Good luck with that.
Bill Garmier doesn't return my email inquires although I've been told he's easier to reach by phone.
Bill Garmier doesn't return my email inquires although I've been told he's easier to reach by phone.
Trying Renewable Lubricants ....
- Thread starter Kuato
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Good luck with that.
Bill Garmier doesn't return my email inquires although I've been told he's easier to reach by phone.
It was Mr. Garmier who did reply to me this past summer re the Haas formulation.
Good luck with that.
Bill Garmier doesn't return my email inquires although I've been told he's easier to reach by phone.
It was Mr. Garmier who did reply to me this past summer re the Haas formulation.
Originally Posted By: dparm
What's the HTHS on the 0w30? Is it a light, medium, or heavy 30?
No idea, other than what 21Rouge said.
When I talked to RLI, I told them that my car specs an HTHS of at least 3.5, and asked them if the 0w-30 would be okay on that front. The response was a very confident-sounding "yes." Take that as you will.
What's the HTHS on the 0w30? Is it a light, medium, or heavy 30?
No idea, other than what 21Rouge said.
When I talked to RLI, I told them that my car specs an HTHS of at least 3.5, and asked them if the 0w-30 would be okay on that front. The response was a very confident-sounding "yes." Take that as you will.
Originally Posted By: 21Rouge
Is this a relatively new development? I ask this because when I spoke to RLI about this this past August I did not get the impression that the AEHaas formula was available to all.
I can't remember exactly when I talked to them, but it had to be at least September if not later, and they were just brewing up a new batch with the new formula (as in, I had to wait for them to finish before they would ship my order). I was advised to specify "the new stuff" when I placed my order, but assured that any 0w-30 I ordered as of that time would be the new stuff.
Is this a relatively new development? I ask this because when I spoke to RLI about this this past August I did not get the impression that the AEHaas formula was available to all.
I can't remember exactly when I talked to them, but it had to be at least September if not later, and they were just brewing up a new batch with the new formula (as in, I had to wait for them to finish before they would ship my order). I was advised to specify "the new stuff" when I placed my order, but assured that any 0w-30 I ordered as of that time would be the new stuff.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: dparm
What's the HTHS on the 0w30? Is it a light, medium, or heavy 30?
No idea, other than what 21Rouge said.
When I talked to RLI, I told them that my car specs an HTHS of at least 3.5, and asked them if the 0w-30 would be okay on that front. The response was a very confident-sounding "yes." Take that as you will.
So they obviously know the HTHS values of their oils but they won't put them on their PDS's. Very strange.
Originally Posted By: dparm
What's the HTHS on the 0w30? Is it a light, medium, or heavy 30?
No idea, other than what 21Rouge said.
When I talked to RLI, I told them that my car specs an HTHS of at least 3.5, and asked them if the 0w-30 would be okay on that front. The response was a very confident-sounding "yes." Take that as you will.
So they obviously know the HTHS values of their oils but they won't put them on their PDS's. Very strange.
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
So they obviously know the HTHS values of their oils but they won't put them on their PDS's. Very strange.
You know, I'm not even sure of that, to be perfectly honest. I suspect (although I would never suggest plausibility on this point) that Bill was making a ballpark guess based on his knowledge of the chemistry, and didn't know an exact figure. I also can't help but notice that the wording of my question would have allowed him to say yes if the actual HTHS wasn't in the right range but he felt the oil would be okay for the application anyway (which it evidently was, based on the UOA).
Again, I don't mean to suggest what's plausible; only what can't be ruled out (largely due to my own wording of the question and failure to follow up or press for specifics).
So they obviously know the HTHS values of their oils but they won't put them on their PDS's. Very strange.
You know, I'm not even sure of that, to be perfectly honest. I suspect (although I would never suggest plausibility on this point) that Bill was making a ballpark guess based on his knowledge of the chemistry, and didn't know an exact figure. I also can't help but notice that the wording of my question would have allowed him to say yes if the actual HTHS wasn't in the right range but he felt the oil would be okay for the application anyway (which it evidently was, based on the UOA).
Again, I don't mean to suggest what's plausible; only what can't be ruled out (largely due to my own wording of the question and failure to follow up or press for specifics).
Well I probably shouldn't say this but I do know that Terry Dyson has performed HTHS vis tests on a number of RLI grades for some clients but they've been asked to keep it to themselves.
I just don't get why the big secret.
I just don't get why the big secret.
Weird how the PDS for 0w30 shows exact figures for KV and such yet other grades don't. The HTHS is just "greater than or equal to 2.9" which is worthless.
Impressive CCS numbers.
Impressive CCS numbers.
Originally Posted By: dparm
Weird how the PDS for 0w30 shows exact figures for KV and such yet other grades don't. The HTHS is just "greater than or equal to 2.9" which is worthless.
Dispite d00df00d's caution in stating flat out that the 0W-30 has a HTHS vis of at least 3.50cP, for what it's worth I believe it does.
Weird how the PDS for 0w30 shows exact figures for KV and such yet other grades don't. The HTHS is just "greater than or equal to 2.9" which is worthless.
Dispite d00df00d's caution in stating flat out that the 0W-30 has a HTHS vis of at least 3.50cP, for what it's worth I believe it does.
Okay this is weird...the PDSes must have JUST been updated because the KV values are now a firm number.
I'm awaiting a call back from their tech guy about the exact HTHS values. Woman on the phone wasn't positive.
I'm awaiting a call back from their tech guy about the exact HTHS values. Woman on the phone wasn't positive.
If you can get the HTHS values you'll deserve at least two brownie points!
Just got a phone call from one of the engineers/senior techs at RLI. Here's the Cliff's Notes:
-0w30 has HTHS of 3.5+, as does 5w30
-base oil VI is 220+ (!)
-many of their oils were reformulated in the last few months
-adding more antimony for anti-wear
-lower ash in new formulations
-new VIIs incorporated to improve shear stability
-5w30 is also recommended for year-round use, most stout formula
-0w30 has HTHS of 3.5+, as does 5w30
-base oil VI is 220+ (!)
-many of their oils were reformulated in the last few months
-adding more antimony for anti-wear
-lower ash in new formulations
-new VIIs incorporated to improve shear stability
-5w30 is also recommended for year-round use, most stout formula
Originally Posted By: dparm
Just got a phone call from one of the engineers/senior techs at RLI. Here's the Cliff's Notes
Well done dparm
.
Did it ever come up as to why some of this info eg. HTHS, VI isn't shown in the online PDS?
Just got a phone call from one of the engineers/senior techs at RLI. Here's the Cliff's Notes
Well done dparm
Did it ever come up as to why some of this info eg. HTHS, VI isn't shown in the online PDS?
Last edited:
Didn't ask.
VI is definitely shown. Their PDSes were all updated within the last few months because of the formula tweaks.
VI is definitely shown. Their PDSes were all updated within the last few months because of the formula tweaks.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dparm
Their PDSes were all updated within the last few months because of the formula tweaks.
Of course I might be mistaken but the PDS I see for the 0W30 shows the same #s as I have seen for the last couple of years...I think.
Their PDSes were all updated within the last few months because of the formula tweaks.
Of course I might be mistaken but the PDS I see for the 0W30 shows the same #s as I have seen for the last couple of years...I think.
Dunno. I had been primarily interested in the 5w40 up until now. The tech guy said the 0w30 and 5w30 would probably be good bets for me. He said the 5w40 is a bit thick for its grade, though you could mix some 5w30 in to thin it out.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: CougarRed
Originally Posted By: deven
Sounds like TD sold his soul to RLI. He is recommending RLI to everyone.
Wrong. And wrong.
Dyson does like the RLI products. For good reason.
But RLI doesn't pay him as a spokesman for their products. And he freely recommends other motor oils he believes in.
Exactly.
deven, suffice it to say that if you were actually using his services, you wouldn't have said that.
Yes I am not using his services. Its just been that when RLI threads come up, his name is somewhere in it. More of an observation. I don't put importance on UOA's but I think I have only seen a couple of good UOA's on them and since TD is the master of dechiphering UOA's I wonder why he recommends them. I may be wrong about RLI and UOA's but on top of my mind I don't think I have seen more than a couple.
Originally Posted By: CougarRed
Originally Posted By: deven
Sounds like TD sold his soul to RLI. He is recommending RLI to everyone.
Wrong. And wrong.
Dyson does like the RLI products. For good reason.
But RLI doesn't pay him as a spokesman for their products. And he freely recommends other motor oils he believes in.
Exactly.
deven, suffice it to say that if you were actually using his services, you wouldn't have said that.
Yes I am not using his services. Its just been that when RLI threads come up, his name is somewhere in it. More of an observation. I don't put importance on UOA's but I think I have only seen a couple of good UOA's on them and since TD is the master of dechiphering UOA's I wonder why he recommends them. I may be wrong about RLI and UOA's but on top of my mind I don't think I have seen more than a couple.
Yes, most of the people on BITOG using RLI seem to be doing so with Terry Dyson's guidance. But that doesn't mean everyone who uses Terry Dyson's services ends up using RLI. It just means not a lot of people are willing to try RLI unless they happen to be working with Terry Dyson.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Yes, most of the people on BITOG using RLI seem to be doing so with Terry Dyson's guidance. But that doesn't mean everyone who uses Terry Dyson's services ends up using RLI. It just means not a lot of people are willing to try RLI unless they happen to be working with Terry Dyson.
Do you know what engines he recommends RLI for? Just trying to see if there is a rhyme or reason to it. From what I gather, he loves RLI for engines that suffer fuel dilution the most. Is this true and are there other issues that sways him towards RLI? I know a lot of his information is proprietory so if you don't/can't tell me, I understand. Thanks.
Yes, most of the people on BITOG using RLI seem to be doing so with Terry Dyson's guidance. But that doesn't mean everyone who uses Terry Dyson's services ends up using RLI. It just means not a lot of people are willing to try RLI unless they happen to be working with Terry Dyson.
Do you know what engines he recommends RLI for? Just trying to see if there is a rhyme or reason to it. From what I gather, he loves RLI for engines that suffer fuel dilution the most. Is this true and are there other issues that sways him towards RLI? I know a lot of his information is proprietory so if you don't/can't tell me, I understand. Thanks.
Originally Posted By: deven
Do you know what engines he recommends RLI for? Just trying to see if there is a rhyme or reason to it. From what I gather, he loves RLI for engines that suffer fuel dilution the most. Is this true and are there other issues that sways him towards RLI? I know a lot of his information is proprietory so if you don't/can't tell me, I understand. Thanks.
All I can say is that he tries to match an oil with what the application needs AND what the client prefers or is able to acquire.
Do you know what engines he recommends RLI for? Just trying to see if there is a rhyme or reason to it. From what I gather, he loves RLI for engines that suffer fuel dilution the most. Is this true and are there other issues that sways him towards RLI? I know a lot of his information is proprietory so if you don't/can't tell me, I understand. Thanks.
All I can say is that he tries to match an oil with what the application needs AND what the client prefers or is able to acquire.
- Status
