Rumors are true - new Royal Purple oils coming

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NHHEMI

Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Messages
6,931
Location
NH
Have heard some rumors lately and seen a few posts around the net that Royal Purple is going to offer some new oils. There was a blurb in a SEMA video( posted here )a while back too where they briefly talked about new formulas. I decided to just write and ask seeing as they are pretty straight forward with answers when they can be.

Here is my e-mail and the response from Chris Barker at RP tech support( David Canitz no longer heads tech support FYI )...

Quote:
Q: I was just curious about your current and future API Certifications on your regular street oils. I know in the past your company has stated that you would not reformulate your API SL certified weights to meet API SM due to the reduction in ppm of ZDDP. I have a copy of your supplemental warranty I got from David Canitz that covers people such as myself who wanted to use your oil but SM was called for in the warranty. I use your 5W-20 in my 08 Ram despite it not technically meeting my warranty. I am a loyal RP guy so I use it anyway.

With all of the recent changes in the oil world such as GM's Dexos and API going up to SN, and the fact API SL will not be continued on forever, I was wondering if the company's stance on not changing the formula(s) has changed? I saw on a SEMA video from late 2010 as I recall where an RP rep( may have been Jared Martin? )made brief mention of possible formula changes( I believe he mentioned Dexos ). There are now rumors circulating around the internet oil forums and vehicle sites of possible API SN weights by as early as this summer. I have seen general comments and then specific comments of a 5W-20 SN.

I am just curious if any of that is true? I understand if you can't confirm it or even discuss it. I am just curious if you can tell me anything though in regards to the situation and if there is any reformulating being done or will be done? Or, will RP continue to stay with the current SL formulas period? Not asking for proprietary formulas or secrets or anything here. Just asking about API certifications and if any changes are upcoming soon or long term?

Thank you as always for your time.

Scott



Quote:
A: Good Morning Scott,

Good to hear from you again. We will be releasing full warranty compliant API SN/ILSAC GF-5 licensed oils, as well as a dexos 1 compliant oil for new GM vehicles. Along with this, a new street performance line of oils will be released for our customers for whom warranty is not a concern, and who want a higher performing oil than API and ILSAC restrictions will allow. I am not sure of exact dates, but the new oils are on track to be released this summer.

Regards,

Chris


So there we are. API SN and GM Dexos oils on the way by this summer it appears. Looks to me like they are going to offer their oils in a manner similar to Amsoil = warranty compliant oils( XL/OE )and then premium oils( ASL/ASM/SSO ). I am wondering if they will use Grp III for the new warranty lines?
 
35.gif
 
Now we need two new threads. One for what does "higher performing oil mean" and second "API and ILSAC restrictions on oil performance".
 
Originally Posted By: TTK
Now we need two new threads. One for what does "higher performing oil mean" and second "API and ILSAC restrictions on oil performance".


There are limits allowed for anti wear additives, such as ZDDP, that RP feels make the oil less effective. They have been very vocal that they do not feel that SM anyway provides better anti wear protection than SL AND that they do not feel ZDDP is the big emmissions issue( poisoning CC's )it is made out to be. I think it is pretty easy to add 1 + 1 and come up with 2.
 
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
There are limits allowed for anti wear additives, such as ZDDP, that RP feels make the oil less effective.

Is there proof somewhere out there that I can review that clearly shows that the level of ZDDP currently allowed is harmful to my engine and provides inadequate protection?
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
There are limits allowed for anti wear additives, such as ZDDP, that RP feels make the oil less effective.

Is there proof somewhere out there that I can review that clearly shows that the level of ZDDP currently allowed is harmful to my engine and provides inadequate protection?



There are reports out there of older cars running traditional flat lifter setups with problems with cam lobe wear using SM. If you have an older vehicle or even a newer one running flat tappets and high spring pressure you could suffer some cam lobe wear using SM/SN oils. If you have a newer vehicle with roller lifters you will be fine. I think most will agree that is now an accepted "truth".

Also, I did not say, nor has RP said, that the ZDDP levels in SM/SN are harmful nor that they provide inadequate protection. That is an extreme comment as it would depend on your engine and how it was built( i.e. components ). RP has simply stated they feel their SL formula with higher ZDDP levels is better than SM oils at wear protection and thus they did not reformulate to meet SM in the more popular weights.
21.gif
Keep in mind their target market is not really your new(er) daily driver but rather older and performance vehicles.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
There are limits allowed for anti wear additives, such as ZDDP, that RP feels make the oil less effective.

Is there proof somewhere out there that I can review that clearly shows that the level of ZDDP currently allowed is harmful to my engine and provides inadequate protection?


Yes. Go to nasioc.com and check out all of the spun bearing and blown turbos running GF4 oils. Then look to see how many have had issues on non GF4 oils. The 2.0 and 2.5 forums are loaded with those threads.

Of course, I'm not going to get into the "nut behind the wheel" issue.
smile.gif


-Dennis
 
Haters keep hating ! Non-users can't help but bash, welcome to Romper room!
06.gif



Thanks for the info NHHEMI !
10.gif
 
Originally Posted By: bluesubie
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
There are limits allowed for anti wear additives, such as ZDDP, that RP feels make the oil less effective.

Is there proof somewhere out there that I can review that clearly shows that the level of ZDDP currently allowed is harmful to my engine and provides inadequate protection?


Yes. Go to nasioc.com and check out all of the spun bearing and blown turbos running GF4 oils. Then look to see how many have had issues on non GF4 oils. The 2.0 and 2.5 forums are loaded with those threads.

Of course, I'm not going to get into the "nut behind the wheel" issue.
smile.gif


-Dennis

Spun bearings and blown turbo's have nothing to do with zddp content. zddp is primarily put in oil for extreme pressure wear protection, such as in slider-follower valvetrains.

The API put a minimum limit on Phosphorous content in the SM spec, and included requirements for Phosphorous retention in the SN spec. I believe it is a tacit admission from them that they are flirting with the lower limits of wear protection in their specifications.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
Oil for 2015 3.5 Ecoboost Police Interceptor
Replies
7
Views
437
edyvw
C
XO5W20-QFS 5w 30 motor oil. Any beside Mopar.........................
Replies
6
Views
1K
bdcardinal
N
Conclusions on Ecoboost Engine Oil - Gas Turbo Direct Injection
5 6 7
Replies
128
Views
12K
odie
CarbonSteel
Is DEXOS 1 the most "stringent" US gasoline oil specification?
Replies
16
Views
4K
bbhero
G
Ford lube spec: Looking for an EXACT SPEC match
Replies
12
Views
1K
bdcardinal
Back
Top