Mobil 1 to Royal purple
Feb 22, 2007, 12:47 PM
#32
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: here
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how about the greddy oil??http://www.greddy.com/home/?id=200
Feb 22, 2007, 05:08 PM
#33
Royal Purple Info
As you may know, RP is big in racing circles. The chemistry they use is something we choose not to use. One of our big selling points is extended drain intervals. Some additive chemicals can cause adverse conditions when used for long periods.
Royal Purple uses a different chemistry than most. They are one of only a handful of marketers using Moly in their oil. Moly is a solid, specifically banned by Cummins, due to excessive valve train wear.
Moly (Molybdenum Disulfide) is a processed mineral that is similar in appearance to graphite. Moly has good lubricating properties when used either by itself (in dry power form or as an additive to oil or other lubricants). Particles of the Moly can come out of suspension and agglomerate. This can actually clog oil filters or oil lines and the rest normally settles in the bottom of the oil pan. This seems to be more likely when using extended drain intervals. The only test we ran on RP involved their 20W50 Racing oil versus our AMSOIL Series 2000 Synthetic 20W50 Racing Oil (TRO). We ran two 4 ball wear tests with different parameters, a spectrographic baseline, FTIR scan and volatility tests. The Royal Purple showed a significantly high volatility rate with a 12.51% boil off rate. This compares to TRO with a 4.47% volatility rating. Wear scars were also smaller with the TRO. For example the TRO left a .41mm scar and the RP oil left a .66mm scar. There was also a surprising difference in the viscosity index. The RP has a VI of 129 versus 155 for the TRO. The higher the VI, the better the viscosity stays in place at high temperatures.
This information was provided by AMSOIL Tech Department. They had an independent lab test Royal Purple against AMSOIL. The results are posted above. They have found Moly in Royal Purple. As stated above, this can have negative effects on your engine.
As you may know, RP is big in racing circles. The chemistry they use is something we choose not to use. One of our big selling points is extended drain intervals. Some additive chemicals can cause adverse conditions when used for long periods.
Royal Purple uses a different chemistry than most. They are one of only a handful of marketers using Moly in their oil. Moly is a solid, specifically banned by Cummins, due to excessive valve train wear.
Moly (Molybdenum Disulfide) is a processed mineral that is similar in appearance to graphite. Moly has good lubricating properties when used either by itself (in dry power form or as an additive to oil or other lubricants). Particles of the Moly can come out of suspension and agglomerate. This can actually clog oil filters or oil lines and the rest normally settles in the bottom of the oil pan. This seems to be more likely when using extended drain intervals. The only test we ran on RP involved their 20W50 Racing oil versus our AMSOIL Series 2000 Synthetic 20W50 Racing Oil (TRO). We ran two 4 ball wear tests with different parameters, a spectrographic baseline, FTIR scan and volatility tests. The Royal Purple showed a significantly high volatility rate with a 12.51% boil off rate. This compares to TRO with a 4.47% volatility rating. Wear scars were also smaller with the TRO. For example the TRO left a .41mm scar and the RP oil left a .66mm scar. There was also a surprising difference in the viscosity index. The RP has a VI of 129 versus 155 for the TRO. The higher the VI, the better the viscosity stays in place at high temperatures.
This information was provided by AMSOIL Tech Department. They had an independent lab test Royal Purple against AMSOIL. The results are posted above. They have found Moly in Royal Purple. As stated above, this can have negative effects on your engine.
Redline is the choice for me..
Feb 22, 2007, 05:32 PM
#36
Royal Purple Info
As you may know, RP is big in racing circles. The chemistry they use is something we choose not to use. One of our big selling points is extended drain intervals. Some additive chemicals can cause adverse conditions when used for long periods.
Royal Purple uses a different chemistry than most. They are one of only a handful of marketers using Moly in their oil. Moly is a solid, specifically banned by Cummins, due to excessive valve train wear.
Moly (Molybdenum Disulfide) is a processed mineral that is similar in appearance to graphite. Moly has good lubricating properties when used either by itself (in dry power form or as an additive to oil or other lubricants). Particles of the Moly can come out of suspension and agglomerate. This can actually clog oil filters or oil lines and the rest normally settles in the bottom of the oil pan. This seems to be more likely when using extended drain intervals. The only test we ran on RP involved their 20W50 Racing oil versus our AMSOIL Series 2000 Synthetic 20W50 Racing Oil (TRO). We ran two 4 ball wear tests with different parameters, a spectrographic baseline, FTIR scan and volatility tests. The Royal Purple showed a significantly high volatility rate with a 12.51% boil off rate. This compares to TRO with a 4.47% volatility rating. Wear scars were also smaller with the TRO. For example the TRO left a .41mm scar and the RP oil left a .66mm scar. There was also a surprising difference in the viscosity index. The RP has a VI of 129 versus 155 for the TRO. The higher the VI, the better the viscosity stays in place at high temperatures.
This information was provided by AMSOIL Tech Department. They had an independent lab test Royal Purple against AMSOIL. The results are posted above. They have found Moly in Royal Purple. As stated above, this can have negative effects on your engine.
As you may know, RP is big in racing circles. The chemistry they use is something we choose not to use. One of our big selling points is extended drain intervals. Some additive chemicals can cause adverse conditions when used for long periods.
Royal Purple uses a different chemistry than most. They are one of only a handful of marketers using Moly in their oil. Moly is a solid, specifically banned by Cummins, due to excessive valve train wear.
Moly (Molybdenum Disulfide) is a processed mineral that is similar in appearance to graphite. Moly has good lubricating properties when used either by itself (in dry power form or as an additive to oil or other lubricants). Particles of the Moly can come out of suspension and agglomerate. This can actually clog oil filters or oil lines and the rest normally settles in the bottom of the oil pan. This seems to be more likely when using extended drain intervals. The only test we ran on RP involved their 20W50 Racing oil versus our AMSOIL Series 2000 Synthetic 20W50 Racing Oil (TRO). We ran two 4 ball wear tests with different parameters, a spectrographic baseline, FTIR scan and volatility tests. The Royal Purple showed a significantly high volatility rate with a 12.51% boil off rate. This compares to TRO with a 4.47% volatility rating. Wear scars were also smaller with the TRO. For example the TRO left a .41mm scar and the RP oil left a .66mm scar. There was also a surprising difference in the viscosity index. The RP has a VI of 129 versus 155 for the TRO. The higher the VI, the better the viscosity stays in place at high temperatures.
This information was provided by AMSOIL Tech Department. They had an independent lab test Royal Purple against AMSOIL. The results are posted above. They have found Moly in Royal Purple. As stated above, this can have negative effects on your engine.
"This information was provided by AMSOIL Tech Department. "
did this tell you something?
i bet if the RP lab does the same test vs AMSOIL the out come would be different.
RP and RL
Feb 22, 2007, 06:40 PM
#37
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southeast US
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_oil
Mobil 1 used to be Group IV. Mobil sued Castrol for calling its Group III oil synthetic, and lost that suit. Since they couldn't beat them, they may have joined them -- Mobil 1 is now believed to be Group III-based, but Exxon Mobil refuses to disclose its bases except to say that it "contains" PAO.
Group IV oils are still available but they cost a lot more and don't really perform any better than Group III for any but the most demanding applications.
Synthetic motor oils have been made from the following classes of lubricants:
* Polyalphaolefin (PAO) = API (American Petroleum Institute) Group IV base oil
* Synthetic esters, etc = API Group V base oils (non-PAO synthetics, including diesters, polyolesters, alklylated napthlenes, alkyklated benzenes, etc.)
* Hydrocracked/Hydroisomerized = API Group III base oils. Chevron, Mobil, and other petrochemical companies developed processes involving catalytic conversion of feed stocks under pressure in the presence of hydrogen into high quality lubricating oil. In 2005 production of GTL (Gas-to-liquid) Group III base stocks began. The best of these perform much like polyalphaolefin. Motor oils formulated with Group III base stocks are considered synthetic motor oil in North America.
* Polyalphaolefin (PAO) = API (American Petroleum Institute) Group IV base oil
* Synthetic esters, etc = API Group V base oils (non-PAO synthetics, including diesters, polyolesters, alklylated napthlenes, alkyklated benzenes, etc.)
* Hydrocracked/Hydroisomerized = API Group III base oils. Chevron, Mobil, and other petrochemical companies developed processes involving catalytic conversion of feed stocks under pressure in the presence of hydrogen into high quality lubricating oil. In 2005 production of GTL (Gas-to-liquid) Group III base stocks began. The best of these perform much like polyalphaolefin. Motor oils formulated with Group III base stocks are considered synthetic motor oil in North America.
Group IV oils are still available but they cost a lot more and don't really perform any better than Group III for any but the most demanding applications.
Last edited by Slowride; Feb 25, 2007 at 08:00 AM. Reason: clarification/correction re: M1
Feb 25, 2007, 01:32 AM
#38
Evolved Member
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I love these statements that have no backing" i dont see your backing either...
i don't want to go again over this one. lets say, i used both...
also i used redline too.
"manufacturers only recommend Mobil 1 "
manufacturers recommend them, because they have contract with them....
plane and simple.
i don't want to go again over this one. lets say, i used both...
also i used redline too.
"manufacturers only recommend Mobil 1 "
manufacturers recommend them, because they have contract with them....
plane and simple.
Feb 25, 2007, 04:52 AM
#39
First off, it's 'plain and simple' not 'plane and simple.' Secondly, my backing is right there in my first statement stating that both oils have the same amount of hydrocarbons. Why pay more for an oil that will do the same exact job a lesser priced oil can do? Lastly, manufacturers will NOT just contract any oil company to lubricate their motors. The manufacturers that know that their cars are going to be driven hard make sure to provide the proper oil. To say that they only recommend them because of contractual issues, is dumb.
Feb 25, 2007, 07:11 AM
#42
Evolved Member
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Socal :)
Posts: 2,636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is full of non-fact based information (except the post that stated that most won't notice a difference)...
Feb 25, 2007, 08:09 AM
#43
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southeast US
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check out the Bob is the Oil Guy forum for more about motor oil than you probably want to know.
Mobil 1 vs. Royal Purple is not clear cut. Mobil 1 likely has some Group III base stock, but so do at least some of the Royal Purple oils. And Group IV/V isn't magic. An oil could be pure Group IV and still suck, or pure Group III and be great and a bargain.
The Bob consensus on Mobil 1 is that it's a good oil, but it's probably not the best value.
Mobil 1 vs. Royal Purple is not clear cut. Mobil 1 likely has some Group III base stock, but so do at least some of the Royal Purple oils. And Group IV/V isn't magic. An oil could be pure Group IV and still suck, or pure Group III and be great and a bargain.
The Bob consensus on Mobil 1 is that it's a good oil, but it's probably not the best value.
Feb 25, 2007, 08:49 AM
#44
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southeast US
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's not true, and that's exactly what the courts determined when Mobil made the same case against Castrol. Group III stock is not just highly refined. The input is petroleum, but the process is chemical: the polymer chains are "cracked" into little pieces and re-joined into chains of the desired lengths. The resulting product performs more like a Group IV oil than a petroleum-based oil because longer-chain impurities like waxes are aren't present. Those impurities are what make refined oils so goopy at lower temperatures.
