More Red Line Specs
- Thread starter priler
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: buster
They also use the moly that requires higher levels of it which results in poor deposit control in turbos.
My car does not have boost, nor do I plan on owning one in the near future with boost, so I do not have to worry about TEOST results, or having to use 'trimer' moly compounds.
They also use the moly that requires higher levels of it which results in poor deposit control in turbos.
My car does not have boost, nor do I plan on owning one in the near future with boost, so I do not have to worry about TEOST results, or having to use 'trimer' moly compounds.
Ok so oils with high moly aren't good for forced induction? Is that what I'm supposed to gather? Or am I missing something?
Their 0w oil is $12qt and the straight wts are $15. I'm guessing the straight wt racing stuff is better quality stocks.
Originally Posted By: JHogan
Ok so oils with high moly aren't good for forced induction? Is that what I'm supposed to gather? Or am I missing something?
You're generalizing too much. It's not the forced induction, it's the deposit control on the hot end shaft components in turbochargers. Superchargers don't have that issue.
Ok so oils with high moly aren't good for forced induction? Is that what I'm supposed to gather? Or am I missing something?
You're generalizing too much. It's not the forced induction, it's the deposit control on the hot end shaft components in turbochargers. Superchargers don't have that issue.
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: DeepFriar
Just out of curiosity where do the deposits accrete and what problem is caused. Honestly just asking, I have no idea.
Deposits on the turbo shaft seals at the hot end.
Would it be endemic with other such additives, say titanium for instance? Or is it moly specific? Could it be less of a problem if the turbo is cooled (water or oil cooler) or perhaps using ceramic bearings? Apologies for being a pest.
Originally Posted By: DeepFriar
Just out of curiosity where do the deposits accrete and what problem is caused. Honestly just asking, I have no idea.
Deposits on the turbo shaft seals at the hot end.
Would it be endemic with other such additives, say titanium for instance? Or is it moly specific? Could it be less of a problem if the turbo is cooled (water or oil cooler) or perhaps using ceramic bearings? Apologies for being a pest.
I loved all the numbers for Red Line 5W30 when I looked them up online...except one. The cold viscosity was about 50% higher than oils like M1 and QSUD, and that is a real concern for me given that I have to park my car outside overnight on ski weekends in the White Mountains and -30C is a real possibility on a bad night.
The reason I think that they are not using the latest VI skyrocketing VIIs is that their oils' VIs would be MUCH higher if they did, even in the same volumes, and even given their high POE content base stocks. [/quote]
sure,ok. or,they could be using a VII with less molecular weight which would provide less VI but also be much less shear prone. your assumptions of the quality of VIIs in relation to VI of an oil formulation is not correct.
sure,ok. or,they could be using a VII with less molecular weight which would provide less VI but also be much less shear prone. your assumptions of the quality of VIIs in relation to VI of an oil formulation is not correct.
Originally Posted By: buster
They also use the moly that requires higher levels of it which results in poor deposit control in turbos.
in other words,buy XOM products,since they use trinuclear moly.
BTW,i am not a believer that their low amounts are truly initially effective unless you've already been using an oil with a good amount of it. for that,they would need about 4 to 5 times as much as what they use.
also,a lesser oil with less amounts can leave just as much,if not more,deposits than a better oil with higher amounts.
They also use the moly that requires higher levels of it which results in poor deposit control in turbos.
in other words,buy XOM products,since they use trinuclear moly.
BTW,i am not a believer that their low amounts are truly initially effective unless you've already been using an oil with a good amount of it. for that,they would need about 4 to 5 times as much as what they use.
also,a lesser oil with less amounts can leave just as much,if not more,deposits than a better oil with higher amounts.
Originally Posted By: JHogan
Ok so oils with high moly aren't good for forced induction? Is that what I'm supposed to gather? Or am I missing something?
what your missing is the BITOG playbook. without that,you don't know who has invested interest,work within certain (oil/chemistry) fields or own certain stocks in specific companies.
Ok so oils with high moly aren't good for forced induction? Is that what I'm supposed to gather? Or am I missing something?
what your missing is the BITOG playbook. without that,you don't know who has invested interest,work within certain (oil/chemistry) fields or own certain stocks in specific companies.
Originally Posted By: priler
Originally Posted By: JHogan
Ok so oils with high moly aren't good for forced induction? Is that what I'm supposed to gather? Or am I missing something?
what your missing is the BITOG playbook. without that,you don't know who has invested interest,work within certain (oil/chemistry) fields or own certain stocks in specific companies.
Yep, there are agendas and its really obvious. Notice how the board experts never ever contradict each other. The good ole boy system is more important than scientific truth.
Originally Posted By: JHogan
Ok so oils with high moly aren't good for forced induction? Is that what I'm supposed to gather? Or am I missing something?
what your missing is the BITOG playbook. without that,you don't know who has invested interest,work within certain (oil/chemistry) fields or own certain stocks in specific companies.
Yep, there are agendas and its really obvious. Notice how the board experts never ever contradict each other. The good ole boy system is more important than scientific truth.
Originally Posted By: priler
Originally Posted By: buster
They also use the moly that requires higher levels of it which results in poor deposit control in turbos.
in other words,buy XOM products,since they use trinuclear moly.
BTW,i am not a believer that their low amounts are truly initially effective unless you've already been using an oil with a good amount of it. for that,they would need about 4 to 5 times as much as what they use.
also,a lesser oil with less amounts can leave just as much,if not more,deposits than a better oil with higher amounts.
Nope. Trinuclear is used by Shell/Amsoil/CP and others. I believe it was made by XOM or Infineum and you don't need as much of it as compared to the type used by some of the Japanese OEM oils and oils like Redline. I'm not entirely sure, but I also think it's more expensive than the other.
http://www.ocsoil.fi/upload/News on Lubes/ILSAC-GF-5.pdf
for the statement:
"The TEOST 33C bench test evaluates an engine oil’s tendency to form high-temperature
deposits. This test was originally developed and included in GF-2 to evaluate turbocharger
deposits. It was not part of GF-3 or GF-4, but is back in GF-5 in anticipation of greater use of
turbochargers. Turbochargers allow the automakers to use smaller displacement, more fuelefficient
engines while still maintaining high power output. Deposit buildup in the turbocharger
bearing areas can lead to loss of engine performance, turbocharger failure and possibly engine
failure. In GF-2, the maximum limit for deposits was 60 mg. For GF-5, the maximum limit is 30
mg (except there is no limit for SAE 0W-20 oils because some Japanese OEMs recommend
SAE 0W-20 oils with high molybdenum content which will not pass this test)."
No playbook here.
Originally Posted By: buster
They also use the moly that requires higher levels of it which results in poor deposit control in turbos.
in other words,buy XOM products,since they use trinuclear moly.
BTW,i am not a believer that their low amounts are truly initially effective unless you've already been using an oil with a good amount of it. for that,they would need about 4 to 5 times as much as what they use.
also,a lesser oil with less amounts can leave just as much,if not more,deposits than a better oil with higher amounts.
Nope. Trinuclear is used by Shell/Amsoil/CP and others. I believe it was made by XOM or Infineum and you don't need as much of it as compared to the type used by some of the Japanese OEM oils and oils like Redline. I'm not entirely sure, but I also think it's more expensive than the other.
http://www.ocsoil.fi/upload/News on Lubes/ILSAC-GF-5.pdf
for the statement:
"The TEOST 33C bench test evaluates an engine oil’s tendency to form high-temperature
deposits. This test was originally developed and included in GF-2 to evaluate turbocharger
deposits. It was not part of GF-3 or GF-4, but is back in GF-5 in anticipation of greater use of
turbochargers. Turbochargers allow the automakers to use smaller displacement, more fuelefficient
engines while still maintaining high power output. Deposit buildup in the turbocharger
bearing areas can lead to loss of engine performance, turbocharger failure and possibly engine
failure. In GF-2, the maximum limit for deposits was 60 mg. For GF-5, the maximum limit is 30
mg (except there is no limit for SAE 0W-20 oils because some Japanese OEMs recommend
SAE 0W-20 oils with high molybdenum content which will not pass this test)."
No playbook here.
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
I loved all the numbers for Red Line 5W30 when I looked them up online...except one. The cold viscosity was about 50% higher than oils like M1 and QSUD, and that is a real concern for me given that I have to park my car outside overnight on ski weekends in the White Mountains and -30C is a real possibility on a bad night.
If you're really worried about that, perhaps a 0w-XX would be your best bet, rather than splitting hairs within the 5w-XX realm. Personally, I have no issue using any 5w-XX oil in the cold we get here.
I loved all the numbers for Red Line 5W30 when I looked them up online...except one. The cold viscosity was about 50% higher than oils like M1 and QSUD, and that is a real concern for me given that I have to park my car outside overnight on ski weekends in the White Mountains and -30C is a real possibility on a bad night.
If you're really worried about that, perhaps a 0w-XX would be your best bet, rather than splitting hairs within the 5w-XX realm. Personally, I have no issue using any 5w-XX oil in the cold we get here.
Originally Posted By: buster
*I would add that Amsoil's white paper showed Redline failing the TEOST test, and it's most likely for exactly the reason stated above. Page 7.
I just gave you 2 sources for this information.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/2995318/5
Quote:
A comment from Cameron at Red Line:
"We have read through Amsoil’s latest document and found some of the results to be out of context to the product that we manufacture. Regarding the TEOST, it appears that the Amsoil test average was 1% above the limit. This limit is established for the low-phosphorous, Resource-conserving, SN-focused products. The non-resource conserving SN uses a different TEOST at a lower temperature which we pass, and for those CF/SN not controlled to a 0.08% phosphorous there is no limit on the TEOST. The TEOST has a plus or minus 10% repeatability.
The TEOST is primarily designed to evaluate low-phosphorous oils. We use an additive chemistry so that keeps Red Line as a product for both API-based and ACEA performance and ACEA do not use the TEOST test. Needless to say, the high number of European cars with turbochargers successfully running lubricants produced to the ACEA standards should calm any concerns voiced in this thread.
This test is difficult to apply when considering higher ZDDP oils like Red Line versus lower ZDDP oils so we can see where confusion would be created by what Amsoil tries to present here.
Hopefully this helps for you to have more insight from our end. We like your forum and appreciate the technical banter. Thanks for letting Red Line present a view that was not covered in your thread. If you have particular questions, feel free to email to [email protected] rather than asking for Red Line replies through the forum thread."
This is TEOST harping, round 2.
*I would add that Amsoil's white paper showed Redline failing the TEOST test, and it's most likely for exactly the reason stated above. Page 7.
I just gave you 2 sources for this information.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/2995318/5
Quote:
A comment from Cameron at Red Line:
"We have read through Amsoil’s latest document and found some of the results to be out of context to the product that we manufacture. Regarding the TEOST, it appears that the Amsoil test average was 1% above the limit. This limit is established for the low-phosphorous, Resource-conserving, SN-focused products. The non-resource conserving SN uses a different TEOST at a lower temperature which we pass, and for those CF/SN not controlled to a 0.08% phosphorous there is no limit on the TEOST. The TEOST has a plus or minus 10% repeatability.
The TEOST is primarily designed to evaluate low-phosphorous oils. We use an additive chemistry so that keeps Red Line as a product for both API-based and ACEA performance and ACEA do not use the TEOST test. Needless to say, the high number of European cars with turbochargers successfully running lubricants produced to the ACEA standards should calm any concerns voiced in this thread.
This test is difficult to apply when considering higher ZDDP oils like Red Line versus lower ZDDP oils so we can see where confusion would be created by what Amsoil tries to present here.
Hopefully this helps for you to have more insight from our end. We like your forum and appreciate the technical banter. Thanks for letting Red Line present a view that was not covered in your thread. If you have particular questions, feel free to email to [email protected] rather than asking for Red Line replies through the forum thread."
This is TEOST harping, round 2.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: DeepFriar
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: DeepFriar
Just out of curiosity where do the deposits accrete and what problem is caused. Honestly just asking, I have no idea.
Deposits on the turbo shaft seals at the hot end.
Would it be endemic with other such additives, say titanium for instance? Or is it moly specific? Could it be less of a problem if the turbo is cooled (water or oil cooler) or perhaps using ceramic bearings? Apologies for being a pest.
Moly and some of the lower quality VII's are the additives that coke onto the shaft seals. I've never heard of a problem with the Titanium additive, but it hasn't been in use very long. It's not a problem with turbos that have water-cooled bearing housings, and most turbos these days have water-cooled bearing housings.
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: DeepFriar
Just out of curiosity where do the deposits accrete and what problem is caused. Honestly just asking, I have no idea.
Deposits on the turbo shaft seals at the hot end.
Would it be endemic with other such additives, say titanium for instance? Or is it moly specific? Could it be less of a problem if the turbo is cooled (water or oil cooler) or perhaps using ceramic bearings? Apologies for being a pest.
Moly and some of the lower quality VII's are the additives that coke onto the shaft seals. I've never heard of a problem with the Titanium additive, but it hasn't been in use very long. It's not a problem with turbos that have water-cooled bearing housings, and most turbos these days have water-cooled bearing housings.
Originally Posted By: Garak
If you're really worried about that, perhaps a 0w-XX would be your best bet, rather than splitting hairs within the 5w-XX realm. Personally, I have no issue using any 5w-XX oil in the cold we get here.
I'm happy with the super cold starts I've had with M1 5W-30, they did seem to be rougher with the Subie oil but we're talking different seasons so it's hard to say for sure.
I am thinking about trying something like M1 0W-40 when I'm out of warranty, will probably stick with the Subie recommended weight until then.
If you're really worried about that, perhaps a 0w-XX would be your best bet, rather than splitting hairs within the 5w-XX realm. Personally, I have no issue using any 5w-XX oil in the cold we get here.
I'm happy with the super cold starts I've had with M1 5W-30, they did seem to be rougher with the Subie oil but we're talking different seasons so it's hard to say for sure.
I am thinking about trying something like M1 0W-40 when I'm out of warranty, will probably stick with the Subie recommended weight until then.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked