Redline writes about hard deposits

Not open for further replies.
Nov 25, 2003
The Tropics of Antartica
It is interesting to note that other synthetics produced considerably more deposit than the petroleum. Petroleum evaporates more readily than the synthetics, so more of the synthetic remains to thermally decompose into a hard deposit. The thermal stability of the synthetic hydrocarbon used in other synthetics is only slightly greater than a petroleum hydrocarbon molecule; however, the polyol esters in Red Line are capable of at least an additional 100°F before breakdown. The above was from the Redline site At the Redline site is a graph showing how some oils performed . The wts are noted with a letter designation for the brand which at least to me is easily indentifiable as Amsoil , Quaker State , Kendall and Mobil . That said , the Kendall 20/50 dino actually left less hard deposits than the Amsoil 20/50 synthetic and the Mobil 15/50 was the clear leader of the pack " under Redline that is " in resistance to form hard deposits which raises a thought about Mobil's Supersyn Formulation . Since the 15/50 is so near the same formulation as the 30wts in the Mobil line up.... would it be possible that the SS 30wts are the clear leader of the other synlubes when tested in the same VI in terms of engine protection against these hard deposits and overall engine cleanliness over the course of an engines life ? Apparently Amsoil is dumbing down the additive packs of their 30wts based on new analysis here in the last weeks while Mobil seems to continually tweek and upgrade their SS oils that now contain relatively huge additive packs in comparison . Also , it's interesting to find that some formulated Pao's can actually leave more hard deposits than dino's , per Redline . Thoughts ? Comments [ January 15, 2004, 08:07 AM: Message edited by: Motorbike ]
It's clear in my view that Mobil 1's formula is better then Amsoil's. Has anyone noticed that Amsoil is now using boron? Mobil 1 contains about 200ppm of Boron vs Amsoils' 60ppm. I've been saying this for quite some time that Amsoil's additive packages are weak. When I see a VOA of Amsoil I see ZDDP, some Calcium and thats it. Not much else. With M1 SS, I see Boron, Moly more Calcium. Amsoil is a nice oil, but they are clearly following the others lead in terms of formulation. As another expert put it, it's a win win situation when looking at M1/Amsoil. Amsoil buys so much PAO from ExxonMobil, giving M1 more profits. Redline is also clearly the best built oil on the market. I don't put to much stock into these UOA's. Unless a professional like Terry is interpreting them, they aren't that valuable other seeing the condition of the oil. [Smile] [ January 15, 2004, 08:33 AM: Message edited by: buster ]
Originally posted by Pablo: BS. The deposit stuff is marketing talk.
I'm not so sure that it's a marketing tactic at all because apparently they run tests to come to this conclusion they wrote about . As for the add packs , just look at the anaylsis's in the other section " virgin " and I left a keyword above and it was relatively huge additive packs in comparison . I don't see any 30wt synlubes over there with comparitive Boron , Magnesium and Calcium all bordering on what one might see in a HDEO and that's relative when comparing to oils with up to 75% less of these adds .
As far as marketing talk, no is better at lousy marketing then Amsoil. Sorry guys. [Frown]
Actually, I've heard in the past that PAO oils can leave resin-like hard deposits behind if the oil gets cooked, especially when shutting off an engine (and turbo!) without a proper cooling-down period.
Originally posted by moribundman: Actually, I've heard in the past that PAO oils can leave resin-like hard deposits behind if the oil gets cooked, especially when shutting off an engine (and turbo!) without a proper cooling-down period.
Thanks for the input , that's more along the lines of what the topic was mean't to be about . The graph clearly shows what I presume to be the Kendall 20/50 dino outperforming Amsoil 20/50 synthetic in regards to hard deposits . The graph will not copy and past though but it was not a small margin that the dino won out by in comparison to the 5/50 Quaker State then Mobil 15/50 smoked em [Wink]
That info has been on there for years ... Actually, I always thought synthetic "A" was the Amoco synthetic lube [Wink] Seriously though, all lube manufacturers are aware of piston deposit issues - that's why they use detergent/dispersant additives in their formulations. It is a particular problem in two stroke motors, where the oil is combusted as part of the design. As a practical matter, the Amsoil 10w-30 was run through a triple length, 240 hr Sequence IIIF test and still met the 80 hour test limits for piston deposits, required for the SL classification. The test results are posted on their website and I have more of the actual test data if anyone is interested. I will say that Redline is an excellent oil and is priced accordingly at $7.00/qt. I highly recommend it as the next best thing to Amsoil for extended drain use. If I was building a race engine, I'd compare Redline to the Amsoil Series 2000, 20w-50 and see how they stack up. You may be interested to know that James Faulkerson holds the "Dragboat" world record; running the Amsoil Series 2000 racing oil. As I recall, we also had an interesting guy from OK on this site who used to post under the same name. I believe the site moderators finally invited him to leave - but I wonder if he got the hint????????????????????????????????????? TS
PAO oils do not leave more deposits than petroleum based oils. While it is true that POE's do have a higher degradation temperatures than PAO's, I think these temperatures are so high that your engine would be so fried that oil type wouldn't matter. Listen, ALL oil companies run tests and hype the results. (and leave out the not so good results) So suddenly we all believe Redline and not trust the other oil companies? Seems strange. I EXPECT you guys to not believe Amsoil's results, that skepticism is fine by me and I don't even post the stuff. But in return a little doubt of the other oil co's marketing is in order. As for the "weakness" of formulations, at $7.50 at qt, I sorta expect a good one from Redline, and they deliver. Well sorta, and despite the excuses, Redline does just OK in street cars. The comparison could have used the weaker 20W-50 from a company called "Axxxx", dunno (but the deposits from that are not PAO's but more likely vis enhancers). I highly doubt that "A" is Amsoil Series 2000 20W-50! Marketing BS, guys!!! The Titan labs results, I just don't believe!! You can't compare the results (especially add packs P, Zn, Ca, Mg, etc) between different labs. The results can have errors over +/- 300ppm!!!
Actually, I've heard in the past that PAO oils can leave resin-like hard deposits behind if the oil gets cooked, especially when shutting off an engine (and turbo!) without a proper cooling-down period.
Never happens in my turbos. Doesn't happen with Mobil1. Just Amsoil? I think not. But petroleum oil in turbos DOES coke, so again the graph is marketing guys... A = Amalie, btw.
Sounds like alot of punches but no good body shots. Having rebuilt and "monkeyed around" with motors for years, dino's leave alot of deposits while synthetics leave barely none. I've used Mobil and now Amsoil. Both synthetics leave spotless valve covers, engine galleys, oil pans, and (from an old mechanic) - "metal clean" dipsticks. As a Chemical Engineer, I understand that analysis is good, but it gets you so far. The proof is in the actuals, supported sometimes by analysis, and from my experience, synthetics are on the top shelf, with both Amsoil and Mobil pretty much next to eachother. Advertising is not a Science, so show me the "beef," and that is - actual good running, clean engines.
Amsoil still uses esters for all their two stroke oils, where they can be of the most benefit. However, Amsoil and Mobil have come to the same design solution and decided that the blended PAO/Ester basestocks have a better overall mixture of physical/chemical properties for use as engine oils ....Redline is also a PAO/Ester blend, but does have a higher percentage of PE than some less expensive formulations .... I like the Redline approach to advertising a bit better than Amsoils, but their site is still mainly advertising, disguised as materials science. Since I used to teach the subject at Georgia Tech, I do feel qualified to say that [Wink] Tooslick
Originally posted by Pablo: The Titan labs results, I just don't believe!! You can't compare the results (especially add packs P, Zn, Ca, Mg, etc) between different labs. The results can have errors over +/- 300ppm!!!
Ok I understand so here's another from Dyson that member Molakule sent in for testing .same detuned add pack .;f=11;t=000112 You Amsoil guys are getting awfully uptight over this when you should'nt cause this type examination of oils is the very nature if the forum here . [Smile] Mobil bashing is common place and without merit because Tooslick has posted many times about Mobil's inferior additive package . Looks like the tides have turned if one beleives in analysis , and I for one do . This is not the BITDWTG site you know so we talk about motor oil ! [Big Grin] " bobisthedishwashingdetergentguy Also point taken on the " A " oil since it is not actually spelled out on the Redline site .
Now , Redlines race oils have little detergents to prevent detonation " per redline " so are they saying detergents can form deposits ? Are they including the detergents when they speak of Pao's and deposits ? Actually though in the first paragraph it only speaks of dino's and that they can leave less deposits than Pao. I thought Pao's were supposed to burn cleaner than dino ?
This is exactly why Mazda always cautioned against using synthetics in their rotary engines. They're designed to burn a bit of oil to lubricate the apex seals. A good dino oil will burn off more completely and cleanly than a synthetic.
I figure synthtics do "burn" cleaner during combustion, but I when the oils is actually burning while sitting on not-moving hot engine parts (rings and cylinder wall mostly), glazing with resin-like deposits can occur.
I see more sludge and carbon in engines with conventional oil and long OCI. I see no sludge and very little carbon in engines run on synthetic. What I do see though with synthetic oils especialy pre SS M1 is a lot more varnish then you would see with a conventional oil. IF shourt OCI intervals are used either will do nicely. THeir are always expections though! THe varnish is almost always in area no critical areas like non contact areas in the block like the cylinder case walls, unmachined casting areas on cam shaft, the floor of the cylinder shead etc! No one ever belives me when I say this and I always get flamed for it but this is my observations from a lot of engines.
Given M1's xx-30 oils appear to have a more robust additive package and both M1 and Amsoil are both PAO/Ester basestocks, why is it that Amsoil's xx-30 oils like the ASL/ATM meet the A3 spec and M1's doesn't? Is this purely a function of the relatively thicker viscosity?
I usually don't get into these things but what the hell! I have tried many oils. I have tested many oils. I am Running AMsoil 2000 0w30 right now. I had some Mobil 1 10/30 left over. Sooooo, put them both to the heat test. Guess which one caught on fire first............. Wasn't Amsoil. Didn't even smoke. We all know as far as synthetics go, Amsoil is a better oil because they have the NON API oils, which they can add more anti wear additives. ie. 35,000 change intervals. And even there API oil is for 7,500 miles. Hmmmmm, what does Mobil 1 say on the back of the bottle. My 2 favorite lines. "Outperform all conventional motor oils" and the other. "Excellent cleanliness and wear protection in high tem/hot running engines EVEN AT LONGER DRAIN INTERVALS." How much longer? 10miles? 20 ?
Not open for further replies.