Hi guys, I just want to get the real score on this one;
http://my.prostreetonline.com/t2540.htm
Keep it coming!
http://my.prostreetonline.com/t2540.htm
Keep it coming!
RP adds HP: oil test on Dynojet
- Thread starter abplus
- Start date
- Status
Everyone has a different opinion on this type of testing but remember that the viscosity of the 5w-30 oils varies as does the high temp/high shear which all effect hp. Royal Purple tends to shear out of grade more than other oils meaning that 5w-30 will end up becoming a 5w-20. I often wonder if this is how Royal Purple claims their increase in Hp. Also, oil analysis should be done on each of the oils to show which one is actually protecting the engine better. You might gain hp with one oil, but loose protection also.
www.joegibbsracingoil.com did some testing between Redline (SAE 30), Mobil 1 0w-30 R NASCAR oil and Royal Purple. Mobil 1 was the second best behind JGR oil.
Busch Engine Test Graphs
www.joegibbsracingoil.com did some testing between Redline (SAE 30), Mobil 1 0w-30 R NASCAR oil and Royal Purple. Mobil 1 was the second best behind JGR oil.
Busch Engine Test Graphs
Pennzoil isn't recycled oil, for one thing.. and second, I think there are too many variables even as controlled as this test may have been, to make a solid conclusion.
What about the magazine tests that show a loss at times with RP?
Your bias is starting to show. You should present all data, not just the data that supports your view.
Mobil 1 showed better than RP on the Busch HP and Busch TQ graphs.
Royal purple performed better than Mobil1 on the GM Crate HP and GM Crate TQ Graphs.
Mobil 1 showed better than RP on the Busch HP and Busch TQ graphs.
Royal purple performed better than Mobil1 on the GM Crate HP and GM Crate TQ Graphs.
I wish I had the 5 minutes back it took read though that "test" and the comments. IMO, the folks at "Pro Street" should stick to putting wings and Autometer tachs + shift lights on clapped out old Civics...
I just posted this on another forum earlier today. It basically addresses all of these "oil shootouts":
I am very skepitcal of these oil marketing "tests" and even most of the tests I see in magazines for the simple fact that proper dyno testing involves more than one or two runs. When my bike was dyno'ed several runs where performed just to establish a baseline, with no changes what-so-ever to the bike or the conditions. HP varied as much as the RP test showed by changing oils. If the HP can vary by 3 or more HP on a 95" Harley motor, with no changes, and if it takes a dozen runs just to establish a baseline that will allow for the before-and-after comparison of timing/jetting changes, then how can anyone say with any confidence that 3 HP (or whatever) was gained from one run to the next by changing the oil. If a correct dyno test was done there would be 10-15 runs made on each oil in similar conditions.
Another problem with the tests is that some of the old oil is left behind in the engine. Did the old oil coat the cylinders, bearing, etc. and cause an increase or decrease in power vs. if the new oil was coating the engine? I believe that Ester-based oils are polar and attracted to metal surfaces and will cling on better than Group I-IV oils will; that could affect oils that are tested after an Ester-based oil (like Redline). These types of tests seem to be very difficult to conduct accurately and would likely involve some sort of matrix wherein all of the oils are tested several times in different order. This would probably take days and hundreds of dyno runs. I doubt if anyone would spend the time or money to do this right.
One thing I have noticed in many of these tests (Joe Gibbs comes to mind) is that a thinner oil is being compared against thicker oils. This seems very deceptive to me. I've learned over the past couple of years that thinner oils are not always what they are cracked up to be. Some engines actually do better with a thicker oil and produce better fuel economy, which normally translates to more power also. My theory is that ring seal is affected by viscosity and I have found that I lost .7MPG in my car (comparing 8,000 miles on each oil viscocity) from switching to a thinner oil. I've also found that my Suburban 5.3L and my Road King are quieter with a thicker oil. On the Suburban, no fuel mileage was lost. On the RK I lost some MPG on short trips but actually gained some on long trips-my theory is that, when cold the oil is causing some pumping losses but when hot the oil is sealing the cylinder/ring better (just a theory, I know).
I think the bottom line is that there may be some slight HP differences between oils, but to find out would be a long and costly process. The fewer oils being compared the better. For example, you could test Amsoil for several runs to establish a baseline one day, then change the oil to Redline and run it for several hundred miles, or more, then dyno test that for several runs to establish a baseline. This would not be an exact science because it will introduce other factors into the equation. Of course the factors would need to be adjusted due to changes in temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, etc.
Any "testing" that involves one dyno run on each oil is complete c**p IMO.
I am very skepitcal of these oil marketing "tests" and even most of the tests I see in magazines for the simple fact that proper dyno testing involves more than one or two runs. When my bike was dyno'ed several runs where performed just to establish a baseline, with no changes what-so-ever to the bike or the conditions. HP varied as much as the RP test showed by changing oils. If the HP can vary by 3 or more HP on a 95" Harley motor, with no changes, and if it takes a dozen runs just to establish a baseline that will allow for the before-and-after comparison of timing/jetting changes, then how can anyone say with any confidence that 3 HP (or whatever) was gained from one run to the next by changing the oil. If a correct dyno test was done there would be 10-15 runs made on each oil in similar conditions.
Another problem with the tests is that some of the old oil is left behind in the engine. Did the old oil coat the cylinders, bearing, etc. and cause an increase or decrease in power vs. if the new oil was coating the engine? I believe that Ester-based oils are polar and attracted to metal surfaces and will cling on better than Group I-IV oils will; that could affect oils that are tested after an Ester-based oil (like Redline). These types of tests seem to be very difficult to conduct accurately and would likely involve some sort of matrix wherein all of the oils are tested several times in different order. This would probably take days and hundreds of dyno runs. I doubt if anyone would spend the time or money to do this right.
One thing I have noticed in many of these tests (Joe Gibbs comes to mind) is that a thinner oil is being compared against thicker oils. This seems very deceptive to me. I've learned over the past couple of years that thinner oils are not always what they are cracked up to be. Some engines actually do better with a thicker oil and produce better fuel economy, which normally translates to more power also. My theory is that ring seal is affected by viscosity and I have found that I lost .7MPG in my car (comparing 8,000 miles on each oil viscocity) from switching to a thinner oil. I've also found that my Suburban 5.3L and my Road King are quieter with a thicker oil. On the Suburban, no fuel mileage was lost. On the RK I lost some MPG on short trips but actually gained some on long trips-my theory is that, when cold the oil is causing some pumping losses but when hot the oil is sealing the cylinder/ring better (just a theory, I know).
I think the bottom line is that there may be some slight HP differences between oils, but to find out would be a long and costly process. The fewer oils being compared the better. For example, you could test Amsoil for several runs to establish a baseline one day, then change the oil to Redline and run it for several hundred miles, or more, then dyno test that for several runs to establish a baseline. This would not be an exact science because it will introduce other factors into the equation. Of course the factors would need to be adjusted due to changes in temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, etc.
Any "testing" that involves one dyno run on each oil is complete c**p IMO.
cfromc,
what thread was that?
what thread was that?
From the link:
"Although we are Greddy and Royal Purple Dealers, this test is NOT sponsored."
So if Pablo conducted a bunch of dyno runs of different oils, including AMSOIL, and it showed higher HP numbers with AMSOIL, would you consider it biased? Sorry Pablo, but you are a easy target.
Never mind the other real problems with dyno "testing" different oils.
You also have this comment at the beginning.
"This thread is meant for informational purposes only."
However, they didn't specify if it would be good or bad information. Also, I originally read that as "entertainment purposes only". I guess I was right with my 1st read through.
"Although we are Greddy and Royal Purple Dealers, this test is NOT sponsored."
So if Pablo conducted a bunch of dyno runs of different oils, including AMSOIL, and it showed higher HP numbers with AMSOIL, would you consider it biased? Sorry Pablo, but you are a easy target.
Never mind the other real problems with dyno "testing" different oils.
You also have this comment at the beginning.
"This thread is meant for informational purposes only."
How about: It's 11:16AM here. I've been up since 3AM. I'm off from work. Between my business, Bitog, taking the dogs out for ---- and poo breaks, trading the market, kids off to school, wife getting my drugs, surfing the news, screening some stocks and funds, getting the paper from the box, waiting for the first play off game in less than an hour.....where was I? Oh yeah, that was my biggest waste of time this morning! Was the Redline result even posted? Not worth looking again. Those differences are easily ambient temps, RH, engine temp, error, designed oil viscosity (10 cSt v. 11 cSt), etc......I am NOT bagging on RP, btw.
The results may or may not be valid. With the different formulations of oil, some might need more than a a few runs for their AF adds to work properly. RP often looks good in these types of tests. Perhaps synerlec works instantly while other adds need a few more miles and changes to do their thing. That alone would skew the conclusion. RP often does well so I wouldn't just dismiss it's results in tests like these. Shearing is not an issue. We're talking a few dyno runs here, not a few k-miles.
- Status