My review/observations of Red Line 0w40

[deven]

I have been running this oil in my 2010 MB E350 for the last 3000 miles and I am so impressed with this oil that I created this thread to document it.

For background this car has so far seen 1 OCI of M1 0w40 and 1 OCI of Royal Purple 5w40. While these oils can hold their own, in my observations they don't hold a candle to Red Line 0w40.

Say what you may of Red Line 0w40, being thick, high NOACK or what not this oil delivers when it comes to real world experience. My idle is nice and smooth, there is no cold start clatter that I got with both M1 and RP. I also had a hot idle tick with both M1 and RP that is also absent with the RL 0w40. The engine also revs very buttery smooth, maybe a characteristic of this oil being on the thick side but I sure will take it. I am very big on reducing NVH and believe me you this oil delivers by suppressing noise, idle vibrations and harshness.

The one downside to this oil as some may have already guessed is gas mileage. This is a thick oil with a 40 visc of 81cSt and a 100 visc of 15.1 cSt but more importantly this oil has an HTHS of 4 which is high compared to its competitors. All those numbers translate into one thing, reduced fuel economy. I saw an average drop of 1 mpg but I really am okay with this because one my commute to and from work is only 2 miles each way and secondly I put more importance in engine smoothness which this oil delivers mightily.

Lastly, the biggest negative about this oil as it is with most Red Line oils is pricing. The cheapest I can get this oil right now is for $131.xx for a case of 12 shipped. If you buy single quarts be ready to shell out more money per quart basis. The average price for a quart right now is $10.95. This in itself prices this oil out of many's wish list which is a shame because this is one stud of an oil in Red Line's line-up.

Thanks,
Deven

 

[deven]

Reference Numbers from Red Line's website:-

API Service Class SM/SL/SG/CF
Viscosity Grade SAE 0W40
Vis @ 100°C, cSt 15.1
Vis @ 40°C, cSt 81
Viscosity Index 197
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @*C 57@-35
Pour Point, °C -60
Pour Point, °F -76
Flash Point, °C 218
Flash Point, °F 424
NOACK Evaporation Loss,1hr @ 482°F (250°C), % 9
HTHS Vis, cP @150°C, ASTM D4741 4

 

[dparm]

Your post is one of the first I've read about that oil. Most go for the 5w40 or even 5w30. Just curious why you opted for the 0w40? Are you racing the car?

The extremely high VI is very good, of course.

 

[BobFout]

Woot

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: BobFout
Woot

Tell me about your experience with RL 0w40 Bob.

 

[BobFout]

Originally Posted By: dparm
Your post is one of the first I've read about that oil. Most go for the 5w40 or even 5w30. Just curious why you opted for the 0w40? Are you racing the car?

The extremely high VI is very good, of course.


I can at least provide my thinking on choosing their 0w40 over 5w40. (1) Moly (2) Better cold weather flow (if we trust the Widman graph at 0C) (3) The 5w40 is probably thicker than needed in these applications (not racing or tracking).

Looking at the 5w30 specs, it might be good option too instead of the 0w40. It is spec'd for MB 229.5 on the bottle, but it's not listed on the data sheet.

I just wonder if there really are "sweet spot" 100C viscos for some engines? (where even though an oil has good HTHS, its 100C visco might not be ideal?)

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: BobFout
Originally Posted By: dparm
Your post is one of the first I've read about that oil. Most go for the 5w40 or even 5w30. Just curious why you opted for the 0w40? Are you racing the car?

The extremely high VI is very good, of course.


I can at least provide my thinking on choosing their 0w40 over 5w40. (1) Moly (2) Better cold weather flow (if we trust the Widman graph at 0C) (3) The 5w40 is probably thicker than needed in these applications (not racing or tracking).

Looking at the 5w30 specs, it might be good option too. It is spec'd for MB 229.5 on the bottle, but it's not listed on the data sheet.


Bob, I echo your reasoning as well. I know Dave at Red Line recommends 5w30 mainly because the HTHS is right at 3.5 which is a MB requirement. I didn't choose Red Line 5w40 because plainly it is just too thick of an oil. The HTHS is 4.6 and 40 visc is 94 cSt. Red Line oil always run on the thicker side and the rule of thumb according to Dave is to always go a grade lower with Red Line products hence him recommending the 5w30. I wanted to stay with a 40 grade so I decided that 0w40 was better suited than the 5w40.

 

[BobFout]

Originally Posted By: deven
Originally Posted By: BobFout
Originally Posted By: dparm
Your post is one of the first I've read about that oil. Most go for the 5w40 or even 5w30. Just curious why you opted for the 0w40? Are you racing the car?

The extremely high VI is very good, of course.


I can at least provide my thinking on choosing their 0w40 over 5w40. (1) Moly (2) Better cold weather flow (if we trust the Widman graph at 0C) (3) The 5w40 is probably thicker than needed in these applications (not racing or tracking).

Looking at the 5w30 specs, it might be good option too. It is spec'd for MB 229.5 on the bottle, but it's not listed on the data sheet.


Bob, I echo your reasoning as well. I know Dave at Red Line recommends 5w30 mainly because the HTHS is right at 3.5 which is a MB requirement. I didn't choose Red Line 5w40 because plainly it is just too thick of an oil. The HTHS is 4.6 and 40 visc is 94 cSt. Red Line oil always run on the thicker side and the rule of thumb according to Dave is to always go a grade lower with Red Line products hence him recommending the 5w30. I wanted to stay with a 40 grade so I decided that 0w40 was better suited than the 5w40.


RL 5w30 is 3.8 HTHS.

(same as M1 0w40 and M1 TDT)

That being said, we could probably use RL 5w30 instead of RL 0w40 *unless* there is some need for 40 wt 100C visco in some areas.

 

[deven]

^^ Thanks for the correction Bob!

 

[BobFout]

Originally Posted By: deven
Originally Posted By: BobFout
Woot

Tell me about your experience with RL 0w40 Bob.


Before running RL 0w40 I had M1 ESP 5w30 in, and before that, M1 0w40. Few years ago, Amsoil DEO and M1 TDT. (
Given the overwhelming engine sound is clack-clack-clack, I could not tell a difference in sound between the 3 recent oils.

 

[mechtech2]

Does that 2 mile commute equate to a fair comparison of oils?

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: mechtech2
Does that 2 mile commute equate to a fair comparison of oils?

No. I do a lot of aimless/leisure driving though. This is thread is not about comparing the 3 oils I have used in this application but more so being impressed with Red Line. All 3 oils are fine but I just prefer Red Line at the moment.

 

[Steve S]

1 mpg less? that is quite a large number. Redline is an interesting oil. Been using in for certain applications since the AllProof days.

 

[wiswind]

The 5W-30 will be a little cheaper than the 0W-xx oil....about 40 cents per quart less at this time (july 2011)

I also like Redline oils, though in the lighter version as my vehicle does not call for a xW-40.
Mine calls for a 5W-30....and I used that for a while....running 5W-20 right now and like it better but thinking of 0W-30 or 0W-20 for a future try.
The Viscosity index on the 5W-20 is a bit low, but all the other spec's look good for it.

In any case.....Redline is a pricy oil, but it is a very good oil from all I have read about it.....and it "seems" to have been great in the 2 vehicles that I have run it in.

From what I have read here......
the 0W-20 has NO viscosity index improvers,
The 0W-30 has very little
The 0W-40 has a little more (but much less than most any other).

I don't know if the 5W-40 has any Viscosity Index Improvers, The 5W-20 and 5W-30 have none, so if it does, it is very little.

The base oil having the need for no or very little viscosity index improvers is one (but not the only) thing that I really like about Redline oils.

 

[Indydriver]

Deven, thanks for the report. I'm curious about the boutique oils but can't really justify the price leap when I'm doing 5qt OCs with PP+P1 for $23.

My question is regarding the "buttery smooth" characteristic you've gained with RL. Is this really a slight loss of throttle response? Or another way of describing it, does it feel like you suddenly have a heavier flywheel?

 

[deven]

Indydriver, there is a loss of throtttle response probably due to the thickness of this oil. It really shows in the gas mileage. 1 mpg loss is significant in my book. Hope I answered your question Indydriver.

 

[Ben99GT]

I've experienced slight MPG increases with Redline versus oils with similar HTHS viscosities.

Both my truck and Mustang gained a bit of fuel mileage with RL 5W-20 (3.3 HTHS) versus PP/PU 5W-30 (3.1 HTHS), averaged over several tanks, on the same drive, in virtually identical conditions, and filled from the same gas pump. I've also noticed the "buttery smooth" feeling that seems common with RL oils, as I've posted several times before.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: wiswind
I don't know if the 5W-40 has any Viscosity Index Improvers, The 5W-20 and 5W-30 have none, so if it does, it is very little.
The base oil having the need for no or very little viscosity index improvers is one (but not the only) thing that I really like about Redline oils.


Yes, their 5W-40 does have some VI improvers added, but again, very little as compared to most other 5W-40s on the market.
As was previously stated, the biggest drawback to RL 5W-40 is the MUCH reduced add pack, and little to no added soluble moly (if one is looking for/concerned about having those AW/friction reducing additives), due to it being a low SAPS diesel oil.

 

[buster]

I forgot how beastly this oil is. VI is mostly likely natural and little/no VII's. VI of 197.

 

[dave1251]

Yeah but if I where to use it in the OP's application I would go for the 5W-30 version first, do you want to try some in the 0W-20 variety?