Look what UPS brought today! More Ravenol!

Originally Posted by BigShug681
Originally Posted by burla
Originally Posted by Cipriano
I recently started a thread asking about Redline or Amsoil in my move up to 5w30. But the more I read about these Ravenol PAO's the more intrigued I got. And then I happened to go to Ebay today and saw the 10% coupon. So, long story short, 5 liters of Ravenol dxg 5w30 is on its way for $41.19 after shipping!



awesome stuff, I may move the wife's car over at some point. My only negative on Ravenol in general is availability. On a personal level I prefer high moly oils and this aint one unless that has changed, dunno I haven't looked it up. But my take is for guys not wanting the super hearty pao oils that dominate the market, this is an easy choice. Lower additives more compliant with zinc phos levels and such. But it seams better suited for modern engines with those low additives.

I feel I read on here that only so much moly actually does stuff and the rest just sorta sits around? Is that correct I can't remember, I'm more of a fan of the big slugs of ZDDP but do enjoy a small dabble of moly?



Well of course it is oil soluble in PCMO, so it aint sitting nowhere. And with all of the lowering of additives thanks to uncle sam, and the research that proves that moly helps avoid lspi, and the movement to thin oils, I do prefer moly as my security blanket. Consider this, FCA set out to spec an oil specifically for my application the hemi, what did they create with the help of Pennzoil? 0w40 PUP, a thick oil with high moly and high detergency. Amsoil as well, both I believe well over 200ppm moly.
 
Originally Posted by PimTac
This refreshed my memory. Thanks for the PQIA reminder.

http://pqiadata.org/Ravenol_DXG_5W30.html

I mentioned this before but the description says it helps to prevent LSPI yet it has a higher amount of calcium plus sodium, both of which have been targeted as LSPI precursors.


Would one of these companies ever lie to us? LOL
 
Originally Posted by JohnnyJohnson
Originally Posted by PimTac
This refreshed my memory. Thanks for the PQIA reminder.

http://pqiadata.org/Ravenol_DXG_5W30.html

I mentioned this before but the description says it helps to prevent LSPI yet it has a higher amount of calcium plus sodium, both of which have been targeted as LSPI precursors.


Would one of these companies ever lie to us? LOL





Why would they. What would be the point?
 
Originally Posted by Andy636
Didn't knew Ravenol was so highly regarded in the US. Over here it's a bottom shelf oil and dirt cheap compared to other brands, under 30 bucks for a jug as the OP has...


What is considered premium over there?
 
Originally Posted by PimTac
This refreshed my memory. Thanks for the PQIA reminder.

http://pqiadata.org/Ravenol_DXG_5W30.html

I mentioned this before but the description says it helps to prevent LSPI yet it has a higher amount of calcium plus sodium, both of which have been targeted as LSPI precursors.

That's the older formulation that met the first dexos version. The current formulation meets dexos1 gen2.
 
Originally Posted by StevieC
Anyway my point is that I think they are correct. If Castrol isn't doing it I'm not sure how because the French part of the country seem heck-bent on making sure french is on every label on everything in this country even though the majority of them speak english along with the rest of the world.

I think Castrol gets away with it because instead of tossing Spanish on a bottle alongside English and eliminating French, they'll keep all three languages. Next time your at Partsource or CT, check the RP bottles. I think it's all in order now, but the labels were American for the longest time. I'm pretty sure the 0w-40 in my garage is old enough to reflect that, too. With Castrol, with some bottles, the only way to really have a good idea is whether the address is Castrol USA or Wakefield.
 
Originally Posted by Andy636
Didn't knew Ravenol was so highly regarded in the US. Over here it's a bottom shelf oil and dirt cheap compared to other brands, under 30 bucks for a jug as the OP has...


I believe you make the same comment in every thread related to Ravenol (please correct me if I'm wrong) and I find it curious because all their info points in the exact opposite direction. Their entire lineup of products is considered crap in Germany or just their non-PAO based stuff?

I just can't see this being bottom of the barrel oil. I'm not saying it's liquid gold but it certainly looks like quality oil.
 
Originally Posted by burla
Originally Posted by BigShug681
Originally Posted by burla
Originally Posted by Cipriano
I recently started a thread asking about Redline or Amsoil in my move up to 5w30. But the more I read about these Ravenol PAO's the more intrigued I got. And then I happened to go to Ebay today and saw the 10% coupon. So, long story short, 5 liters of Ravenol dxg 5w30 is on its way for $41.19 after shipping!



awesome stuff, I may move the wife's car over at some point. My only negative on Ravenol in general is availability. On a personal level I prefer high moly oils and this aint one unless that has changed, dunno I haven't looked it up. But my take is for guys not wanting the super hearty pao oils that dominate the market, this is an easy choice. Lower additives more compliant with zinc phos levels and such. But it seams better suited for modern engines with those low additives.

I feel I read on here that only so much moly actually does stuff and the rest just sorta sits around? Is that correct I can't remember, I'm more of a fan of the big slugs of ZDDP but do enjoy a small dabble of moly?



Well of course it is oil soluble in PCMO, so it aint sitting nowhere. And with all of the lowering of additives thanks to uncle sam, and the research that proves that moly helps avoid lspi, and the movement to thin oils, I do prefer moly as my security blanket. Consider this, FCA set out to spec an oil specifically for my application the hemi, what did they create with the help of Pennzoil? 0w40 PUP, a thick oil with high moly and high detergency. Amsoil as well, both I believe well over 200ppm moly.

I believe amsoil is only about 200ppm not much more if at all. What I'm getting at is anything over that is basically being wasted from my understanding. I believe someone once stated that only about 80-100ppm of moly is actually being worked in the oil the rest just sits around and only accomplished making the oil much more expensive. Maybe I misunderstood I'm not sure just more looking for if that's the correct train of thought or not lol
 
Originally Posted by BigShug681



I believe someone once stated that only about 80-100ppm of moly is actually being worked in the oil the rest just sits around and only accomplished making the oil much more expensive. Maybe I misunderstood I'm not sure just more looking for if that's the correct train of thought or not lol


That wouldn't really make sense though, why would an oil blender use more of a product than necessary? It's only going to cost them more money. So they must have their reasons, and it isn't to satisfy the "moly lovers" on BITOG, as we're just a drop in the bucket compared to overall sales of an oil.
 
Originally Posted by Patman
Originally Posted by BigShug681



I believe someone once stated that only about 80-100ppm of moly is actually being worked in the oil the rest just sits around and only accomplished making the oil much more expensive. Maybe I misunderstood I'm not sure just more looking for if that's the correct train of thought or not lol


That wouldn't really make sense though, why would an oil blender use more of a product than necessary? It's only going to cost them more money. So they must have their reasons, and it isn't to satisfy the "moly lovers" on BITOG, as we're just a drop in the bucket compared to overall sales of an oil.

So they can charge a premium and make more?
 
Burla, we can drop the FCA pom-poms when discussing DXG. It's marketed as a Dexos oil, and NONE of its specifications or approvals cover any FCA or Chrysler specs other than SN/SN+. So this oil can't be used in anything that's still under warranty, because if the cam or lifters fail and all you've got is receipts for this, they will likely deny it because it doesn't meet the specs. As stated before, oils cannot correct or eliminate mechanical design flaws, it can only mask the issue but failure will still be nearly inevitable.

It's a stellar oil on paper and in the PQIA VOA, but even great oils will not meet every requirement for every manufacturer for warranty purposes.

Originally Posted by DXG info page
Specifications
API SN Plus, API SN (RC), ILSAC GF-5, License: API SN Plus, API SN Resource Conserving, ILSAC GF-5

Approvals
GM dexos1â„¢ Gen 2 (License No. D10709HK081)

Practice and tested in aggregates with filling
Ford WSS-M2C946-A, Ford WSS-M2C929-A, Chrysler MS-6395, Honda/Acura HTO-6, Fiat 9.55535-CR1


I bought this oil because it meets the specs I need, has the formulation I want, and that's about it. I do not, have not, and will never own an FCA product from personal preference. And the oil is already doing what I hoped it would, quieting down the cold starts below freezing in my Fusion, and it has also smoothed out the idle while sitting stopped in gear. UOA will complete the story as far as I'm concerned, for my personal use and expectations.
 
Originally Posted by Patman
Originally Posted by BigShug681



I believe someone once stated that only about 80-100ppm of moly is actually being worked in the oil the rest just sits around and only accomplished making the oil much more expensive. Maybe I misunderstood I'm not sure just more looking for if that's the correct train of thought or not lol


That wouldn't really make sense though, why would an oil blender use more of a product than necessary? It's only going to cost them more money. So they must have their reasons, and it isn't to satisfy the "moly lovers" on BITOG, as we're just a drop in the bucket compared to overall sales of an oil.


Yeah and look at thew new TGMO 0w20 oil. It's loaded with Moly, why would Toyota make this part of the formulation if it wasn't valuable over a certain point.
 
Originally Posted by BigShug681
Originally Posted by Patman
Originally Posted by BigShug681



I believe someone once stated that only about 80-100ppm of moly is actually being worked in the oil the rest just sits around and only accomplished making the oil much more expensive. Maybe I misunderstood I'm not sure just more looking for if that's the correct train of thought or not lol


That wouldn't really make sense though, why would an oil blender use more of a product than necessary? It's only going to cost them more money. So they must have their reasons, and it isn't to satisfy the "moly lovers" on BITOG, as we're just a drop in the bucket compared to overall sales of an oil.

So they can charge a premium and make more?


But that still doesn't make sense since the average oil buyer doesn't really care if it has more moly in it. They just see a higher priced oil and avoid it. So having a higher price doesn't always mean having a bigger profit.
 
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by Patman
Originally Posted by BigShug681



I believe someone once stated that only about 80-100ppm of moly is actually being worked in the oil the rest just sits around and only accomplished making the oil much more expensive. Maybe I misunderstood I'm not sure just more looking for if that's the correct train of thought or not lol


That wouldn't really make sense though, why would an oil blender use more of a product than necessary? It's only going to cost them more money. So they must have their reasons, and it isn't to satisfy the "moly lovers" on BITOG, as we're just a drop in the bucket compared to overall sales of an oil.


Yeah and look at thew new TGMO 0w20 oil. It's loaded with Moly, why would Toyota make this part of the formulation if it wasn't valuable over a certain point.




It has to be mentioned that there are different formulations of moly. TGMO uses a older form. Many modern oils use tri-nuclear moly which requires less to achieve the same effect.
 
Originally Posted by Patman
Originally Posted by BigShug681
I believe someone once stated that only about 80-100ppm of moly is actually being worked in the oil the rest just sits around and only accomplished making the oil much more expensive. Maybe I misunderstood I'm not sure just more looking for if that's the correct train of thought or not lol
That wouldn't really make sense though, why would an oil blender use more of a product than necessary? It's only going to cost them more money. So they must have their reasons, and it isn't to satisfy the "moly lovers" on BITOG, as we're just a drop in the bucket compared to overall sales of an oil.

Lots of moly (above a typical dose of around 70 ppm) does have benefits, wear and friction reduction, also LSPI quenching, & anti-oxidant properties. Racing oils have a lot of it typically (Mobil1 Racing 0w30 has 1700 ppm for example). Formulators in Japan often like using a lot of it (TGMO, Zepro, Eneos) in their street oils. Pennzoil Ultra SRT 0w40 has over 200 ppm, also Amsoil SS, Redline too.
See this link for a bunch of really dull boring graphs on moly timing chain benefits: Moly Study Wear Benefits
 
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Burla, we can drop the FCA pom-poms when discussing DXG. It's marketed as a Dexos oil, and NONE of its specifications or approvals cover any FCA or Chrysler specs other than SN/SN+. So this oil can't be used in anything that's still under warranty, because if the cam or lifters fail and all you've got is receipts for this, they will likely deny it because it doesn't meet the specs. As stated before, oils cannot correct or eliminate mechanical design flaws, it can only mask the issue but failure will still be nearly inevitable.

It's a stellar oil on paper and in the PQIA VOA, but even great oils will not meet every requirement for every manufacturer for warranty purposes.

Originally Posted by DXG info page
Specifications
API SN Plus, API SN (RC), ILSAC GF-5, License: API SN Plus, API SN Resource Conserving, ILSAC GF-5

Approvals
GM dexos1â„¢ Gen 2 (License No. D10709HK081)

Practice and tested in aggregates with filling
Ford WSS-M2C946-A, Ford WSS-M2C929-A, Chrysler MS-6395, Honda/Acura HTO-6, Fiat 9.55535-CR1


I bought this oil because it meets the specs I need, has the formulation I want, and that's about it. I do not, have not, and will never own an FCA product from personal preference. And the oil is already doing what I hoped it would, quieting down the cold starts below freezing in my Fusion, and it has also smoothed out the idle while sitting stopped in gear. UOA will complete the story as far as I'm concerned, for my personal use and expectations.


FCA pom poms? You were the one asking why I prefer moly, that was the answer. Perhaps your question was rhetorical, I'll just assume all your questions are such from here on. I'm sure you are more educated then the oil engineers at Pennzoil and FCA. Maybe you can just dispense with the questions and simply enlighten me on the error in my thinking from here on.
 
The continual assertion that a different oil can only "mask" an issue depends on the issue. You put something in a box and never consider all the variables. The cam lobs wear over time as you see the images of smoothed out cams, this shows up in uoa's as decelerated wear. Sometimes the cams are pitted, sometimes smooth as a baby's bottom. We've had a guy run 3 uoa's before his cam failed, the wear numbers were like in the 170ppm wear numbers, and higher. He did this on his own and only cam into the program after his cam failed, I don't even recall what oil he used, it wasn't redline. Now, the guys that had hemi tick also had high wear numbers, but killed the tick with redline 5w30 and with long term use the wear numbers are trending towards zero. Look at the uoa's. If you want to assert this situation in your box, that's on you, there is no cost to being wrong around here and plenty of guys will give you a group hug on that. But all that can potentially do is talk some guy researching this from perhaps from trying something that may fix his issue. Again, the long term uoa's were the final piece of the puzzle as far as what we can figure out. Possibly over 10 years we can actually see if any of the 30 guys that killed their ticks needed a cam/lifter replacement. But regardless, using an oil proven to quiet hemi tick and provide great long term wear numbers isn't that big of deal, it is a small group of people that can potentially benefit from this. The best medicine would be to get the dealer to fix it under warranty, the problem is they call that normal hemi sound, but the uoa's prove that isn't true. So when the dealer turns you down, what are your options? Redline 5w30 looks like a pretty good option to me. Quiet the tick and have very low wear numbers with long term use, why wouldn't that be the best option? The proof has been presented here, our mistake was thinking that "oil guys" would find that interesting. It works, and every guy that has had this happen is grateful to have this formula, that is why they speak about it. Yes I am the worst spokesman for them, whatever my apologies for being an old grumpy guy, but you guys should consider that just maybe you are wrong, that the more uoa's and the more guys having this happen, the more is suggests that specific oil formulations can offer real results with specific issues.
 
Pretty sure I never asked your preference on moly... this thread was started as a discussion about Ravenol DXG since AFAIK nobody else on the board has bought or used it yet. The only comment I made that may have been construed to be about moly was that NOTHING in a lubricating oil can eliminate a manufacturing defect such as the Hemi Tick. It was an engineering mistake to pair SADI cam cores with billet lifter wheels, and then stick MDS on it which allows the lifter to beat the snot out of the cam lobe. Some formulations may slow down and minimize that damage that is occurring, but the defective engineering/manufacturing issue still exists, and WILL fail at some point regardless of the lubricant. And it's quite humorous that you are now beating the Pennzoil drum for FCA when every other post has you bowing at the Redline throne...

Also, in my post you quoted, there is not a single question mark, so I'm not sure how you thought I was asking you questions...
 
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