How good is Royal Purple

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

You have no data, not facts, just a giant chip on your shoulder which you wield like a child throwing a tantrum every time there is a Mobil 1 thread. You make it a point to vehemently slander the brand with your baseless tripe and crooked agenda, and then call anybody who opposed you a cheerleader, shill or fan-boy. Grow up! If you put half as much effort into actually putting together some sort of evidence that could be evaluated in a peer review scenario as you do ripping on Mobil, perhaps you'd actually have something to yap about.


Replace Mobil 1 above with Royal Purple and you know how we feel.


By some perhaps, but I'm not one of those people. I think RP is a decent product, just like I think Valvoline, AMSOIL, Redline....etc are ALL decent products! And in a given grade, in real world conditions, likely all yield extremely comparable performance. I think this goes for any GF-5 SN synthetic oil really.

What I can't stand, which I think I made quite clear, is the baseless slandering/bashing, often being fast and loose with "the facts", using data pulled from past threads and presented in a light that simply serves to further an agenda. I don't care if somebody doesn't like a product. Clevy doesn't like Mobil, and has made that abundantly clear, yet he's not out posting tripe like the stuff Dusty is trying to pander as "facts and data" here because he obviously has a lot more self-control and understands the difference between not liking something and actually being able to prove something is no good.

 

[Capa]

Originally Posted By: DragRace
Originally Posted By: Capa
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

You have no data, not facts, just a giant chip on your shoulder which you wield like a child throwing a tantrum every time there is a Mobil 1 thread. You make it a point to vehemently slander the brand with your baseless tripe and crooked agenda, and then call anybody who opposed you a cheerleader, shill or fan-boy. Grow up! If you put half as much effort into actually putting together some sort of evidence that could be evaluated in a peer review scenario as you do ripping on Mobil, perhaps you'd actually have something to yap about.


Replace Mobil 1 above with Royal Purple and you know how we feel.


Actually, NHHEMI, you are wrong. BP/Castrol did provide data and facts here:

http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article001398592.cfm

This is precisely why so many here view RP as overrated and overpriced. It did not outperform Castrol at all in REAL tests and yet costs significantly more. The PQIA site VOA shows that it is very similar to Napa synthetic, yet significantly more expensive. RP is an average synthetic with an enormous price hike.


You know Capa,it seems to me,that you carry the same old data anytime a royal purple topic is brought up,why is that? Can you not provide anything recent that shows that royal purple is a inferior oil?


The PQIA test was less than a year ago. The BP/Castrol test was four years ago. Someone asked for real data and facts and they were provided. Nothing anecdotal here just real, factual data numbers.

I didn't mention in my last post that RP was inferior. I said that it was an average synthetic that is overpriced and that is what the data points to as well.

 

[TechnoLoGs]

RP is pretty good for most that have put it in their engine.

It sure does cost a lot.

It worked so well in one of my engines that I have resolved to putting some Reldine, or RP, in my fills.

 

[TechnoLoGs]

Now.. "IS it the best????" .....

All data points to that it is very good.. but... Synerlec is gimmicky.. STILL cant determine what does and does not have it..

 

[surfstar]

So we have:

Purple = RP
Red = Redline
Green = GC
Yellow = PYB

These came easily, help me out, what else?

And who said BITOG wasn't diversified? An oil color for every car/person!

 

[dparm]

Originally Posted By: surfstar
So we have:

Purple = RP
Red = Redline
Green = GC
Yellow = PYB

These came easily, help me out, what else?

And who said BITOG wasn't diversified? An oil color for every car/person!



Well, GC is not green anymore. Hasn't been for a very long time.

Torco is blue.
Some of the castor oils are bright red.
Motul 300V is fluorescent green.
MoS2 is a silver color, I believe.

 

[surfstar]

Originally Posted By: dparm
Originally Posted By: surfstar
So we have:

Purple = RP
Red = Redline
Green = GC
Yellow = PYB

These came easily, help me out, what else?

And who said BITOG wasn't diversified? An oil color for every car/person!



Well, GC is not green anymore. Hasn't been for a very long time.

Torco is blue.
Some of the castor oils are bright red.
Motul 300V is fluorescent green.
MoS2 is a silver color, I believe.


That just about covers the prime colors!

Now lets all bash on the various colors, so that purple doesn't feel picked on! Gotta be PC!

/threadkiller

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Capa

The PQIA test was less than a year ago. The BP/Castrol test was four years ago. Someone asked for real data and facts and they were provided. Nothing anecdotal here just real, factual data numbers.

I didn't mention in my last post that RP was inferior. I said that it was an average synthetic that is overpriced and that is what the data points to as well.


The BP stuff was nothing more than a marketing challenge. Also it was about oil not even made any longer. Sorry but your heavily used( again and again and again )BP data argument is outdated and irrelavent. If you are going to use something to try and defend a point make sure it actually can be applied to the argument. Even at the time it reminded me of kids out on the playground whining to the teacher about something.

No comment on the PQIA stuff. Haven't seen the results, don't know anything about PQIA to know what their qualifications are, etc...

I don't see how you can believe anyone will take your views seriously when you use outdated data to defend your position. It is probably a safe bet to say you haven't used the product either. You have zero grounds to dislike RP or even call it average. Try using it and form your own opinion rather than parroting the views and comments of others( who most likely also haven't used it ). Otherwise change your screen name to Lemming.

I am currently using the API SN formula and am happy with it and not over paying in the least. As usual this asanine argument that RP is over priced is just flawed beyond words. People need to wake up and reallize there is a whole world full of oil deals and options beyond the 5qt jug at Wal-Mart.

Also, lose the BP stuff as it is old news that has nothoing to do with the current oils. Not only that but it was ridiculous even when it was relavent.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
No comment on the PQIA stuff. Haven't seen the results, don't know anything about PQIA to know what their qualifications are, etc...



You've been posting on here for 6 years, and you don't know anything about the PQIA? Or are you just being obtuse to avoid acknowledging the validity of recent data that is relevant?

 

[Garak]

NHHEMI should take a look at the PQIA stuff. Fine. However, where on the PQIA site and by which actual expert here is there a recommendation that VOAs are a great tool for choosing which oil is better than another, assuming all meet the relevant specifications?

It's funny how people point out that Valvoline conventional looks very weak on paper, yet produces some of the finest used oil analysis. On the other hand, any resemblance RP shares with Valvoline synthetic is considered a problem?

We don't have the data, unfortunately, either way. I'm a RP fan. However, we don't have a lot of data from everyday users of the product. When we do have used oil analysis, they're few and far in between and never part of a trended program and usually in some atypical application.

 

[dparm]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
No comment on the PQIA stuff. Haven't seen the results, don't know anything about PQIA to know what their qualifications are, etc...



You've been posting on here for 6 years, and you don't know anything about the PQIA? Or are you just being obtuse to avoid acknowledging the validity of recent data that is relevant?



+1

 

[Stelth]

Last OC, I put RP 5w30 SN in my wife's 2010 Sentra. Now, it doesn't drive so much as glides on a cushion of air from place to place. I'm sure it hasn't used any gasoline in the last thousand miles or so. The only sound it makes is the sound of the engine being rebuilt from the inside out.

Seriously, though, I wouldn't have bought RP at the regular price, which around here is about $10/quart. I would pay the Pep Boys sale price of $30 for 5 quarts and a filter. My plan is to run it out to 7500 miles and do a used oil analysis, which I haven't done in this car yet. I got two of those oil change specials, and used a "gift card" rebate to get a jug of Mobil 1 and a Mobil 1 filter for about $20, so, for that car, I'm set for the next 22,500 miles of oil changes. Since I don't have a baseline used oil analysis, I realize that when I do it with the RP, it will just be a snapshot, but it should be an interesting snapshot.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
No comment on the PQIA stuff. Haven't seen the results, don't know anything about PQIA to know what their qualifications are, etc...



You've been posting on here for 6 years, and you don't know anything about the PQIA? Or are you just being obtuse to avoid acknowledging the validity of recent data that is relevant?


Yes, I have been here 6 years and I don't follow PQIA.

I haven't checked out the RP test they did. As said I don't know anything about those tests. I know very little about them on the whole as well. Have a baseline idea( they test oils )but I don't follow their testing and such. Frankly I could care less as well.

I am not commenting on something I don't know about. All there is to it. Nothing obtuse about it nor I am avoiding anything.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Garak
NHHEMI should take a look at the PQIA stuff. Fine. However, where on the PQIA site and by which actual expert here is there a recommendation that VOAs are a great tool for choosing which oil is better than another, assuming all meet the relevant specifications?

It's funny how people point out that Valvoline conventional looks very weak on paper, yet produces some of the finest used oil analysis. On the other hand, any resemblance RP shares with Valvoline synthetic is considered a problem?

We don't have the data, unfortunately, either way. I'm a RP fan. However, we don't have a lot of data from everyday users of the product. When we do have used oil analysis, they're few and far in between and never part of a trended program and usually in some atypical application.


I really could care less what the PQIA tests show about RP oil. As you point out there is the paper results and then the real world results. I care about how it performs for me. In that regard it has done right by me since the early 90's. All that matters to me.

You are right though. Definitely different standards around here for RP and then other brands. VVL is great stuff unless you are pointing out it compares to the new RP stuff and then suddenly it is mediocre at best. Amsoil is appluaded for offering different formulas, that are of varying degrees of quality, to meet different customer needs but RP gets a kick in the pants for it. The RP bigotry here is a riot.

I plan on doing a used oil analysis with the new API SN 5W20 but as I don't drive much these days it has taken me a while to get the miles on. I also wanted to let the engine break in before I did it as well. I had the oil chanegd in late Jan or early Feb as I recall so I should be doing another OC around September before I go on vacation. It will be approx 8 months and 7500+ miles on the oil. Probably 75-80% city driving and quite a bit of towing so not an easy service interval. I will post the results be they good bad or ugly.

One thing I know...

A) - If the results are good-very good it will be down played and passed off as an anomoly

B) - if the results are less than stellar it will be jumped all over by the anti RP folks

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: dparm
Originally Posted By: surfstar
So we have:

Purple = RP
Red = Redline
Green = GC
Yellow = PYB

These came easily, help me out, what else?

And who said BITOG wasn't diversified? An oil color for every car/person!



Well, GC is not green anymore. Hasn't been for a very long time.

Torco is blue.
Some of the castor oils are bright red.
Motul 300V is fluorescent green.
MoS2 is a silver color, I believe.


Valvoline VR1 synthetic is a saphire blue.
Really pretty when you pour it in.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: Garak
It's funny how people point out that Valvoline conventional looks very weak on paper, yet produces some of the finest used oil analysis. On the other hand, any resemblance RP shares with Valvoline synthetic is considered a problem?



I don't think there's a problem with RP looking similar to VSP in a virgin oil analysis. The problem is that it's more expensive.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: dparm
Originally Posted By: surfstar
So we have:

Purple = RP
Red = Redline
Green = GC
Yellow = PYB

These came easily, help me out, what else?

And who said BITOG wasn't diversified? An oil color for every car/person!



Well, GC is not green anymore. Hasn't been for a very long time.

Torco is blue.
Some of the castor oils are bright red.
Motul 300V is fluorescent green.
MoS2 is a silver color, I believe.


Valvoline VR1 synthetic is a saphire blue.
Really pretty when you pour it in.


And Brad Penn is a lovely emerald green.
SWEPCO 306 is purple.

 

[dparm]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI


I really could care less what the PQIA tests show about RP oil. As you point out there is the paper results and then the real world results. I care about how it performs for me. In that regard it has done right by me since the early 90's. All that matters to me.



PQIA is an independent third-party that makes the data available to the public at no charge. Why wouldn't you want to go read it? Not sure why you're digging your heels in on that.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: dparm
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI


I really could care less what the PQIA tests show about RP oil. As you point out there is the paper results and then the real world results. I care about how it performs for me. In that regard it has done right by me since the early 90's. All that matters to me.



PQIA is an independent third-party that makes the data available to the public at no charge. Why wouldn't you want to go read it? Not sure why you're digging your heels in on that.


I am not digging my heels in. I just could care less. I am amazed that people seem aggitated that I don't.

 

[Nightmare]

I have used Mobil 1 & RP. Both are nice oils.

Who funds PQIA????? -------------


Since 2011, Petroleum Quality Institute of America LLC has been providing Petroleum Product Wholesalers,except Bulk Stations from Metuchen. (NJ) Petroleum Quality Institute of America LLC has estimated annual revenues of $ 200,000.00 and also employs an estimated 3 employees.

LLC-- a person & 2 family members?


Do not confuse PQIA with the real regulators--
"The American Petroleum Institute "
which licenses motor oil to meet specified standards
( The API is the chief lobbying group for the oil industry)-funded by the oil industry..

How credible are independent labs? First, find out who is funding them, how they make their money, etc.

The oil industry funds PQIA..........

Guess I am saying how accurate & unbiased are independent labs?, when their funding comes from the owners of the products they are testing.

People were shocked when they found out www.snopes.com is funded by the federal govt.
Where did they think the funding came from?

Follow my point on these independent labs who are anything but independent...