Royal Purple horsepower gains

[jk_636]

Royal Purple is great stuff and I wouldn't be surprised if it actually does increase HP BUT. As for the article,'all manyfacturers run "tests"'like this for advertising and notability. RP claims to increase HP, Amsoil says you can run it for 25k miles, gumout says it cleans your fuel system. its all one in the same

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
So what is the explanation for the HP increase?


There is one better ... if you take stock in fluff advertising.



And Nulon is actually a very very good/stout oil that has a cult following in the racing sector with great word of mouth reputation. I always tend to take word of mouth testimonials over company advertising.

 

[BlueOvalFitter]

Originally Posted By: deven
RP is at it again with their HP claims. Wasnt there a lawsuit by BP that said they couldn't claim HP gains anymore? LOL.

Tech Tests HPS in Subie

If you put a RP decal on your window you are bound to gain more horsepower.

 

[RISUPERCREWMAN]

Cause Royal Purple Rocks!

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: deven
RP is at it again with their HP claims. Wasnt there a lawsuit by BP that said they couldn't claim HP gains anymore? LOL.

Tech Tests HPS in Subie


deven;

NO reason RP can't claim their oil added HP in this specific case because it did. This isn't a generic marketing "blanket" claim. Also, RP voluntarily stopped making those claims. BP didn't actually sue them in court but rather it was a marketing/advertising board that heard it. Some branch of the Better Business Bureau. They basically told RP they should modify or stop making the claims like they were and RP agreed. RP was not legally bound to do so however. Just an FYI for you.

I have to say, seeing as you are an RP user, I am surprised you brought this up the way you did.

The RP detractors on this site always poo-poo these RP dyno tests claiming that it is rigged or they don't use a fair comparison oil( i.e. 5W20 RP vs 10W40 or 20W50 for the other ). Basically that the entire test is flawed or rigged somehow.

Well, this seems to me to have been a very fair comparison test and it is exactly the kind of test the naysayers always say they want to see run if the oil mfg is going to make claims of HP gains.

We have multiple dyno runs of each oil done on the same day, on the same machine, so we can rule out weather impact and any differences between the dyno machines used. They also used NEW Subaru 5W30 synthetic oil vs. NEW RP HPS 5W30. So the vehicle was tested using fresh oil in each brand plus the same weight was used so there was no funny business with different weights being used.

I am curious just what else people expect RP to do in providing data that the RP oil provided a HP/FTLBS increase? I would say they made a good faith effort to be as fair as possible in the test. The RP oil had no advantage over the Subaru oil. Both were synthetics, both started out as fresh OC's, both were the same weight, and the same dyno was used to do the runs which as I read it were all done on the same day.

I guess I fail to see how this is anything but legit? On that day, in that vehicle, the RP oil did in fact provide a power gain over the Subaru oil. Doesn't mean it always will but it did that day.

 

[deven]

NHHEMI,
Sorry if my post sounded negative towards Royal Purple. It wasnt meant that way. I posted it as a tongue in cheek remark letting all those people who post the infamous link of RP getting "sued". But as you mentioned they never got sued for it thus still able to post HP gains on their website. It was my way of letting the BITOGers know that Royal Purple really believes in its lubricants to increase HP and will do independant testing to show this.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: deven
NHHEMI,
Sorry if my post sounded negative towards Royal Purple. It wasnt meant that way. I posted it as a tongue in cheek remark letting all those people who post the infamous link of RP getting "sued". But as you mentioned they never got sued for it thus still able to post HP gains on their website. It was my way of letting the BITOGers know that Royal Purple really believes in its lubricants to increase HP and will do independant testing to show this.


No, they weren't sued, they were taken to the BBB for false advertising. I posted this earlier in the thread:

http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article001398592.cfm

 

[BHopkins]

I know it would be expensive to do, but it would be telling to see the testing repeated, but change the sequence of the oils being tested.

Having been involved in product testing for almost all of my professional career, I am always looking for factors that could cause test bias, and thus skew the data. There are at least three factors in the testing shown in both these videos, that should be eliminated by additional testing. All are related to sequence.

First question I would have is, how old was the oil in the engine, that was drained just prior to the first test? Is the first oil testd at a disadvantage, because it becomes more contaminated with dirty oil? And all subsequent tests have the advantage of a clean engine, since the first oil sacrificially cleaned the engine? The results would suggest that the first oil may be at a disadvantage.

Second is the engine warm-up. The first test is the first test on the engine. While I would imagine that an engine is brought to temperature before taking runs on a dyno, it is still a question. The validity of this as a factor that affects results is supported by the fact that, for every oil, the second run always yields higher performance. Thus, it is reasonable to suppose that the same is true from first set of runs to each subsequent set of runs.

Third is environmental conditions. I really doubt the shop is environmentally controlled. Is the first run done early in the AM, when room temperature and humidity may be different, than later in the day, when the last run is performed?

For these results to be validated, all three of these factors need to be addressed. The first factor - dirty oil - would have to be addressed by running one fresh oil change through, but throw out the data. Then start the testing. The second and third factors could be addressed by mixing up the sequence. Same five oils. Start at the same time of day but different order. Of course this still doesn't fully address environmental changes. The first day it may be dry and hot by mid day. The day of the second run, it could be rainy and humid

The best way to address environment, would be to have a controlled environment. I would imagine that there are some dyno test facilities out there with that sort of capability. But it sure doesn't look like that is the case on either of these videos.

 

[MolaKule]

Looking at the data I think it was a valid Dyno test.

To increase HP and Torque an oil can have increased levels of FM and special mixes of base oils.

It would have been more interesting if the driver had run each oil for say 3750 miles and reported wear elements for each oil type with the same vehicle.

I do have a question:
Quote:
Dyno Scenario One used a stock engine tune, Subaru oil and filter.

Dyno Scenario Two had a COBB Tuning State 1 off-the-shelf tune using COBB Acess Port V3, Subaru oil and filter.


Did Ms Solomon actually mean "Stage 1" instead of "State 1." If you are going to toot your horn you should be somewhat accurate and cconsistent.

 

[demarpaint]

Do you see that big fan in front of the car on the dyno? Just crank up or down the air flow and you can change the power the engine is putting out, and change the emissions coming out of the exhaust. Is that what they do? Your guess is as good as mine. I remember that trick from years ago when cars where put on the rollers for NYS inspection. Many failed, then out came the big fan and many would pass once the fan went on. I take all those claims with a grain of salt. No this is not a RP bash, just pointing what appeared obvious to me.

 

[geeman789]

Originally Posted By: deven
RP is at it again with their HP claims. Wasnt there a lawsuit by BP that said they couldn't claim HP gains anymore? LOL.

Tech Tests HPS in Subie


They're not claiming them, they are showing them...! The dyno doesn't lie.. Except it does, sort of...

There are so many variables that can influence the results....engine heat, intercooler heat soak, oil temps, ambient temps, driveline lubricant temps etc.

But, wow, 9 horsepower from changing your oil... SOUNDS really good...!

But the spidey sense is tingling...!

 

[Oil Changer]

So true! LOL

Originally Posted By: MolaKule
If you are going to toot your horn you should be somewhat accurate and cconsistent.

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: deven
NHHEMI,
Sorry if my post sounded negative towards Royal Purple. It wasnt meant that way. I posted it as a tongue in cheek remark letting all those people who post the infamous link of RP getting "sued". But as you mentioned they never got sued for it thus still able to post HP gains on their website. It was my way of letting the BITOGers know that Royal Purple really believes in its lubricants to increase HP and will do independant testing to show this.


No, they weren't sued, they were taken to the BBB for false advertising. I posted this earlier in the thread:

http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article001398592.cfm

Yes but in the sad state we live in not many want to read the article. As soon as they see the heading of "BP v Royal Purple" they think it was a lawsuit. So many other car forums have posted this link and they all use the word lawsuit including some on here.

 

[GMorg]

From the time stamps and comments, it looks like the sequence was stock oil, stock tune at 11:28. Then RP oil, Stage 1 tune at 13:49. Then two RP oil, stock tune runs at 14:15 and 14:17.

On this vehicle, are there data stored in memory that were erased or reset between tunes. Why weren't there any RP runs done prior to the Stage 1 tuning? Does it even matter? I don't know enough about this vehicle to suggest anything. It just seem odd that every RP run that is shown was AFTER something was done to the tuning. Or, I have missed something and need to be corrected.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Nate1979
So what is the explanation for the HP increase?

Ask what the size of the error bar is, first.

That always worries me first, assuming proper procedures were followed in the first place.

 

[GMorg]

I'm still curious if I am missing something here. Were all of the RP runs done after a tune? Were any RP runs done under the same conditions as the stock oil? Am I reading too much into the time stamps on the graphs?

 

[CrawfishTails]

Was this an independent test, or is this when the proverbial butcher puts his thumb on the scales a little bit?

A better, simpler test would be to compare fuel flow sensor rates at 4,000 rpm. RP vs. whatever, repeat runs, control it precisely and steadily at 4,000 rpm. If RP needs less grams/second fuel flow, then we have a winner. Less fuel flow means less engine friction.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: GMorg
I'm still curious if I am missing something here. Were all of the RP runs done after a tune? Were any RP runs done under the same conditions as the stock oil? Am I reading too much into the time stamps on the graphs?


Both oils were tested 3-4 runs on the stock tune and then also using a custom tune. Both oils were tested under the exact same conditions.

 

[BHopkins]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: GMorg
I'm still curious if I am missing something here. Were all of the RP runs done after a tune? Were any RP runs done under the same conditions as the stock oil? Am I reading too much into the time stamps on the graphs?


Both oils were tested 3-4 runs on the stock tune and then also using a custom tune. Both oils were tested under the exact same conditions.


Are you sure about that? I don't see it that way. One was first. The other was second. One would have been tested immediately following dirty oil. The second would have been tested immediately following motor oil with only minutes of run time on it. One was tested earlier in the day than the other, with different ambient conditions. Not what I would consider a controlled study.

I find it interesting that every time I see a dyno test of motor oils, the favorable one is always tested last.

One

 

[deven]

They never dyno'd RP on a stock tune.
Car came in. Oil was changed to Subaru 5w30 with Subaru filter and then dyno'd 3-4 times. Then the Subaru got a COBB tune and dyno'd again 3-4 times. Then the oil and filter were changed to Royal Purple 5w30 HPS and then dyno'd 3-4 times.
As to why they dyno RP last, RP has made it very clear as to why. Because their Synerlec additive clings to metal parts and if it were to be dyno'd first there would be residual synerlec additive still remaining in the engine after RP is drained and the next oil dyno'd would probably lead to better dyno numbers.