Royal Purple Can Do What??

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: 2k05gt
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
It just amazes me. Im not starting an arguement, here, but here is a pic of my "race" cams off my evo with 40K on the clock while using M1 EP 10/30

Evo Cam

My cams look nothing like those cams. That is the thing. Did those ugly pics come off a car with 1000 lb spring rates or what? I am just curious because I have never seen anything like that on an evo cam before.

So if Royal Purple "mirco polishes" then iin essense it should "smooth" out inperfections in an engine using a different oil?

Does ONLY Royal Purple protect parts like this? or does Redline and Amsoil do as well?

Very confused here.
confused.gif



The Modular cams? If so, the 2nd set of cams (the Mobil 1 ones) may actually have LESS wear if you look at the pictures I posted and the link Ben99GT posted.

Modulars run light spring pressure. What you see as "grey" on those cams may be the virgin cam material with the "wear tracks" in the middle being the only spots with very LIGHT wear from where the roller contacts the lobe.

I'd rather have my cam lobes virgin than "micro polished", but that's just me....

I am not sure what Cams you are Referring too, but the M1 cams on the car with less miles did have considerable wear, I took them to a shop and had them MIC'ed the RP Cams with twice the milage had NO wear at all. We tested Brand new stock cams and the Micrometer reveiled ZERO. yet the M1 cams had a noticable "groove" where the followers touched the lobes on the cam.

I have replaced the heads on my 2005 Mustang because I installed a Comp 127300 Cams and Beehive Springs. I lightly ported and polished the heads (cleaned up). My car has 95,000 miles today and I am still hitting the track. No compression loss, no wear, and still run RP. I sold the Comp 127200 cams and the guy thought they were new. even the bearing guides were unmarked and like new.


Did you look at the SEQ-IVA pics?

And unless you measured the cams with zero miles and then after mileage accrued, you can't draw that conclusion (unfortunate I know) due to variances in machining. It was a joke (but a true one) that all the HO camshafts for the 302 HO were unique because none of them would spec out the same when measured. As it is with mass produced camshafts, none of the cams will be absolutely identical, and this is the reason we cam doctor custom camshafts.

Regardless, the "tracks" on the cams are normal, as cam lobes aren't polished. You polish something, you remove material.

This has been hashed over and over (as I'm sure you are aware) and if you feel comfortable running RP, that's fantastic! Nobody is stating that it is a bad oil, simply that the "testing" methodology used here really isn't valid. It wasn't controlled, and was done on two different cars with different drivers done in different conditions. We don't even know if the lobes on the cams came from the same batch or not. There are so many variables....

But I mean, you didn't set out to prove anything, it was a casual observation that turned into a full-blown debate. And I'm glad you posted the pictures, as the subsequent discussion(s) that ensued were educational.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL


Did you look at the SEQ-IVA pics?

And unless you measured the cams with zero miles and then after mileage accrued, you can't draw that conclusion (unfortunate I know) due to variances in machining. It was a joke (but a true one) that all the HO camshafts for the 302 HO were unique because none of them would spec out the same when measured. As it is with mass produced camshafts, none of the cams will be absolutely identical, and this is the reason we cam doctor custom camshafts.

Regardless, the "tracks" on the cams are normal, as cam lobes aren't polished. You polish something, you remove material.

This has been hashed over and over (as I'm sure you are aware) and if you feel comfortable running RP, that's fantastic! Nobody is stating that it is a bad oil, simply that the "testing" methodology used here really isn't valid. It wasn't controlled, and was done on two different cars with different drivers done in different conditions. We don't even know if the lobes on the cams came from the same batch or not. There are so many variables....

But I mean, you didn't set out to prove anything, it was a casual observation that turned into a full-blown debate. And I'm glad you posted the pictures, as the subsequent discussion(s) that ensued were educational.


I did look at the SEQ-IVA pics and non of the cams I have look like those pictures. The Mobil 1 cams have dark colors like heated metal with groves you can feel with your nail. the RP cams are not polished where the follower touches the lobe, you can see marks but they are not as pronounced as the M1 cams.

The Stock Cams are shiny or polished new, I know; the shop that MIC'ed the cams had a stock Ford set of cams on the shelf. I am assuming the picture you posted of "NEW" 3 valve cams were from a sales site that had professional photos taken, they would want the cams to be dull so the image would be consistant without light shining off polished surfaces. I think they spray a satin clear coat to dull the polished areas.

My Comp cams came new polished as well, but I assume this is because they are custom grind cams.

Yes my cams were identical to the stock shelf cams, I Provided 3 M1 cars and cams and2 RP cars and cams with identical results, 2 out of the 3 M1 cams BTW showed considerable wear when MIC'ed, so much so that the Mechanic showed some consern. But said that for the normal car M1 is fine, but as a racer M1 is not the best for our cars. He pushes BG additives and Motorcraft Synthetic based on ford recomendations.

I bought my wife a 2009 Dodge Durango Hybrid (only 200 made) and it ran rough on startup, since the hybrid does not have a starter; the electric motor turns the engine over when the batteries need to charge. We stopped using M1 and switched to Castrol Syntec and I can’t feel or hear when the 5.7 dual mode hemi starts up now. So I personally think that Mobil one is over rated and there are a lot belter oils out there, recently I have come to like Castrol for the daily drivers.
 
Last edited:
It is unfortunate that my experience with their products does not mirror your own. My HO cam was immaculate with 280,000Km on it when I pulled it. I had used Mobil 1 in it exclusively in various grades. And this is with much higher spring pressure (push-rod engine) than a Modular.

When we pulled the valve covers off my buddy's engine, who had been running Mobil 1 0w20 in it, the cams looked a lot like the ones Ben posted. You could see the tracks, but couldn't feel anything. Tracking on the roller surface is normal; neither surface is perfect.

You never posted the mic results, what were they? (sorry for the disconnected points here). And considerable wear relative to what? the stock reference cam? Side-to-side or?

FWIW, many of the stock cams I've seen for various applications have a mild satin finish to the machine surface. Even my custom grind wasn't super-shiny, and my TFS #1 looked like the cam I posted. I think this varies, and it is possible that it may even vary between OEM Ford cams.

It sounds like you are having good luck with Castrol products, that is excellent! I think any approved lubricant will provide satisfactory performance for a stock application. Personally, I found that my M5 was much smoother/quieter on M1 0w40 than it was on the Castrol BMW 5w30. But I fully admit I'm not a big fan of BP products and have had great success with Mobil products over my 15 years of using them.

To each their own, however, I think that the only real "conclusion" we can draw from this thread is that you look after your vehicles and have the results to show for it
thumbsup2.gif


My buddy spinning his rod bearing was self-inflicted; definitely not a lubricant issue. He has a history of destroying engines. I'm making this point as sort of an aside, but it is simply that a vehicle's maintenance and how the owner treats it can have a significant impact on how it wears.

It would be nice if you could have run some miles after your RP miles on M1 with the same driving style and see if the cams changed condition. Same car, engine and driver.... Gives us much more than we have currently. But, from my understanding of this situation, you were posting what you considered an "interesting finding" after observing that your cams looked quite different from this friend of yours. You had not set this up as a test, hence the lack of control and the like. I'm not faulting you in any way for this, so please don't take it as a criticism, as it isn't one.
 
Let me ask you then, if the polishing is done when the follower was in contact with the lobe, wouldn’t the track only be polished? yet you look at the cams I posted, the polish or shiny area is consistent across the entire surface. so either the oil is polishing all moving parts whether they come in contact with another surface or not. personally I think that’s impossible but stranger things have happened.

Second thing on my mind, if the oil is polishing the surfaces then you should see higher metal numbers in the UOA correct? But my numbers are below average. So my conclusion is that it’s not polishing it’s reduced friction is not marking the original surface. But again that’s my opinion.

I did use M1 for a short time when I was unemployed, I got a Wal-Mart sale on M1 with Filter for 25.00
I did notice that the cam phaser Ticked like crazy, this is a common problem with the 3 valve Mod motor, people would say that it sounds like a lifter tick, it’s really the phaser gear tapping under low oil pressure. For recommends using Motorcraft Synthetic to silence the phaser tick, for some reason it hated M1, some have found that going up to 5w-30 or 10w-30 to quiet them down. I never could figure out why M1 5w-20 would not allow the pressure to build up at idle to keep the gears locked.

Oh my Beehive springs specs (mild spring setup)

.550" maximum lift, 1.061" O.D.
No machining required

Specs
OD: Top .959" Bottom 1.061"
ID: Top .636" Bottom .738"
Seat Pressure: 93 lbs @ 1.570''
Open Pressure: 198 lbs @ 1.020''
Coil Bind: .952"
Spring Rate: 191 lbs/in
 
Last edited:
Those are nice and light! My pushrod springs are 500lbs open
wink.gif
K-Motion K800's.

My thoughts were that it was just chemical polishing with the RP, something to do with their Synerlec product perhaps. I'm not saying it is bad, just that it is different, and probably not something that is allowable in any of the newer API-approved formulas.

I think what you see on the M1 cams is the polishing action only where the roller contacts the lobe, whilst the RP cams are more uniform with the mechanical polishing being far less visible and I think the composition of the product has something to do with that, because they are SHINY!

Just my theory however
wink.gif


The RP probably has a higher HTHS than the M1 BTW, so that's likely why you didn't have the phaser noise with it.
 
Yes light weight springs for sure, I think my 1971 455 HO Trans-am had some heavy springs as well, the lope was very noticable where the car would shake. the cams I have in the Mustang are bearly noticable it idle the car would shake a little with lope.

My car is a good weather Daily driver and a agressive cam would be to much so I setteled with a stage II. I gained about 40 RWHP, not bad for a light street cam.

I really am looking into getting a 2012 Boss 302, that is a nice car; and the engine is vastly superior to the 3 valve.
with 444@7400 Horsepower and 380@4500 Torque stock running 11's in the 1/4 mile, yea 11.s with DR's Here is a friend
who just bought it, took it to Maryland International Raceway (MIR) aka Budds creek.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLmXeUflf4I

11.72 @ 117 MPH
Car is still stock with Drag Radials
3800 pounds with driver!
hit the traps in 4th gear around 7000rpm
Launched at 5000 rpm
1/8 - 7.52 at 93.16mph
1000 ft - 9.80
60 ft - 1.69
No Power Adders
All Motor!!!

Our Last race event this year a guy drove his 2012 GT from Texas to MIR, with just a Tune and Drag Radials he was running 12.1 @ 114, and he got air under the left tire
7074eab31a720179.jpg


Yes the New 5.0 is a strong motor...


Here is one of my Car...
TireLift_b.jpg


The debate is there light under my tire or not?
 
Last edited:
No debate here. I see light.

Rear suspension squat is a bit extreme for the street but very effective with DR's. One [censored] of a hook up.

One amazingly quick little car.
 
Thanks, the car has 95,000 miles on the clock with almost 500 passes at the 1320; stock springs and shocks, Che Lower Control and steeda upper CA. 4.10 Gears with Detroit TruTrac locker. 3500 Super Street Fighter Converter and Stock 5R55S 5 speed trans with one peice Aluminum Drive shaft.

Engine: JBA Long tube Headers, high flow cats, Comp 127300 XFI VSR Cams and Springs, Hand ported and polished heads (done by me)not agressive, just cleaned up. Intake and tune thats it.
Oh and Only used Royal Purple since 3000 miles.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
No debate here. I see light.

Rear suspension squat is a bit extreme for the street but very effective with DR's. One [censored] of a hook up.

One amazingly quick little car.



This!
thumbsup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
No debate here. I see light.

Rear suspension squat is a bit extreme for the street but very effective with DR's. One [censored] of a hook up.

One amazingly quick little car.


I agree, that front tire is definitely off of the ground.
 
Originally Posted By: Nederlander75
OP, I have probably put 200K miles on various engines with RP including my 03 EVO VIII. All have been without issue and the only noticable remark would be fuel economy increases between 10 and 18 percent on RP. My UOAs show slightly better with it than most other oils excluding NEO and RL. The EVO has been on it since new besides a couple of ventures into M1, NEO, and RL. It shears all oil to a light 30wt/heavy 20wt without exception. Im only ECU toned with, but it sees quite a bit of track time and extended cruising at 100 mph plus.

What grade oil are you using for the EVO?
 
Originally Posted By: Nederlander75
the only noticable remark would be fuel economy increases between 10 and 18 percent on RP.

Is it a requirement of everyone who uses RP to exaggerate to the ninth degree on the products friction reducing capabilities?
Perhaps if you were previously running straight 140wt gear oil plus a couple of cans of STP in your engine you might see a 10% increase in fuel economy, but 18% would require a very heavy dose of divine intervention.
 
I think Red Line has the coefficient of friction marketing claims cornered with their high levels of MoTDC and high lubricity POE base stocks; and yet they limit the claims to a single bullet point on their bottles.

Mobil 1 & Red Line remain the classiest acts in the synthetic oil marketing, IMHO.
 
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Is it a requirement of everyone who uses RP to exaggerate to the ninth degree on the products friction reducing capabilities?


He he. I've used it, and I saw no measurable difference in fuel economy. It may be a great oil, but anyone who claims to get better fuel mileage out of, say, RP 5w-30 than they get out of a dino 5w-30 with similar HTHS is engaging in wishful thinking.
 
If divine intervention is an option, I suppose demons could also pull off a similar performance...maybe a good dose of magic would do the trick.
 
I recommend Red Line 5w30 for your modd'ed up Evo. I definitely noticed a quicker spool-up on my k04 turbo. It's a very heavy 30 weight if you go by HTHS it's thicker than some 40 weights so I have no doubt it could handle tracking it in the heat of summer while stick giving great cold start and short trip protection. Love the stuff myself.
 
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Nederlander75
the only noticable remark would be fuel economy increases between 10 and 18 percent on RP.

Is it a requirement of everyone who uses RP to exaggerate to the ninth degree on the products friction reducing capabilities?
Perhaps if you were previously running straight 140wt gear oil plus a couple of cans of STP in your engine you might see a 10% increase in fuel economy, but 18% would require a very heavy dose of divine intervention.


I would say that, no, it is not requirement of everyone who uses RP to exaggerate to the ninth degree on the products friction reducing capabilities.

OTOT.. Royal Purple can do magic! *do-dee-doo* .. it can do anything that you desire..

smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: 45ACP
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Nederlander75
the only noticable remark would be fuel economy increases between 10 and 18 percent on RP.

Is it a requirement of everyone who uses RP to exaggerate to the ninth degree on the products friction reducing capabilities?
Perhaps if you were previously running straight 140wt gear oil plus a couple of cans of STP in your engine you might see a 10% increase in fuel economy, but 18% would require a very heavy dose of divine intervention.


I would say that, no, it is not requirement of everyone who uses RP to exaggerate to the ninth degree on the products friction reducing capabilities.

OTOT.. Royal Purple can do magic! *do-dee-doo* .. it can do anything that you desire..

smile.gif



Royal Purple has fantastic Marketing.
 
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Nederlander75
the only noticable remark would be fuel economy increases between 10 and 18 percent on RP.

Is it a requirement of everyone who uses RP to exaggerate to the ninth degree on the products friction reducing capabilities?
Perhaps if you were previously running straight 140wt gear oil plus a couple of cans of STP in your engine you might see a 10% increase in fuel economy, but 18% would require a very heavy dose of divine intervention.


Hahahaha! I know! 18% increase in fuel economy!?!?! If that were true, the OEM's would be lining up to put RP in their cars & trucks as a factory fill, to comply with the ever increasing MPG requirements set forth by the gov't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top