HPL Piston Photo

[Hohn]

After 50k miles those pistons are not that clean.

View attachment 315109

Valvoline Restore and Protect is an excellent cleaning oil. HPL is not a cleaning oil. It's a top performing oil that just happens to have some documented cleaning effect. HPL makes no claims of cleaning. They only claim the esters minimize intake deposits and maintain clean engines. So if the engine's clean, it will stay clean.


What do we know about the HPL service in this engine? We know that the engine had no lube related issues at all. We know the oil consumption never got worse and perhaps improved. We know the oil filter shows evidence of carbon particle removal.

If you never removed this piston, how would you assess the performance of the HPL? You'd say it was superior because all the *other* observables say so. Then you pull the piston and find that all the important parts are indeed clean-- almost certainly cleaner than what they were at 174k.

So on the one hand, maybe Valvoline Restore and Protect can clean better, as it's marketed to do. On the other, who cares? The HPL did very well in this particular application, and achieved a surgically clean crown area that is super critical. The Valvoline Restore and Protect photos of actual testing do not shown a completely clean crown. Would Valvoline Restore and Protect achieve this? Maybe. Probably, who knows. But that's beside the point.

I mean honestly-- if you have two engines using two different oils and they both show superb wear and no consumption, who cares if one cleans non functional surfaces faster.

Valvoline Restore and Protect is excellent oil. But there's no fair way to interpret this evidence-- the totality of it, as laid out by OP-- as anything but a resounding success for the HPL service.

I'm a fan of Valvoline Restore and Protect and it's my first recommendation for anyone willing to stay on top of oil changes who wants a 20 or 30 grade oil. Valvoline Restore and Protect in the same 55k interval would likely have produced cleaner pistons in certain areas that are largely non functional surfaces.

But it's a non sequitur to criticize the empirical anecdotal evidence of HPL doing well in this engine with the hypothetical that Valvoline Restore and Protect would have done better. It might have done better, but it would do better in a way that has no utility whatsoever.

 

[Hohn]

Maybe I'm expecting too much I don't know.

All I'm saying is I'm skeptical on HPL's ability to clean back to factory levels. Maybe it can but I have not seen definitive proof. I have with Valvoline.

*for the record, I don't even like Valvoline as a brand. They have one oil I like and that is Valvoline Restore and Protect.

As a Valvoline Restore and Protect fan, I've yet to see this evidence. Care to share with the group?

I've seen all of the Valvoline marketing materials. None of them yet have shown parts that are brand new clean unless they used a piston that was already coated to be black all over the top? Some kind of thermal barrier?

 

[buster]

Obviously we can't tear down engines ourselves so that leaves the manufacturer responsible for providing evidence which they did.

Can we see some TEOST, IIIH, IVA, GM Turbo, or tear down before/after photos of dirty pistons from HPL? All I've seen are borescope images and components they use.

 

[buster]

Valvoline Restore and Protect is an excellent cleaning oil. HPL is not a cleaning oil. It's a top performing oil that just happens to have some documented cleaning effect. HPL makes no claims of cleaning. They only claim the esters minimize intake deposits and maintain clean engines. So if the engine's clean, it will stay clean.

I mean honestly-- if you have two engines using two different oils and they both show superb wear and no consumption, who cares if one cleans non functional surfaces faster.

Exactly. You summed up my points perfectly. That's all I'm saying.

But fanboys are going above and beyond reaching and just now being silly about it.

*It's possible HPL can clean as well as Valvoline Restore and Protect, I just haven't seen it. Sorry I'm a big proponent of industry standard testing and testing in general. I've been on this site since 2002. I like testing data.

If in future I see evidence HPL can, then of course I'll change my mind and acknowledge it.

You can't have it both ways though. You can't say "oh it's an API oil it's a race to the bottom", then tout oils with very little testing beyond bench and claim superiority. It's just not how chemistry works. Additionally, as I've posted many times before, these EP oils EXCEED all the baseline testing. So the whole argument that approved oils can't be good is just DUMB.

 

[Hohn]

Valvoline Restore and Protect restores to factory clean?

Based on this?

And this?

and this?

It's obvious to me that you and I are meaning different things when we say "factory clean." I prefer my definition, informed by the fact that I work in an actual engine factory and see brand new pistons every day. They do not look like any of the Valvoline Restore and Protect or Amsoil pistons post-test.

None of these oils are producing factory clean pistons. Amsoil is not clean. Valvoline Restore and Protect is not clean. HPL is not clean.

 

[buster]

Valvoline Restore and Protect restores to factory clean?

Based on this?
View attachment 315125

And this?
View attachment 315126


and this?

View attachment 315127



It's obvious to me that you and I are meaning different things when we say "factory clean." I prefer my definition, informed by the fact that I work in an actual engine factory and see brand new pistons every day. They do not look like any of the Valvoline Restore and Protect or Amsoil pistons post-test.

I think they're referring to the two rings. I don't think you can technically clean the top parts.

100% refers to zero piston deposits.

 

[Hohn]

I think they're referring to the two rings. I don't think you can technically clean the top parts.

100% refers to zero piston deposits.

Well, if it's not deposits, what is it that is keeping pistons from appearing as anything other than bare shiny aluminum?

 

[OVERKILL]

Here are the facts:
Valvoline - lab tested over 500k miles using IIIH, field, modeling. Approved oil.
HPL - basic lab testing, anecdotal filter pics with no context or conclusion, no approvals, bombed TEOST, claim to fame - "we use xyz"

Sorry that's just not how things work and @OVERKILL you should know better.

What in the hell does any of that have to do with the points I've made?

 

[buster]

Here is a Mobil pass/fail.

Pass

Fail

 

[buster]

What in the hell does any of that have to do with the points I've made?

Everything. One was lab tested in engines, sent into the field, modeled. The other is unknown. I'm providing lab tested tested data. You're speculating and talking about lighting in the lab. That is what the hell its' about.

 

[OVERKILL]

Everything. One was lab tested in engines, sent into the field, modeled. The other is unknown. I'm providing lab tested tested data. You're speculating and talking about lighting in the lab. That is what the hell its' about.

No, it doesn't. You've literally addressed NONE of those points.

 

[mt23]

I think it's important to note that the HPL piston engine and the Valvoline Restore and Protect engine may not be ideal engines to draw conclusions from. Both engines were consuming large amounts of oil. The HPL engine was consuming from the intake. The Valvoline Restore and Protect engine was consuming from the rings and at the time of picture was consuming lots of oil still

 

[buster]

I appreciate the comments and information provided by all members in this post. My intention is not to slam HPL. This site has to remain objective, and I think for the most part it truly is, with some exceptions at times but that is normal. I was biased towards Mobil 1 in the past.

HPL is a fantastic oil. Their entire line exceeds what Valvoline offers. Valvoline Restore and Protect is a niche oil to me, for the most part.

I just prefer lab tested results via manufacturer either industry standard or field.

HPL may clean as well as Valvoline Restore and Protect, I just can't say that for sure. I'll leave it at that. And of course if we see more evidence of a lack of cleaning by Valvoline Restore and Protect or more cleaning by HPL it would be discussed. Maybe mt3's future posts will show that?

I'm not attached to a brand. I have my favorites but not entire brand loyal.

@OVERKILL I appreciate your comments and knowledge you bring the board. No one put me up to this post btw LOL.

 

[mt23]

Whenever that Valvoline Restore and Protect piston car needs head gaskets I'll be in there again. Or sooner. So far according to the owners it is consuming "much less"

 

[buster]

Whenever that Valvoline Restore and Protect piston car needs head gaskets I'll be in there again. Or sooner. So far according to the owners it is consuming "much less"

I appreciate your efforts. If the teardown shows limited cleaning, then we can surely start to question the rate/effectiveness in some engines. Maybe in some engines it could take 6 OCI....who knows....

Valvoline did what you would normally do - lab, model, engine test (IIIH), then to the field. They used a few cars, one being a Ford Explorer.

 

[Hohn]

The oil control rings are the most important rings to keep clean. If they are unable to scrap the oil it reaches the compression rings. It’s pretty rare to find stuck top rings. It can happen but the stuck rings normally start at the bottom and then the deposits work their way up.

I mostly agree, but only because stuck oil control rings are the primary reason you can get hard carbon packing in the upper rings and lands.

The oil control rings themselves tend to get stuck with varnish-like carbon that's sticky, but it's not abrasive the way the hard carbon on the upper ring lands can be. So we care about oil control rings not so much because a bit of consumption is annoying (and it is), but also because that consumption can lead to major piston scuffing and secondary failures that are more severe.

Oil ring lands operate a lower temperature and have significantly more cooling flow (scraping residual oil). By contrast, the lands above them get very little oil and rely heavily on thin film lubrication while operating hotter.

The more severe issue is top land carboning and bore polishing/scuffing. That doesn't just cause oil consumption, it takes out engines.

It's all but impossible to have a pristine top land if the oil control rings aren't also doing their job, because the excess oil residue working its way up the ring pack is a contributor to top land carbon.

So when I see a piston with pristine top lands and more deposits as you go down the piston, it tells me that the deposits on the lower portion are inconsequential regardless of cosmetic appearance and that the primary mission is accomplished.

 

[hemioiler]

HPL is not a cleaning oil. It's a top performing oil that just happens to have some documented cleaning effect. HPL makes no claims of cleaning.

HPL is a cleaning oil, marketing literature aside.

https://www.advlubrication.com/collections/passenger-car-lubricants/products/engine-cleaner

That's there dedicated cleaning product, the actual oils clean better than the dedicated cleaner. Not mentioned on the site, but that info came from comments from David Ward here on BITOG.

 

[GW.]

I mostly agree, but only because stuck oil control rings are the primary reason you can get hard carbon packing in the upper rings and lands.

The oil control rings themselves tend to get stuck with varnish-like carbon that's sticky, but it's not abrasive the way the hard carbon on the upper ring lands can be. So we care about oil control rings not so much because a bit of consumption is annoying (and it is), but also because that consumption can lead to major piston scuffing and secondary failures that are more severe.

Oil ring lands operate a lower temperature and have significantly more cooling flow (scraping residual oil). By contrast, the lands above them get very little oil and rely heavily on thin film lubrication while operating hotter.

The more severe issue is top land carboning and bore polishing/scuffing. That doesn't just cause oil consumption, it takes out engines.

It's all but impossible to have a pristine top land if the oil control rings aren't also doing their job, because the excess oil residue working its way up the ring pack is a contributor to top land carbon.

So when I see a piston with pristine top lands and more deposits as you go down the piston, it tells me that the deposits on the lower portion are inconsequential regardless of cosmetic appearance and that the primary mission is accomplished.

I was a tech at a GM dealer during the 80’s and 90’s. Gasoline quality greatly improved around the mid to late 90’s. Before that point we would see fuel deposits in the compression rings in the form of a sticky varnish. Once lower tension oil control rings became more prevalent we would see the hard carbon deposits on these. They would fill the entire area between the land like below. Some may also remember the use of a ridge reamer. Those were the days

Now I’m guessing diesel engines may be a different animal. I have limited diesel experience.

 

[KEVINK0000]

And we use a short drain oil to clean up the residue of long drain orthodoxy. Does anyone else see the poetry in that?

 

[tired]

I have to keep it real. I'm standing with Valvoline on this one with their claim that it's the first and only motor oil that restores pistons to factory clean, until proven otherwise.

I'm just not ready to say HPL has cleaning ability to clean pistons that well. To a limited extent sure. HPL is great in other areas no doubt.

I stand on the side with thorough lab and field testing in actual engines via lab/field and tests designed to measure deposits (IIIH).

HPL hasn't cleaned these pistons enough over 50k miles for my liking. Is it bad, NO. The two rings look clean. The piston skirts are still heavily carboned up. Sure we don't know the before photos, but this is AFTER 50k miles. That's 5 years worth of driving and still a lot of carbon.

View attachment 315081

View attachment 315082


Notice the piston skirt of the Amsoil piston after a double length IIIH. It's clean. HPL one is not.

View attachment 315084

Same with Valvoline Restore and Protect. 1 OCI.

View attachment 315085


View attachment 315086

All good points. And great idea to add in the Amsoil piston photos too.