If HPL was NOT a sponsor here then how would it truly compare to other boutique oils like redline and Amsoil? What makes HPL different and special?

[02zx9r rev2]

The Members that are coming to HPL's Defense are the ones who have used the Product and liked it. The ones saying negative things are the ones who have not used HPL's products.

I can relate to that. I never used RP and probably never will because of the price and what you supposedly get for said price. But I used to bash them (and got a well deserved vacation from here because of said bash).

It’s basically like that with any brand of oil, some people like them and praise them, others don’t and bash.

I will say I’ve never had a single problem or issue with any oil I have used wether it’s a “boutique” oil such as Amsoil, or the cheapest oil from Walmart (supertech). I honestly believe as long as it is the proper grade and as kschachn has mentioned before, it is appropriate for whatever starting temps you will see, your motor will probably never know if it is HPL, Amsoil, or Amazon basics and live a happy healthy life with sensible oci’s

 

[4WD]

What‘s the test called for slowly thickens to offset fuel dilution?

Despite starting with a weird title - this has been a good thread to me. However - this ^^^ is in response to claims that certain formulas slowly build viscosity to offset dilutions …
Like with what ? A milder sloped oxidative profile … ?
(Oh, and star polymer is more common than folks think) …
How is that relationship tested ?

 

[kschachn]

Despite starting with a weird title - this has been a good thread to me. However - this ^^^ is in response to claims that certain formulas slowly build viscosity to offset dilutions …
Like with what ? A milder sloped oxidative profile … ?
(Oh, and star polymer is more common than folks think) …
How is that relationship tested ?

I saw you asked that before and I meant to comment. It’s not something that is beneficial in order to “counteract fuel dilution” nor is it something that is designed into the oil formulation. Oxidative thickening is a bad thing. You want to avoid it as it has undesirable consequences.

It’s a precursor to sludge formation.

 

[buster]

Ideally you want a virgin and used oxidation value to determine oxidation.

 

[Nitronoise]

I am on my second trial of the 5w30
so far 1st lab was Great ,going to pull a sample at 7K and swap out the filter and take it to 10 k
stood up well in the hills of KY and TN and the heat and traffic of Atlanta this summer and 3 trips to MN so far,

 

[OVERKILL]

Despite starting with a weird title - this has been a good thread to me. However - this ^^^ is in response to claims that certain formulas slowly build viscosity to offset dilutions …
Like with what ? A milder sloped oxidative profile … ?
(Oh, and star polymer is more common than folks think) …
How is that relationship tested ?

I don't think any formula does this to offset dilution. A bit of oxidative thickening is a fact of life, so, depending on the performance requirements for shear resistance (stay in-grade requirements), VII selection will rely on how the base oils are going to age in service (oxidize). Ideally, you can use an affordable VII that might shear a bit in service, but this will be offset by the oxidation of the base oil.

If you use more shear stable VII's, you get what we've seen with HPL's oils, which is a bit of oxidative thickening during normal service. AMSOIL used to be notorious for doing the same thing.

If you completely remove VII from the picture, like HPL's no-VII series, it's quite easy to see how much thickening of the base oils takes place during regular service, and then how much shear in an application where viscosity stays about virgin at the end of the OCI, takes place.

None of this in any way considers the effects of fuel dilution, you'd need massive amounts of oxidative thickening (which is a serious problem) to even begin to offset some of the viscosity loss from significant fuel dilution, and you are still dealing with a compromised additive package as well as the other negative effects gasoline has on the oil.

 

[4WD]

I don't think any formula does this to offset dilution. A bit of oxidative thickening is a fact of life, so, depending on the performance requirements for shear resistance (stay in-grade requirements), VII selection will rely on how the base oils are going to age in service (oxidize). Ideally, you can use an affordable VII that might shear a bit in service, but this will be offset by the oxidation of the base oil.

If you use more shear stable VII's, you get what we've seen with HPL's oils, which is a bit of oxidative thickening during normal service. AMSOIL used to be notorious for doing the same thing.

If you completely remove VII from the picture, like HPL's no-VII series, it's quite easy to see how much thickening of the base oils takes place during regular service, and then how much shear in an application where viscosity stays about virgin at the end of the OCI, takes place.

None of this in any way considers the effects of fuel dilution, you'd need massive amounts of oxidative thickening (which is a serious problem) to even begin to offset some of the viscosity loss from significant fuel dilution, and you are still dealing with a compromised additive package as well as the other negative effects gasoline has on the oil.

Yeah - amazingly it’s in this this thread though …
At higher OLM % - I spiked in some SAE30 with my Fumoto valve and the howler monkeys shook the trees here - IMO, that does more than these other fantasies …

 

[DirectRejection]

I offered the rather pedestrian observation that after 30k miles on the HPL PP 0W8, the dipstick oil color was medium amber. In the pan it was dark amber-not black.

I am led to the conclusion that the effects of potential sludge precursors is mitigated. It's the novel basestocks. Oxidative thickening still leaves me at at a very reasonable viscosity, regarding performance.

This is no surprise to me, frankly. The "no compromise" motor oil wins.

GF-7 is going to be looking at tackling all these issues. Mix in that NOACK < 10 threshold, in an efficient, yet protective motor oil, and it gets interesting in a hurry.

 

[RDY4WAR]

Your points are noted. It's essential to clarify that my comments were based on a broader perspective of the industry and not solely on HPL. The distinction between individual components being API-approved and the final formula's certification is understood. However, it's also crucial to approach these discussions with an open mind, recognizing that every member brings a unique perspective based on their experiences and research.

While I respect the depth of knowledge present in this forum, it's equally important to ensure that discussions remain objective and fact-based.

As for API licensing...

URL: https://www.api.org/products-and-services/engine-oil/application-and-fees#tab-fees

View attachment 177017

That's just the cost for the license, so you can put the starburst on the jug. The lab and live engine tests cost way more than that. The Sequence III-H test alone is close to $120k, and that's just one test. That's the cost of assembly, 100 hours of operation with manpower and fuel for that time. The fuel alone is ~$18/gal. (Probably more now, that figure is a few years old) You can imagine how much fuel that 3.6L Pentastar uses at sustained 3900 rpm against a steady load for 100 hours.

That would also only certify that exact formula. If, for example, HPL found better anti-foaming chemistry, they couldn't use it and keep the API cert. They'd have to go through all of the testing all over again. It's very cost prohibitive and is in direct opposition to how HPL operates. They're constantly testing new additive chemistry and base oil blends looking for better performance.

Most of the API certs are obtained by the additive companies. They front the large cost for testing a specific add pack and base oil blend. The major brands then purchase that approved add pack, blend it with the base oils and VII used for testing that exact add pack (no deviation), pay the license fee to use it, slap the starburst on the jug, and send it out the door.

HPL purchases these same add packs though usually in a better carrier oil. (Most add packs use group I carrier... bleh) They blend it in a much better base oil blend and top treat with more individual additives to reach their performance targets. Because they have deviated well away from the cookie cutter API recipe, regardless of how much better the oil is, they can't use the license with that add pack.

This is what I was talking about when I said the API oils are all in the same small box chemistry wise. API traps them there with no room for deviation. OEM approvals often do the same thing. Of course, you'll have varying degrees of performance between these brands in that API box as there's multiple approved add packs and recipes. Mobil 1 and Shell (for example) have an advantage in having their own joint additive company to promote multiple tiers of performance with their oils. However, it's still within a pretty narrow range of chemistry and material. You have to get away from certs and approvals if you want to use better additives and base oils not approved for use with approved add packs.

 

[DirectRejection]

Anti foaming comes in real handy when fuel dilution causes the dipstick level to skyrocket.

 

[kschachn]

Anti foaming comes in real handy when fuel dilution causes the dipstick level to skyrocket.

But doesn’t help with the MOFT.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

. Just don’t see any other oil brand being defended on here like HPL

Pennzoil has: been a board sponsor, had several Q&As with the board and given away free UOAs, just like HPL. In addition, Pennzoil publicly gave away quite a bit of its top-shelf product. Yet it has never truly been the board darling. Why is that?

Does that not alone validate the likely reality that the reason HPL has a better reputation is because they’ve proven both their value AND their worth to all their customers, rather than implying they’re buying favoritism and a sanitized public persona via their sponsorship of this board?

 

[Mainia]

As someone that values testing and approved lubricants, I can make an exception with HPL and Amsoil. I have 100% trust in their products. Both are top notch. The rest of the boutique world, meh no so much.

Oh my God, what happened to your Redline love?

Mine got priced out of my financial reach that makes sense. I could make it work, but why when cheaper others will suffice.

 

[RDY4WAR]

Pennzoil has: been a board sponsor, had several Q&As with the board

Those Q&As are a bit useless. They're all canned responses with a sales pitch, like they copy/pasted from a brochure.

 

[buster]

Oh my God, what happened to your Redline love?

Mine got priced out of my financial reach that makes sense. I could make it work, but why when cheaper others will suffice.

I like Red Line but I think their oils are more suited for track. UOA's are spotty.

 

[DirectRejection]

But doesn’t help with the MOFT.

That is for the slug o' moly Sir. And surface bonding.
No ?

 

[DirectRejection]

Pennzoil has: been a board sponsor, had several Q&As with the board and given away free UOAs, just like HPL. In addition, Pennzoil publicly gave away quite a bit of its top-shelf product. Yet it has never truly been the board darling. Why is that?

Does that not alone validate the likely reality that the reason HPL has a better reputation is because they’ve proven both their value AND their worth to all their customers, rather than implying they’re buying favoritism and a sanitized public persona via their sponsorship of this board?

BITOG got pretty hacked off when the NOACK of PUP suddenly, mysteriously fell off the end of the Earth.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Those Q&As are a bit useless. They're all canned responses with a sales pitch, like they copy/pasted from a brochure.

I was being extremely generous to make my final point even more poignant

 

[02zx9r rev2]

Pennzoil has: been a board sponsor, had several Q&As with the board and given away free UOAs, just like HPL. In addition, Pennzoil publicly gave away quite a bit of its top-shelf product. Yet it has never truly been the board darling. Why is that?

Does that not alone validate the likely reality that the reason HPL has a better reputation is because they’ve proven both their value AND their worth to all their customers, rather than implying they’re buying favoritism and a sanitized public persona via their sponsorship of this board?

I’m seeing that HPL is definitely a step above other oils

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

BITOG got pretty hacked off when the NOACK of PUP suddenly, mysteriously fell off the end of the Earth.

Meh, the guys that know best don’t even use Noack, because it isn’t a relatable test to an oil’s performance other than checking a box. They’re even evaluating changing the test criteria.