Is Royal purple worth the extra $$?

[deven]

Originally Posted By: rockydee
Originally Posted By: deven
Wasnt going to reply to all the dyno comments but will just to clarify why we dyno the way we do.

First we have dyno'd using new oil and we would use the mfg recommended oil after we dyno'd the car with the oil it came in.
After a while we saw a pattern where therewas either no difference or the used oil produced very very minimal increase in hp, maybe since the oil had sheared a bit even though it was still in grade(verified by uoa) and/or maybe the anti wear additives were already activated by heat(complete speculation). So we decided that it was a waste of time, money, resources and wear and tear of equipment and stopped performing dyno on new oil.

As for variations in dyno results, sure its a valid point but in that case it would work both ways where a lot of times RP would be the benefactor of flawed results and we surely would not have a 90-92% success rate. After all it should be a 2 way road. The variances should hurt RP just as much. I know no one especially futuredoc wont believe in this argument but it is what it is.

I would love to perform your experiment futuredoc but we all know that it is not feasible nor financially reasonable to perform 30-100 dynos in a row. Not only would we put undue stress on the dyno but we would probably uncalibrate it and the results would become meaningless. We have to rest the dyno at least an hour after each run to get an optimum amount of equipment life.

Lastly if we performed that many runs my electricity bill would run me into the 5 digit category. I simply cannot afford to do that.


Statistical noise/error call it whatever you want. My bet is if you ran the same exact test leaving the car on the Dyno with a 5 minute rest period the results would be the same. Your testing proves nothing unfortunately. How many of us have to tell you that? But if RP is hiring sales reps you'd be someone worth their consideration. Good effort man!-RD

Believe me, I am one of the lesser fanboys. If you spend enough time in the circles of drag racing like we do, RP will have an army of people to choose from if they needed a sales rep.

 

[kschachn]

Thank you, I don't know a lot about measuring wear on engine components but I was pretty sure you didn't do it with a caliper. Can you even do it with a good micrometer? Don't you have to use Plastigauge? Where would you even put the micrometer if you wanted to measure it?

And those pictures seem to imply you are measuring between the cam lobes, is that correct?

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Yes, I remember that thread. I thought the RP cams looked better than the M1 cams, but also thought it was pointless to try to measure cam wear with a set of digital calipers. The amount of wear one would be trying to detect is much smaller than the resolution of the calipers. Based on the appearance of the lobe surfaces, I would have said that the M1 cams would eventually spall, and the RP ones wouldn't. "Eventually" meaning 250k+ miles.

 

[deven]

He's measuring the lobe itself.

 

[deven]

Give the guy a break. That's what he had to measure and he's using it to measure both. It is an apples to apples comparison.

 

[surfstar]

Originally Posted By: deven
Give the guy a break. That's what he had to measure and he's using it to measure both. It is an apples to apples comparison.


...and...

the reading is the exact same, therefore RP wins!!!

Purple apples are better than green apples
More fanboy logic

 

[rockydee]

Originally Posted By: surfstar
Originally Posted By: deven
Give the guy a break. That's what he had to measure and he's using it to measure both. It is an apples to apples comparison.


...and...

the reading is the exact same, therefore RP wins!!!

Purple apples are better than green apples
More fanboy logic

HA- Hey at least he didn't use a yard stick.-RD

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Thank you, I don't know a lot about measuring wear on engine components but I was pretty sure you didn't do it with a caliper. Can you even do it with a good micrometer? Don't you have to use Plastigauge? Where would you even put the micrometer if you wanted to measure it?

And those pictures seem to imply you are measuring between the cam lobes, is that correct?

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Yes, I remember that thread. I thought the RP cams looked better than the M1 cams, but also thought it was pointless to try to measure cam wear with a set of digital calipers. The amount of wear one would be trying to detect is much smaller than the resolution of the calipers. Based on the appearance of the lobe surfaces, I would have said that the M1 cams would eventually spall, and the RP ones wouldn't. "Eventually" meaning 250k+ miles.


No, a micrometer won't do it either. During my time as a valvetrain engineer, I figured out that by the time you are able to measure .001" of wear, the part has already suffered widespread damage to its wear surface and should be replaced so that its debris doesn't contaminate the rest of the engine.

Another problem with trying to measure cam lobe wear with calipers or micrometers is there are size tolerances on the base circle radius that is on the order of +/-.001". So if you could measure reliably down below .001", you wouldn't necessarily be measuring anything other than normal dimensional variation within the allowable tolerance range.

If one is actually trying to measure wear, pre-test measurements of the cam lobes have to be taken so that when the engine is torn down, post-test measurement have a basis for comparison. These pre-test measurements are normally taken on high-end Coordinate Measuring Machines that have resolution down to .00004" (1 micron).

In the case of the Mustang cams, in order to measure the ability of the two oils to resist wear, it would probably be easier to take profilometer measurements in defined zones on the lobes before and after test, and then see which lube allowed a smaller amount of roughness increase. The appearance of the lobes on the M1 cams showed circumferential streaks, which in my experience is a precursor to pitting wear.

 

[kschachn]

What? Now you're just being silly. I know enough about measuring something with repeatability and accuracy, and I think it's been established that the caliper doesn't have the resolution to make any kind of meaningful determination in this case. As someone mentioned you might as well use a yardstick.

You - running a speed shop should know enough not to make a statement like that.

Originally Posted By: deven
Give the guy a break. That's what he had to measure and he's using it to measure both. It is an apples to apples comparison.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: deven
As for variations in dyno results, sure its a valid point but in that case it would work both ways where a lot of times RP would be the benefactor of flawed results and we surely would not have a 90-92% success rate. After all it should be a 2 way road. The variances should hurt RP just as much.

In your example, all oils will experience the same variances and therefore, nothing can be gleaned from your dyno runs--certainly not that RP is better or worse than any other oil or that any other oil is worse or better than RP. There is too much variance and lack of repeatability in the process. In essence, you are not "proving" anything and to attempt to use this information as credible only causes the types of responses and the "flame whipping" towards RP that it did. There is plenty of anecdotal "evidence" that RP is a good oil, and IMHO, it does not need to be defended, but can stand on its own merits for everyone to decide if it works for them or not.

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
What? Now you're just being silly. I know enough about measuring something with repeatability and accuracy, and I think it's been established that the caliper doesn't have the resolution to make any kind of meaningful determination in this case. As someone mentioned you might as well use a yardstick.

You - running a speed shop should know enough not to make a statement like that.

Originally Posted By: deven
Give the guy a break. That's what he had to measure and he's using it to measure both. It is an apples to apples comparison.

My point was simply that its better than no measurement.

 

[rockydee]

Originally Posted By: deven
Originally Posted By: kschachn
What? Now you're just being silly. I know enough about measuring something with repeatability and accuracy, and I think it's been established that the caliper doesn't have the resolution to make any kind of meaningful determination in this case. As someone mentioned you might as well use a yardstick.

You - running a speed shop should know enough not to make a statement like that.

Originally Posted By: deven
Give the guy a break. That's what he had to measure and he's using it to measure both. It is an apples to apples comparison.

My point was simply that its better than no measurement.


When you're measuring engine parts for braggin rights or determining wear you either use the right equipment or don't bother. Measuring with the wrong tools is a waste of everyone's time. This thread is becoming a waste of time too. But I'm in for the ride. -RD

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Originally Posted By: deven
As for variations in dyno results, sure its a valid point but in that case it would work both ways where a lot of times RP would be the benefactor of flawed results and we surely would not have a 90-92% success rate. After all it should be a 2 way road. The variances should hurt RP just as much.

In your example, all oils will experience the same variances and therefore, nothing can be gleaned from your dyno runs--certainly not that RP is better or worse than any other oil or that any other oil is worse or better than RP. There is too much variance and lack of repeatability in the process. In essence, you are not "proving" anything and to attempt to use this information as credible only causes the types of responses and the "flame whipping" towards RP that it did. There is plenty of anecdotal "evidence" that RP is a good oil, and IMHO, it does not need to be defended, but can stand on its own merits for everyone to decide if it works for them or not.


Exactly.
And let's get real here. The add pack of an oil isn't immediately functional. So it takes time for it to lay down its anti-wear layer and so on.
So an immediate dyno pull with royal purple in the sump shouldnt change other than the +\- variation in the machine itself.
I've always liked royal purple and I've always said synerlec is special however it's effects are not immediate.
After 1000 miles or so the additive package should be in effect and only then should a measurement be taken.
And 1% isn't even relevant.
The members here arent(for the most part) swayed by anecdotes. They want to see repeatability,and the butt dyno isn't accurate enough.
So Deven I suggest you drop it. I agree the royal purple cams look to be in much better shape however you can't use 2 different engines,driven by 2 different people and compare them,you just can't.
If you even give that a second thought you're beyond help.
And I sownd a lot of time at both our tracks. In fact I got to drive my charger around our oval last fall.
Your post about racers and royal purple is interesting only because locally most of the real track stars I see run conventional on track days,on the strip anyway.
They know enough that they are changing the oil again at the end of the day,so so spending big bucks on oil is dumb for a single days run.
These are grass roots guys. Building cars in their barns and what not.
Royal purple seems to be popular with the tuner crowd though. You know the type. Making payments on the car they are racing. Living in moms basement. Think city streets are a track. Those kinds of guys.
I like the products. Royal purple makes some good stuff. Synerlec is special

 

[kschachn]

No it's not. It's worse actually, when it leads you to an unsubstantiated conclusion.

Originally Posted By: deven
My point was simply that its better than no measurement.

 

[Shannow]

+1

 

[Tony10s]

Originally Posted By: deven
I am just wondering why 90% of the people here use M1, PP, PPPP, or any group III synthetic when we all know that all their vehicles will run fine on PYB, Mobil 5000, or any other conventional oil that will most likely give them 300+ thousand miles of joy. Heck in most cases you could use conventional and go 7,500 miles easy so folks no need to pay more for synthetic oil!
As people here say for oil "As thin as possible and as thick as necessary" it should be the same with buying oil, "As cheap as possible and only as expensive as necessary"


I always used conventional oil in my vehicles until this year. This year I have used both conventional and synthetic motor oil ... not that I needed to use synthetic oil. In the past, I always used conventional oil, and my vehicles lasted a very long time (I keep my cars until the wheels fall off, lol). I would still be driving my previous car (Pontiac) if someone had not struck me in the rear end and totaled it. It was 11 years old at the time and running great ... I never had any problems out of that car/engine, and I used Castrol conventional oil in it the entire time (and I did not use high-end synthetic oil filters either ... just basic cellulose or cellulose/synthetic blend/glass blend oil filters). The car I had before that (Chevrolet) also saw nothing but conventional oil (PYB), and I never had any problems out of that car either. So, in my opinion, cars that don't require synthetic oil I believe will be just fine with conventional oil, and I don't see a need to spend more money than necessary on motor oil.

I started buying some synthetic oil this year after I started following BITOG, but I basically just did it for the fun of it ... just to try out different motor oils. However, all the synthetics I have bought have been on sale at a really low price (or the Pennzoil/Quaker State synthetics with the FRN rewards program). Otherwise, I probably wouldn't have bothered to buy them. I plan to buy some NAPA Synthetic when it goes back on sale because the price is very low per quart ... lower than conventional oil in most cases. I plan to use the synthetic I have in the winter and conventional in the summer. However, I don't know if I will continue to buy any synthetic oil after that (after I use up my stash) because I know that conventional oil is fine for my needs.

 

[Dallas69]

When you find yourself in a hole,quit digging

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: Dallas69
When you find yourself in a hole,quit digging

Never worried about digging out of a hole as long as I am true to myself and believe what I see.
Digging out of BITOG hole is like the blind leading the blind.
Now I am done for sure. So if people dont get a reply from me, I am not avoiding you just this thread.

 

[WiskyBadger]

Guys it's just oil.....

 

[Dallas69]

Give me a medal I think I finally killed this thread !!

 

[147_Grain]

You win the Royal Purple Customer of the Year Award.