Red Line: chemstry tweaks across the street range

[tudorart]

You are stating facts or a personal preference when you say you don't like x or z ?
All oils are a compromise when they need to price them reasonably. You really can't have everything.
You are getting top notch base stocks (that cost as much as 6 times more) and lots of moly for that money. RL users appreciate that more than OEM approvals and a standard add pack. Different priorities. The RL 12pack box reads: "Designed for power and performance" not "designed with OEM approvals at the lowest cost possible". If that is not your priority then you can't LIKE them. It's simple. RL users don't appreciate what you may use, for example, because of their priorities.

Look at the price for Mobil 1 racing oil. Compare that to Red Line racing oils and see how the corporation takes more money from you. Now that's a bit closer to apples to apples.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: tudorart
You are stating facts or a personal preference when you say you don't like x or z ?
All oils are a compromise when they need to price them reasonably. You really can't have everything.
You are getting top notch base stocks (that cost as much as 6 times more) and lots of moly for that money. RL users appreciate that more than OEM approvals and a standard add pack. Different priorities. The RL 12pack box reads: "Designed for power and performance" not "designed with OEM approvals at the lowest cost possible". If that is not your priority then you can't LIKE them. It's simple. RL users don't appreciate what you may use, for example, because of their priorities.

Look at the price for Mobil 1 racing oil. Compare that to Red Line racing oils and see how the corporation takes more money from you. Now that's a bit closer to apples to apples.


The other side of that is that OEM approvals and certifications guarantee a particular level of performance. Performance that has been tested extensively not only by companies like ExxonMobil, but by companies like Porsche, Mercedes, BMW, Ferrari....etc. One can expound all kinds of evil motives about base stock quality and dubious tactics employed in the name of profit, but at the end of the day, your argument here is that you are willing to take the word of one oil company over another oil company because you feel that the one oil company isn't all about profits, and the other oil company, which spends literally billions of dollars on R&D, testing, certification and other verification processes IS all about profits. And that spending those billions of dollars to have their product verified by OEM's somehow makes it inferior..... instead of superior?

You realize the lunacy of that proposition right?

Mobil has spent an obscene amount of money developing their 0w-40 product for example. And yes, they expect it to make money. And no, it isn't touted as being "ALL POE" or the like. And yes, it has an arm's-long list of certs/approvals, and yes, it sells for half of what Redline sells for.

But that oil is good enough that Porsche, Mercedes, Audi.....etc use it on the Nurburgring, run it in their 24hr of Daytona cars and these companies do not have a vested interest in further padding XOM's pocket book. If the product wasn't "this good", they wouldn't be using it in their LeMans and Daytona cars. But they do, so it is.

Sometimes you can be about making a profit and still make a top-notch product. Particular when you are the company that makes the base stocks that most of these blenders use. XOM makes their own POE, PAO, AN's....etc. And they co-own Infineum with SHELL. They are the top of the food chain. They aren't buying oil components and then trying to make a profit. They make the works in-house.

 

[buster]

^+1 Exactly.

Point:

Quote:
Let us rather concentrate on the universe in which we, sales guys, operate: realities of the business world. To make and distribute oil at a competitive price, a company must be able to manufacture or buy the components at a competitive price, and have enough of a market to pay for the development and manufacturing cost. That company has to be able to “be a player”. Once that company decides to “be a player”, say, in the Porsche market, then the sound and professional way to operate is to present the finished product to Porsche so they put it through the Porsche 996FL Engine test. This test will last 203 hours. The engine, and the oil, will go through: - 4 times the simulation of 35 hours of summer driving, - 4 times the simulation of 13.5 hours of winter driving, - 40 cold starts, - 5 times the simulation of 1-hour sessions on the “Nürburgring” racetrack, - 3.5 hours of “running-in” program Measurements on the engine and on the oil will be done at regular intervals, and the following parameter will be taken into account to grant the approval or not: - torque curve (internal friction), - oxidation of the oil, - Piston cleanliness and ring sticking, - Valve train wear protection. Cam & tappet wear must be less than 10 µm. - Engine cleanliness and sludge: after 203 hours, no deposits must be visible. - Bearing wear protection: visual rating according to Porsche in-house method. Several mechanics told me that they were relying on “their own testing” to choose an oil. None of these mechanics showed me that their method came close to matching what Porsche does: running dozens of oils through the same 203-hour test, and comparing the results. This test has been designed by Porsche to guarantee the availability of test-proven oils for all Porsche since model year 1973: the letter (attached) given to oil manufacturers specifies that date.

 

[OVERKILL]

Ran out of edit time, so I'd like to add this to the above:

Ultimately, my point here is that your argument doesn't really make sense. BOTH companies are out to make a profit. If they weren't, they'd be out of business. Mobil makes a broad range of products for a host of different applications. For many of those applications, the product doesn't need to be able to survive race-track conditions to perform above and beyond the performance level required to ensure an exceptionally long and healthy engine life. For other products, like their 0w-40, D1 5w-40, 5w-50, 15w-50....etc, they are designed (and certified/approved) for applications where they DO need to survive race track conditions. Often this being part of an OEM testing regiment (see: Porsche). The fact that Mobil pays for OEM approvals and Redline doesn't isn't the issue here. So your focus on it as some sort of validation factor for Redline's oils somehow being better because they aren't approved is silly. They aren't approved because they aren't approved. The products aren't designed to BE approved, they are blended using quantities of additives that, in many grades, would make the product unable to be approved under the API or ACEA. In other grades, well, what's the point of having only a few of your oil grades blessed with the basic API/ACEA stuff? So they don't. That doesn't make the product any better or worse. It makes it different. What we CAN extrapolate from this is that we know POE base stocks are great for high heat. They are also hydroscopic, so may not be all that great for an engine that sits a lot and builds up condensation. We know that the oils are additized to provide maximum protection, and that, based on user testimonials and the brand's popularity in racing circles, that it does very well in this respect. THAT is what we can derive from the information we know.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: buster
^+1 Exactly.

Point:

Quote:
Let us rather concentrate on the universe in which we, sales guys, operate: realities of the business world. To make and distribute oil at a competitive price, a company must be able to manufacture or buy the components at a competitive price, and have enough of a market to pay for the development and manufacturing cost. That company has to be able to “be a player”. Once that company decides to “be a player”, say, in the Porsche market, then the sound and professional way to operate is to present the finished product to Porsche so they put it through the Porsche 996FL Engine test. This test will last 203 hours. The engine, and the oil, will go through: - 4 times the simulation of 35 hours of summer driving, - 4 times the simulation of 13.5 hours of winter driving, - 40 cold starts, - 5 times the simulation of 1-hour sessions on the “Nürburgring” racetrack, - 3.5 hours of “running-in” program Measurements on the engine and on the oil will be done at regular intervals, and the following parameter will be taken into account to grant the approval or not: - torque curve (internal friction), - oxidation of the oil, - Piston cleanliness and ring sticking, - Valve train wear protection. Cam & tappet wear must be less than 10 µm. - Engine cleanliness and sludge: after 203 hours, no deposits must be visible. - Bearing wear protection: visual rating according to Porsche in-house method. Several mechanics told me that they were relying on “their own testing” to choose an oil. None of these mechanics showed me that their method came close to matching what Porsche does: running dozens of oils through the same 203-hour test, and comparing the results. This test has been designed by Porsche to guarantee the availability of test-proven oils for all Porsche since model year 1973: the letter (attached) given to oil manufacturers specifies that date.


That is some excellent insight into exactly what I was talking about. And these tests are EXPENSIVE. We also know that the lubricants that pass testing like this are exceptional performers with a guaranteed level of performance. There's no blind faith or brand loyalty required. It is an unbiased testing protocol that doesn't care if you claim your product is 95% POE with the testicular fortitude of Zeus. These are the ultimate equalizers because there's no marketing or anecdotes here, just results.

 

[CATERHAM]

The more info you can have on a lubricant such as meeting certain OEM spec's and requirements the better. For example an oil on the Porsche A40 list tells one a lot. Even more so is the oil a manufacturer actually uses such as the FF and a manufacturers own brand since that oil is scrutinized to death in on going testing and development.
As a result oils such as M1 0W-40 and the Mobil made TGMO 0W-20 are hard to match let alone beat for their overall performance.

That said, there is a place for boutique formulators such as Red Line that use premium base oils and additives targeted usually at the high performance racing oriented crowd.
I'm glad they exist as they make motor oil more interesting than it really needs to be for use oil nerds.
And if they didn't exist I wouldn't be able to posit the question, is RL 0W-40 the only oil available that's "better" than M1 0W-40?

 

[Cup of Joe]

Originally Posted By: buster
However, I buy oil based on the specifications they meet. You don't get points for boosting your oils with tons of ZDP and Calcium.



You cannot be serious. Don't you know by now you should only shop by VI or the VI you can achieve by blending 2 different oils together? The major brands maybe able to meet a specification but they clearly have no idea of how to achieve the correct VI for your engine in the process.

 

[buster]

 

[tudorart]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Ran out of edit time, so I'd like to add this to the above:

Ultimately, my point here is that your argument doesn't really make sense. BOTH companies are out to make a profit. If they weren't, they'd be out of business. Mobil makes a broad range of products for a host of different applications. For many of those applications, the product doesn't need to be able to survive race-track conditions to perform above and beyond the performance level required to ensure an exceptionally long and healthy engine life. For other products, like their 0w-40, D1 5w-40, 5w-50, 15w-50....etc, they are designed (and certified/approved) for applications where they DO need to survive race track conditions. Often this being part of an OEM testing regiment (see: Porsche). The fact that Mobil pays for OEM approvals and Redline doesn't isn't the issue here. So your focus on it as some sort of validation factor for Redline's oils somehow being better because they aren't approved is silly. They aren't approved because they aren't approved. The products aren't designed to BE approved, they are blended using quantities of additives that, in many grades, would make the product unable to be approved under the API or ACEA. In other grades, well, what's the point of having only a few of your oil grades blessed with the basic API/ACEA stuff? So they don't. That doesn't make the product any better or worse. It makes it different. What we CAN extrapolate from this is that we know POE base stocks are great for high heat. They are also hydroscopic, so may not be all that great for an engine that sits a lot and builds up condensation. We know that the oils are additized to provide maximum protection, and that, based on user testimonials and the brand's popularity in racing circles, that it does very well in this respect. THAT is what we can derive from the information we know.


You missunderstood me completely or maybe it's just the way it came out. I do agree with the facts above about the industry. My response was intended to explain the user why a highly additized oil may cost more. Mobil 1 racing was a good example because it also does not have OEM approvals and si similarly priced. Sorry I did not write earlier...it's good info you provided and I'm sure others will benefit from it. Your interpretation about my thoughts however...
I know what the theory is for virgin stock. Do you also believe Red Line oil in particular (as a finished product) has a problem as far as being hydroscopic?

 

[tudorart]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

That said, there is a place for boutique formulators such as Red Line that use premium base oils and additives targeted usually at the high performance racing oriented crowd.
I'm glad they exist as they make motor oil more interesting than it really needs to be for use oil nerds.

This is a point I wanted to make but again English is my 2nd language and it's easier to quote you

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: tudorart

You missunderstood me completely or maybe it's just the way it came out. I do agree with the facts above about the industry. My response was intended to explain the user why a highly additized oil may cost more. Mobil 1 racing was a good example because it also does not have OEM approvals and si similarly priced. Sorry I did not write earlier...it's good info you provided and I'm sure others will benefit from it. Your interpretation about my thoughts however...
I know what the theory is for virgin stock. Do you also believe Red Line oil in particular (as a finished product) has a problem as far as being hydroscopic?



If I misunderstood your position, my apologies. With regards to cost, well, again that's relative to a company's size and how they source their components. It would cost XOM far less to produce a lube identical to Redline because they don't need 3rd party suppliers to do it

Mobil 1 racing is targeted specifically at the racing crowd. They make no "suitable for..." claims on their website or bottles for the product:

Originally Posted By: Mobil 1

Available as:

Mobil 1 Racing™ 0W-30
Mobil 1 Racing™ 0W-50

Mobil 1 Racing oils are not recommended for street use. For road and track use, consider:

Mobil 1™ 15W-50
Mobil 1™ 0W-40


Whereas Redline does market their lubricants at the street guys, for example, from their 0w-40:
Originally Posted By: Redline
Recommended for water-cooled Porsche and Mercedes-Benz 229.5 applications
Suitable for VW/Audi 500.00/502.00/503.01/505.00
Used in Dodge Viper and many later Chryslers (MS-10725)
Better flow at extremely cold temperatures compared to 5W40 and 10W40
Popular in the latest Four-Stroke Snowmobile engine applications
Recommended for API SN/SM/SL/SJ/SH/SG/CF and ACEA A3/B3/B4


So while it may seem like it makes more sense to compare Redline to Mobil 1 Racing, they aren't marketed in the same manner.

With respect to your last point, I don't know if the hydroscopic nature of a POE base is actually an issue in application for Redline lubricants. That would require extensive testing, which I am not able to perform. However, the demographic their lubricants are targeted toward likely makes it less of an issue in the first place.

 

[tudorart]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: tudorart
I see it.
All in all I think Red Line solved two problems here: flash on the 0W grades and HTHS being too high on the rest of the line up BUT intentionally lost the opportunity to offer a higher VI for the 0W-30 when they did it for the 0W20. Why? I could've understood a 3.5cP and over for that VI.

No the 0W oils are just one oil with varying VI content as I mentioned before. All three grades have the same NOACK, Flash Pt and Pour Pt. The VI is a consequence of the VII content therefore the VI of the 0W-30 grade must be between the 0W-20 and 0W-40 grades. There is no such disparity among the 5W range of oils nor their 10W range.

I just noticed the CCS on the 0W30. Did You notice it's higher than on the 0W40? I am starting to think 3.2 HTHS is rather conservative here.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: virginoil
This is not RL bashing, just stating RL facts.

In fairness to Red Line, they don't make any apologies for not having a bunch of certifications. That's not what they're aiming for. They're not a drag and drop replacement for SN/GF-5 oils, and they're not supposed to be. They're not for everyone, and that can be good or bad.

And they're not exactly cheap up here, either.

They are a tad hard to find lately, though. As an aside, their fuel system cleaner is actually competitively priced here.

What's the price you pay there for a quart?
The bolding is by me so others that haven't seen it see it before any other complaints.
Originally Posted By: tudorart

Look at the price for Mobil 1 racing oil. Compare that to Red Line racing oils

To Overkill: I WAS comparing M1 to RL racing in my original post .... specifically to make the point that with RL you are paying for the extra add pack (street or racing) just the same way you do with the highly priced M1 racing (which also comes in 0W20 BTW). Things may have changed but last time M1 came out a bit more expensive. Maybe you have a theory why but AFAIK, theirs is PAO or GTL or both and off course it is sourced in house so should be less.

As far dual purpose street oils the only 3 RL recommends on their website are the 10W40 and 15/20W-50. They seem to be old school and won't recommend a wide spread for track.
"Best choice for high-performance engines that see street/strip or track activity"
"For wider bearing clearances and racing engines that see occasional street use"
They also recommend 10W30 street and 5W50 for high performance/crate engines.
I guess many of their street oils would be suitable for occasional track use. Even 5W/15W40 if you track your diesel

 

[tudorart]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

And if they didn't exist I wouldn't be able to posit the question, is RL 0W-40 the only oil available that's "better" than M1 0W-40?

How about RLI 5w40? They say it would qualify as a 0w40.
Mobil 1 also makes other excellent and different approvals 0W40's ...not as readily available in the US, true.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: tudorart
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

And if they didn't exist I wouldn't be able to posit the question, is RL 0W-40 the only oil available that's "better" than M1 0W-40?

How about RLI 5w40? They say it would qualify as a 0w40.
Mobil 1 also makes other excellent and different approvals 0W40's ...not as readily available in the US, true.

If RL 5W-40 qualified as a 0W-40 it would have to be called a 0W-40 assuming RL follows the SAE grading rules.
If you need an oil with a higher HTHSV than the 4.0cP of RL 0W-40 I would would not use RL 5W-40 but rather blend in some RL 5W-50 (VI 186, HTHSV 5.0cP) or even some RL 10W-60 (VI 188, HTHSV 5.8cP). This way you'll be maintaining the VI close to 190 so the oil will be as light as possible on start-up for a given hot operational viscosity.

Can't comment on whether there are different versions of M1 0W-40 in Europe, you'll need to check with the actual formulating plant. In Canada we are still getting the Cdn made SM PAO version with somewhat different viscosity spec's (HTHSV 3.6cP, VI 187 and MRV of 21,000cP).

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: tudorart

To Overkill: I WAS comparing M1 to RL racing in my original post .... specifically to make the point that with RL you are paying for the extra add pack (street or racing) just the same way you do with the highly priced M1 racing (which also comes in 0W20 BTW). Things may have changed but last time M1 came out a bit more expensive. Maybe you have a theory why but AFAIK, theirs is PAO or GTL or both and off course it is sourced in house so should be less.


Ahhh yes, but Mobil has some oils (M1 0w-40, D1 5w-40, M1 15w-50/5w-50) that all have "extra" add packs over their more pedestrian PCMO counterparts too

And with respect to their (Mobil's) racing oils, they could be a blend of pretty much anything, LOL

They use PAO, POE, AN's....etc All kinds of goodies in their lubricants to meet a desired performance target. And I'm confident Mobil's pricing on their race lubes is entirely because "they can". I'm sure it doesn't cost them (and if it does, it isn't by much) any more to make than it does to blend an oil like M1 EP or M1 0w-40.

Quote:
As far dual purpose street oils the only 3 RL recommends on their website are the 10W40 and 15/20W-50. They seem to be old school and won't recommend a wide spread for track. "Best choice for high-performance engines that see street/strip or track activity"
"For wider bearing clearances and racing engines that see occasional street use"
They also recommend 10W30 street and 5W50 for high performance/crate engines.
I guess many of their street oils would be suitable for occasional track use. Even 5W/15W40 if you track your diesel

OK, so given that fact, then what is the point in comparing Mobil's race lubricants to the "normal" Redline lubricants? Wouldn't we be better served comparing "street" oils to "street" oils, regardless of how they are additized? Don't get me wrong, I do understand what you are trying to do, but in this case I think we'd probably be making more sense comparing the lubes from Mobil I listed earlier to the oils from Redline if we are shooting for lubricants with a similar target audience, no?

 

[tudorart]

To Caterham
I don't think they follow it strictly. I read that for the application it was designed, 5W40 is the recommended viscosity and hence the reason to market it as such.

I agree about the RL 5W40 blend but mostly because I wouldn't want to trade moly for extra dispersants. I am also of the few that is glad HTHS went down on the new RL 5W40.

In Europe there's a 0W40 ESP and a Turbo Diesel on top of the New Life (same or close to North Am versions of European Formula)

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: tudorart
To Caterham

I agree about the RL 5W40 blend but mostly because I wouldn't want to trade moly for extra dispersants. I am also of the few that is glad HTHS went down on the new RL 5W40.

That's the other thing about RL 5W-40 as it is a "universal oil" being both a PCMO and HDEO as they have dropped the moly.
So if you want the moly forget RL 5W-40.

 

[tudorart]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

OK, so given that fact, then what is the point in comparing Mobil's race lubricants to the "normal" Redline lubricants? Wouldn't we be better served comparing "street" oils to "street" oils, regardless of how they are additized? Don't get me wrong, I do understand what you are trying to do, but in this case I think we'd probably be making more sense comparing the lubes from Mobil I listed earlier to the oils from Redline if we are shooting for lubricants with a similar target audience, no?


Making more sense for sure especially for whever reads this later ..it seems like going in circles here

My initial approach was to show the user that you pay for what you get with RL and the overhead is less than in the case of Mobil1 Racing just like you state here:
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
And I'm confident Mobil's pricing on their race lubes is entirely because "they can". I'm sure it doesn't cost them (and if it does, it isn't by much) any more to make than it does to blend an oil like M1 EP or M1 0w-40.

In my opinion a street oil comparison is harder to make since there are too many differences like approval costs and moly levels which both can get expensive.
I really think RL street is targeting differently and not in direct competition (not going into HTHS or used/after shear HTHS) and I was trying to extrapolate from the racing oils which seemed more apples to apples at the time and most likely to have a more expensive base stock to compare to.

Now when you talk about their extra add packs, I honestly only know about more zinc from their PDF...which is not very expensive. What else do you know about?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: tudorart

Now when you talk about their extra add packs, I honestly only know about more zinc from their PDF...which is not very expensive. What else do you know about?


They use AN's in their high-end lubes (like M1 0w-40) as part of their way of achieving the level of performance that oil provides. Yes, it has more Zinc and phosphorous (and Moly) too, but that's what is nice about the Porsche stuff that buster posted earlier, it is THAT level of performance that requires this product to be exceptional (and subsequently, different) from its same-branded peers.

 

[tudorart]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: tudorart

Now when you talk about their extra add packs, I honestly only know about more zinc from their PDF...which is not very expensive. What else do you know about?


They use AN's in their high-end lubes (like M1 0w-40) as part of their way of achieving the level of performance that oil provides. Yes, it has more Zinc and phosphorous (and Moly) too, but that's what is nice about the Porsche stuff that buster posted earlier, it is THAT level of performance that requires this product to be exceptional (and subsequently, different) from its same-branded peers.


I know about the AN. Let me ask you this though: do they use it as a correction fluid to account for less PAO in there and did they use it before when majority was PAO based? Is the Delvac 1 5W40 having it. do you know?

What is the source for Buster's post? I read it and concur.

Now on the other hand there's that Joe Gibbs DT40 developed with an Porsche engine builder/racing team that specifically wanted better performance than the 0W40. whereas I'm not too familiar with the DT40 which is a street oil firstly, there seems to be higher performance levels desired.