Look what UPS brought today! More Ravenol!

https://www.ravenol.de/en/products/usage/d/Product/show/p/ravenol-dxg-sae-5w-30.html

Quote
RAVENOL DXG SAE 5W-30 is a PAO (Polyalphaolefin) based, fully synthetic low friction motor oil with especially USVO® and proven CleanSynto® technology for passenger car petrol engines with and without turbo-charging and direct injection.
For the developement of RAVENOL DXG SAE 5W-30 the proven formulation of tri-nuclear molybdenum, tungsten and OFM (Organic Friction Modifiers) was used. A highly polar Group V base oil was used in this formula, which has good compatibility with the PAO used.
 
I'm curious, do you use this oil for fun? To try something different? Or do you think it will extend the life of your fusions engine? The first two i totally get, I like the idea of running a "fancy" oil as i like to call it. But I think we all can agree it wont really have any special effect on a standard daily driver.
 
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by burla
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
I figured what the hey, I had some "funny money" in my Virgin Healthmiles account, and the DXG fill in my Fusion right now seems to be doing pretty well. So I ordered 2 more jugs from Blauparts. Amazon website listing still shows D1G1 which I was fine with (no GDI/TGDI for me!), but lo and behold, Blau is shipping D1G2 DXG now. So, we've got the PQIA VOA of D1G1, I'll have a UOA of D1G1 in a couple months, and now D1G2 to ponder testing as well. This will probably go in the Fusion again (unless it's sold before then), and maybe the Odyssey, but it has run really well on the PP Euro 0W40, so who knows?
smile.gif




I wish Ravenol was more widely available in the states, true quality oil not a fake boutique. No Gimmicks with that brand, lve that stuff!


Originally Posted by burla
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by bbhero
Fancy fancy oil....

And it is really stout. The PQIA test results showed a NOACK of 8 percent... Very impressive.


Amsoil also has a Noack of 8% and lower depending on which oil you use from their signature series line. Just FWIW.


And Redline has a noack of 6 and is real synthetic oil, FWIW


Give it a rest you sound like you work for Redline running around all the threads pushing Redline and calling other synthetics fake.

Amsoil Signature Series is as much of a real synethic oil as anything else out there and they have Noack's as low as 4.1 on one of their oils. Now what burla?


apparently you missed the joke, lmao. You were the one that brought up amsoil, I just showed you what that was like. Apparently if someone else does it you take issue, lmao. Pot calling kettle black.
 
jees you guys should get out more ravenol specs stuff that most other companies don't, such as making a clone fluid for the zf transmission, saves people 100's of dollars off an oil change to not use zf fluid. So yeah, I bet anyone saving 100's of bucks feels special. also one of the few companies that commit to pao, so that must mean bob sharks will come out and tear then down,, Hey we have to pretend our brand who doesn't say so uses pao, so we cant have companies that actually use it popular here, lets say something, lol. eating popcorn...m
 
Hey davie those amsoil numbers, why doesn't the hths hold suit with the noack? Usually low noack, higher hths? things that make you go huh.
 
Originally Posted by burla
Hey davie those amsoil numbers, why doesn't the hths hold suit with the noack? Usually low noack, higher hths? things that make you go huh.


I think you mean Stevie, but anyways. AMSOIL follows the Energy-Conserving/GF-5 viscosity plot for the most part. If you want higher HTHS brews you need to look at their Euro or Heavy Duty offerings. Their DHD 5w-30 has an HTHS of 3.5, ADN 10w-30 has an HTHS of 3.6...etc. There are plenty of others.
 
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by burla
Hey davie those amsoil numbers, why doesn't the hths hold suit with the noack? Usually low noack, higher hths? things that make you go huh.


I think you mean Stevie, but anyways. AMSOIL follows the Energy-Conserving/GF-5 viscosity plot for the most part. If you want higher HTHS brews you need to look at their Euro or Heavy Duty offerings. Their DHD 5w-30 has an HTHS of 3.5, ADN 10w-30 has an HTHS of 3.6...etc. There are plenty of others.


That and anything over 2.3ish is more than what is needed by most users in normal applications. It's just the folks here that stress about HTHS that want more "head room". Lots of vehicles running round with 5w20 conventional with HTHS of in the 2.3ish-2.6 seeing long lives.
 
Last edited:
Stevie, one paper showing wear results for one region of an engine should not be used to generalize the wear behavior of all regions of other engines. Also, that HTHS range you mentioned is below that of 5W-20.
 
Originally Posted by JAG
Stevie, one paper showing wear results for one region of an engine should not be used to generalize the wear behavior of all regions of other engines. Also, that HTHS range you mentioned is below that of 5W-20.

Look in the UOA section at the miles folks are putting on with low wear metals in the observable spectrum that the UOA can show. Certainly if lower HTHS and lower weight oils were a problem it would increase wear across the spectrum of the UOA's as well as outside that spectrum and this isn't happening.

Are there some applications that benefit from a thicker oil with more HTHS rating sure, is it the be all end all? Not at all or we would have every OE back peddling from the 20wt spec and certainly 0w16 wouldn't be a thing either. Not to mention we would have all sorts of folks running around the internet sharing their experiences how their Toyota that spec'ed 30wt over 20wt lasted longer. We have had 20wt specifications for well over a decade. Surely high mileage folks like myself would have noticed a steep decline in lifespan if wear was such a problem.

Folks here are OCD about these things. (Myself included, just about other things than HTHS / oil weights). There is no perfect weight of oil that satisfies all components in an engine. One weight works really well for certain components and another for others but to generalize and say that a thicker oil is better with a HTHS rating that is higher than the minimum required because they fear about headroom is just crazy without real world evidence showing much shorter lifespans that other vehicles. And to my earlier point, by using a thicker oil than specified you are opening up the door for it to be not the optimum thickness for another component that might do better with say a 20wt.

Castrol GTX PDS for 5w20: https://msdspds.castrol.com/bpglis/FusionPDS.nsf/Files/2811CF6C9F4AF94880257EC60063ED84/$File/BPXE-A2ZRHH.pdf (2.6 HTHS)
 
Last edited:
It just cracks me up how you truly believe UOA's show actual engine wear. They by themselves DO NOT! I don't know why you continue to spread this mistruth.
 
Originally Posted by AzFireGuy79
It just cracks me up how you truly believe UOA's show actual engine wear. They by themselves DO NOT! I don't know why you continue to spread this mistruth.


They show some wear (observable spectrum), not all wear (outside the observable spectrum) and trending is a must.

Source: https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/used-oil-analysis-how-to-decide-what-is-normal/
Quote

... we'll focus on the wear metals, because they are the "tellers of tales"; they let us know how much wear has occurred, and can allow us to have reasonable understanding of how much more might occur, should an OCI be extended. In short, manipulated physical fluid properties and additive-package criteria are inputs, whereas wear-data results are outputs.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by StevieC
They show some wear (observable spectrum), not all wear (outside the observable spectrum) and trending is a must.

What is an "observable spectrum"?
 
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by StevieC
They show some wear (observable spectrum), not all wear (outside the observable spectrum) and trending is a must.

What is an "observable spectrum"?


The range that a UOA is capable of measuring.
 
Originally Posted by JoelB
I'm curious, do you use this oil for fun? To try something different? Or do you think it will extend the life of your fusions engine? The first two i totally get, I like the idea of running a "fancy" oil as i like to call it. But I think we all can agree it wont really have any special effect on a standard daily driver.



Yes, Joel, it's all in good fun for me. I had some "free" Amazon credit and decided to purchase some of this since the TDS and Ravenol info look amazing. I don't need the D1G1/2 (or any Dexos spec for that matter), and I have a UOA history on my Fusion of over 100k so I know the trends and where PUP puts the engine for OCI distances. There were a couple things I was trying to address coming from the PUP (camshaft ramp polishing and a nagging cold tick when below freezing) and the DXG has cured the cold tick so far, likely due to its great pour point number. One thing that still has to be watched is the gas mileage when it's below freezing; for some reason my Fusion trends pretty steadily by losing 1mpg for every 10*F decrease in ambient temps. I'm wondering if the higher HTHS and viscosity is going to make that worse.

To answer your question about extending the life, I honestly believe as long as the oil is robust enough to keep the metal surfaces apart, about 98% of engine life is dictated by the air and oil filters. As long as metal-to-metal is prevented, and debris kept out of the bearing surfaces, rings, and piston-to-cylinder interface, that's about all you can do. So yes, this is completely done for fun and the scientific exploration; if you have any questions about my enjoyment of this, just search the oil filter section with posts from car 51/53' stude. I've sent him about 20 filters over the past 6 months, both new and used, to C&P for the board. It's pure enjoyment!
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by StevieC
They show some wear (observable spectrum), not all wear (outside the observable spectrum) and trending is a must.

What is an "observable spectrum"?

The range that a UOA is capable of measuring.

I'm not sure what you mean, as in lower detectable limits for elements or elements not detected?
 
Ravenol makes great oil, no doubt, using premium ingredients. Its more like "Why not use the best I can find?" than "why not put anything in there". Thats the two choices. At various times I've done both.
Recently I decided to go with an oil that showed exceptional ingredients (Eneos Racing Street, high moly, group3+) and I paid extra. Ravenol is in that category, using it means you want the best you can find, as its got tri-nuke moly, tungsten, PAO, & esters, sounds excellent to me, and a better ingredient list than most oils I've seen, with all the certifications one could ask for.
 
Well I'm certainly interested in seeing the UOA from this oil. Especially if we have lots of previous UOA's to compare it to. That should shine some light on it's awesomeness. At least in this application. Please post it for us to check out!
 
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by StevieC
They show some wear (observable spectrum), not all wear (outside the observable spectrum) and trending is a must.

What is an "observable spectrum"?

The range that a UOA is capable of measuring.

I'm not sure what you mean, as in lower detectable limits for elements or elements not detected?


It detects metal wear in the form of debris measured in ppm not the actual particle count of this metal wear measured in um which would be direct wear/tear. This is why trending is important because if you have an established trend and change a variable and the measured debris in the UOA spikes drastically then the particle count will have done the same thing. (Note: I'm not talking from going from 5ppm to say 20ppm, it would be much higher than this)
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by JoelB
Well I'm certainly interested in seeing the UOA from this oil. Especially if we have lots of previous UOA's to compare it to. That should shine some light on it's awesomeness. At least in this application. Please post it for us to check out!

What parameters of the UOA do you look at to determine awesomeness?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SubieRubyRoo
  • Locked
More Ravenol USVO VOA coming! (SFE 5W20)
Replies
16
Views
3K
kstanf150
SubieRubyRoo
  • Locked
Poll time - which Ravenol to use from stash?
Replies
1
Views
2K
Olas
SubieRubyRoo
Catch can sample testing results & analysis! What's really in your PCV system?
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
SHOZ
T
2015 BMW X5 N55: Ravenol VST 5W-40 10,490mi UOA
Replies
19
Views
4K
BMWTurboDzl
P
  • Locked
Long term E85 usage - '09 Mercedes C300
Replies
15
Views
11K
Rat407
Back
Top