Wow, that's wild! Are you going to keep running the VRP for a a few OCI's at least?
Valvoline Restore & Protect
- Thread starter Scott S
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2024
- Messages
- 7
Yeah, that’s the plan. My family member that drives it now doesn’t put a ton of miles on a year, so it will probably be a while before I get an update. I’ll likely change the filter mid-interval this time to be safe.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
If that's accurate (5K OCI's with conventional) then it underscores how that strategy, prescribed by many on here, can utterly fail at keeping an engine clean.
Devil's advocate: did the build-up result in quantifiable performance issues?
A lot of the blanket or one size fits all statements often written here can get some people in trouble. Statements from back in the day like a good conventional oil can go 5K miles, or a good synthetic oil can go 10K miles, IMO for many of us that's looking for trouble.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Good question. I'd assume if it was put on a dyno, it would be down on power, but maybe @YotaGearhead can let us know if there were any observed issues with the engine.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2024
- Messages
- 7
Based on my 15 years in the industry servicing Toyotas, 5k intervals on conventional doesn’t typically pose a problem (for Toyota at least) aside from those exceptions for vehicles that fall under “severe” conditions. In this instance, the lack of crankcase ventilation flow caused a lot of buildup that is not typical for these engines. I agree though that some manufacturer’s intervals seem stretched under some conditions and are not a “one interval fits all” for all usage scenarios.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2024
- Messages
- 7
The buildup had no ill effects on power or performance other than some oil consumption which I’d suspect is caused from carbon deposits in the oil control rings. That was the primary reason for trying out R&P.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
That makes sense, that's the area R&P targets, and is a logical motivation to try the product.
Another VRP win. Thanks for sharing again. Probably wouldn’t hurt to run that indefinitely.
I’m not surprised. I see a lot of good synthetics here still resulting in carbon buildup, much less doing any actual cleaning.
See Overkill’s results with HPL after M1 EP, a forum favorite, at good intervals. VRP is a truly revolutionary product.
That’s for the Cummins Restore product, I think.
Last edited:
Just curious, why do you run Amsoil SS at 5k intervals? Is your engine GDI? Known for burning oil? Earnest question. (Personally, in my view, if you're going to the trouble to get dirty and do an oil change yourself, I can see the argument to use a boutique. Doing it yourself with Amsoil is still cheaper than a dealer change.)
I'm probably going to switch to VRP or M1 next. SS every 5k is certainly overkill.
VRP and M1 ESP are really hard to beat.
You can even drop down to Quaker State Euro 5W-40 for $23 a jug and still get the MB 229.5 cert. Pretty hard value proposition to beat IMHO. I think I have a little fuel dilution from lots of short tripping, especially in the winter when we don't really get out on the highway a lot (no chance to burn it off), so going up to a 40 weight is appealing.
I'll update that a 2007 Rav4 2.4L that has been in the extended family since new is now down to less than a pint of consumption in 5,000 oci. Prior to Berrymans B12 chemtool piston soak and 3 oil changes of VRP it was 4+ quarts in 5,000 oci. Well done Valvoline, Berrymans. Let's take this Toyota closerto it's true longevity potential. Only 110k or so on the odometer.
Nice that VRP is doing what you were looking for.
Why does it bother me that 55k miles of what I would consider quality synthetic oils didn't seem to do much for the junk already in the motor. When was PCV changed? Maybe it's due again if that much junk is moving around the system?
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2024
- Messages
- 7
Valve was changed shortly after purchasing. Probably within 10-15k miles after I noticed a small amount of oil residue in the intake pre-throttle body where the PCV should draw air from, not vent to. Confirmed with vacuum gauge placed in the PCV fresh air tube that engine was building pressure (with PCV fresh air inlet blocked with gauge, and suction line still connected to intake) instead of drawing a slight vacuum as it should normally under that scenario. Checked valve and sure enough it was plugged. Currently have no indications of it being plugged again. Actually wondering if R&P will help keep the PCV oil separator and remainder of PCV system cleaner to help prevent the valve from getting stuck with carbon again. I never pulled a valve cover on this 3UR to see how bad it really was, but I suspect that PCV was clogged for awhile.
My opinion FWIW - I think synthetic usage in itself is good preventative maintenance. In a healthy, well cared for engine it’s sufficient long-term unless that engine has an inherent issue that would lead to buildup that affects operation. I have a 2008 Camry in the family with the 2.4L 2AZ. Prior to R&P oil being available, these engines low-tension one piece oil control ring design was notorious for clogging up with carbon causing oil consumption as I’m sure many on this forum are aware of. I saw it with all different types of oil. Maintenance history, oil quality, and driving habits were all factors, but I saw cars that were seemingly well maintained experience the issue. At 180k I replaced rings on this Camry’s engine, and valve stem seals. Reused block, head, bearings, and everything else as it was in great shape. Car now has 445k on the clock with maybe a 1/4qt consumption in the 7-8k miles it sees between oil changes with whatever synthetic 0w20 or 5w20 oil I have in stock (currently working through a ton of Mobil 1 truck and SUV bought on clearance from every AAP in the Pacific Northwest during their store closure sales,
. No signs of excessive buildup in that engine, no real reason to switch to R&P. When I run low on my stock maybe I will. Long story short, I think this Sequoia had too much buildup for the standard synthetics to tackle. The real test will be how it cuts down on oil consumption and ring cleaning. If 2AZ owners are having success with it with the old ring design, that’s impressive in my book.
My opinion FWIW - I think synthetic usage in itself is good preventative maintenance. In a healthy, well cared for engine it’s sufficient long-term unless that engine has an inherent issue that would lead to buildup that affects operation. I have a 2008 Camry in the family with the 2.4L 2AZ. Prior to R&P oil being available, these engines low-tension one piece oil control ring design was notorious for clogging up with carbon causing oil consumption as I’m sure many on this forum are aware of. I saw it with all different types of oil. Maintenance history, oil quality, and driving habits were all factors, but I saw cars that were seemingly well maintained experience the issue. At 180k I replaced rings on this Camry’s engine, and valve stem seals. Reused block, head, bearings, and everything else as it was in great shape. Car now has 445k on the clock with maybe a 1/4qt consumption in the 7-8k miles it sees between oil changes with whatever synthetic 0w20 or 5w20 oil I have in stock (currently working through a ton of Mobil 1 truck and SUV bought on clearance from every AAP in the Pacific Northwest during their store closure sales,
. No signs of excessive buildup in that engine, no real reason to switch to R&P. When I run low on my stock maybe I will. Long story short, I think this Sequoia had too much buildup for the standard synthetics to tackle. The real test will be how it cuts down on oil consumption and ring cleaning. If 2AZ owners are having success with it with the old ring design, that’s impressive in my book.Similar threads
- Locked