Last week I sought input from BITOG as to why Castrol "warned" about using 5W20 in engines for which the manufacturer did not make a 5W20 recomendation. By the way, as far as I could tell, only Castrol used the word "only" in their recomendations.
Last night I noticed that the back of Redline's 5W30 that they warn against using their product in the first 3000 miles. "not for break-in".
So, does the group think that Redline is using marketing double speak to make us think that this stuff is so "slick" that your rings won't wear? Or, do you guys think that Redline has experience and data that forces them to try to restrick their product from use in new engines? Are they just being responsible or being salesmen?
Redline is doing it too...
- Thread starter GMorg
- Start date
- Status
I started up my new motor on M1 10W30. 52K miles later is still doesn't use any noticable amount of oil in 5K mile OCI. I guess all the bad things that are suppose to happen will happen at 100K miles
GMorg, I take your point, but I'm not necessarily talking about all-out NHRA Top Fuel or Nextel Cup cars, either. An example that comes to mind where vastly more than 3,000 miles would be put on a racing motor is quite a bit of amateur and/or SCCA racing. I can think of several Neons out road racing with near or over 100,000 miles on them. Then, the owner(s) 'freshen' the engine with a rebuild and start again. At least a number of these folks drive the cars to the tracks (of course they make tire changes and such before racing).
Again, RedLine will tell you they're being very conservative.
EDIT: I meant to say that a recent phone call to them (~2 weeks ago) prompted the response that 3000 miles was in fact what their labeling said, but that in a factory-new car 1,000-1,500 miles should be just fine.
When a company recommends something that will cost them some sales, I really listen to them...at least I do now. A few years ago, I didn't listen to Redline's recommendation and may or may not have paid for it. I put Redline 5W-30 in my 02' Subaru Impreza RS engine at 4000 miles and the engine was an oil burner for the 60k miles that I owned it. I can't say for sure it was because of what I did, but it does make me wonder since most other owners of this engine didn't have near the consumption that my engine did (0.9 qts/1000 miles on Redline and 0.4 qts/1000 miles on all other oils I tried).
Remember that RedLine is often used in a racing context (even their street oils), which would often be a non-factory rebuild rather than an assembly-line new engine. Rebuilds are a different animal from factory-new engines. Also, RedLine will tell you that they're being very conservative with that recommendation, at least wrt factory-new engines.
In the racing context, how often do you get to 3000K miles on a motor? 3000K is their recomendation.
Wow, sorry 3K miles or 3000 miles. Not 3000K miles. My mistake!
BTW the new motor was a factory re-manufactured unit. So I guess that makes it a rebuild.
I asked Volvo corporate about using Synthetic from the start and they saw no problems with my using it.
Jag, 4000 miles is plenty broke-in for Redline to be used. Now what you did and used the first 4000 miles might have some bearing! How you drove it dureing break-in might also have some bearing. More then likely though you just got one of the oil burner Subie's. It is not uncommon for say 1 in 4 Subie owners to complain of consumption!
quote:Bingo!! Plus, if a new rebuild is going to fail due to a defect, it'll most likely do so by 3,000 miles. Same thing with a bad breakin procedure. Great strategy to avoid being blamed for something that isn't your fault.
Remember that RedLine is often used in a racing context (even their street oils), which would often be a non-factory rebuild rather than an assembly-line new engine. Rebuilds are a different animal from factory-new engines.
From the consensus thus far, the group seems to think that Redline does NOT have data demonstrating that their oil is "to slick" for break-in.
My impression is that some believe that synthetic oils, in general, should not be used for break-in. "They are too slick." "They will glaze the cylinders" Is this real or is this a myth? Rebuilds do occur? Has anyone prevented a proper breaking by using a synthetic oil?
Redline says something, it must be true. Mobil or Castrol says something, it must be marketing. Help me out. Is this a double standard or should we accept info from Redline but not "big oil".
MolaKule
Staff member
Gmorg,
Not sure why you're singling out Redline. Full synthetic formulations in general have this property. Possibly, Redline is making a broad statement in general terms, but their main audience is racing enthusiasts who rebuild engines.
quote:I believe vad has the topic in proper perspective. For new, modern engines, run-in is a non-issue. From my '92 Burb on, running synthetics in a new engine does not cause oil consumption. I generally run synthetics as soon as I can get them home from the dealer and change oil, and have had no consumption issues. For rebuilds or where shops cannot hone the cylinders to OEM finishing specs, the use of full synthetic oils will cause the run-in time to be rather long, but not impossible. So rather than wasting a costly oil on a rebuild that by-passes (uses or consumes) oil via the rings, one should use a mineral oil or blend for the rebuild until the ring/cylinder interfaces are mated. I don't see any conflicts between Castrol's and others 5W20 application recommendations and Redline making this statement. I.E., I don't see the link.
It's a non-issue since the new engines are already sufficiently broken-in coming from the factory floor. The rebuild engines is one area where RedLine's recommendations should be followed.
They may warn against using their oil for break in use for another reason.
I surmise it is because of the insane amounts of moly Redline has [normally a good thing], that won't let the parts mate to each other, as they should.
I am not trying to single out Redline. I am using their current marketing language as a specific example. For example, Mobil does not make a similar claim on their bottles. Is Mobil taking a risk by not telling us to avoid their product for break-in? Or, is Redline propagating a myth.
The connection between the Castrol thread and this one is this: these two companies both provide a warning on their bottles. Each provides a warning a little stronger than their competitors. From my point of view, it seems that either there is a factual, testable basis for these warnings, or there is not. Castrol implies that their 5W20 should not be used outside of manufacturers recomendations. We (as a group) accept this statement for a thin oil and yet reject this same position for a high-viscosity oil. It seems inconsistant. We accept that UOA is telling us that wear numbers are very similar between mineral and synthetic oils, yet seem to also accept that a synthetic prevents sufficient wear to seat rings or break-in an engine. Again, this seems inconsistant.
My original question, in both threads, attempted to validate or refute claims on a lable - Claims that were not backed-up.
The comment from "mechtech" is a perfect example. The expressed idea is that Redline has something in it (moly is held up) which makes it so slick that parts won't even mate. Wow, if that is true, and not marketing, I think we should all be using Redline. If it is not true, then marketing wins again.
If we had the equivalent to an FDA that required proof of claim prior to marketing, we would have less snake oil. On the other hand, maybe we not have as much to talk about.
MolaKule
Staff member
quote:Much depends on how good their general liability insurance is and how many lawyers they have at their disposal to defend claims.
I am using their current marketing language as a specific example. For example, Mobil does not make a similar claim on their bottles. Is Mobil taking a risk by not telling us to avoid their product for break-in? Or, is Redline propagating a myth.
quote:You bet. Redline has a high level of moly that is used as a friction modifier and reduces wear. So run-in time would take longer and waste an expensive oil during run-in. Who knows, maybe some idiot used Redline in a rebuilt engine and sued them, so they are doing a CYA. Send Redline a message and find out.
The expressed idea is that Redline has something in it (moly is held up) which makes it so slick that parts won't even mate. Wow, if that is true, and not marketing, I think we should all be using Redline.
quote:Ummm, never assume what you assume is the thinking of anyone else here on BITOIG.
From my point of view, it seems that either there is a factual, testable basis for these warnings, or there is not. Castrol implies that their 5W20 should not be used outside of manufacturers recomendations. We (as a group) accept this statement for a thin oil and yet reject this same position for a high-viscosity oil. It seems inconsistant.
![[Coffee]](/forums/graemlins/biggthumbcoffe.gif)
quote:We all do testing on our oils and know the limitations and advantages of each oil, and realize the litiguous nature of our society. [ March 02, 2006, 01:33 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
...testable basis for these warnings, or there is not.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,800
quote:I do believe that was expressed as a possible explanation. I don't see how either marketing or "truth" had anything to do with it
The comment from "mechtech" is a perfect example. The expressed idea is that Redline has something in it (moly is held up) which makes it so slick that parts won't even mate. Wow, if that is true, and not marketing, I think we should all be using Redline. If it is not true, then marketing wins again.
![[Confused]](images/icons/confused.gif){kind=icon}
As with hearsay evidence, it cannot be presented for the "truth" of the assertion ..just, and limited to, how one arrived at it.
Of course, most of the people that have a little experience under their belt, and live in the USA, realize that "Truth" and lawsuits often have no relevance to one another. CYA stuff is the norm, not necessarily something trying to disseminate the Truth about a topic. I'd be shocked to find that Redline used before 3000 miles on a factory engine would cause any problems...specifically no problems due to the Molybdenum content. OR, the Honda "factory fill must be left in the duration of the OCI", ostensibly BECAUSE the great amount of Molybdenum present HELPS with break-in, is incorrect. Too many conflicting anecdotes to trust any of them.
I'd wager you could go polar opposite of these two recommendations, i.e., go with Redline sooner than 3000 miles or change out the original Honda oil very quickly, and as long as you practiced reasonable care, your engine would be fine.
I have been wrong before, but, that's my take on it.
http://www.stealth316.com/2-breakin.htm
To find out, we spoke with Mobil and Redline Oil companies for their take on the synthetic break-in question. Mobil's response was that engines break-in just fine on synthetics, and that any wear point in the engine significant enough to be an interference, and thus susceptible to rapid wear, would be a wear point no matter what lubricant is used.
Redline, on the other hand, has found it best to recommend a mineral oil break-in. Occasionally an engine will glaze its cylinder walls when initially run on Redline, they say, so by using a mineral oil for 2000 miles, verifying there is no oil consumption and then switching to the synthetic, glazing is eliminated.
Why is glazing not a problem for the major manufacturer? Because they have complete, accurate control over their cylinder-wall finish and ring type. Redline deals with a huge variety of engines and manufacturers, both OEM and from the aftermarket. Cylinder-wall finish and ring type thus vary greatly, and glazing can therefore occur, albeit rarely.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
