Ravenol Excessive For My Needs?

[edyvw]

The advantage of M1 EP is of course the extended drain capability, something that HC oils may struggle with. Oxidation resistance is a department PAO excels at (along with cold temperature performance) so it's whether the advantages of PAO can be taken advantage of, or make sense in the product, that really determines its worth.

To be more succinct: PAO has a certain set of advantages over other bases. These advantages are offset by its poor solubility and the fact that it is hard on seals. This makes blending with PAO expensive, as you have to counteract those effects by balancing it with something else, which may be a lower group base and/or POE. So, those advantages need to be relevant to the application.

And to counteract disadvantages of PAO, they will mix it with HC bcs. POE would end up driving price too high. HC is also good in oxidation department, hence most current LL01 and LL04 oils have substantial amount of HC or are HC based.

 

[blingo]

You're fine for the time being, edyvw. But you could change your nick now just to go incognito from there and never belief it were anything personal

Michael, the quality, value of a 70% PAO oil is in the 10% AN complement not mentioned in an SDS, if you're lucky. And would also be there in other non- german-fully-synthetics with or without PAO. The LM should be fine in the sense of not interesting in any way.

Oxidation resistance e.g. ain't really in the base oils (except for said AN inbetween base oil and anti-oxidant), one common misconception behind the PAO flavour of fetishes around.
You're mainly far off the track for a few more reasons and should take your time to read across the board on things like these. Or just not care at all. It ain't worth it that way.

 

[edyvw]

You're fine for the time being, edyvw. But you could change your nick now just to go incognito from there and never belief it were anything personal

Michael, the quality, value of a 70% PAO oil is in the 10% AN complement not mentioned in an SDS, if you're lucky. And would also be there in other non- german-fully-synthetics with or without PAO. The LM should be fine in the sense of not interesting in any way.

Oxidation resistance e.g. ain't really in the base oils (except for said AN inbetween base oil and anti-oxidant), one common misconception behind the PAO flavour of fetishes around.
You're mainly far off the track for a few more reasons and should take your time to read across the board on things like these. Or just not care at all. It ain't worth it that way.

I was already wondering can I be part of the forum without your permission, but feel better now.

 

[ChristianReske]

That is statement, not proof.

https://oil-club.de/index.php?threa...nthetisch-bleibt-zu-wahren-urteil-21-06-2018/

https://eikel-partner.de/vollsynthe...ehrung-ueber-wesentliche-merkmale-einer-ware/

This link should open a PDF with a verdict from the Bundesgerichtshof, stressing the 75-80% content of Group IV/V Oil neccesary for a oil to be labeld "Vollsynthetisch" :

http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/c...ll&Sort=12288&Seite=3&nr=88822&pos=90&anz=507

https://medien-internet-und-recht.de/volltext.php?mir_dok_id=2893


Short:
MOTUL was sued for wrong advertising in Germany by a competitor, because Motul labeld their HC oils as "Vollsynthetisch" (fully synthetic) here in Germany. MOTUL lost the case at the Bundesgereichtshof, (federal Court) one of the highest german Courts.
The Bundesgerichtshof stressed in his verdict, again (!), that in germany oil that be labeld as "Vollsynthetisch" should contain 75%-80% Group IV base oil, the rest could be addtives.

If you dont trust me, let friends or google translator translate this for you.
Or just create a account here and ask questions:
https://oil-club.de/
A lot of english speaking members there.

Oh, here is more about this:

https://www.it-recht-kanzlei.de/motorenoel-vollsynthetisch-hinweispflicht.html

Fazit
Als „vollsynthetisch“ dürfen hinweisfrei nur solche künstlich hergestellten Öle bezeichnet werden, deren Grundöl-Anteil aus den API-Gruppen IV und V besteht. Diese Einschränkung greift nicht deshalb, weil andere synthetische Öle andere Eigenschaften aufweisen, sondern weil dem Verbraucher nur diese Öle bisher als „vollsynthetisch“ bekannt sind und seine Erwartungen an dem Altbekannten ausrichtet. Trotzdem können Öle, die keinen Mineralölanteil enthalten als „vollsynthetisch“ beworben werden, wenn die Werbung einen Hinweis dahingehend enthält, dass sie auf andere Weise als die aus den API-Gruppen IV und V bestehenden Öle hergestellt wurden.

Conclusion
Only those artificially produced oils with a base oil content from API groups IV and V may be referred to as “fully synthetic”. This restriction does not apply because other synthetic oils have different properties, but because only these oils are known to the consumer as "fully synthetic" and their expectations are based on the familiar. Nonetheless, oils that do not contain any mineral oil can be advertised as "fully synthetic" if the advertisement contains an indication that they have been manufactured in a different way than the oils from API groups IV and V.


So, is this proof enough or still a statement?

By the way, so much for MOTUL: "the real deal, fully synthetic".

 

[edyvw]

https://oil-club.de/index.php?threa...nthetisch-bleibt-zu-wahren-urteil-21-06-2018/

https://oil-club.de/index.php?threa...nthetisch-bleibt-zu-wahren-urteil-21-06-2018/

https://eikel-partner.de/vollsynthe...ehrung-ueber-wesentliche-merkmale-einer-ware/

This link should open a PDF with a verdict from the Bundesgerichtshof, stressing the 75-80% content of Group IV/V Oil neccesary for a oil to be labeld "Vollsynthetisch" :

http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/c...ll&Sort=12288&Seite=3&nr=88822&pos=90&anz=507

https://medien-internet-und-recht.de/volltext.php?mir_dok_id=2893




Short:
MOTUL was sued for wrong advertising in Germany by a competitor, because Motul labeld their HC oils as "Vollsynthetisch" (fully synthetic) here in Germany. MOTUL lost the case at the Bundesgereichtshof, (federal Court) one of the highest german Courts.
The Bundesgerichtshof stressed in his verdict, again (!), that in germany oil that be labeld as "Vollsythetsich" should contain 75%-80% Group IV base oil, the rest could be addtives.

If you dont trust me, let friends or google translator translate this for you.
Or just create a account here and ask questions: https://oil-club.de/ A lot of english spaking members there.

Oh, here is more about this:

https://www.it-recht-kanzlei.de/motorenoel-vollsynthetisch-hinweispflicht.html

Fazit
Als „vollsynthetisch“ dürfen hinweisfrei nur solche künstlich hergestellten Öle bezeichnet werden, deren Grundöl-Anteil aus den API-Gruppen IV und V besteht. Diese Einschränkung greift nicht deshalb, weil andere synthetische Öle andere Eigenschaften aufweisen, sondern weil dem Verbraucher nur diese Öle bisher als „vollsynthetisch“ bekannt sind und seine Erwartungen an dem Altbekannten ausrichtet. Trotzdem können Öle, die keinen Mineralölanteil enthalten als „vollsynthetisch“ beworben werden, wenn die Werbung einen Hinweis dahingehend enthält, dass sie auf andere Weise als die aus den API-Gruppen IV und V bestehenden Öle hergestellt wurden.

Conclusion
Only those artificially produced oils with a base oil content from API groups IV and V may be referred to as “fully synthetic”. This restriction does not apply because other synthetic oils have different properties, but because only these oils are known to the consumer as "fully synthetic" and their expectations are based on the familiar. Nonetheless, oils that do not contain any mineral oil can be advertised as "fully synthetic" if the advertisement contains an indication that they have been manufactured in a different way than the oils from API groups IV and V.


So, is this proof enough or still a statement?

By the way, so much for MOTUL: "the real deal, fully synthetic".

Absolutely!
There is no reason for me to translate, I just wanted to see that there is evidence that it is 80%, or as you said 75-80%.
Again, proof that SDS really does not say anything meaningful except some indications.

 

[OVERKILL]

And to counteract disadvantages of PAO, they will mix it with HC bcs. POE would end up driving price too high. HC is also good in oxidation department, hence most current LL01 and LL04 oils have substantial amount of HC or are HC based.

HC is also pretty dry and has poor additive solubility. Yes, it's better than PAO, but not massively. They still tend to blend it with "lesser" bases to bring solubility up or dose it with a splash of POE to help. Not sure as to the solubility with AN's, but that may be another option, as I believe they are quite good in that department as well, though not as good as POE IIRC.

Back in the "Tri-Syn" days Mobil was using PAO, POE and AN's (hence the name) in the base oil blend. Now they are also using GTL and some Group III HC bases, presumably their own VISOM product.

 

[edyvw]

HC is also pretty dry and has poor additive solubility. Yes, it's better than PAO, but not massively. They still tend to blend it with "lesser" bases to bring solubility up or dose it with a splash of POE to help. Not sure as to the solubility with AN's, but that may be another option.

Sure, but we end up at question what makes sense financially.

 

[OVERKILL]

Sure, but we end up at question what makes sense financially.

And that was where I went with the earlier statement you replied to. In order to use PAO and justify the cost, there needs to be a reason, because balancing the rest of the base oil blend for proper additive solubility may be expensive depending on how much PAO you are putting in there. I expect you can get away with a lot less POE and or AN's in the blend if you use more Group III, but they are still necessary because Group III has poor solubility too. You can use Group I or II but then you risk having a negative impact on other aspects of the formulation I suspect, which is why I assume Mobil's old tri-syn formula was blended the way it was.

 

[edyvw]

And that was where I went with the earlier statement you replied to. In order to use PAO and justify the cost, there needs to be a reason, because balancing the rest of the base oil blend for proper additive solubility may be expensive depending on how much PAO you are putting in there. I expect you can get away with a lot less POE and or AN's in the blend if you use more Group III, but they are still necessary because Group III has poor solubility too. You can use Group I or II but then you risk having a negative impact on other aspects of the formulation I suspect, which is why I assume Mobil's old tri-syn formula was blended the way it was.

Probably. Though they still use that formulation, just GTL is more prevalent, than PAO and POE.

 

[michael007]

You're mainly far off the track for a few more reasons and should take your time to read across the board on things like these. Or just not care at all. It ain't worth it that way.

You're absolutely right. I knew a little bit about PAO coming into the conversation since some of the oils I buy have it in their formulas.

I had the impression it was better than HC because of the stink liqui moly was getting compared to the praise ravenol gets.

Now things are starting to make sense.

I learnt a ton from this conversation. Had no idea of the advantages of HC's and AN's.

There isn't a week that goes by that I don't learn something from this knowledgable forum so it is always a pleasure to read up.

 

[ChristianReske]

Funny thing is, that Ravenol has produced UOAs that doesnt look good, the oil shears or thins out. It sure (maybe) was a only a bad batch, but it was discussed heavily in the German "Oil club" Forum. That is surprising because Ravenol is advertising the new generation of oils as "USVO", ultra strong viscosity. Shear free.

ROWE oils produces very good UOAs, Liqui Moly comes close. But wich oil gets Praised? Ravenol. And wich one is constantly critisied here on BITOG? LM.
As a note, in the german Honda Community is LM 5w-40 the most prefered oil. People beat the hell out of their engines, redline up to 9.000 RPM without problems.

My personall opinion is, Ravenol looks good on paper, yes, but i wouldnt use it. I would prefer LM.
I am under the impression that Ravenol is doing the thing for what LM is constantly blamed her: Heavy advertising and marketing.
BTW, ravenol dont produce the oils itself, they are juste a blender, while LM has their own big oil factory.
Funny if you think about it.

Collection of UOAs: https://oil-club.de/index.php?board...a/&s=ae49fe4575d56035873060419a5b3f97937ac1a8

I am wating for the first UOAs of Ravenol here on BITOG.
I am curios if there is also a batch that shears down heavily, from a -40 to a -30 oil in no time. We will see.

My Opinion, my impression and i am maybe wrong.

 

[blingo]

Ravenol certainly learned a lot from ugly Liqui Moly and presses to be seen as more boutiquesque, why synthesize much distinction between the two? Liqui Moly was Meguin regarding production, some of their oils can be had cheaper labeled Meguin. Ravenol is (mainly?) Deutsche Ölwerke Lubmin GmbH regarding production.
Ravenol's USVO label sometimes only indicates current VII, not strictly VII free formulations. Likewise LM promotes Titanium and Wolfram as the oil fashion victim's must haves of choice. Two brands among dozens in Germany alone – and Rowe probably just more mature.
Ancient HC narratives shouldn't mean anything when in front of the shelves. Neither between Castrol and Mobil1 nor between Motul and Ravenol or LM or Rowe or else.
Castrol and Total could have the more interesting approaches in an oil or two behind the curtains of label performance, a Kroon PolyTech be your underdog and so on. In the end it comes down to what one considered true charm and performance.

PAO in general is just another base oil group and basically the whole "vollsynthetisch" became more misleading than the "fully synthetic" while both are primarily annoying laden undeads by now :-=
For colder Canada some PAO may get in the mix just as GTL or better HC oils get in.

To decidedly move to one product more often than not won't really mean a thing and to move to a brand – well, figure it out.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Funny thing is, that Ravenol has produced UOAs that doesnt look good, the oil shears or thins out. It sure (maybe) was a only a bad batch, but it was discussed heavily in the German "Oil club" Forum. That is surprising because Ravenol is advertising the new generation of oils as "USVO", ultra strong viscosity. Shear free.

ROWE oils produces very good UOAs, Liqui Moly comes close. But wich oil gets Praised? Ravenol. And wich one is constantly critisied here on BITOG? LM.
As a note, in the german Honda Community is LM 5w-40 the most prefered oil. People beat the hell out of their engines, redline up to 9.000 RPM without problems.

My personall opinion is, Ravenol looks good on paper, yes, but i wouldnt use it. I would prefer LM.
I am under the impression that Ravenol is doing the thing for what LM is constantly blamed her: Heavy advertising and marketing.
BTW, ravenol dont produce the oils itself, they are juste a blender, while LM has their own big oil factory.
Funny if you think about it.

Collection of UOAs: https://oil-club.de/index.php?board/153-gebrauchtöl-göa-uoa/&s=ae49fe4575d56035873060419a5b3f97937ac1a8

I am wating for the first UOAs of Ravenol here on BITOG.
I am curios if there is also a batch that shears down heavily, from a -40 to a -30 oil in no time. We will see.

My Opinion, my impression and i am maybe wrong.

LM only gets criticized on BITOG due to the comparatively high price ($USD) vs Shell, Mobil 1, Valvoline, Castrol, etc. Compared to the UK and Europe motor oil is incredibly cheap in the United States.

BTW there are some Ravenol UOA's around here. IIRC Overkill has few.

 

[edyvw]

LM only gets criticized on BITOG due to the comparatively high price ($USD) vs Shell, Mobil 1, Valvoline, Castrol, etc. Compared to the UK and Europe motor oil is incredibly cheap in the United States.

BTW there are some Ravenol UOA's around here. IIRC Overkill has few.

Considering what they offer, LM should be cheaper.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

I'll start with a confession. I know I way overspend on oils. I've bought Ravenol, Redline, Mobil 1, Pennzoil Ultra, LiquiMoly, Motul, etc. It makes me feel good knowing that I've spent lots of time poring over oil details to pick the best oil and nab the cheapest price for that oil. Then I beat the snot out of my engines to "prove" I made a good choice. But deep down, the analytical side of me is telling my emotions that it's all for naught. Thousands of dollars spent on VOAs and UOAs, stretching OCIs to 2x manufacturer recommendations; the real data is irrefutable: all my engines are still running with several hundred thousand miles on them, without any need for repair.

Conclusion: use an oil that meets manufacturer specs, keep the dipstick measurement area submerged, and change it at a reasonable duration (1.25x manufacturer rating is likely safe without ever getting a UOA). Your engine will last a very, very long time. Yes, Ravenol is excessive. Mobil 1 is excessive. I've even run Harvest King synthetic several times, which is still likely excessive for your situation. Knowing that, buy what meets specs and tickles your fancy. All will be well.

 

[OVERKILL]

It doesn't, in Germany. Most German beer in Germany is like Budweiser, I find it harder to get a decent beer there than in the US. Actually most countries for that matter. The US has some of the best craft beer in the world.

German beer in Canada is, in many cases, significantly cheaper than either Canadian or American beer.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

For beer you should be able to buy a case with two really good ones and then the rest is junk. So you drink the two good ones and after that the rest doesn't matter.

 

[kschachn]

For beer you should be able to buy a case with two really good ones and then the rest is junk. So you drink the two good ones and after that the rest doesn't matter.

Only if you drink a case at a time though.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

Only if you drink a case at a time though.

Who doesn't?

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Isn't bud light America's favorite beer? Remember, both American and German beer, objectively, will only get you drunk. Everything else is in your head. So why should German beer cost more than a bud light?

Bud Light just barely qualifies as beer and would qualify as beer under the German purity law of 1516.