Shearing and Royal Purple Tech response

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SargeGTO

Joined
Dec 24, 2006
Messages
802
Location
Rio Grande Valley
Well I have been in contact with Royal Purple tech folks. I'll share here for everybody's own edification and comments/thoughts. My disclaimer is I am not bashing RP at all.
I emailed and ask if there had been any issues to their knowledge on RP shearing across various viscosity RP products.
I shared my own UOA for their own edification and reference.
I pointed them here for their own review of other RP UOA's and comments.
They responded rather quickly ( the very day) and pointed out that RP was used by many top tier racing teams. And my shearing was probably caused by not using the correct viscosity for my motor. Further they do not visit bitog.com nor are they members. In closing they recommend anybody experiencing shearing with RP should double check they are utilizing the correct viscosity.
-------------------------------------------------------
 
The shearing has always made me wonder if RP was truly a PAO/Ester based oil. I think it's also the reason they claim more Hp. Oils that shear will yield slightly more hp.
 
"... my shearing was probably caused by not using the correct viscosity for my motor."

Is the correct oil thicker or thinner?
 
I agree with bustier - It's rare that a true PAO or ester based oil shears.

I haven't seen many recent RP UOA's so I can't make general comments on the oil, but seems to me 3 or 4 years ago, just about every RP UOA dropped in was on the thin side.
 
What a lame response. They make it sound as if this is the first time they have heard about this. This has been pointed out for as long as I have been a member of this board.
 
That is a lame response.

Motor oils only shear in engines because the polymeric VIIs shear, not the oil molecules. No polymers, no shear. Lots of polymers, high potential to shear. It's not a basestock matter. Some top tier synthetics have a lot of polymers, like 0W-40 oils. They shear quite a bit. German Castrol is very shear stable due to none to little polymers. Straight weight dino oils are very shear stable.
 
What JAG says except that there are many types of damage that can occur we call shear. Mechanical and initiation chemical shear are primary.
 
I copied and pasted this from an Impreza site:

Okay so I switched oil once again, this time to RP 5w-30. I usually use Mobil full synthetic but I decided to give RP another try. It's been about a thousand miles on RP and every time I let my car warm up it will emit mass smoke on revs and not just a little smoke but a huge lingering cloud.:huh: The car is stage 2 w/ full catless exhaust and I am approaching 62K miles but it never smoked with mobil. Is there some kind of grace period between switching oil brands or is it time to start using a high mileage oil?


This is the very same thing that happened to me when I tried RP. My car literally billowed out a huge lingering cloud of black smoke while it was idling and warming up one cold morning (plus my lifters were tapping like crazy!!!!!). I drained it,went back with my faithful M1,and she was back to her like-new self again.
 
What a horrible response. Blame the customer and fall back on your standard marketing hype. No wonder these guys are selling in WalMart now! Argh.
 
Perhaps I just had a horseshoe I didn't know of because I have run their 5W30 and 5W20 for intervals up to 10K in three different vehicles. All stock daily beaters in good health. I must admit that I don't have any stroker engines and have not tried their old racing oils.
The UOAs that I did were always good and not a drop of oil useage in 10K miles.
My only reason for changing to another oil was that through UOAs I found another oil that turned in good results for alot less money. I also had two of my customers that were using the 5W30 in 02 and 05 Tacomas and their 10K oil change intervals looked good. I was even having a hard time getting one of them to change it a 10K because it was still a golden brown color with TBN left.
I do not doubt some have had UOAs thet were less than stellar with their oils. I'm not sure that UOA is always without error and I don't think that there is a one -oil -fits-all for every application. I will (at the risk of personal injury) relate my own experience with 0W30 GC. I had heard that this oil was sent from the oil Diety to save all engines from certain destruction. I could not stand it any longer so I paid almost 7 bucks a qt. for 5qts. First, my Civic felt like it was trying to pull a 38ft. Airstream behind it. At 5K I dropped it out and sent in a sample for testing. In my case,the results were not as good as a wonderful green Blend I now run at substancially less money. We could spend all night saying the poor result was because of this or that but why waste the time? The GC would still have kept my Honda alive for longer than I probably will live.
Iknow of others that can show you UOAs of GC that are super and I believe them but mine were not. So,do I take it upon myself to slam GC at every opportunity because my numbers were not zero across the board for wear metals? If I did that I would be rebutted by someone with good UOAs in hand. It is the same with RP. I have heard one man on this board who has forgotten more about oil than most will ever learn speak highly of RP's oils. More than once.
I still use their tractor transmission oils that live in an enviroment that'll kill anything that has a tendecy to shear. It doesn't. Yes, I know we are talking motor oil, not tractor fluids.
I have spoken with David Canitz on their tech line numerous times and he's always been straitup about what is in their oils(other than propietary stuff).
I guess the jist of what I am saying is that over the last year we have seen super results from an oil only to see another person's results with the same oil to be less than great. M1,Amsoil,Havoline,GC,you name it. There are alot of people that are running RP and loving it. I was one of them and if cost was not an issue I would still run it. No more GC for me though.
wink.gif
 
Hi Sarge,

Pointing anybody from RP or Redline to this site is a waste of time. Neither company believes their oil gets a fair shake on this site. Although I don't know this for sure, I would bet anybody who works for Mobil would feel the same way. Dave at RP feels that this site is dominated by a handful of people only a couple of which know anything about oil. He is a big fan of Terry's however, as are the guys at Redline. Which strikes me as odd, because if the oil sucks, the last person I would recommend or want anything to do with is someone like Terry.
 
"Pointing anybody from RP or Redline to this site is a waste of time. Neither company believes their oil gets a fair shake on this site. "

Isn't the problem that none of these companies wants to tell us anything substantial? They consider all the engineering facts about their products both in formulation and in standard test results to be top secret. All they have to say to the public is marketing double talk. Of course they don't want to participate here because they aren't willing to share any real meaningful information. The recent ENEOS thread is typical of what we here when a purported official company rep comes around. Marketing speak a plenty, but never any engineering speak.

That said, there is a massive echo chamber effect on BITOG where many people agree on collective truths without solid enough evidence to back them up. "Valvoline has a weak additive package (this based on nearly meaningless VOA information)", "UOAs will tell you which oil your vehicle likes", "Mobil-1 is either the best or the worst synthetic available, depending on the week".
 
Quote:

"Pointing anybody from RP or Redline to this site is a waste of time. Neither company believes their oil gets a fair shake on this site. "

Isn't the problem that none of these companies wants to tell us anything substantial? They consider all the engineering facts about their products both in formulation and in standard test results to be top secret. All they have to say to the public is marketing double talk. Of course they don't want to participate here because they aren't willing to share any real meaningful information. The recent ENEOS thread is typical of what we here when a purported official company rep comes around. Marketing speak a plenty, but never any engineering speak.

That said, there is a massive echo chamber effect on BITOG where many people agree on collective truths without solid enough evidence to back them up. "Valvoline has a weak additive package (this based on nearly meaningless VOA information)", "UOAs will tell you which oil your vehicle likes", "Mobil-1 is either the best or the worst synthetic available, depending on the week".

Click to expand...


I know of no company that is ready and willing to share closely guarded secrets about a product that cost millions in R&D to develop. Now if someone wants to know if RP is PAO with enough carrier oil to hold the add package, David will be glad to tell you that. If you don't believe him when he tells you that what else can he do? Is he lying or telling the truth? We could argue that one for a long time but at least he did reveal that it was a PAO product with enough dino for the add pack. I would be inclined to think that if he was lying he certainly would not admit it had ANY dino in it at all. I wonder how many of our well-loved PAO oils have a bit of group 1 in them for the carrier oil? You don't know because they don't say. I ain't fer it or agin it. I have however used it and seen firsthand the good results from it's use and I respect those that say it did not perform up to their expectations. I have also heard Terry say good things about their oil more than once on this site. I have talked with David before and sadly, the way some on here treat representatives of companies it's a wonder any rep from any company would stay on here long.
I
 
I like Redline and have for over 10 years...because the entire range of Redline products has worked in my vehicles.

Also the people at Redline have been very decent and honest individuals.

Then there is the techical side. Redline has an explanation as to why their product works, and it makes sense.

Royal Purple has failed to impress me. They have refused to answer my questions. I'm not impressed with the 'synerlec' explanation. And I wasn't impressed with the rude and arrogant behavior of the Royal Purple employees when I spoke to them in person at SEMA.

The response that SargeGTO posted from RP made me wonder...was RP being helpful and was their answer correct? Or was RP just blaming the customer?

Redline seems to have chosen a good or top tier basestock and uses a healthy dose of well known additives...and the stuff works for me.

Royal Purple relies on a mystery additive Synerlec in a mystery synthetic basestock.

Synerlec might be a chlorinated parrafin, or a sulpherized ester. The RP basestock might be Group IV with some Group I as a carrier oil for additves.

The only way to tell if RP is any good is to use their products. UOA's should tell part of the story.

I used Royal Purple Sychromax in one gearbox and it worked quite well. So I was interested in the RP oils until SEMA when I met some RP people face to face.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
Royal Oil Co??
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
kschachn
S
What to run in a Yamaha Zuma 125 Scoot
Replies
15
Views
3K
Cujet
AEHaas
Another "Taxi" Study: Relationship of Engine Bearing Wear and Oil Rheology 872128
17 18 19
Replies
361
Views
25K
TiGeo
wwillson
  • Locked
  • Sticky
Pennzoil Q&A GF-6 and GF-7 with the American Petroleum Institute (API) - Answers
2
Replies
22
Views
13K
weaponoffreedom
R
Is 5w30 "better" than it used to be compared to 10w30?
2
Replies
39
Views
9K
SubieRubyRoo
Back
Top