IMO the amount of POE has been reduced considerably. The flash points dropped quite a bit with the reformulation. Despite being one of the most expensive oils out there, they have obviously buckled to cost considerations, thus my decision to switch from Redline after using it exclusively for the last eight years. Personally, I would have preferred to pay an extra dollar per quart in order to keep the POE levels where they were. PU now has better NOACK numbers than Redline. I would have switched to it were it available at the Wally World up here.
Red Line: chemstry tweaks across the street range
- Thread starter tudorart
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
I should add that RLI have heavy 0W-20 (HTHSV 3-3.3cP) with a 178 VI and a heavy 0W-30 (HTHSV 3.6-3.8cP) with a 193 VI. That combination is still somewhat better than the new RL 0W oils.
(I know buster is going to freak out over this question, but here goes anyway
):
Just how incompatible would you imagine the base stocks, and AW,AF/detergent packs to be between the RLI 0W-30 and Sustina 0W-20 for a winter OCI blend??
Is there ANYTHING to worry about with this mix (regardless of buster's, or others' dissing of it)?
Looks like you've got Buster's response anyway.
The RLI 0W-30 base stocks are a blend of up to 30% vegetable oil and presumably (hopefully) PAO synthetics. The only thing that I can see unique about their additive package is that they use antimony in addition to modest levels of ZDDP as an AW agent.
They claim that their oils are fully compatible with other conventional and synthetic MOs.
I don't see any problem any problem blending with Sustina 0W-20.
I do have an alternative RLI suggestion, and that would be to use their 10W-60 which has a 187 VI instead.
To produce a 0W-30 with a 3.2cP HTHSV would require 60% of RLI 0W-30 resulting in a 207 VI. If you use RLI 10W-60 instead requires only have as much (30%) to produce the same HTHSV of 3.2cP but the VI will be 216.
It's hard to say if the oil would qualify as a 0W-30 although I would think so with such a high VI. Besides in you're climate VI is more relevant than a purely academic spec' of whether an oil will pump at -40 or -35C.
P.S. I'm certainly interested in how the Millers ND works out.
Do you plan on having a UOA done at the end of the season?
I'm sold on the nano technology, I just wish it came as an additive that we could add to any oil we want.
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
I should add that RLI have heavy 0W-20 (HTHSV 3-3.3cP) with a 178 VI and a heavy 0W-30 (HTHSV 3.6-3.8cP) with a 193 VI. That combination is still somewhat better than the new RL 0W oils.
(I know buster is going to freak out over this question, but here goes anyway
Just how incompatible would you imagine the base stocks, and AW,AF/detergent packs to be between the RLI 0W-30 and Sustina 0W-20 for a winter OCI blend??
Is there ANYTHING to worry about with this mix (regardless of buster's, or others' dissing of it)?
Looks like you've got Buster's response anyway.
The RLI 0W-30 base stocks are a blend of up to 30% vegetable oil and presumably (hopefully) PAO synthetics. The only thing that I can see unique about their additive package is that they use antimony in addition to modest levels of ZDDP as an AW agent.
They claim that their oils are fully compatible with other conventional and synthetic MOs.
I don't see any problem any problem blending with Sustina 0W-20.
I do have an alternative RLI suggestion, and that would be to use their 10W-60 which has a 187 VI instead.
To produce a 0W-30 with a 3.2cP HTHSV would require 60% of RLI 0W-30 resulting in a 207 VI. If you use RLI 10W-60 instead requires only have as much (30%) to produce the same HTHSV of 3.2cP but the VI will be 216.
It's hard to say if the oil would qualify as a 0W-30 although I would think so with such a high VI. Besides in you're climate VI is more relevant than a purely academic spec' of whether an oil will pump at -40 or -35C.
P.S. I'm certainly interested in how the Millers ND works out.
Do you plan on having a UOA done at the end of the season?
I'm sold on the nano technology, I just wish it came as an additive that we could add to any oil we want.
Originally Posted By: BerndV
IMO the amount of POE has been reduced considerably. The flash points dropped quite a bit with the reformulation. Despite being one of the most expensive oils out there, they have obviously buckled to cost considerations, thus my decision to switch from Redline after using it exclusively for the last eight years. Personally, I would have preferred to pay an extra dollar per quart in order to keep the POE levels where they were. PU now has better NOACK numbers than Redline. I would have switched to it were it available at the Wally World up here.
If RL has reduced the POE content in favour of more PAO doesn't concern me and their NOACK numbers are still excellent.
Yes I wish they made a true high VI 20wt oil but their 0W-40 is one of my fav's as well as their 5W-50 and 10W-60 grades but just for blending purposes.
IMO the amount of POE has been reduced considerably. The flash points dropped quite a bit with the reformulation. Despite being one of the most expensive oils out there, they have obviously buckled to cost considerations, thus my decision to switch from Redline after using it exclusively for the last eight years. Personally, I would have preferred to pay an extra dollar per quart in order to keep the POE levels where they were. PU now has better NOACK numbers than Redline. I would have switched to it were it available at the Wally World up here.
If RL has reduced the POE content in favour of more PAO doesn't concern me and their NOACK numbers are still excellent.
Yes I wish they made a true high VI 20wt oil but their 0W-40 is one of my fav's as well as their 5W-50 and 10W-60 grades but just for blending purposes.
spoke with dave again just now..he said red line tweaked their oils to meet the more strigent acea guidelines and that the poe in their oils has stayed the same!!berndv is incorrect in his statements.
Originally Posted By: boxcartommie22
spoke with dave again just now..he said red line tweaked their oils to meet the more strigent acea guidelines and that the poe in their oils has stayed the same!!berndv is incorrect in his statements.
Thanks for going DIRECTLY to the source,too many know it alls with inaccurate info on this website these days.
spoke with dave again just now..he said red line tweaked their oils to meet the more strigent acea guidelines and that the poe in their oils has stayed the same!!berndv is incorrect in his statements.
Thanks for going DIRECTLY to the source,too many know it alls with inaccurate info on this website these days.
Originally Posted By: boxcartommie22
spoke with dave again just now..he said red line tweaked their oils to meet the more strigent acea guidelines and that the poe in their oils has stayed the same!!berndv is incorrect in his statements.
Talked to Dave as well one week ago. He said he did not know if the POE percentage had changed and could not give me an unequivocal affirmation that it had not. Furthermore, I emailed them for a direct answer regarding this question and received NO response.
spoke with dave again just now..he said red line tweaked their oils to meet the more strigent acea guidelines and that the poe in their oils has stayed the same!!berndv is incorrect in his statements.
Talked to Dave as well one week ago. He said he did not know if the POE percentage had changed and could not give me an unequivocal affirmation that it had not. Furthermore, I emailed them for a direct answer regarding this question and received NO response.
apparently he knows now.dave always emails me answers for years.the lastest was the densities of the new oils. he emailed me two days later with the answers...i also asked him in may about poe's said nothing changed they just tweaked the oil esters stayed the same..he knows my name so he must have been guarded with other people he doesn't know..i would use their oils with confidence it is still the very best oil in the world.
Can you PM me those densities? Thanks.
I was also confirmed that the POE stocks are still there within the same proportion.
About the flash point coming down on the oils...it does come down when using thinner stocks (for ACEA reasons or not). They are just fine at min.232, not to mention the 0W's that went all up to 230. Did your application make use of 252FP? Even so Noack figures override them anyway and they haveN'T changed.
I was also confirmed that the POE stocks are still there within the same proportion.
About the flash point coming down on the oils...it does come down when using thinner stocks (for ACEA reasons or not). They are just fine at min.232, not to mention the 0W's that went all up to 230. Did your application make use of 252FP? Even so Noack figures override them anyway and they haveN'T changed.
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: BerndV
IMO the amount of POE has been reduced considerably. The flash points dropped quite a bit with the reformulation. Despite being one of the most expensive oils out there, they have obviously buckled to cost considerations, thus my decision to switch from Redline after using it exclusively for the last eight years. Personally, I would have preferred to pay an extra dollar per quart in order to keep the POE levels where they were. PU now has better NOACK numbers than Redline. I would have switched to it were it available at the Wally World up here.
If RL has reduced the POE content in favour of more PAO doesn't concern me and their NOACK numbers are still excellent.
Yes I wish they made a true high VI 20wt oil but their 0W-40 is one of my fav's as well as their 5W-50 and 10W-60 grades but just for blending purposes.
Let's stop the misinformation. Noack numbers are the same on the new formulations and the lowest FPoints went up for a minimum of 230 for the whole range...compapred to 216 before.
Originally Posted By: BerndV
IMO the amount of POE has been reduced considerably. The flash points dropped quite a bit with the reformulation. Despite being one of the most expensive oils out there, they have obviously buckled to cost considerations, thus my decision to switch from Redline after using it exclusively for the last eight years. Personally, I would have preferred to pay an extra dollar per quart in order to keep the POE levels where they were. PU now has better NOACK numbers than Redline. I would have switched to it were it available at the Wally World up here.
If RL has reduced the POE content in favour of more PAO doesn't concern me and their NOACK numbers are still excellent.
Yes I wish they made a true high VI 20wt oil but their 0W-40 is one of my fav's as well as their 5W-50 and 10W-60 grades but just for blending purposes.
Let's stop the misinformation. Noack numbers are the same on the new formulations and the lowest FPoints went up for a minimum of 230 for the whole range...compapred to 216 before.
Last edited:
Buster I don't know what you mean. RL confirmed to me as to most that they use as much POE as before. Flash points are on the data sheet... as well as viscosity values.
Were you answering to someone else?
Were you answering to someone else?
here are the densities: red line 10w30=0.891
5w30=0.888
5w20=0.890
5w30=0.888
5w20=0.890
Last edited:
i know also that motul has an all ester poe oil the 300v series.
Densities close to 0.9 are strong indicators that a large percentage of the base oil mixture are esters, since they are typically considerably more dense than other base oil groups on an equal viscosity basis. Most non-ester motor oil densities are between 0.85 to 0.865.
Mea Culpa; I just received an email from Cameron Evans, the VP/COO of Redline Oil. Perhaps they peruse the forums here on BITOG and felt it necessary to provide clarity in this matter. Anyway, his response regarding my query about the POE percentages in the new formulations was, in part, as follows:
"While we do not provide the detailed composition of our blends, we can tell you that the POE concentration is the same as it has been for the last 10 years. The variations in flash have to do with differences in additives used, which may have a small amount of a low flash material which has a large effect on flash."
The speculation from myself and others regarding a possible reduction in POE levels was clearly wrong, and I have no problem admitting as much. In the past, they have always been very forthcoming when I have made such inquiries, which is among the reasons I have used the product for so long. This particular inquiry obviously went higher up the food chain than others I have made. Perhaps this was considered an important area of inquiry for their brand.
"While we do not provide the detailed composition of our blends, we can tell you that the POE concentration is the same as it has been for the last 10 years. The variations in flash have to do with differences in additives used, which may have a small amount of a low flash material which has a large effect on flash."
The speculation from myself and others regarding a possible reduction in POE levels was clearly wrong, and I have no problem admitting as much. In the past, they have always been very forthcoming when I have made such inquiries, which is among the reasons I have used the product for so long. This particular inquiry obviously went higher up the food chain than others I have made. Perhaps this was considered an important area of inquiry for their brand.
Originally Posted By: boxcartommie22
i know also that motul has an all ester poe oil the 300v series.
Where did you take your info from? The last MSDS showed 25%-50% HC oil. I have it saved on my drive. It wasn't available to US IPs.
300V has never been a majority ester oil in the past. It's really just marketing.... Look at PP and density...before the ester core line, PP for 5W40 300V was -36C...if I remember correctly.
i know also that motul has an all ester poe oil the 300v series.
Where did you take your info from? The last MSDS showed 25%-50% HC oil. I have it saved on my drive. It wasn't available to US IPs.
300V has never been a majority ester oil in the past. It's really just marketing.... Look at PP and density...before the ester core line, PP for 5W40 300V was -36C...if I remember correctly.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: boxcartommie22
here are the densities: red line 10w30=0.891
5w30=0.888
5w20=0.890
Thanks for this. Right, I also posted the same number for 10W30 a few pages back.
Here are the SAPS, TBN and Moly levels for refference:
The Euro-Series 5W30, Sulfated ash 0.63%, Phosphorus 866ppm, Sulphur 0.28%, Moly 120ppm, TBN 6.3
The Euro-Series 5W40, Sulfated ash 0.78%, Phosphorus 890ppm, Sulphur 0.23%, Moly 120ppm, TBN 7.2
here are the densities: red line 10w30=0.891
5w30=0.888
5w20=0.890
Thanks for this. Right, I also posted the same number for 10W30 a few pages back.
Here are the SAPS, TBN and Moly levels for refference:
The Euro-Series 5W30, Sulfated ash 0.63%, Phosphorus 866ppm, Sulphur 0.28%, Moly 120ppm, TBN 6.3
The Euro-Series 5W40, Sulfated ash 0.78%, Phosphorus 890ppm, Sulphur 0.23%, Moly 120ppm, TBN 7.2
Originally Posted By: JAG
Densities close to 0.9 are strong indicators that a large percentage of the base oil mixture are esters, since they are typically considerably more dense than other base oil groups on an equal viscosity basis. Most non-ester motor oil densities are between 0.85 to 0.865.
Right,
That's also the reason they score lower in kinematic viscosity tests, where gravity is a factor or better said it isn't.
Densities close to 0.9 are strong indicators that a large percentage of the base oil mixture are esters, since they are typically considerably more dense than other base oil groups on an equal viscosity basis. Most non-ester motor oil densities are between 0.85 to 0.865.
Right,
That's also the reason they score lower in kinematic viscosity tests, where gravity is a factor or better said it isn't.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: BerndV
Mea Culpa; I just received an email from Cameron Evans, the VP/COO of Redline Oil. Perhaps they peruse the forums here on BITOG and felt it necessary to provide clarity in this matter. Anyway, his response regarding my query about the POE percentages in the new formulations was, in part, as follows:
"While we do not provide the detailed composition of our blends, we can tell you that the POE concentration is the same as it has been for the last 10 years. The variations in flash have to do with differences in additives used, which may have a small amount of a low flash material which has a large effect on flash."
The speculation from myself and others regarding a possible reduction in POE levels was clearly wrong, and I have no problem admitting as much. In the past, they have always been very forthcoming when I have made such inquiries, which is among the reasons I have used the product for so long. This particular inquiry obviously went higher up the food chain than others I have made. Perhaps this was considered an important area of inquiry for their brand.
Bernd, thanks for going to the source. Redline has the best customer service/support. Nice guys and they really do try to answer all of your questions.
Mea Culpa; I just received an email from Cameron Evans, the VP/COO of Redline Oil. Perhaps they peruse the forums here on BITOG and felt it necessary to provide clarity in this matter. Anyway, his response regarding my query about the POE percentages in the new formulations was, in part, as follows:
"While we do not provide the detailed composition of our blends, we can tell you that the POE concentration is the same as it has been for the last 10 years. The variations in flash have to do with differences in additives used, which may have a small amount of a low flash material which has a large effect on flash."
The speculation from myself and others regarding a possible reduction in POE levels was clearly wrong, and I have no problem admitting as much. In the past, they have always been very forthcoming when I have made such inquiries, which is among the reasons I have used the product for so long. This particular inquiry obviously went higher up the food chain than others I have made. Perhaps this was considered an important area of inquiry for their brand.
Bernd, thanks for going to the source. Redline has the best customer service/support. Nice guys and they really do try to answer all of your questions.
Originally Posted By: tudorart
Originally Posted By: JAG
Densities close to 0.9 are strong indicators that a large percentage of the base oil mixture are esters, since they are typically considerably more dense than other base oil groups on an equal viscosity basis. Most non-ester motor oil densities are between 0.85 to 0.865.
Right,
That's also the reason they score lower in kinematic viscosity tests, where gravity is a factor or better said it isn't.
That's right. I don't think most people realize that. The denser oils have larger gravitational force per unit volume pulling on them, increasing the tendency to flow in the kinematic viscosity tests, thus resulting in a lower viscosity value than if they had lower density. This effect does not happen in the HTHS test because it's not a gravity-powered test. Net result is a higher HTHS viscosity to kinematic viscosity ratio due to the higher density.
Originally Posted By: JAG
Densities close to 0.9 are strong indicators that a large percentage of the base oil mixture are esters, since they are typically considerably more dense than other base oil groups on an equal viscosity basis. Most non-ester motor oil densities are between 0.85 to 0.865.
Right,
That's also the reason they score lower in kinematic viscosity tests, where gravity is a factor or better said it isn't.
That's right. I don't think most people realize that. The denser oils have larger gravitational force per unit volume pulling on them, increasing the tendency to flow in the kinematic viscosity tests, thus resulting in a lower viscosity value than if they had lower density. This effect does not happen in the HTHS test because it's not a gravity-powered test. Net result is a higher HTHS viscosity to kinematic viscosity ratio due to the higher density.
- Status
Similar threads
