RLI Bio-SynXtra Booster Pack

[buster]

Link

Quote:
Now more than ever, there is an increased need for a high performance lubricant that is designed to out perform the
conventional petroleum API SM/SN formulas. Bio-SynXtra Booster Pak is formulated with Stabilized HOBS* that
provides a Super High Viscosity Index (VI) to improve performance in high stress engines without the use of polymers
to improve the VI. This concentrated formulation offers a variety of advantages over mineral oil-based additives.


Last page of the PDF, they test the Oxidation stability of Mobil 1, RLI and Quaker State.

Mobil 1 5W30 RLI 5W30 Quaker State 5W30
TFOUT ASTM D4742A 187 minutes 223 minutes 62 minutes
TEOST ASTM D6335 3.6 mg 28.6 mg

No TEOST for Mobil 1 but RLI tested it before and it was 5.2 mg, which is extremely good.

 

[JHZR2]

Is that Quaker State conventional?

I find it funny that they give the now more than ever bit, when all the progressing standards are more stringent than the last.

Sounds like advertising to me...

That said, I believe this is what Schaeffer's #132 has been out to do for years now...

While Im sure their stuff is good and will add some VI, the basis of performance of the parent fluid still needs to be considered.

My take away is that if this kind of stuff is needed, go with RLI. If they really wanted to sell this additive, they should have taken the Quaker State oil and put it in, then re-run the test and shown it to be up to M1 standards or something like that...

 

[buster]

Good question, I don't know. I agree though. I know RLI tested M1 before in the TEOST but have not seen QS.

 

[CATERHAM]

I'm not impressed.
It's a 40wt oil with a 179 VI which I in no way would consider "Super High" to quote Red LineI.
As far as improving the VI of the 30wt oil you would be adding this stuff to, some Mobil 1 0W-40 with it's 185 VI would be more effective and much less expensive I would imagine.
Or some Red Line 0W-40 with it's 197 VI.

 

[chubbs1]

I absolutely agree with CATERHAM. Although some have questioned my mix in my Altima as unnecessary (maybe it is), RLI is basically advertising a product to do the same thing. I feel a little better about my choice to mix the two and we will see how the UOA does after 6mo. of 100% short trip and stop and go driving in the FL summer.

 

[buster]

I agree. Never thought RLI was that great, but I like the idea behind it.

 

[addyguy]

Very interesting, but not suprising that they would come out with this.

Suprised this wasn't put in the 'oil additives' section - that's what it is, after all.

 

[bluesubie]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
I'm not impressed.
It's a 40wt oil with a 179 VI which I in no way would consider "Super High" to quote Red LineI.
As far as improving the VI of the 30wt oil you would be adding this stuff to, some Mobil 1 0W-40 with it's 185 VI would be more effective and much less expensive I would imagine.
Or some Red Line 0W-40 with it's 197 VI.

I guess it depends on what you're comparing it to. What's the VI of Shell's super high VI base stock?

I say kudos to Red LineI for actually saying what's in the additive. There are lots of popular "additives" and "treatments" out there with little or no beneficial additives.

-Dennis

 

[Bruce T]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
While Im sure their stuff is good and will add some VI, the basis of performance of the parent fluid still needs to be considered.

My take away is that if this kind of stuff is needed, go with RLI.


That's how I see it: the purpose of the booster pack is to turn regular RLI into racing RLI. I haven't seen prices for this additive package yet, but I doubt that it's cost effective for Group III oil.

Yes, I agree with Dennis that they're being unusually honest about content for the oil industry.

 

[CATERHAM]

About the only thing significant that I can see in this additive is the high Antimony level.
It looks to be a HDEO 40wt with a decent 179 VI (accomplished without the use of polymer thickeners) as a carrier for the Antimony. Since Red LineI is only talking about a 5% -10% doseage, all the other attributes are of very minor importance.

It's interesting to note that all Red LineI multi-viscosity oils contain polymer thickeners. If they could formulate their oils with the same polymer free base oil chemistry as this additive, now that would be interesting.
There are a expensive formulations that do, i.e.; Red Line 0W-20 (166 VI), FUCHS Titan GT-1 XTL 0W-20 (172 VI) and possibly Motul 300V 0W-20 (177 VI).

 

[dailydriver]

Where's d00df00d??

He's the RLI lover/defender on here, maybe he knows about this stuff?

 

[buster]

I have not kept up with Red LineI oils. Looks like they are very stable oils that have good oxidation resistance. They will keep an engine clean. That's all I can really say about them.

A few years ago, some were amazed that they didn't lose viscosity from fuel dilution, but that was more of a result of not using any viscosity modifiers. Redline and Amsoil make a few oils that don't have any, as pointed out, and they won't lose their viscosity either.

It's often not fair to compare a licensed oil that has to meet fuel efficiency requirements with a non licensed oil that doesn't have to comply. IMO. Oils such as Amsoil AFL and Mobil 1 0w40 were often compared to Red LineI 5w40. It's really not an apples to apples comparison. Red Line 5w40 won't budge either.

 

[Bruce T]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
About the only thing significant that I can see in this additive is the high Antimony level.
It looks to be a HDEO 40wt with a decent 179 VI (accomplished without the use of polymer thickeners) as a carrier for the Antimony. Since Red LineI is only talking about a 5% -10% doseage, all the other attributes are of very minor importance.

It's interesting to note that all Red LineI multi-viscosity oils contain polymer thickeners. If they could formulate their oils with the same polymer free base oil chemistry as this additive, now that would be interesting.
There are a expensive formulations that do, i.e.; Red Line 0W-20 (166 VI), FUCHS Titan GT-1 XTL 0W-20 (172 VI) and possibly Motul 300V 0W-20 (177 VI).


The HOBS esters will reduce friction and clean, but how much can they help in a 5-10% add pack? Especially mixed with PAO? I don't know. There are generous amounts of other additives. I don't understand plenty here, like the nitrogen/sulfur. Red LineI pulls back the curtain farther than other adds, but they can't give away all trade secrets.

I also wish Red LineI didn't use VII in every formula, but the degree of shearing seems to vary by viscosity. The 0W-20 I've used didn't shear. I think the 0w30 might be similar. The 10w30 sheared heavily, yet it still protected my engine equally well from fuel dilution. I don't pretend to fully understand how Red LineI formulas can do this.

 

[dailydriver]

Are "HOBS esters" the same formulation as the Ken Jetlube stuff??

 

[Bruce T]

I'm not a chemist like MolaKule, but I don't think they're related. HOBS means "High Oleic Base Stock," so it's a natural ester from genetically-bred plants (not a synthetic ester). I briefly tried to research Jet-Lube, but I had no success. I'm not familiar with the types of esters this company uses.