My open mind wants to try Royal Purple

[Johnny]

Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
Originally Posted By: Johnny
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: Johnny
Group II, Group III, and PAO are clear base stocks. Clear as water. When you start putting in all of the necessary additives to make it work as motor oil, that's where the different shades of brown come from.

I just got off the phone with a blender I know at Shell and he told me the only thing they put color in is their 2-cycle oils and ATF.


Like I said, every oil has color added to it in some way.


Well let me put it this way. The color purple, red, blue, green, etc., has absolutely nothing to to with the performance of a product. The natural color of shades of brown from the additives have everything to do with the performance of the product.


You are 100% correct. The color of the oil( ie; red, blue, purple, green, etc... ) means nothing. It is just a dye. I don't think RP is great because it is purple. The purple dye in RP burns off very fast and the oil goes brown so a hundred miles down the road it is no longer purple anyway.


I agree with you 100% on what you just said.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Johnny
Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
Originally Posted By: Johnny
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: Johnny
Group II, Group III, and PAO are clear base stocks. Clear as water. When you start putting in all of the necessary additives to make it work as motor oil, that's where the different shades of brown come from.

I just got off the phone with a blender I know at Shell and he told me the only thing they put color in is their 2-cycle oils and ATF.


Like I said, every oil has color added to it in some way.


Well let me put it this way. The color purple, red, blue, green, etc., has absolutely nothing to to with the performance of a product. The natural color of shades of brown from the additives have everything to do with the performance of the product.


You are 100% correct. The color of the oil( ie; red, blue, purple, green, etc... ) means nothing. It is just a dye. I don't think RP is great because it is purple. The purple dye in RP burns off very fast and the oil goes brown so a hundred miles down the road it is no longer purple anyway.


I agree with you 100% on what you just said.


I hope so seeing as I was agreeing with you.

 

[jpr]

Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
Certification is nice because it saves you having to spend a couple minutes showing your oil meets or exceeds the spec but that really is all it does. Saves a little leg work for the customer. Other than that the certification/approval does nadda for the oil itself. Either it does what you need or it doesn't.

Any word on how RP did in the CEC-L-46-T-93, CEC-L-53-T-95, or CEC-L-093, or OM602A tests? Any info on chlorine content? Any info on HTHS values? Any info on how it compares to other oils in the BMW N52 or N42RNT tests? How about it's performance on the Porsche 996FL test, did it meet or exceed those requirements?

 

[Louie's gone fishing]

In some cases a cert limits your ability to make substitutions in your product mix when you have problems with suppliers.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: jpr

Any word on how RP did in the CEC-L-46-T-93, CEC-L-53-T-95, or CEC-L-093, or OM602A tests? Any info on chlorine content? Any info on HTHS values? Any info on how it compares to other oils in the BMW N52 or N42RNT tests? How about it's performance on the Porsche 996FL test, did it meet or exceed those requirements?


I am afraid I do not know what those test are nor if RP was tested for them. All you have to do however is write RP tech and ask for the results. If they were tested they will provide the data. If they weren't tested obviously it wouldn't qualify under the meets/exceeds law until you could provide that data.

It is pretty obvious I am not suggesting using a non certified product in situations where you don't have the data to show it meets/exceeds the spec. If a product hasn't been tested for a spec don't use it of course.

However just because a product is not certified does not mean it can not be used and THAT was my point. I did point out you need to be able to show it does so. If it hasn't been tested for it obviously you can't. Again I will say certification/mfg approval means nothing about an oils abilities. The actual results of the tests to meet those spec's/standards are what matter. As long as the product has been tested and you have the data to go by certification means nothing.

 

[jpr]

Okay – I agree completely with this:
Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
However just because a product is not certified does not mean it can not be used and THAT was my point....Again I will say certification/mfg approval means nothing about an oils abilities. The actual results of the tests to meet those spec's/standards are what matter. As long as the product has been tested and you have the data to go by certification means nothing.

and I agree with you on this:
Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
I did point out you need to be able to show it does so. If it hasn't been tested for it obviously you can't.

and this:
Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
It is pretty obvious I am not suggesting using a non certified product in situations where you don't have the data to show it meets/exceeds the spec. If a product hasn't been tested for a spec don't use it of course.

But this has not been my experience:
Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
All you have to do however is write RP tech and ask for the results. If they were tested they will provide the data
I did email RP a while back and ask them for HTHS data for a selection of their multi-grade oils. Despite a somewhat extended email correspondence, no data was provided. Perhaps others have been more successful than I.

But the crux of the matter is that I don't see how this conclusion:
Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
Not to start this up again but factory approval/certifications mean SQUAT other than the oil mfg paid to have their product tested. I wish people on this site would stop putting so much emphasis on, and giving so much credit to, those approved/certified lists. They mean nothing for people who know how to research oils...Certification is nice because it saves you having to spend a couple minutes showing your oil meets or exceeds the spec but that really is all it does. Saves a little leg work for the customer.
can follow logically from this one
Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
I am afraid I do not know what those test are nor if RP was tested for them...If they weren't tested obviously it wouldn't qualify under the meets/exceeds law until you could provide that data.

It is pretty obvious I am not suggesting using a non certified product in situations where you don't have the data to show it meets/exceeds the spec. If a product hasn't been tested for a spec don't use it of course.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: jpr


But the crux of the matter is that I don't see how this conclusion:
Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
Not to start this up again but factory approval/certifications mean SQUAT other than the oil mfg paid to have their product tested. I wish people on this site would stop putting so much emphasis on, and giving so much credit to, those approved/certified lists. They mean nothing for people who know how to research oils...Certification is nice because it saves you having to spend a couple minutes showing your oil meets or exceeds the spec but that really is all it does. Saves a little leg work for the customer.
can follow logically from this one
Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
I am afraid I do not know what those test are nor if RP was tested for them...If they weren't tested obviously it wouldn't qualify under the meets/exceeds law until you could provide that data.

It is pretty obvious I am not suggesting using a non certified product in situations where you don't have the data to show it meets/exceeds the spec. If a product hasn't been tested for a spec don't use it of course.


My assumption was anyone reading what I posted would realize my comments apply only if you were able to achieve test data to make sure it met whatever spec you were dealing with. If you can't back up the use of a non certified oil with test results you best not use it under warranty.

My comments about certification meaning SQUAT are stricly based on people who act like certification somehow makes an oil bettter and any oil not on the list is an inferior product and if you use it your engine will explode. That is just ridiculous but you see stuff like that here all the time.

Certification only means that oil was tested to see if it meets the critieria the car mfg sets for a certain standard. That standard, like GM 6094M, may be pretty easy to achieve so being certified for it means very little yet many think it makes that oil superior to a non certified oil. It doesn't make Brand X better than Brand Y not on the list JUST because Brand X was certified. If the data is available to compare as long as the oil you want meets or exceeds the data it it is fine and that certification brand X has means squat.

Oh, and when I say if a product hasn't been tested for a spec I mean the product hasn't been tested to provide the standard test results most mfg's standards and spec's are derived from. Like API service level, Brookfield Viscosity, Pour Point, Corrosion, Wear, etc...

I don't mean if the oil hasn't been tested for say GM4718M don't use it in a new Vette that requires that standard. IF the oil you want to use isn't certified already for that standard check the various test results that make up the standard and see if that oil meets or exceeds them. If it does you can use it and be fine.

This is a perfect example of this too. Mobil 1 is cetified to this standard and RP is not. However, RP meets/exceeds that standard and thus it is safe for use. The test data required to achieve certification is data you can get for RP to show it is okay to use.

Hope that explains things better.

 

[Cory]

I think an open mind comes with opening your wallet in this situation. I, personally, cannot justify the greater expense as compared to some less expensive (sometimes FREE w/ BOGO) alternatives like PP. Also the reason why I switched from Mobil 1 to PP. Same UOA results, same fuel economy, with half the expense.

Even in my situation where I drive 25K+ miles a year, I cannot justify the more expensive synthetics to include Amsoil into the equation.

Now, Amsoil Universal ATF and Gear Lubes, "yes".

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Cory
I think an open mind comes with opening your wallet in this situation. I, personally, cannot justify the greater expense as compared to some less expensive (sometimes FREE w/ BOGO) alternatives like PP. Also the reason why I switched from Mobil 1 to PP. Same UOA results, same fuel economy, with half the expense.

Even in my situation where I drive 25K+ miles a year, I cannot justify the more expensive synthetics to include Amsoil into the equation.

Now, Amsoil Universal ATF and Gear Lubes, "yes".


Very good point except it is possible to get RP for reasonable costs. I can get PP for example around here for around $4.25-$4.50 on average p/qt. I haven't seen it under $4 here for a long time except for Wal-Mart and the $19.87 jug which I am pretty sure is a 5 qt jug( right? so $3.97 ). I pay just $5.75 for RP.

More yes but not that much more. I too would not go to PepBoys, AAP, AZ, etc... and pay $7.50+ p/qt( unless an emergency ). You are only talking $9 more for 5 qts of RP at what I pay for it vs the cheapest PP deal I could find. I might do 3-4 OC's a year so less than $40 more p/ year to use a product I prefer. Not a big enough deal to sway me from it.

Shop around and RP can be had for $6 and less p/ qt. That is inline with Amsoil and Red Line.

 

[02zx9r]

Originally Posted By: Cory
I, personally, cannot justify the greater expense as compared to some less expensive (sometimes FREE w/ BOGO) alternatives like PP. Also the reason why I switched from Mobil 1 to PP. Same UOA results, same fuel economy, with half the expense.

Even in my situation where I drive 25K+ miles a year, I cannot justify the more expensive synthetics to include Amsoil into the equation.


smart man, stay away from it.

Can get better results for less price! Why do you think there is more uoa's on here of PP than RP?

People dont want to pay more for [censored]. If RP is so competively priced with PP, val syn, castrol etc... why do people bypass RP for better performing oils.

 

[jpr]

Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
My assumption was anyone reading what I posted would realize my comments apply only if you were able to achieve test data to make sure it met whatever spec you were dealing with. If you can't back up the use of a non certified oil with test results you best not use it under warranty.

My comments about certification meaning SQUAT are stricly based on people who act like certification somehow makes an oil bettter and any oil not on the list is an inferior product and if you use it your engine will explode. That is just ridiculous but you see stuff like that here all the time.

Certification only means that oil was tested to see if it meets the critieria the car mfg sets for a certain standard. That standard, like GM 6094M, may be pretty easy to achieve so being certified for it means very little yet many think it makes that oil superior to a non certified oil. It doesn't make Brand X better than Brand Y not on the list JUST because Brand X was certified. If the data is available to compare as long as the oil you want meets or exceeds the data it it is fine and that certification brand X has means squat.

Oh, and when I say if a product hasn't been tested for a spec I mean the product hasn't been tested to provide the standard test results most mfg's standards and spec's are derived from. Like API service level, Brookfield Viscosity, Pour Point, Corrosion, Wear, etc...

I don't mean if the oil hasn't been tested for say GM4718M don't use it in a new Vette that requires that standard. IF the oil you want to use isn't certified already for that standard check the various test results that make up the standard and see if that oil meets or exceeds them. If it does you can use it and be fine.

This is a perfect example of this too. Mobil 1 is cetified to this standard and RP is not. However, RP meets/exceeds that standard and thus it is safe for use. The test data required to achieve certification is data you can get for RP to show it is okay to use.

Hope that explains things better.
It does. The big question remaining though is one of missing data. RP, to their credit, is API certified, and that does provide certain specific information about the oils properties. Likewise, they appear to have done the testing to the publicly available GM standards to believe they can state on their bottles that they meet or exceed those standards.

But for other applications, there is simply no info available. We simply do not know how the oils would or did perform to ACEA, VW, MB, BMW, Porsche, etc. various specific test standards nor are we likely to ever get it.

As you point out, this does not automatically mean using RP will make your engine explode. Nor does it constitute any sort of "bad" information about RP. But the absence of data does mean that using RP in a vehicle that calls for oils that meet a certain spec will require a leap of faith. Some will be perfectly comfortable with that, others will choose a more conservative approach. Either approach works, but if one is going to make a leap of faith, I think it is best to acknowledge it.

 

[glxpassat]

Originally Posted By: 02zx9r
Originally Posted By: Cory
I, personally, cannot justify the greater expense as compared to some less expensive (sometimes FREE w/ BOGO) alternatives like PP. Also the reason why I switched from Mobil 1 to PP. Same UOA results, same fuel economy, with half the expense.

Even in my situation where I drive 25K+ miles a year, I cannot justify the more expensive synthetics to include Amsoil into the equation.


smart man, stay away from it.

Can get better results for less price! Why do you think there is more uoa's on here of PP than RP?

What if the TBN of RP is much higher, allowing a much longer OCI? That may reduce the cost of RP, and possibly make it cheaper to use than PP. It's a SL rated oil with high TBN whereas PP is SM and can't be run as long. Look at some of the UOA's where the RP retained a high TBN after many miles.

[/quote]
People dont want to pay more for [censored]. If RP is so competively priced with PP, val syn, castrol etc... why do people bypass RP for better performing oils.

[/quote]

How do you know they perform better if you've never tried it? There's more to performance than UOA's. You might love the way your motors runs so much better that it would be worth the extra cost (and could be a bargain with a longer OCI). You'll never know until you give it a try.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: jpr
It does. The big question remaining though is one of missing data. RP, to their credit, is API certified, and that does provide certain specific information about the oils properties. Likewise, they appear to have done the testing to the publicly available GM standards to believe they can state on their bottles that they meet or exceed those standards.

But for other applications, there is simply no info available. We simply do not know how the oils would or did perform to ACEA, VW, MB, BMW, Porsche, etc. various specific test standards nor are we likely to ever get it.

As you point out, this does not automatically mean using RP will make your engine explode. Nor does it constitute any sort of "bad" information about RP. But the absence of data does mean that using RP in a vehicle that calls for oils that meet a certain spec will require a leap of faith. Some will be perfectly comfortable with that, others will choose a more conservative approach. Either approach works, but if one is going to make a leap of faith, I think it is best to acknowledge it.


I actually agree with you 100%. I think we are saying the same thing just in a different way. When I say certification/mfg approval means SQUAT that only applys when you have means to verify non certified/approved oils meet the spec/standard. If you can't then avoid it to be safe.

I would not use any fluid if I wasn't sure it met the standard/spec in question while under warranty or if it has been shown you MUST use a certain fluid type only to avoid problems like GM's Autotrak fluid( the blue stuff )in their automatic t-cases( to my knowledge there is no aftermarket fluid for this ). I don't own used vehicles these days and always sell before warranty expires so for me warranty preservation is important.

My experience has been when I come across a standard I can't research on my own, to determine if their product meets or exceeds the requirements, I contact their tech dept and get a straight answer. If I ask about how their product performed in a specific test( not standard or specification but an individual test like wear, viscosity, etc... ), if the RP product has been tested for it, they have provided the results to me. I have also found them to be very honest and they will tell you outright they don't recommend their product when it doesn't meet the requirements for warranty or if they really don't have one for it. If you contacted them about say the Porsche rating you mention I would expect you to get a straight answer and any data they have. At least I always have.

Example - I wanted to run RP MaxATF in my Silverado but it calls for Dex VI and at least when I looked RP did not meet that spec. I know people using it with no issue and I am sure it would be fine but until they test it and say it is fine or I can check data to see I wouldn't under warranty. Actually, I e-mailed and asked just to see and they said not to use it.

 

[02zx9r]

Originally Posted By: glxpassat
Originally Posted By: 02zx9r
Originally Posted By: Cory
I, personally, cannot justify the greater expense as compared to some less expensive (sometimes FREE w/ BOGO) alternatives like PP. Also the reason why I switched from Mobil 1 to PP. Same UOA results, same fuel economy, with half the expense.

Even in my situation where I drive 25K+ miles a year, I cannot justify the more expensive synthetics to include Amsoil into the equation.


smart man, stay away from it.

Can get better results for less price! Why do you think there is more uoa's on here of PP than RP?

What if the TBN of RP is much higher, allowing a much longer OCI? That may reduce the cost of RP, and possibly make it cheaper to use than PP. It's a SL rated oil with high TBN whereas PP is SM and can't be run as long. Look at some of the UOA's where the RP retained a high TBN after many miles.


People dont want to pay more for [censored]. If RP is so competively priced with PP, val syn, castrol etc... why do people bypass RP for better performing oils.

[/quote]

How do you know they perform better if you've never tried it? There's more to performance than UOA's. You might love the way your motors runs so much better that it would be worth the extra cost (and could be a bargain with a longer OCI). You'll never know until you give it a try.



[/quote]

you are correct

 

[DmanWho]

Since I enjoy home-brewing so much, I have decided my next oil blend will be based on Bitog's 'Most Hated On' oils... Red Line, RP, and M1!

 

[Audi Junkie]

Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Shop oils, like GC are colourd to insure the owner recieves the genuine oil called for to maintin warranty service.

As for RP, is there a VOA on it? Isn't it just plain motor oil? I'd say it's no better or worse than $2 SM dino oil. Is there any serious oem style testing to back up claims that RP is a contender? When I buy GC or M1 0w-40, I have a buttload of factory approvals.

BMW
MB
Ford
GM (vette)
Audi/VW
Opel/Saab
ACEA
Porsche
et al

I hate to be a cliche', but "where's the beef"?


Well, RP oils for the most part are Group IV PAO based. UNless I have been lied to which I doubt. From what I have seen RP folks are honest to a fault. I guess a few weights/offerings( Racing? )have some Group V. It definitely is not plain motor oil which I assume you mean is conventional? It also is not Group III either if that was what you meant although as PP shows that isn't always a bad thing.

Not to start this up again but factory approval/certifications mean SQUAT other than the oil mfg paid to have their product tested. I wish people on this site would stop putting so much emphasis on, and giving so much credit to, those approved/certified lists. They mean nothing for people who know how to research oils.

What has that certification got to do with it really? The mfg can't refuse you warranty coverage because you used an oil that wasn't on their certified/approved list( for whatever standard you want to apply ). I would think most here would know about the Magnuson-Moss act and the rights they have under that law. No mfg can require/mandate you use an oil that is "certified" to meet their own standard/spec. Just that the oil you use at least meets it. There is a big difference.

As to the actual oil itself. If an oil meets or exceeds a certain standard it does so whether or not it is certified by the mfg to do so. The certification doesn't make it a better oil than one not certified. The test results do and I would think people at this place, of all places, would realize that. So Mobil 1 is on a few( actually most - they really go for it )mfg's certification lists. Does that mean it is better than Amsoil, RedLine, Royal Purple, Penzoil Platinum, Schaeffers, etc...? How does that certification make their oil better? All it means to me is they spent a BUTT LOAD of money to get their products certified( and to be the official oil of many mfg's )and the products would have still been as good if not certified.

As to RP and why they never get certified. What I have been told is they feel the cost for certification is too high. As I stated about the law, what really is the point anyway. The oil is still okay to use. I doubt you see RP ever get certified for any mfg's spec. Not because it couldn't per say but because of the cost involved.

Certification is nice because it saves you having to spend a couple minutes showing your oil meets or exceeds the spec but that really is all it does. Saves a little leg work for the customer. Other than that the certification/approval does nadda for the oil itself. Either it does what you need or it doesn't.



So, that's a no. It DOES NOT MEET the specs call for by these oems which account for a vast number of performance applications.

If it could pass, why not test for approval? Cost? Well, if they dont' have the resources to test their oil, that speaks to the resources they have to engineer their oil. Why should a customer settle for a half-assed product that costs...more? Good enough for Porsche, good enough for me. Royal Purple is good enough for??? Ricers and motor heads?

 

[glxpassat]

Audi, didn't you try RP Maxgear in your tranny? Seems like I remember you giving it a try and liking it and recommending it to others. So I'm kind of surprised you would be so down on them and wouldn't be willing to try the motor oil as well.

If you're going to live by oem tests alone, the factory VW G50, G52... gear oil would be the only one to use, as the oem doesn't provide an approved list for gear lubes. But many have tried RP, Redline, Amsoil, Motul, etc.. in their gear box and like it better than the factory fluid. If not RP, what are you running in your gear box now?

 

[Audi Junkie]

The 1987 Audi I used it in called for a GL-4. The fluid that came out had 180k on it, so pretty much anything was an improvment. I'd use RP again in that app if it were the only one available locally, like it was then. Since that time, I've use RedLine. Can't really compare to an example of one. I'd like to try AMSoil next, fwiw. I'm guessing it's a far cry from Royal Purple. Also, I did not get the RP because it `was` purple.

btw- great memory there bud. Any suggestions on how I can improve on mine? Maybe pour some RP on my pancakes? ;o)

 

[glxpassat]

Yeah, I'm running MT-90 in mine now and it's the best I've tried so far. RP's not any good on pancakes, but it's excellent on ice cream and it does improve your memory!

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Originally Posted By: NHSilverado
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Shop oils, like GC are colourd to insure the owner recieves the genuine oil called for to maintin warranty service.

As for RP, is there a VOA on it? Isn't it just plain motor oil? I'd say it's no better or worse than $2 SM dino oil. Is there any serious oem style testing to back up claims that RP is a contender? When I buy GC or M1 0w-40, I have a buttload of factory approvals.

BMW
MB
Ford
GM (vette)
Audi/VW
Opel/Saab
ACEA
Porsche
et al

I hate to be a cliche', but "where's the beef"?


Well, RP oils for the most part are Group IV PAO based. UNless I have been lied to which I doubt. From what I have seen RP folks are honest to a fault. I guess a few weights/offerings( Racing? )have some Group V. It definitely is not plain motor oil which I assume you mean is conventional? It also is not Group III either if that was what you meant although as PP shows that isn't always a bad thing.

Not to start this up again but factory approval/certifications mean SQUAT other than the oil mfg paid to have their product tested. I wish people on this site would stop putting so much emphasis on, and giving so much credit to, those approved/certified lists. They mean nothing for people who know how to research oils.

What has that certification got to do with it really? The mfg can't refuse you warranty coverage because you used an oil that wasn't on their certified/approved list( for whatever standard you want to apply ). I would think most here would know about the Magnuson-Moss act and the rights they have under that law. No mfg can require/mandate you use an oil that is "certified" to meet their own standard/spec. Just that the oil you use at least meets it. There is a big difference.

As to the actual oil itself. If an oil meets or exceeds a certain standard it does so whether or not it is certified by the mfg to do so. The certification doesn't make it a better oil than one not certified. The test results do and I would think people at this place, of all places, would realize that. So Mobil 1 is on a few( actually most - they really go for it )mfg's certification lists. Does that mean it is better than Amsoil, RedLine, Royal Purple, Penzoil Platinum, Schaeffers, etc...? How does that certification make their oil better? All it means to me is they spent a BUTT LOAD of money to get their products certified( and to be the official oil of many mfg's )and the products would have still been as good if not certified.

As to RP and why they never get certified. What I have been told is they feel the cost for certification is too high. As I stated about the law, what really is the point anyway. The oil is still okay to use. I doubt you see RP ever get certified for any mfg's spec. Not because it couldn't per say but because of the cost involved.

Certification is nice because it saves you having to spend a couple minutes showing your oil meets or exceeds the spec but that really is all it does. Saves a little leg work for the customer. Other than that the certification/approval does nadda for the oil itself. Either it does what you need or it doesn't.



So, that's a no. It DOES NOT MEET the specs call for by these oems which account for a vast number of performance applications.

If it could pass, why not test for approval? Cost? Well, if they dont' have the resources to test their oil, that speaks to the resources they have to engineer their oil. Why should a customer settle for a half-assed product that costs...more? Good enough for Porsche, good enough for me. Royal Purple is good enough for??? Ricers and motor heads?


Well, I never said anything about whether or not it met any of those spec's or not. How you get me saying NO out of what I wrote is a puzzle to me?

FYI however. RP "DOES" meet the Vette spec( GM4718M )and it says so on the bottle. RP is very popular with Vette owners that are required to use an oil that meets that standard. Mobil 1 is the most popular because their car came with it from GM and the oil fill cap says use M1 so somehow that makes it better.

I imagine it also meets or exceeds most any Ford spec too although possibly not a really new one. I seem to recall something about a special synthetic oil in the 5.4L newer hi-perf Stang's that was hard to find? Maybe it is more weight related than oil spec related though. Think it is a 5W-50 which would not be readily available from everyone. I do know RP is very popular in the Mustang, SC Harley Davidson F150, and F150 Lightning circles. These guys would not be running it if it was not up to spec.

Not sure on the foreign ones though. Have no interest in BMW's, Porsche's, etc... so I don't bother to research them.

You do realize how much it costs to become certified for one of these spec's/standards right? Thousands of dollars. With so many out there it can add up fast. Not submitting due to cost doesn't mean the company has limited resources or anything. Perhaps it simply means they feel the cost is not justified.

You are placing WAY too much emphasis on certification and approval. It means nothing. So by your logic an oil not on a certified/approved OE's standard list for a simple and easy to meet standard like GM6094M is still a poor oil or the company is broke. Crazy man.

You always should use an oil that meets/exceeds any standard or spec the car's mfg calls for. I am just saying it doesn't have to be OE certified or approved. If you can get the data and verify the oil you want to use meets/exceeds it you are fine. Mobil 1 is "certified" to GM4718M. Does that make it a better oil than RP and Amsoil which both makes products that meet/exceed that spec but did not pay GM to be certtified? No of course not. Many would argue both the RP and Amsoil offerings would be better than the Mobil 1 oil.

What matters is the standard's requirements and how the oil you want to use stacks up to it. NOT OE certification/approval. If you don't know the spec's then look for a certified oil certainly. That is just a tool for the consumer, a way for the mfg to make a lot of money, and has nothing to do with whether or not the oil is actually any good.

By all means feel free to use any oil that makes you happy. I will do the same and know I am safe warranty wise as long as it meets/exceeds the spec called for even if not OE certified/approved.

Some of you on here are a real laugh a minute riot.

Have a great day.