Supertech VS Redline - Project Farm

Status
Not open for further replies.
That is correct, redline not in that test, but tests against Amsoil many many times and wins every every time, as posted earlier in this thread.

So Redline > Amsoil .> Super Tech in cold flow.

In case you forgot, Amsoil is one of the slow cloudy ones.

[video:youtube]https://youtu.be/hj3X_o0_NCo?t=2[/video]


Next time just thank for my post and I'll go away, keep it up and you and your sharp comments wont look so good. -15 is a flawed test tempature, an epic fail, only a shill trying to prove a non point would suggest it means anything. A few more degrees, super tech is an ice cube when most other oils aren't.
 
Last edited:
Oh wait, we only post video's that support the whack idea of this test, my bad on that, I'm wrong guy for sure. Keep on with disinformation guys, you seriously do a great job at that. i yield
 
Originally Posted by burla
Oh wait, we only post video's that support the whack idea of this test, my bad on that, I'm wrong guy for sure. Keep on with disinformation guys, you seriously do a great job at that. i yield


You dis on ST synthetic showing a video using ST conventional.

Integrity = 0
 
Originally Posted by burla
That what this is all about right, showing a video of cold flow, 5w30 redline performs as well as 0w30 m1, and you saw what m1 did to amsoil in other video. huh, thanks Burla?

[video:youtube]https://youtu.be/rvhl3JgYS8A?t=2[/video]

No, if you actually pay attention to the labels, M1 0W-30 is flowing two to three times as fast as RL 5W-30. It's not even a competition there. I think you're looking at the M1 0W-40 bottle.

The other thing you apparently don't realize is that according to the legal definition, no SAE 5W oil is allowed to flow faster than any SAE 0W oil. If it does, by definition, it's a SAE 0W oil and it cannot be sold legally as a SAE 5W oil. It would have to be labeled RL 0W-30 if that were the case.

Regarding M1 0W-40 appearing to flow slow, it doesn't mean much because the actual ASTM cold-crank simulator is a high-shear test (the shear rate is 10,000 - 100,000 per second), and you would see a lot faster flow when the generous amount of VII in M1 0W-40 temporarily shears.

Why insist on this when everyone has told you that you are obviously wrong? It's OK to be wrong -- everyone can be wrong sometimes. As I told you, Red Line has a very thick base oil (for a SAE 5W) and its CCS viscosity is actually higher than average for a SAE 5W -- nothing impressive regarding its cold flow at all. But that's OK -- Red Line doesn't even intend it as a superior cold-flowing oil but as a race oil instead.
 
The 5W30 Red Line flows within the parameters of its weight with using little if any VI. The HTHS and Noack alone show a superior oil versus the ST. That being said the ST looks to be fully capable of doing what 99% of the consumer market wants and is a fine oil especially at its price point.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by sloinker
The 5W30 Red Line flows within the parameters of its weight with using little if any VI. The HTHS and Noack alone show a superior oil versus the ST. That being said the ST looks to be fully capable of doing what 99% of the consumer market wants and is a fine oil especially at its price point.



Yes for about 1/3 the money!
 
Originally Posted by JohnnyJohnson
Perhaps not as scientific as it could have been. Still at $15.98 vs $47,95. Just remember the Redline comes in gallons and the Supertech is a 5 quart. Sorry you Redline guys but when it appears to be this close I'm picking the Supertech every time.

That's fair enough, but that demonstrates why this is a foolish test, irrespective of the methodology or lack thereof. SuperTech and Red Line are not in competition with each other. They both serve nominally the same functions, but the differences in marketing and purpose, not to mention base stock, are significant. If someone has a new vehicle (or an old one) and wants to purchase an oil that is certified to most ordinary North American specifications and be able to get it at Walmart and at a great price, SuperTech is the clear winner.

That's not the market Red Line is seeking, though. Most of their products are not certified, and for a reason. They are also not created with simply meeting specs at the best price point available. Others have pointed out additive level differences here and the HTHS differences.

This is like a video comparison of which is the better meal: Steak and lobster or chilli. The answer is do whatever floats your boat, because they're not in competition with each other.

Oh, and if someone is dissatisfied with cold weather performance of either of these oils (and this video doesn't test cold weather performance), then buy a 0w-XX. They're literally on every oil shelf. If you want an expensive one, Red Line makes many 0w-XX products. If you want a 0w-30 SN/GF-5 type oil, M1 0w-30 AFE is probably within a couple feet of the SuperTech.
 
Originally Posted by burla
Common man, you are sharper then this. Here. see with your own eyes Super tech at the time of fail, worst then any oil tested. Don't believe your lying eyes? Too bad he didn't do redline, it would have easliy flowed best in this test.

[video:youtube]https://youtu.be/uQ_vxdO_9nc?t=113[/video]


B.S.
Can't believe people are paying attention to a "flow test" that has nothing to do with API ratings.

But the biggest garbage of all, lying eyes? Huh?
How can you call Super Tech the "WORST OIL OF ALL" ??

Its laughable, the video pits 3 SYNTHETIC OILS against CONVENTIONAL SUPER TECH.

Ummm ... hello, WHY did the video USE CONVENTIONAL SUPER TECH instead of SYNTHETIC SUPER TECH??
I suggest he didnt use Super Tech because it would have been just as good OR BETTER then the others.

This is the problem with "Fake News" people are so easily fooled, manipulated, they see what they want to see and ignore common sense.
Meanwhile the idiot who makes this video gets COUNTLESS views around the world everyday because of manipulation of people who lack common sense, just like CNN takes advantage of peoples lack of common sense for the sole purpose of "exposure".
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by alarmguy
Originally Posted by burla
Common man, you are sharper then this. Here. see with your own eyes Super tech at the time of fail, worst then any oil tested. Don't believe your lying eyes? Too bad he didn't do redline, it would have easliy flowed best in this test.

[video:youtube]https://youtu.be/uQ_vxdO_9nc?t=113[/video]


B.S.
Can't believe people are paying attention to a "flow test" that has nothing to do with API ratings.

But the biggest garbage of all, lying eyes? Huh?
How can you call Super Tech the "WORST OIL OF ALL" ??

Its laughable, the video pits 3 SYNTHETIC OILS against CONVENTIONAL SUPER TECH.

Ummm ... hello, WHY did the video USE CONVENTIONAL SUPER TECH instead of SYNTHETIC SUPER TECH??
I suggest he didnt use Super Tech because it would have been just as good OR BETTER then the others.

This is the problem with "Fake News" people are so easily fooled, manipulated, they see what they want to see and ignore common sense.
Meanwhile the idiot who makes this video gets COUNTLESS views around the world everyday because of manipulation of people who lack common sense, just like CNN takes advantage of peoples lack of common sense for the sole purpose of "exposure".



Seriously not the first in this thread to make this mistake. Look again and read the labels closely.

[Linked Image]


Yes that Supertech label does say Full Synthetic!
 
And official pourpoint, and certainy not some glug glug test have absolutely ZERO to do with anything automotive engine cold start related.

The API crossed that Rubicon decades ago, but the youtubers and the brand name related fanbois are treating it like it's 1960 all over again.

Same with the "wear" tests
 
Originally Posted by JohnnyJohnson
Originally Posted by alarmguy
Originally Posted by burla
Common man, you are sharper then this. Here. see with your own eyes Super tech at the time of fail, worst then any oil tested. Don't believe your lying eyes? Too bad he didn't do redline, it would have easliy flowed best in this test.

[video:youtube]https://youtu.be/uQ_vxdO_9nc?t=113[/video]


B.S.
Can't believe people are paying attention to a "flow test" that has nothing to do with API ratings.

But the biggest garbage of all, lying eyes? Huh?
How can you call Super Tech the "WORST OIL OF ALL" ??

Its laughable, the video pits 3 SYNTHETIC OILS against CONVENTIONAL SUPER TECH.

Ummm ... hello, WHY did the video USE CONVENTIONAL SUPER TECH instead of SYNTHETIC SUPER TECH??
I suggest he didnt use Super Tech because it would have been just as good OR BETTER then the others.

This is the problem with "Fake News" people are so easily fooled, manipulated, they see what they want to see and ignore common sense.
Meanwhile the idiot who makes this video gets COUNTLESS views around the world everyday because of manipulation of people who lack common sense, just like CNN takes advantage of peoples lack of common sense for the sole purpose of "exposure".



Seriously not the first in this thread to make this mistake. Look again and read the labels closely.

[Linked Image]


Yes that Supertech label does say Full Synthetic!



Burla referenced this video showing how bad the ST was in cold flow. In this video, it is ST conventional vs synthetics.

Quote
Common man, you are sharper then this. Here. see with your own eyes Super tech at the time of fail, worst then any oil tested. Don't believe your lying eyes? Too bad he didn't do redline, it would have easliy flowed best in this test.

[video:youtube]https://youtu.be/uQ_vxdO_9nc?t=113[/video]
 
Originally Posted by Brigadier
Burla referenced this video showing how bad the ST was in cold flow. In this video, it is ST conventional vs synthetics.

Has someone on YouTube been able to determine that an API licensed oil has failed its cold cranking and MRV requirements? If that's the case, he should report it to the oil company, the PQIA, and the API. A YouTube audience isn't particularly useful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top