading of that msds.

Hint: They won't tell you the exact content. It's not because it's
only 5% It's because they are protective of their formula.

What about Mobil suing Castrol over the term "Full Synthetic"?
They lost the suit but Mobil has always contended that full synthetic
meant using PAO as the basestock. They still believe that, but you
would rather bash them

 

based on what??? cite your source!!!

dude, /you/ wrote on 5/10/07, 10:33:
"PAO's are the base stock of Mobil 1 10w-30. This base stock is well
over 50%."

where did you get that number? i've searched the web extensively, and
see nothing authoritative or unequivocal other than the msds filings.
all i see /you/ doing is steadily dropping your numbers.

again, /you/ call them and get them to put that in writing - something
that *unequivocally* states that pao's *are* the base content. all
their web content says it /could/ be, not that it unequivocally /is/.
you're the one that wants to believe whatever you want to believe. cite
something authoritative.

i'm not bashing them - i've been using m1 myself!!! all i want to know
is exactly what i'm paying for. and they won't state that. the only
written evidence i have is the legal msds filings showing 5% pao.

all we know for sure is that they say it's "full synthetic", and that
"full synthetic" doesn't have to mean pao. it /could/, but mobil stop
short of unequivocal language that states that it is. hen when mobils
own web site references "supersyn" and how there's 50% /more/ of this
stuff in m1 extended performance compared to conventional m1, basic math
determines that unless they somehow have pao and "super-pao", then by
definition, their "supersyn" pao is a minority component.

so far, all your content here has shown is an ability to self-delude and
change your story as you go along. one more chance, then we're done.
hard evidence required.

 

snip

So this is the marketing crux of the issue. Why should Exxon/Mobil use
more than 5% PAO when guys like Jim are willing to pay their price? In
a previous discussion with Jim, he convinced me I was wasting my money
on Mobil 1 and I've been buying whichever "synthetic" is on sale when
I need oil. Now if Mobil 1 were to return to their previous practice
of using PAO as the base and publishing the data then I'd be happy to
resume my former brand loyalty.

 

snip

I explained already. Site your source! Don't tell me it's that msds
that you can't read correctly.

snip

I'm not dropping the numbers. well over 50% is not 50% and can easily
be 80%-90%

How many times do I have to tell you. Mobil will NOT divulge the exact
numbers. It is however safe to say that the term "well over 50% " is
accurate in that Mobil 1 uses PAO as it's basestock, and the basestock
is the major component of oil.

snip

The msds does not show PAO at 5%. Before you start using your
interpretation of that msds don't you think it would be better to
call them and ask them one simple question. Ask them if you are
interpretation that specific msds correctly. Ask them if POLYOLEFIN
POLYAMINE SUCCINIMIDE, POLYOL is the total content of PAO.
They will tell you no. At that point you can not say that Mobil 1
is 5% pao. You can only say that you wish they would divulge
what the actual percentage is. They won't. You'll just have to stay
confused for the rest of your life.

snip

The story about PAO being 5% is the only story here.

 

i'd be a little more cautious than that - the additive package is real
important. that's why i still stick to brands i've found to be good in
that respect - castrol and mobil.

 

eh? game over. b-bye!

 

Jim, if you were a member of my negotiating team I'd have to fire you
for not being able to read between the lines.