Question: Lake used the main Redline Performance, I was using Mid SAPS Redline Performance 5w-30 Euro. Wouldn't that have less ash, and be less dirty then the one he tested?
LSJR Boutique vs OTS shootout
- Thread starter rstsco
- Start date
I think in theory the RL Euro would have a better TEOST score due to far less moly but it's really hard to say for sure. I think TEOST is a valid test, but I don't think it's entirely conclusive on real world deposit formation from what I've read. I wouldn't entirely discount it but also wouldn't be overly concerned about it.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yeah, and we know TEOST tracks with moly content, so it's not surprising.
Last edited:
I’m most interested in these TEOST results. I think I had some deposits in one of my TGDI engines, either from Mobil 1 Advanced Fuel Economy or the HPL P+; the latter of which does use those alleged deposit prone star VII. Of course the No VII oil doesn’t have those…do we know what kind of VII the other oils in this test video might use? I would like to know more about the influence of different VII types & moly additives on real world engine deposit results.
Even though the Ravenol/LiquiMoly used here don’t seem to have VW/MB approval, maybe the API formulations tested here still share attributes with their mainstay euro oils that do. They did the best on TEOST. Could this highlight some shortcomings of API sequences VH & IIIH deposit testing that still uses a port injected normally aspirated 3.6L pentastar engine? At least Amsoil appears to take deposit testing a little beyond the API minimum. API uses a 2.0L TGDI ecoboost for chain stretch and LSPI testing, they should be using an engine like that for all of the deposit and wear tests at API in my idiotic opinion.
Even though the Ravenol/LiquiMoly used here don’t seem to have VW/MB approval, maybe the API formulations tested here still share attributes with their mainstay euro oils that do. They did the best on TEOST. Could this highlight some shortcomings of API sequences VH & IIIH deposit testing that still uses a port injected normally aspirated 3.6L pentastar engine? At least Amsoil appears to take deposit testing a little beyond the API minimum. API uses a 2.0L TGDI ecoboost for chain stretch and LSPI testing, they should be using an engine like that for all of the deposit and wear tests at API in my idiotic opinion.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
You might be interested in this thread from a while back:
And another that notes, that, despite moly heavily influencing TEOST 33C performance, it had no impact on actual turbocharger deposits:
Last edited:
Here's the average of the performance tests. Just torturing numbers to see if they would admit to anything.
Amsoil-3.33
Driven-3.00
HPL-3.33
Liquimoly-3.17
Ravenol-3.5
M1-3.67
Redline-6.00
Pennzoil Ultra Platinum-4.00
Ed
Why not 300V? That would surprise me if its track performance is subpar
Does it track with any Moly content, or certain types of Moly? Some AMSOIL Signature Series VOA’s have shown a significant amount of Moly (>200ppm) and AMSOIL Signature Series still outperformed oils with a lower Moly Content (Mobil 1 and Pennzoil Ultra Platinum).
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Think it's MoDTC that's the biggest culprit with respect to performance on TEOST 33C, that's mentioned in the threads I linked as well.
If I look back at the results in the video for VOA:
| Oil | Moly ppm | TEOST ranking |
| Redline | 858 | 8 |
| HPL | 1,567 | 7 |
| Driven | 970 | 6 |
| Mobil 1 | 108 | 5 |
| Pennzoil | 112 | 4 |
| AMSOIL | 303 | 3 |
| Ravenol | 161 | 2 |
| LiquiMoly | 163 | 1 |
Last edited:
Thermal stability/oxidation resistance is very important for deposit control as is proper dispersant/detergent/aw balance. I do think it matters.
Pre Lab era for Amsoil they used to use TFOUT which was not reliable at all.
I've just decided that the HPL is the way to go. I'm sure the Motul works fine.
Agreed that the shear sucks. My data showed it as well. But...with shorter intervals in some applications it should be fine and it was at the top of the other tests' rankings.
4wd
$50 site donor 2026
Didn’t ASTM D8447 come out in 2022.
Some things posted are the former standards.
Some things posted are the former standards.
obviously it's fine for more tolerant requirements. the issue is that this it costs almost $70 for an oil change's worth and I think you'd have to be obsessed with one or two of these engine tests (in a motor without a turbo, direct injection or even a timing chain!) to decide it was worth the premium over oils that clearly provide a better overall package, potentially even at a lower price.
but, y'know, predator blood.
Last edited:
Rookie interloper here. I chose to use Mobil 1 Truck and SUV to replace the TGMO in my 2023 Tacoma following the free dealer OCIs, so it's nice to see that Lake decided to test it and that it hangs in there. I'm in the middle of my second 5k OCI and plan on an analysis. His previous test of Mobil oils with T&S fairing well was an influence along with opinions voiced on this forum. Most of what you guys post are way over my head, but I'm learning.
My question too Sir. How would HPL Premium+ or Supercar do vs No VI ?
An obvious question would be what if they used RL High Performance 5W20, known to be an entirely different animal, beyond viscosity ?
You trolling again?
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked