Redline...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: dparm
XPR is too much of an unknown. RP doesn't publish or share data on those. To me, not worth it.

Try something like Redline 5w30 or Motul 300V 5w30. Both can handle turbo abuse.


I see you are using Motul in that Turbo S4. Well if you have the S4 I am thinking of its turbo'd. So maybe the Redline is the Ticket? I can't stand Amsoils "our oil walks on water" approach it just [censored]'s me off, and RP is an unknown and too pricey for a ??? oil. VOA's look good though on the RP XPR.

Redline is the least expensive of the trio too. Unless you throw in M1 HM to the mix. That is the underdog oil I threw in, but I don't want to throw in too many variables here.
 
My S4 is not turbo, it's an NA 4.2L 40V V8. I do track it and race it.

My UOA looked really good on the 300V, far better than the Lubro-Moly Synthoil 5w40 that all the Audi guys seem to be obsessed with. Overkill for my car? Maybe, but for a few extra bucks I'd rather be safe than sorry.

I'm actually going to give German Castrol a shot for the next change and see how it compares. If the UOAs look good, I'll probably stay with that since it costs only $6/qt versus $15.
 
Originally Posted By: dparm
I don't believe HM is group 4. Only the 0w40 is. Everything else is the proprietary Visom group 3.


I don't believe M1 can be categorized as a group "X" oil. We know M1 contains XOM's group III "Visom" base stock (even 0W-40), but I believe they still have PAO and some sort of group V (ANs?) in the mix.
 
Fair enough. The 0w40 is much higher in PAO content than the other grades though. I'd bet there's a very small amount of group V too.
 
The recent reformulation of M1's 0W-40; lowering the KV100 to 13.5cSt and raising the HTHS to 3.8cP, implies the use of naturally higher VI base stocks and less use of VII's, while thickening up the oil somewhat in the process. The VI is up to 185 now.
If you need a HTHS vis 3.8cP oil or something close to it, as it will shear at least a bit in most applications, it's hard to beat for the price and easy availability. Around the world it's got to be the most widely used PCMO in racing applications including being the spec' oil in the Honda IRL race engines.

Since this is a Red Line thread, what most don't realize is that M1's 0W-40 is lighter than RL 5W-30 at all start-up temperatures not just below freezing as one would expect. Actually, probably at all oil temp's since RL contains no VII's and is therefore virtually impervious to shear.
 
Originally Posted By: dparm
Originally Posted By: bluesubie
Write RL and M1 HM (and maybe RLI and ester based Motul) on separate pieces of paper. Throw them in a hat and pick one.
banana2.gif


19.gif

-Dennis



Depends which variety of Motul. There are several 8100s and then there's race-oil 300V.


Should have said "one of the" ester based Motuls; 300V, X-lite, or X-max which is closer in price to Red Line (although with less z and p).

-Dennis
 
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
I don't mean to be so dificult to decide.

Then just flip a coin. You've already told us you're not interested in doing what is required to make an informed decision; really, you're just looking for an oil that would make you feel good. Any of the oils you are considering should be more than good enough for that. Seriously. Pick one and go with it.
 
I fully agree with buster and CATERHAM's pros and cons for Red Line, with two small exceptions:


Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
-Most of their oils contain a boat load of moly

Not sure I would call this a pro. It seems to be more of a formulation choice.


Originally Posted By: buster
I think Redline feels ZDP is still the most cost effective anti wear additive.

Something doesn't sit right with me about Red Line using something because it's cost effective.
 
I have a feeling the marketing folks stepped in there and told them the price had better be under 11/qt or people wouldn't buy it.
 
Cost effective and proven. With the exception of Fuch's, what boutique manufacturer doesn't rely on ZDDP as its primary anti-wear additive?
 
Originally Posted By: dparm
I just wish their 0w30 had a better HTHS value. I'd run it in a heartbeat. (my mfg calls for 3.5 min)

Then run a 50/50 blend of RL 0W-30(HTHS 3.2cP) and 0W-40(HTHS 4.0cP).
 
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
Thanks for trying to help me out guys. I don't mean to be so dificult to decide. To me, I agree, Redline in a grocery getter is overkill. But what about a 400bhp Rally Car grocery getter? haha. I figure which a turbo, 26psi of boost, 7950rpm fuel cut redline, and 200bhp per liter, even if I get groceries the Redline should be ok for my application.

Dave at redline recommended the 5/30 instead of 10/30 that Mitsubishi Recommends. Dave feels the turbo will spool quicker with the 5/30. I trust him. So if I order Redline I will get the 5/30.

Im just trying to decide on either the Redline 5/30, Amsoil RD30 or the RP XPR 5/30.

I have been running M1 EP for over 30K miles, but am willing to try something new. I did use RP XPR 10/40 while experimenting with water/methanol injection. I ditched that effort and so went the 10/40 XPR, back to M1 EP now. I will change to one of the 3 I mentioned very very soon.

Decisions, Decisions.


When choosing among RL 5w30, AMSOil RD30, and RP 5w30, I would go with the Redline. Then start on a regimen of UOA to monitor the long-term trend of wear metals from the engine. I think you need to do at least three UOA's to establish the trend of wear metals over time. Then pay attention to TBN and fuel dilution numbers to determine when to change the oil. I think the Redline will go longer than 3000 miles in your application, if you are just doing street driving with a little bit of dyno tuning mixed in. (But let the OUA be your guide on that.)

Face it, you just can't use your engine at 400hp on the street long enough to heat the oil up enough to worry about thermal breakdown. Even dyno-tuning is not so hard on things if you are just doing WOT sweeps, then allowing the engine to cool between runs. On the other hand, if you are running WOT on the dyno for 2-3 minutes continuously, then the oil will have time to heat up and reach a stabilized hot temperature.
 
Dumb question...if you have been running the M1 for 30K, why change? Is the motor having issues? Are UOAs coming back lousy?
 
Good question.
I think a decent approximation would come from plugging in the HTHS numbers into a viscosity blending calculator at 100C.
Using the Widman calculator give a figure of 3.58cP.

Or just use the RL 0W-30. Audi may spec' a min' 3.5cP oil but they also allow at least 15% shear before the oil is condemned from continued service. That translates into a 3.0cP oil that doesn't shear.
RL's 0W-30 uses very little VII's and I've never seen a UOA yet that shows any shear. So I'd say you're definitely fine using a 3.2cP shear stable oil particularly for street winter use while enjoying the benefits of a lighter oil at start-up.

To further put your mind at rest, you could dig up an old Audi viscosity/ambient temp' chart for use of lighter oils during the winter that was used before the advent of 0W-XX oils. I could go on but that's enough for this thread.
 
Originally Posted By: dparm
Dumb question...if you have been running the M1 for 30K, why change? Is the motor having issues? Are UOAs coming back lousy?

Mobil1-phobia brought on by the Evo forum.
smile.gif


-Dennis
 
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Good question.
I think a decent approximation would come from plugging in the HTHS numbers into a viscosity blending calculator at 100C.
Using the Widman calculator give a figure of 3.58cP.

Or just use the RL 0W-30. Audi may spec' a min' 3.5cP oil but they also allow at least 15% shear before the oil is condemned from continued service. That translates into a 3.0cP oil that doesn't shear.
RL's 0W-30 uses very little VII's and I've never seen a UOA yet that shows any shear. So I'd say you're definitely fine using a 3.2cP shear stable oil particularly for street winter use while enjoying the benefits of a lighter oil at start-up.

To further put your mind at rest, you could dig up an old Audi viscosity/ambient temp' chart for use of lighter oils during the winter that was used before the advent of 0W-XX oils. I could go on but that's enough for this thread.



Yeah it looks like here's how it breaks down:

50:50 = 12.8, 67.7 (light 40); HTHS 3.58
60:40 = 12.4, 65.4 (heavy 30); HTHS 3.66
70:30 = 12.0, 63.2 (heavy 30); HTHS 3.74

I do race my car (track, auto-x) so obviously I want something stout. But the car sees little DD time since I use public transit. Maybe 7k a year at most. I only drive it a handful of times a month. Heated parking garage (typically 50 F).

Blending 5w30 and 5w40 looks halfway decent too.

50:50 = 12.6, 76.1 (light 40); HTHS 4.18
60:40 = 12.2, 73.0 (heavy 30); HTHS 4.10
70:30 = 11.8, 70.0 (heavy 30); HTHS 4.02
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dparm[/quote



Yeah it looks like here's how it breaks down:

50:50 = 12.8, 67.7 (light 40); HTHS 3.58
60:40 = 12.4, 65.4 (heavy 30); HTHS 3.66
70:30 = 12.0, 63.2 (heavy 30); HTHS 3.74

I do race my car (track, auto-x) so obviously I want something stout. But the car sees little DD time since I use public transit. Maybe 7k a year at most. I only drive it a handful of times a month. Heated parking garage (typically 50 F).

Blending 5w30 and 5w40 looks halfway decent too.

50:50 = 12.6, 76.1 (light 40); HTHS 4.18
60:40 = 12.2, 73.0 (heavy 30); HTHS 4.10
70:30 = 11.8, 70.0 (heavy 30); HTHS 4.02


Those calculated kinematic viscosity numbers from blending RL 0w30 and 0w40 are close to what you get with plain GC (American Syntec 0w30): KV40=72, KV100=12.2

HTHS is significantly better.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
5.7 hemi oil discussion
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
The Lube Guy
E
2011 Toyota avalon Redline 5w-30
Replies
7
Views
1K
edyvw
6
Oil quality & Timing Chain Cam phased life 3.5 EB
Replies
11
Views
1K
21_6.7f450
C
Catalytic Converter Safe Oil?
2 3
Replies
40
Views
3K
AdmiralYoda
M
My brain hurts c5 Z06 oil
Replies
13
Views
2K
ScottyB
Back
Top