Here are some recent NOAC numbers of some Red-Line oils.

Messages
5,104
Location
Pittsburgh,PA U.S.A.
I gave Red-Line a call today, mainly to verify that the maintnce dose level for adding SL-1 fuel system cleaner ( amount per U.S. gallon of gasoline ) is still the same. I mentioned to Dave that the label on the SL-1 bottle use to say the recommended maintnce dose was 4.45 mL per U.S. gallon. And I asked him if a dose of approximately 4.5 mL per gallon is still a good recommended maintnce dose. And he said yes. He said the product is the same, just the label has been changed over the years.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

BTW, I actually do keep a plastic translucent white 100 mL graduated cylinder I got from McMaster-Carr in my vehicle with a bottle of Red-Line SL-1 and use the trip B to record the miles since last fill, divide by MPG = number of gallons use since last fill. Multiply that by 4.5 = how many mL of SL-1 to add before the fill up.

Store the graduated cylinder upside down in several used plastic grocery bags, and discard the bag next to it each fill up because the residue of the SL-1 actually pulls moisture out of the air and mixes with it and makes a mess of the bag.

Also wear glove or use old plastic grocery bags as gloves, this stuff is a oil that gets on anything you touch if you do not wear gloves or wash your hands if you do not wear gloves.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Then I asked him for NOAC numbers on there oil so I could post them on bobistheoilguy. The following is the data he sent me today:

James,

It was good to talk to you today, I have listed the NOACK evaporation numbers for some of our oils, we consider this an important characteristic and typically lower than others.

NOACK evaporation loss, 1hr @ 482°F (250°C) %

0W20 - 9

5W20 - 8

5W30 - 6


Regards,

Dave Granquist
 
Last edited:
Messages
5,624
Location
Atlanta,GA
I gave Red-Line a call today, mainly to verify that the maintnce dose level for adding SL-1 fuel system cleaner ( amount per U.S. gallon of gasoline ) is still the same. I mentioned to Dave that the label on the SL-1 bottle use to say the recommended maintnce dose was 4.45 mL per U.S. gallon. And I asked him if a dose of approximately 4.5 mL per gallon is still a good recommended maintnce dose. And he said yes. He said the product is the same, just the label has been changed over the years.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

BTW, I actually do keep a plastic translucent white 100 mL graduated cylinder I got from McMaster-Carr in my vehicle with a bottle of Red-Line SL-1 and use the trip B to record the miles since last fill, divide by MPG = number of gallons use since last fill. Multiply that by 4.5 = how many mL of SL-1 to add before the fill up.

Store the graduated cylinder upside down in several used plastic grocery bags, and discard the bag next to it each fill up because the residue of the SL-1 actually pulls moisture out of the air and mixes with it and makes a mess of the bag.

Also wear glove or use old plastic grocery bags as gloves, this stuff is a oil that gets on anything you touch if you do not wear gloves or wash your hands if you do not wear gloves.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Then I asked him for NOAC numbers on there oil so I could post them on bobistheoilguy. The following is the data he sent me today:

James,

It was good to talk to you today, I have listed the NOACK evaporation numbers for some of our oils, we consider this an important characteristic and typically lower than others.

NOACK evaporation loss, 1hr @ 482°F (250°C) %

0W20 - 9

5W20 - 8

5W30 - 6


Regards,

Dave Granquist
Isn't it hard to meter out 2-3 oz of fluid?
 
Messages
16,050
Location
N.H, U.S.A.
I’d be interested to know what it is for their 30/10W-30, and their 5W-20, which I read here is free of viscosity modifiers.
I be interested in a retest of the NOACK and see if the % off stabilises to a much lower number vs. initial;
as I suspect it would as these (and most oils) are not
solvent refined oils and the % off # is likely the needed solvent for the package dispersion with only a minor % of light fractions.

I don't see NOACK as an important # with modern process oils in a water-cooled engine.
 
Messages
189
Location
Ontario, Canada
I know exactly what they are. Just figured a lot of product willl adhere to the funnel and the filler neck. It's just a 1/4 cup.

This is why I bought a fuel additive dispenser.

Sometimes you're not filling up the whole tank so its hard to judge small quantities if measuring out.

If you use your own solution like @JimPghPA , you risk getting product on your hands or in the car.

Ezypor may seem like a solution to a problem that doesn't exist but any fluid that leaks out gets automatically poured back into the bottle, instead of onto the side of the bottle so it's a A+ product to me.

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/ezypor-fuel-additive-dispenser.335387/
 
Messages
4,623
Location
Ca.
I be interested in a retest of the NOACK and see if the % off stabilises to a much lower number vs. initial;
as I suspect it would as these (and most oils) are not
solvent refined oils and the % off # is likely the needed solvent for the package dispersion with only a minor % of light fractions.

I don't see NOACK as an important # with modern process oils in a water-cooled engine.

Pretty much aligned.

I'm much more concerned about it in my air cooled 20KW genset running a 5ton AC unit on a 100+ degree day.
 
Messages
3,781
Location
Nashville, TN via Memphis
Noack starts to matter a lot more in high-output engines.

I ran 4.7% Noack PPPP 10W-30 in my 2016 WRX because it made 134 HP/L and oil temps would reach or exceed 250°F when pushed hard (as I did when I played around with a GT-R on I-24 over Monteagle Mountain once). Also, I liked the relative lack of viscosity modifier in that oil because of the boxer engine’s known tendency to shear oil, along with the TGDI fuel dilution.

The wife’s new 4Runner @ 67 HP/L? Nah. Noack probably doesn’t matter that much. But it’s still a good indicator of base oil quality.
 
Messages
45
Location
Pittsburgh
Noack starts to matter a lot more in high-output engines.

I ran 4.7% Noack PPPP 10W-30 in my 2016 WRX because it made 134 HP/L and oil temps would reach or exceed 250°F when pushed hard (as I did when I played around with a GT-R on I-24 over Monteagle Mountain once). Also, I liked the relative lack of viscosity modifier in that oil because of the boxer engine’s known tendency to shear oil, along with the TGDI fuel dilution.

The wife’s new 4Runner @ 67 HP/L? Nah. Noack probably doesn’t matter that much. But it’s still a good indicator of base oil quality.
So a stock wrx????? Was the gtr in limp mode?
 
Messages
3,781
Location
Nashville, TN via Memphis
So a stock wrx????? Was the gtr in limp mode?
I think so, LOL!

He was just playing around and I was balls to the wall trying to keep him in sight!

No, seriously, though, that WRX was a good-running car. Not a GT-R, but not slow, either. 268 HP, around 3200 lbs, 0-60 in mid-5’s, top speed of >140 mph (143, to be exact). Just fantastic handling, too.

Brakes sucked, not even close to having enough heat dissipation capacity for the speed that car could generate.

Ive heard they upgraded the brakes on the newer ones - at some point they started spec’ing 2-piece brake rotors, which, I’m sure, do a lot better job at getting rid of the heat and not warping.

Also heard they’ve addressed the horrible rev hang mine had. Of course, thats fixable with the Cobb Accessport.
 
Last edited:
Messages
16,050
Location
N.H, U.S.A.
Noack starts to matter a lot more in high-output engines.

I ran 4.7% Noack PPPP 10W-30 in my 2016 WRX because it made 134 HP/L and oil temps would reach or exceed 250°F when pushed hard (as I did when I played around with a GT-R on I-24 over Monteagle Mountain once). Also, I liked the relative lack of viscosity modifier in that oil because of the boxer engine’s known tendency to shear oil, along with the TGDI fuel dilution.

The wife’s new 4Runner @ 67 HP/L? Nah. Noack probably doesn’t matter that much. But it’s still a good indicator of base oil quality.
NOACK boil off is performed at almost 500 deg F.

Your 250F indicated oil temp is a cake walk.

I think the NOACK volatility test needs rethinking.

You say it matters, you think it matters - but does it really?

I could see in motorsports running WOT most of the time on road course or circle track.

Hard to get a passenger car engine that hot before you die or get arrested :)
 
Messages
3,781
Location
Nashville, TN via Memphis
NOACK boil off is performed at almost 500 deg F.

Your 250F indicated oil temp is a cake walk.

I think the NOACK volatility test needs rethinking.

You say it matters, you think it matters - but does it really?

I could see in motorsports running WOT most of the time on road course or circle track.

Hard to get a passenger car engine that hot before you die or get arrested :)
Having a good Noack % is a good marker of good base oil quality.

Having Noack of <10% is also a requirement of several stringent Euro oil specs, so, yeah, it does matter.
 
Messages
12,388
Location
Colorado Springs
Noack starts to matter a lot more in high-output engines.

I ran 4.7% Noack PPPP 10W-30 in my 2016 WRX because it made 134 HP/L and oil temps would reach or exceed 250°F when pushed hard (as I did when I played around with a GT-R on I-24 over Monteagle Mountain once). Also, I liked the relative lack of viscosity modifier in that oil because of the boxer engine’s known tendency to shear oil, along with the TGDI fuel dilution.

The wife’s new 4Runner @ 67 HP/L? Nah. Noack probably doesn’t matter that much. But it’s still a good indicator of base oil quality.
Not a problem. I ran my BMW 328 on track to 293f when limp mode would kick in. I did that several times, and ran oil next 5k after that (Mobil1 0W40).
BMW 335 with N54/55 engines allow much higher oil temperature.
Though that oil temp. had me install oil cooler this winter.
 
Messages
12,388
Location
Colorado Springs
NOACK boil off is performed at almost 500 deg F.

Your 250F indicated oil temp is a cake walk.

I think the NOACK volatility test needs rethinking.

You say it matters, you think it matters - but does it really?


I could see in motorsports running WOT most of the time on road course or circle track.

Hard to get a passenger car engine that hot before you die or get arrested :)
His oil temperature is not oil temperature that is present around journal bearings etc. So test is OK.
250f is normal oil temperature in many BMW's for example, as DME purposely runs water pump and thermostat in low mode to allow higher oil temperatures to increase efficiency.
 
Messages
16,050
Location
N.H, U.S.A.
His oil temperature is not oil temperature that is present around journal bearings etc. So test is OK.
250f is normal oil temperature in many BMW's for example, as DME purposely runs water pump and thermostat in low mode to allow higher oil temperatures to increase efficiency.
Ed your fist sentence is a non sequitur. I agree there is heating through mechanical shear, but its not excessive.
250 is not 500. It is too severe and absolutely not representative of in situ conditions. IMHO.
Again much of the % off likely represents the NEEDED solvent carrier for the DP
But I am not on committee for SAE, ILSAC or API, Its just an engineering observation.

This sounds like a Concern looking hard for and actual Problem that doesn't exist.
I'll call it BITOG "nervousness"
This is intervention therapy - not a call out :)
 
Top