nycgps

iTrader: (1)

Maybe the time when you ask about Mobil1, he was trying to say *oh yeah Mobil1 was no good that time*

but who knows

Many people use Mobil1 without any problems.

What I find weird is that New Yorker thinks that stock car is the most reliable way to deal with. You will get less BS from a dealership thats true, but for long term reliability I dont really think so.

Best example would be FD3S. Stock = overheats.

Even Altima, yep the one that my brother has, has an unusual high amount of engine failure. but Nissan quickly replaced them so people didnt complain much, but hey, its there.

rotarygod

Mobil 1 is the most widely used synthetic in the world. I can say that I have personally never seen an engine failure as a result of using it. The fact that the head of Mazda's rotary department doesn't like it specifically for whatever reason leads me to believe that they have in fact tested it and found something about it that has caused them to say what they say. They aren't against all synthetics but that name did pop up. Since Mazda has in fact done more research on these engines than anyone (which is why they realized they needed to fix the oil metering design), I respect their opinion in this matter. Mazda isn't against synthetic. They are against a couple of them though.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

If they have a sale for Mobil1 I still use it

elysium19

iTrader: (1)

Just my 2 cents on all of this, after reading this thread in it's entirety.

As someone relatively new to the fascinating technical details of engine design and maintenance, I have really enjoyed reading about this stuff and VERY sincerely appreciate the depth of knowledge and experience represented by the folks who post here. This is NOT your typical car-owner's forum, and that's awesome.

With that said, I think it's fair to say that for those of you who want to do every possible thing to prolong the life and performance of your engine, the info here on premixing and oil weight/type and all that good stuff seems to have substantial objective support behind it. At the same time, the vast majority of RX8 owners will not do anything besides what the manual says, and their cars will run fine and have a typical service life as do most modern cars. How do we reconcile these two things?

I'm sure that if you did a valid statistical analysis of engine longevity vs. care variables (premixing, etc), you would find that they do have a positive effect. But for any individual engine, unless they have racing or have FI or other serious increases in stress and wear, this extra effort will not guarantee any better outcome, only probably increase the chances of it marginally.

The real difference lies in how we feel about our cars. I think I speak for most enthusiasts when I say we care for our cars in a personal way; you know, "it's my baby" and all that. The satisfaction gained from knowing that you're doing everything possible to care for your car properly is a fantastic one, and I think that's what we're aiming for. Even if you do everything perfectly, life's a bit of a lottery and your engine may still have troubles.

I guess I just hope people consider these things when thinking about how different people care for their cars in different ways. Truth is, as much as I don't like the idea, there is a very good chance that in 20 years my "baby" will be nothing but a pile of rust in a junkyard somewhere. But the enjoyment and knowledge she's giving me right now will be much, much longer-lived.

SpIcEz

RG, what Im really curious about is... WHY ?

Ok, Mazda Rotary engineer says he doesnt like Mobil 1. Fine. ok... but why ?

Ive been going through every single post you have written on this forum about oil.

Beleive you me, its a long process. I should be calling back clients... but now I feel... obssesed to find an answer

So... it comes back to...

All Synthetics (ok 99%) = good
some synths = Great (i.e RP)
Mobil 1 = Great (but wait, ultra super crap for rotaries)

ok... WHY ?

BTW, I have made a super-human effort to search and read. If I have missed the post where someone explains exactly why Mobil 1 is not acceptable except that 1 guy at Mazda (granted THE GUY) says he doesnt like it, please slap me... but be gentle

What Im looking for is... analysis, or explanations, like a certain additive, specifics.

Thanks!!!

p.s. I have also spent time on BITOG, so if anyone wants to suggest that... Ive already been reading there too

SpIcEz

ok, so I just fell on this in the 1 million posts on oil.

https://www.rx8club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=417

"They have an additive in their synthetic that doesn't seem to get along with rotaries in the longterm. This has nothing to do with the fact that the base stock is synthetic. It's an additive causing the issues and they only use it in their synthetic line. "

OK, still no details on the exact additive though and what issues exactly it causes.

"They assume people are morons (because they are!) so they say the safest thing they can say and then stick to it regardless of what is really going on. They can't just single out one oil. They'd get sued over it."

Well... I dont see why? If they have the test data. Can prove that Mobil 1 has something specific in it that causes a tangible specific problem, whats wrong with saying Mobil 1 is not recommended in Rotary engines because of such and such.

Its not like pointing towards Mobil and sayin = CRAP.
Its a specific scientificaly proven issue.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

this is going back to the Synthetic thing ....

Lets take this somewhere else can we ?

Back to topic :

elysium19, yes most of the people out there will just follow whatever Mazda or their stealership saids. Sure it works fine. but for how long ?

take expo's motor for example. He pull it out around 110K miles. and Paul said that his motor should be good for a bit more miles. but 10-20 ? who knows. The wear is down to the last layer already (Cooper). Its just the matter of time the engine will go bye bye. So what does that mean ? Yes his motor works fine, but its already on its *last leg*.

Most people these days consider cars to be *old and worthless* as soon as it hits 100K miles. but what people forgot is that in the old days, a lot of cars can go over 200K miles without issues.

Mazda knows what people are thinking these days, so their goal is "Lets make it 100K miles without issue"

The point is, instead of listening to Mazda's "Lets make it 100K miles without issue", we can actually try to make it to 200K miles without issue.

I dont see why not ? agreed ? opinions welcome.

rotarygod

There are 2 different entities within any company that you need to take into consideration because they each have an equal say on what gets done and what gets told to the public. The first is the engineering department. This is the side that matters most to me but rarely speaks to the public because of the second important department. That department is the legal department. The engineering department has done their tests and I just happened to speak with them directly about their opinion on synthetics. A few other forum members were there to witness it. However the legal department has to step in when certain things get passes on to the public. If Mazda released a statement naming certain oils and said they aren't good to use, it leaves them open for potential lawsuits. They can't do that. The legal ramifications of this would be too big. Instead they release a blanket statement that says don't use any. This way they name no names and it raises questions as to why it is this way. It could be interpreted that there is something inside the engine that isn't good when used with synthetics. The point is that this blanket statement names no one and can potentially be interpreted in other ways as to why they shouldn't be used. This way they don't leave the door open for lawsuits. Even if they named a specific chemical in the makeup of Mobil 1 or any other oil, they still leave the door open for backlash and lawsuits. Why would they do that when they can just release a blanket statement and be done with it? I was never informed of what exactly it is that they don't like. I just know that it's an additive.

Even though I have passed this on and the info that I have learned, they still can't get in trouble for it as the company has not admitted this in public and there is no direct proof other than my word and that of a few others. What gets said by outsiders on the internet can't be proven so Mazda will never come forward and confirm nor deny it. You never know what to believe on the internet! They will just stick to their story. We all know why they say what they say. They have nothing against synthetics as a type of oil. They shouldn't. There's nothing about it as a base stock that is bad. They have a problem with certain synthetics due to what gets added to the base stock. It's the additives that make a motor oil what it is. Without the additive package, you don't have a motor oil. If they were against synthetics, they wouldn't have helped formulate Idemitsu and used it. Contrary to popular belief, there is absolutely nothing special about Idemitsu that magically makes it safe for a rotary where other synthetics aren't. That's an uninformed myth.

I know there are people that will believe that synthetics are bad to use because Mazda says so. I also understand that it seems contradictory for me to say I know which oils are good and not because Mazda says so. The difference is that I am listening to the engineering department and not the legal department.

SpIcEz

I understand what you are saying. And Ive lived it, but I have also found when it is well said, it can be said.

I work for a not so small multinational, Tyco.
I work in sales and thus have had to deal with the legal departement on numerous occasions. I also used to be part of the technical depertament, actually I still am sort of as I am a sales engineer for security products.

I understand the fear of law suits, and I know it IS important to take things with white gloves before making brash statements.

However, I cannot beleive, in a million years that illiminating half the oil market with a blanket statement like they have, is better in the long run than identifying intelligently that mobil 1 because of some of its properties is not compatible with Rotary engines.

I mean, if you calculate the cost of engine replacements for those using Mobil 1 (if in deed it causes problems), or all the different statements from different Mazda corporate headquarters. Fielding calls. Etc...

If I make a blanket statement that no Biometrics products are compatible with my product, its much more of a problem than stating that 1 specific Biometric companies products isnt compatible with my stuff because of the red wire and blue wire (bla bla) reason. Its documented, irefutable and true.

Like I said, we both seem to know and understand the Corporate world, and I understand your argument completely, I just dont think it was the right choice that they made.

And would still like to know how bad exactly Mobil 1 is for our engines, and which additive is the culprit, and for which reason But I think he hasnt transfered that info to you either, so we are both SOL on answers.

rotarygod

I too am curious what it is that they say is bad about it. Many people have used it in rotaries for many years.

Eliminating half of the oil market is irrelevant as they ship all their cars with only a certain one anyways. Besides the entire market of conventional oils is still wide open and this is what most people use anyways.

whitebeau

LOL - yeah the good old QR25 motor. pre 07's had an issue with the intake valve screws backing out and falling into the combustion chamer.. . Then the 02/03's until reflashed later that year had a warmup problem of the pre-cat's getting soaked from the rich warmup, then flaking and getting sucked back into the combustion chamber from the exhaust pulse. (Note pre-cats were 2-3 inches away from the exhaust port).


I had an 02 Sentra Spec-V that had the QR25DE motor... sucker had the worlds flattest power band it was fun. But i traded it in on the reasoning with the intake/exhaust quarks for this 8.... irony. I don't look back though, this 8 is awesome

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

lol :P

but my point is, I just dont believe in "stock is the most reliable" and/or "Just follow whatever the Manufacture said and you'll be fine"

5w20 is ok ? Go ahead and read Honda's engine problems now. I still remember couple years ago GM said their *Dex-Cool* is the only thing their customers need for their cars. but *sadly* cars with Dex-cool overheated and died like there was no tomorrow, and *for some reason* people who flushed their systems with *Regular, Typical stuff, aka Ethylene glycol has no overheating problems. Plus Im pretty sure GM tested their Dex-cool like nutz b4 they starts pumping them to their cars. what happened ?

nothing personal here, just my pure opinion.

CnnmnSchnpps

iTrader: (1)

Lots of good discussion here.. I should have paid closer attention to this thread..

I'd like to point something out - yes the finance dept will have alot of say in how things are designed and will often rein in the engineers. People seem to think that this is a bad thing in and of itself. Would you rather the RX8 had been over-engineered to bits and cost 50k? Or that Mazda scapped it as a money pit during the R&D stage. That doesn't mean that the bean counters should have free rein either. And they should take more into account the long term costs of warranty repairs and reputational impact... It's a difficult balance, but I think overall they didn't do too bad in this regard. Remember that they brought to market a very unique car at a very reasonable price point...

From a customer service point of view though, at least in the US, they have lots of room to grow.. The hush hush attitude on what the flashes do, the constant pushing back on warranty repairs... Why do I have to be treated like a criminal when I bring my car in for warranty work? After experiencing customer service in Japan (all I was buying was a set of clear corners and you would have thought I was there to buy the dealership ) it put into very stark contrast just how low we've sunk on this side of the pond.. There was a time people in the States cared about customer service. Now they just don't want to pay for it.

And to the "the manufacturer knows best" club - I have only one thing to say. Mazda only cares about your engine for the first 5 years / 60k miles. How about you?

rotarygod

The company as a whole and the dealerships may feel this way but I guarantee the engineers don't feel this way.

CnnmnSchnpps

iTrader: (1)

Certainly!! Unfortunately I don't know the engineers.. That's why I put alot of stock in what you say they say..

Nubo

4 years and most of my 30,000 Renesis miles on Mobil1 5W30. Ok so far. Of course if it dies this afternoon........

rotarygod

Are you running Mobil 1 synthetic or conventional?

robrecht

rotarygod:

Concrete, practical question if you don't mind: Would you hesitate to buy a used, low mileage RX-8 for a very good price or how much of a premium would you pay for a new 2009 RX-8 with the engine modifications?

For example, if you could save $10-12,000 by buying a slightly used current model with 10,000 miles on it. Would you think the newer engine modifications would be worth it?

Don't mean to put you on the spot, and I know there's no way really to quantify your hypothesis, but I would greatly appreciate it if you could take a stab at it. TIA!

Nubo

Well, it's labelled "Synthetic"

AFAIK, their conventional offerings are labelled "Mobil"....

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

depends on how much is the *actual* price of the used rx-8.

The new model has no newer engine modification, well there is some modification, its like relocated oil dip stick and other minor stuff, engine still the same.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

There is only Mobil1 Extended and Mobil1.

The Extended has *double* the amount of whatever Additive they have in Mobil1.

Both based on the same kind of PAO, I think.

Mobil has regular stuff too, but its called Mobil 5000/7500.

rotarygod

I don't really care what they call it. They make both conventional and synthetic oils which is why I asked.

I also don't know of anyone that has had issues with running Mobil 1 synthetic in rotaries. I don't know what Mazda engineers have found in it they don't like. I wish I did know. I just know there is something about it that they don't like in rotaries.

rotarygod

I am a little bit concerned about used RX-8's based on this but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't buy one. Not all of them have shown issues. The reason we see so many here is because you typically hear more from the peple with bad experiences than you do from those with good. If you went solely off of reliability stories on forums, every car would seem unreliable!

As far as answering the question about whether or not you should buy a used one or a new '09, that's going to bit something that you have to decide of for yourself. I personally love the way the '09 looks and feel that's how the car should have always looked. The engine fixes are just a bonus. That doesn't mean I'm going out to buy one though. If the looks don't really matter to you between models and your heart isn't set on a new car, I don't see anything wrong with buying a used one. Just remember that the difference in price between them is going to be much higher than the cost of a new engine if you need one. If you do, just premix a small amount afterwards and you shouldn't have any issues.

As with the first year model of any car, the first model year of a major upgrade is also something that should be watched carefully. We may find that something changed on those cars that wasn't for the good as it was intended to be. What if they still have engine issues? Only time will tell.

robrecht

Thanks, rotarygod. Don't worry, I wasn't asking you to make a decision for me (... unless, of course, you were also going to buy me a car). Just trying to get a sense of how serious and prevalent the issues are from someone who really knows a lot about these egines. Personally, I like the older look but will only buy one if I can get what I consider to be a good deal. Thanks.

saxdogg

Honestly, even if Mazda made no recommendation as to which type of oil to use, I'd probably still use conventional over synthetic. This is because of the simple fact that the engine is designed to BURN some oil, not just be lubricated by it. Seems to me that synthetic isn't made to burn, it's made to lubricate...it may be perfectly fine, but seems to me, regular old petroleum would be the best for burnin'!