Fascinating study on Ravenol 0w16 vs 5w30 in fleet of similar autos

Messages
51
Location
Central Texas
With all of the talk about 0w20 vs 5w30, I found this particular study very interesting. I recently came across Ravenol DXG 5w30 for my Enclave V6 GDI engine, (which looks very interesting with Group V PAO, 6.0 Noack, and 256°C flash point.) Admittedly I'm a little on the fence with the 0w20 that GM calls for their V8 trucks, especially when in the instance of my 6.2L V8 L86 calling for 0w20, which is essentially same long block used in the C7 Corvette (LT1) which until recently, has called for 5w30 for years but is now saying that 0w40 is what you need to use going forward. Needless to say, I'm interested in Ravenol and trying to get their 0w20 DFE with DEXOS1 Gen2 rating over here in the US (for all the GM trucks!) In this study, they used an identical fleet of six 2015 Toyota Aygo commercial vehicles (1.0L engines) used for in-home nursing services, Ravenol ran half the cars with their new Ravenol EFE 0w16 and the other half with ACEA C3 5w30 oil. The drivers all changed vehicles and never knew which one was which. They ran 5,000km OCI's. The Ravenol 0w16 viscosity remained virtually unchanged over this period and retained its TBN much greater than the 5w30. With an average decrease in fuel consumption of about half a liter per 100km, meaning that essentially the vehicles could drive about 53km more on a single tank of fuel. Long story short is, apparently, the 0w16 provided better wear and fuel mileage than the 5w30. Ravenol EFE 0w16 vs 5w30

Capture.JPG


Capture 2.JPG


Capture 3.JPG


Capture wear beaings cam.JPG
 
Messages
25,053
Location
ON, Canada eh?
I suspect that it's because they use high quality basestocks and a great additive package and the oil is built for performance not price point. The sky is the limit with premium oils when they aren't confined by bean counters. This is also great to show that 16wt oil can have better wear than 30wt oil based on what oil you choose even though the HTHS would be lower for the 16wt over the 30wt. Paging all the "Thicker is better" folks. Thanks for posting. thumbsup
 
Last edited:
Messages
35,696
Location
NY
Originally Posted by BobsArmory
Originally Posted by demarpaint
It begs the question: Why didn't they compare it to their own 5W30?
Now that is a good question!
Because they might already know the answer.........LOL
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Messages
46,081
Location
Ontario, Canada
So a premium PAO-based synthetic 0w-16 did better than a generic 5w-30 in many key performance areas including relative to the performance limits of API SN? Colour me shocked smirk
 
Messages
11,586
Location
USA
ACEA C3 is the thick stuff HTHS over 3.5 (like A3/B4) Ravenol is very expensive. Do you think Amalie 0w16 (supplier to CQ/AAP) will be just as good? Will Valvoline 0w16 hold up as well?
Originally Posted by demarpaint
It begs the question: Why didn't they compare it to their own 5W30?
approved
 

AP9

Messages
346
Location
Chicago suburbs
Agreed. Meaningless study since there are so many independent variables. If their point was to convince me that lower viscosity correlates to superior wear protection, they have failed. Almost nothing is indicated regarding the basestock, anti-wear additives, or detergents of the competing 5W-30.
 
Messages
1,858
Location
Danville, Indiana
What does the BITOG hive generally think of Ravenol? I noticed it has Chrysler MS6395 approval, so it might be fun to do a run with their 0w20 in my Jeep and then a UOA. I've had a couple good runs with Mobil 1 AP and have some PUP waiting in the wings. (Yes, I know M1 isn't 6395 approved, but it doesn't matter. My dealer uses M1 oils. I only look for it in the Ravenol to see if it meets any US specs because I know little about it.)
 
Last edited:
Messages
35,696
Location
NY
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
So a premium PAO-based synthetic 0w-16 did better than a generic 5w-30 in many key performance areas including relative to the performance limits of API SN? Colour me shocked smirk
Yea, shocked!! LOL Cherry picking for results at its best, no surprise, but there are some people that will believe.
 
Messages
13,920
Location
Kendall, FL
Originally Posted by demarpaint
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
So a premium PAO-based synthetic 0w-16 did better than a generic 5w-30 in many key performance areas including relative to the performance limits of API SN? Colour me shocked smirk
Yea, shocked!! LOL Cherry picking for results at its best, no surprise, but there are some people that will believe.
It's a 5w30 C3 (HTHS 3.5) oil their comparing it to. Not a run of the mill SN.
 
Messages
9,420
Location
Virginia
Still.... They should also compare it to their own very high quality 5w30... With the Dexos gen 2 approval... That would be more telling.
 
Messages
17,245
Location
...
I think it's a interesting study and it does show that a good 0w16 will hold up. My nitpick is the oci schedule they used. 5000 kilometers is very short for any oil and especially a premium based oil like Ravenol. I would have no problems running that if my car called for it.
 
Messages
35,696
Location
NY
Originally Posted by wemay
Originally Posted by demarpaint
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
So a premium PAO-based synthetic 0w-16 did better than a generic 5w-30 in many key performance areas including relative to the performance limits of API SN? Colour me shocked smirk
Yea, shocked!! LOL Cherry picking for results at its best, no surprise, but there are some people that will believe.
It's a 5w30 C3 (HTHS 3.5) oil their comparing it to. Not a run of the mill SN.
There 5W30 is not a run of the mill oil either.
Originally Posted by bbhero
Still.... They should also compare it to their own very high quality 5w30... With the Dexos gen 2 approval... That would be more telling.
Exactly.
 
Top