I have been using Mobile 1 synthetic 5W-30 oil for most of the miles on my truck, and have always used a quality oil and changed it at least every 5k miles. I noticed on the packaging for Mobile 1 that there is a 'newer vehicle formula' and a 'higher milage formula' for vehicles with over 75k miles. I'm going to be at this point for my next oil change, and was wondering if I should switch to the higher milage formula, or just stick with what I've been using. What are your alls thoughts?

Thanks,

 

I think the mobil 1 higher mileage and newer vehicle formulas are the same. If you are having consumption problems maybe add 1 qt of 15w50 to thicken the already thin mobil 1 5w30.

 

What's the difference in price?

If they cost the same, go for the HM oil. It won't hurt (but it probably will not help either). If the HM is more expensive, stick with what you have been using, the extra cost for the HM oil is just extra profit for Mobil.

BTW - There is nothing "magical" about 75,000 miles. The oil companies just made up this number to help peddle HM oils.

Does your owners manual say anything about switching oils at the 75,000 mile service?

 

Personally I think it's a scam. M1 advertizes that an engine can go 200,000mi. and show No Wear. So whats the deal with 75,000mi. being high milage. If the HM oil is so much better, why not just put that in the bottle and leave it at that.

 

All marketing.. Stay with the 5w30

 

Thanks for the info. I'll probably just stick with what I have. I was guessing that the 'high milage' stuff might hve some additives, but my truck runs great now, so I don't see the point in changing. Thanks again.

S

 

You should go to the website and pull up the tech data on them. Maybe the "higher mileage" formula is different. The regular Mobil One runs on the thin side and there may be some benefit to the "higher mileage" formula if it is a bit thicker.

Yes the term "high mileage" is a gimmick but in many cases it is a better oil. In the case of Valvoline, I would rate the Maxlife "high mileage" oil as a much better oil than the basic All Climate, whether for a high mileage vehicle or a new vehicle.

EDIT: I just went over there and the only newer vehicle and high mileage oils I could find were the Drive Clean Plus synthetic blend. Might not be a bad way to go. Should cost a lot less than the Mobil One and I have heard that the Drive Clean oil is very good.

 

Premium gas is "better" than regular gas. That doesn't mean that it does anything useful in your engine or is worth the extra money.

 

When Mobil reformulated the Mobil1 line they labeled the 5w30 as "new car formula" to mean that most new car mfg. recomended 5w30. They labeled 10w30 as "High mileage" meaning that many cars that recomended 10w30 are quite old by now and have many miles on them. They have since relabeled this to "Multi Vehicle formula" to ease the confusion with oils such as VAlvoline max life. This was confirmed for me by Mobil1 tech line during a phone conversation.

What I do not understand is that if the synthectic oils is superior to conventional oil why do they need 0w30,5w30 and 10w30? Why not just recomend 0w30 to replace all of them?

 

Because manufacturers still recommend/insist on certain weights. My 2005 GM V-6 strongly recommends 5w-30 (too bad, it's getting 10w-30 in the summer). My 2004 VW says use an "appropriate" weight oil, but makes no specific recommendation. Ford gassers and Hondas require 5w-20. Honda reportedly will void your warranty for running something else.

While syn. may be "good" enough to have a wider viscosity range, dino requires a lot of additives, so no dino will be a jack-of-all-trades 0w-40. And, just in case you haven't notice, virtually no manufacturer recommends using syn.

 

As far as I know premium is not any better than regular, just different.

 

At least more octane additive. That's better.

Costs more too. That must make it better.

Not to belabor the Consumer Reports oil test, but people tend to get all caught up in brand wars and miss the point of the test.

CR never said that one oil wasn't "better" than another.

CR never said that syn wasn't "better" than dino. In fact, CR says that syn. could be better for your engine under some extreme circumstances.

What CR said was that when changed according at the manufacturers recommended service intervals, none of the oils performed better than another. The difference in performance between samples of the same oil brand was greater than the differences between brands. So, what CR concluded was that any API rated oil is quite capable of getting your engine to at least 60,000+ miles (the limit of the test) with minimal wear and deposits. For some reason, this tends to really p*** people off. I do not understand why.

Read for yourself:

http://www.xs11.com/stories/croil96.htm

So, if you want to put a "better" oil in your engine, go ahead, but unless you are going to put 100,000s of miles on the engine, or live in an extreme environment, you are not likely to see any benefit at all to the extra expense.

 

The Consumers Reports' taxi cab study is great. And very likely any old oil will do, but some will leave your engine cleaner, like the Mobil One that Stan_02Ranger is using. Also, the Consumers' study really did not include a significant amoung of short trips and cold starts. In all likelihood the taxis were running day long with excessive idling. A great test though. Just wonder if the amount of cold starts and short trips the average city dweller makes would show a difference. I do see quite a variation in cold performance properties (per company tech data listings) in various oils and, of course, Mobil One excells in this area. But again, probably no matter as the rest of the vehicle likely will be shot before the engine gives up the ghost (especially here in the rust belt), but possibly you can have the engine in better shape towards the end of its service life by using higher quality oils.

That all said, the cost of motor oil is not all that great (unless you live from paycheck to paycheck) that one can run the better oils for extra peace of mind. We don't always eat at McDonalds, but sometimes folks like to go to the steakhouse and pay a whole lot more, even though it really doesn't give them any added physical benefit. At least with the motor oil, I can be reasonably confident that the better oils should help keep my engine cleaner, help me run longer OCIs, perform better on cold starts, and hold up better under high heat (less viscosity index improvers in the more highly refined and synthetic oils).

 

CR recognizes this omission and addresses that issue in its report. Either you accept the test or you don't. CR couldn't test every oil in every possible condition. That test would be far too expensive and probably will never be done.

Sorry, but this is not a particularly good example.

Yes, I hear this argument and understand the point that you are making. I will ask you this. There are two gas station side by side. One is a RaceTrac (or other generic gas), the other is a Chevron station selling gas with Techron. Gas at the Chevron is $0.10/gal. more than at the generic station. What do you buy?

How you answer this question (and there is no wrong answer) will also probably answer the question of whether you are willing to pay extra from the brand name oil.

That's the great thing about America. Lot's of choices.

 

I accept the Consumers' study for what it is, but long for further studies to support it and expand it.

Well I thought the McDonalds example was as relevant as the regular vs. premium example. I just don't think running premium would be any benefit unless the car calls for it or your engine is knocking, in which case the premium is a temporary band aid. Actually heard too high an octane can reduce fuel mileage.

I would steer into the Chevron station hoping that they sell quality fuel. If I knew what stations sold good fuel, that's where I would go.