Double-Super-Secret 5W-40 Audi RS4 Racing Oil

[RI_RS4]

benjamming

40 minutes is pretty darn short, but it helped to show that the fuel dilution problem was not isolated to an idle richness issue.

sulfate is part of the formula, VOA for the 5W-40 is 116, I don't have a VOA for the 40W yet.

Yep, lots of fuel. But, what is unique for the RLI oil in my engine is that it levels off and does not cause the oil to crash like Motul did.

Oil filter is stock Audi cartridge filter. Changed every oil change, so in the latest case 6500 miles ago. Air filter is stock filter, and was changed 6500 miles ago. I usually do not let the air filter go for longer than 10K miles.

Oil change interval is variable and can be determined from the UOA data. This current oil should be good until my next change at 35K miles, 9700 miles on the oil. I'll probably do another intermediate oil sample after racing the car this coming weekend.

In addition, all of the RLI oil changes have had 2 track days on them to this point. The 40W currently has 2 1/2 hours of track time at Watkins Glen prior to the last sample, between the 28765 and 31719 mile sample points. So, incremental differences between those points include some extremely hard driving with oil temperatures running up to 276F (when I actually had a chance to look down). It will have 2 more track days at Mont Tremblant before it is changed out.

 

[RI_RS4]

Wow, no comments? I'm surprised.

 

[SubLGT]

Quote:

---

.............VOA for the 5W-40 is 116, I don't have a VOA for the 40W yet.............

---

40W??? I thought the W designation only went as high as 25W, after 0W, 5W, 10W, and 20W.

 

[G-MAN]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

.............VOA for the 5W-40 is 116, I don't have a VOA for the 40W yet.............

---

40W??? I thought the W designation only went as high as 25W, after 0W, 5W, 10W, and 20W.

---

He means 40 "weight" as in straight SAE 40. But in the case of RLI's straight 40, the VI is high enough that this oil probably would test out as a 20w40.

 

[DmanWho]

Been thinking that if one of the keys to this oils success is the antimony, why not blend with a oil containing a high moly content. I don't see any contraindications in doing so...

 

[Last_Z]

RI_RS4,

You posted this data for us to scrutinize; so we will!

This is what I notice from reading the data:

1- The interval length DOES NOT match engine miles when using RLI oils. Example; last OCI you state you ran the oil for 6428 miles, yet the difference in engine miles between last and second to last interval is only 2954 miles (31719-28765=2954) How is this possible or what am I missing?

2- Your main point for choosing this oil was to combat fuel dilution, yet from 0 to 14779 miles your fuel dilution average was 1.44%. After that you started using RLI for a total of 16940 miles and your dilution average is 1.22%. This is a mere 0.22% reduction! An improvement, but not what you had me believing!

3- Aluminum is at best a wash! From 0 to 14779 engine miles, your aluminum average is 5.2ppm. From that point on, you aluminum average is 4.1ppm using RLI oils.

Now, if you take into account break-in and you start to average after the engine reaches 8233 miles, then aluminum is better than RLI at only 3.36ppm! I think this is a more fair comparison than to average from 0 miles.

4- Copper obviously can not be compared to RLI, however, it went down fast after 8815 engine miles and stayed there before use of RLI oils.

5- Tin, lead, chromium and nickel are essentially the same for the entire life of the engine.

6- From your data, oil comsuption is actually higher with RLI oils!?!?!?

7- Flash point, provided it has always been measured by the same people, using the same method has improved some, but not as much as you had me believing. It averaged to 309*F with the other oils and 326*F with RLI oils. It's an improvement of 17*F, which is good, but I was expecting more than 30*F difference.

Enough data crunching for now. PLEASE DO NOT TAKE THIS AS AN ATTACK! You gave us the data knowing very well we are going to break it down to the last ppm!

Fire back soon!

Rick

 

[SubLGT]

By my calculation, going from a fuel dilution of 1.44% down to 1.22% is a reduction of 15.3%, not 0.22%

Calculating simple averages for the wear metals data and fuel dilution will be highly misleading, as the calculated averages can be greatly skewed by how many miles the oil has on it, and how the car was driven during that oil use. It is more valid to compute averages based on ppm/mile, assuming that wear is linear over the accumulated miles. But even that data can be skewed by differences in how the car was driven.

 

[G-MAN]

Quote:

---

By my calculation, going from a fuel dilution of 1.44% down to 1.22% is a reduction of 15.3%, not 0.22%

---

 

[Last_Z]

Come on guys, neither one of you is retarded! You know exactly what I mean. Going from an average fuel dilution of 1.44% to 1.22% is a difference of .22 units, which is indeed a 15% reduction.
My point was that although it is a reduction, it's nowhere near what I was led to believe.....I was thinking more of a 40-50% reduction. In all, but one of the RLI UOAs, fuel is still over 1% of the oil....that's a hellish environment.

SubLGT,

How exactly do you propose we calculate which oils are performing better??? The fact is, before and after RLI oil was used, wear has NOT changed! Let's not start making excuses....I'm sure RI_RS4 has been racing this car since day 1!

Rick

 

[Last_Z]

Forgot to mention....RI_RS4 stated that ALL these UOAs were done using Terry's services. This obviously reduces the marging of error to oil used and driver habits. I think, from RI comments, his driving habits are pretty much the same.....that leaves only one variable; the oil.

 

[Lonnie]

Besides the reduction in fuel dilution as a lab value it appears that RLI oil handles the fuel dilution at what ever percent better. It appears that RLI oil is more resistant to chemical shear. I have notices this in my testing with a high mileage car that has a carb vs fi. On short runs there is a lot of fuel dilution. The past non-RLI oil would loose viscosity and in the exact same conditions the RLI oil does not budge. I know this is not a direct comparison between a fire breathing 1500 cc stock Civic and a hopeless outclassed RS4 but we both have a similar problem. It appears that even though the problem is still there the effect on viscosity is greatly reduced. This thread with the help of Terry and RLI_RS4 has opened my eyes to a new kind of oil and for that I think it has been a great success.

 

[Last_Z]

Lonnie,

Do not forget this oil is a hair away from being a 50W. That has a lot to do with the reduction in fuel and "staying" in grade. As Bruce had mentioned before, the RLI 5W-40 stayed in grade because it started as a high end 40W and lost ~3cSt and ended up a low 40W. Still, it sheared down quite a bit. The straight 40W on the other hand is doing much better retaining it's viscosity.

I think a good, thick, synthetic straight 40W would have similar benefits at reducing dilution.

Sorry guys, I just don't see where this oil is far superior to the other players......nothing personal. Somebody please point me in the right direction.

 

[Last_Z]

Another point, why is this car burning more of the RLI oil than the Motul oil?

Tell you what, someone please take each and every point I wrote, from 1 through 7, and break it down for me!

 

[Lonnie]

It appears that the design of RLI oil includes some burning. I believe it's part of getting oil up to the piston rings for lubrication, just speculation on my part. I have notices a pattern of oil consumption right after an oil change that settles down in a couple of hundred miles. If that is how it works and this design improves lubrication I can afford a little extra oil for each oci. And by the way my viscosity held up under fuel dilution a bit better than RLI_RS4's car. And remember, our Audi pilot does track days and drives his car like it's meant to be driven, with your foot down. I do not do track days in my 84 Civic wagon.

 

[bruce381]

RI RS4 I asked before and would love to see a VOA vis of the RLI oils you show the 5/40 @ 14.8 the 0/40 @ 15.5 and the 0/40 @ 16.6. What were the starting vis?
bruce

 

[mckennaiii]

no oil consumption here using RLI 5W40 HD in my 93 infinity g20 or my 97 nissan pathinder. running smooth as silk. thankx Terry and RLI. no oil anaylisys done yet.

 

[SubLGT]

Quote:

---

Forgot to mention....RI_RS4 stated that ALL these UOAs were done using Terry's services. This obviously reduces the marging of error to oil used and driver habits. I think, from RI comments, his driving habits are pretty much the same.....that leaves only one variable; the oil.

---

I see several other variables that can affect the fuel and metals data:
a. amount of make up oil
b. mileage on the motor
c. mileage on the oil
d. oil temp
e. ambient temp
f. number of cold starts
g. hours spent at max rpm
h. mileage on the air filter

 

[Last_Z]

Lonnie, all oils are designed to lubricate the pistons and rings, and this one isn't different. Why this oil is getting burned faster than the other is beyond me. I doubt this oil was designed to "burn" throughout the life of an interval. Some engines on the other hand are designed to burn oil, such as rotary engine. Without this pre-determine consumption, the seals in the rotors would not survive. Also, if the story about Zinc killing catalytic converters is true, then that would be an even bigger reason to design an oil with a low burn off rate.
Lastly, per RI_RS4, driving habits are the same....I'm pretty sure about.

I think Bruce's questions are critical. That way we can determine exactly how much, % wise the oils sheared.

Again guys, I'm not trying to bring this oil down. I'm simply doing the math and crunching the numbers. At the end of the day, this oil doesn't seem as mighty as I was led to believe.

 

[SubLGT]

Quote:

---

............SubLGT,

How exactly do you propose we calculate which oils are performing better??? The fact is, before and after RLI oil was used, wear has NOT changed!.......

---

IMO, a DEFINITIVE statement about whether or not wear has changed with the RLI oils cannot be made with this data set, due to the number of uncontrolled variables. The data is good enough to support a personal decision to purchase the oil and try it out in your vehicle, but it would not pass scrutiny in an engineering or scientific journal. If you wanted data that would survive such scrutiny, you would need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on the experiment.

 

[ocspray]

Quote:

---

Last_Z:
At the end of the day, this oil doesn't seem as mighty as I was led to believe.

---

Quote:

---

SubLGT:
IMO, a DEFINITIVE statement about whether or not wear has changed with the RLI oils cannot be made with this data set, due to the number of uncontrolled variables. The data is good enough to support a personal decision to purchase the oil and try it out in your vehicle, but it would not pass scrutiny in an engineering or scientific journal. If you wanted data that would survive such scrutiny, you would need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on the experiment.

---

These two posts sum up why I'm giving RLI's products a try. To date, they appear to perform at least as well as any other PCMO. The available evidence gives me confidence in the oil, and the renewable source is also encouraging. In the spirit of doveriai, no proveriai, I'll use it, while carefully monitoring its interaction with my engine.