Honda V6 engines and synthetic oil

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by techman41973, May 5, 2007.

  1. techman41973

    jim beam Guest

    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.
     
    jim beam, May 9, 2007
    #41
  2. techman41973

    tnom Guest

    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% ?
     
    tnom, May 9, 2007
    #42
  3. techman41973

    Steve Guest

    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.
     
    Steve, May 9, 2007
    #43
  4. techman41973

    Tegger Guest



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

    One reply, and that one saying "ofefin" is a typo.
     
    Tegger, May 9, 2007
    #44
  5. techman41973

    jim beam Guest

    and that reply is from uncle al. it's a typo.
     
    jim beam, May 10, 2007
    #45
  6. techman41973

    jim beam Guest

    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.
     
    jim beam, May 10, 2007
    #46
  7. techman41973

    Tegger Guest


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

    I just had a read of Uncle Al's stuff. I like it. Good writer.
     
    Tegger, May 10, 2007
    #47
  8. techman41973

    jim beam Guest

    he's a rude, obnoxious, opinionated mfsob, but organic chemistry? he
    knows a thing or two!
     
    jim beam, May 10, 2007
    #48
  9. techman41973

    Guest Guest


    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.
     
    Guest, May 10, 2007
    #49
  10. techman41973

    tnom Guest

    Ok. Next question.

    Is POLYOLEFIN POLYAMINE SUCCINIMIDE, POLYOL the same as
    Poly(alphaolefins)?
     
    tnom, May 10, 2007
    #50
  11. techman41973

    jim beam Guest

    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.
     
    jim beam, May 10, 2007
    #51
  12. techman41973

    tnom Guest

    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
     
    tnom, May 10, 2007
    #52
  13. techman41973

    jim beam Guest

    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.
     
    jim beam, May 11, 2007
    #53
  14. techman41973

    tnom Guest

    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
     
    tnom, May 11, 2007
    #54
  15. techman41973

    jim beam Guest

    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.
     
    jim beam, May 11, 2007
    #55
  16. techman41973

    ACAR Guest

    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.
     
    ACAR, May 11, 2007
    #56
  17. techman41973

    tnom Guest

    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.
     
    tnom, May 11, 2007
    #57
  18. techman41973

    jim beam Guest

    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.
     
    jim beam, May 12, 2007
    #58
  19. techman41973

    jim beam Guest

    eh? game over. b-bye!
     
    jim beam, May 12, 2007
    #59
  20. techman41973

    ACAR Guest

    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.
     
    ACAR, May 12, 2007
    #60
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.