VR1 Racing Oil isn't the oil we thought it was
03-13-2007, 11:29 PM
#21
Melting Slicks
really what I think you guys need to do is quit going by weight percents and find the actual weight of ZDDP in the oil. That shouldn't be a trade secret, so give a call tomorrow to Havoline and find out the exact weight of ZDDP in VR-1 and the sythetic blend.
03-13-2007, 11:33 PM
#22
Race Director
http://www.valvoline.com/products/VR...otor%20Oil.pdf
The Valvoline VR-1 Racing Motor Oil
• The #1 selling Racing Oil of all time and race track proven.
• Protects against high-temperature deposits for a cleaner engine.
• ZDDP additive provides tough anti-wear protection.
• Enhanced with fricition modifier to improve horsepower.
• Formulated with enhanced anti-foam system.
Approvals/Performance Levels
Viscosity Grade/Other
API SM/SL/SJ
- - - - - - 20W-50
API SH
10W-30 20W-50
API CD
10W-30 20W-50
Test
10W-30
20W-50
Vis @ 100°C (cSt)
11.5
20.5
Vis @ 40°C (cSt)
77.0
181.8
Viscosity Index
143
132
Spec Gravity @ 60°F
0.8722
0.888
Density (lbs/gal)
7.27
7.39
Total Base No.
8
8
Flash COC (°C)
212
248
Pour Point (°C)
-33
-24
CCS cP (°C)
6200(-25C)
8000(-15C)
MRV TP-1 cP (°C)
20,000(-30C)
27,000(-20C)
Noack % off @ 250C
<15
<15
Sulfated Ash
1
1
Zinc/Phosphorus
0.130/0.120
0.130/0.120
Calcium
0.250
0.250
The Valvoline VR-1 Racing Motor Oil
• The #1 selling Racing Oil of all time and race track proven.
• Protects against high-temperature deposits for a cleaner engine.
• ZDDP additive provides tough anti-wear protection.
• Enhanced with fricition modifier to improve horsepower.
• Formulated with enhanced anti-foam system.
Approvals/Performance Levels
Viscosity Grade/Other
API SM/SL/SJ
- - - - - - 20W-50
API SH
10W-30 20W-50
API CD
10W-30 20W-50
Test
10W-30
20W-50
Vis @ 100°C (cSt)
11.5
20.5
Vis @ 40°C (cSt)
77.0
181.8
Viscosity Index
143
132
Spec Gravity @ 60°F
0.8722
0.888
Density (lbs/gal)
7.27
7.39
Total Base No.
8
8
Flash COC (°C)
212
248
Pour Point (°C)
-33
-24
CCS cP (°C)
6200(-25C)
8000(-15C)
MRV TP-1 cP (°C)
20,000(-30C)
27,000(-20C)
Noack % off @ 250C
<15
<15
Sulfated Ash
1
1
Zinc/Phosphorus
0.130/0.120
0.130/0.120
Calcium
0.250
0.250
Last edited by bobs77vet; 03-13-2007 at 11:36 PM.
03-14-2007, 10:06 AM
#23
Melting Slicks
Member Since: May 2004
Location: Banana Republic
Posts: 2,627
Received 693 Likes
on
318 Posts
2023 C7 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2018 C3 of Year Finalist
Valvoline was nice enough to look at this thread, here's their response:
We are not able to join the forums, but we can give you the answer you need, or maybe would like to add to the forum. Our VR1 Racing Oil is NOT just an "ordinary new car street oil" as listed. Our Valvoline VR1 Racing Oils can be used in street applications, but still contains the high amount of ZDDP (Zinc and Phosphorus). This information can be found on our Valvoline.com website, under the section where it lists the Racing Oils. We have also added the product information sheet for both the VR1 and the "Not Street Legal" Racing oils. As you will see, Valvoline still contains 1200 ppm Zinc content in our regular conventional VR1. It does carry the API Service "SM" rating, but this oil was not made to change for emission standards due to it not being a "ordinary street car oil." This information clearly states the amount of both the Zinc and Phosphorus levels in the oils. The main difference between the the "Not Street Legal" racing oil, or commonly known as Conventional and Synthetic Racing oils, and the VR1 is the Calcium content. Calcium levels are higher in the NSL oils, compared to the VR1, and the NSL oil is only recommended for 500 mile oil changes, while the VR1 is a 3 month/3,000 mile oil.
Valvoline stands behind the flat-tappet and more aggressive type cam applications 100% with our Valvoline VR1 and NSL Racing oils. The proof is in our product information sheets, which are online for the viewing as well.
Here are the product information sheets with test results for all of VR1, Not Street Legal conventional, and Not Street Legal Synthetic.
Thank you,
Valvoline
Valvoline stands behind the flat-tappet and more aggressive type cam applications 100% with our Valvoline VR1 and NSL Racing oils. The proof is in our product information sheets, which are online for the viewing as well.
Here are the product information sheets with test results for all of VR1, Not Street Legal conventional, and Not Street Legal Synthetic.
Thank you,
Valvoline
03-14-2007, 10:33 AM
#25
Melting Slicks
Member Since: May 2004
Location: Banana Republic
Posts: 2,627
Received 693 Likes
on
318 Posts
2023 C7 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2018 C3 of Year Finalist
Here's another bit of info from Valvoline:
Adding to what we stated earlier, we have read throughout the forum. We see a lot of references to the API Service "SM" rating, being the main cause for catalytic converter damage. SM is basically just a gasoline rating. The S stands for Spark ignition, which refers to the ignition for gasoline type vehicles. When an oil has an SM rating, that just plainly means that the oil past the specific API (American Petroleum Institute) test requirements to obtain this specification. It has nothing to do with catalytic converters. The rating that stands out on conventional motor oils, (Premium conventional, Durablend, & Synpower) is the GF-3 and GF-4 ratings. These are energy conserving ratings that are necessary because of the Environmental Protection Agency mandating federal standards to further reduce emissions, beginning with '05 vehicles. These are the ratings that make the oil safe for catalyst effectiveness, and these ratings are not found on the VR1 Racing Oils due the ZDDP additive content, not API Service "SM."
Hope this helps,
Valvoline
Hope this helps,
Valvoline
03-14-2007, 11:46 AM
#26
Melting Slicks
I had similar concerns about the current SM oils being sold so I inquired to the API tech line and this is what I found.
CI-4 PLUS oils do not have a limit on ZDDP, so the amount in specific CI-4 PLUS oils depends on the additive treat used by the oil marketer. You can safely say that CI-4 PLUS oils have a fair amount of ZDDP.
Oils meeting ILSAC GF-4 requirements (usually 0W-20, 0W-30, 5W-20, 5W-30 and 10W-30 SM oils) cannot have the following restrictions on phosphorus and sulfur:
0.08 ppm maximum phosphorus
0.06 ppm minimum phosphorus
0.5 ppm maximum in 0W and 5W oils
0.7 ppm maximum sulfur in 10W oils
Hope this helps.
In an inquiry about oils rated CI-4+ this is what they wrote back.
We address some of your questions at www.apicj-4.org, but I don’t think we compare CI-4 to CJ-4. CI-4 has NO phosphorus (the antiwear component of ZDDP) limit, so it can be as much or as little as a marketer requires. Generally, it’s somewhere between 1000 and 1200 ppm phosphorus. This is fairly consistent with CJ-4’s phos limit of 1200 ppm.
Conclusion is SM oils have less than 1 PPM of phosphorus ( the anti wear component of ZDDP) wheras CI-4+ has between 1000-1200 PPM of phosphorus. IF the can sez API SM dont use it on vintage flat tappet engines.
CI-4 PLUS oils do not have a limit on ZDDP, so the amount in specific CI-4 PLUS oils depends on the additive treat used by the oil marketer. You can safely say that CI-4 PLUS oils have a fair amount of ZDDP.
Oils meeting ILSAC GF-4 requirements (usually 0W-20, 0W-30, 5W-20, 5W-30 and 10W-30 SM oils) cannot have the following restrictions on phosphorus and sulfur:
0.08 ppm maximum phosphorus
0.06 ppm minimum phosphorus
0.5 ppm maximum in 0W and 5W oils
0.7 ppm maximum sulfur in 10W oils
Hope this helps.
In an inquiry about oils rated CI-4+ this is what they wrote back.
We address some of your questions at www.apicj-4.org, but I don’t think we compare CI-4 to CJ-4. CI-4 has NO phosphorus (the antiwear component of ZDDP) limit, so it can be as much or as little as a marketer requires. Generally, it’s somewhere between 1000 and 1200 ppm phosphorus. This is fairly consistent with CJ-4’s phos limit of 1200 ppm.
Conclusion is SM oils have less than 1 PPM of phosphorus ( the anti wear component of ZDDP) wheras CI-4+ has between 1000-1200 PPM of phosphorus. IF the can sez API SM dont use it on vintage flat tappet engines.
03-14-2007, 12:26 PM
#27
Race Director
Member Since: Jan 2000
Location: Corsicana, Tx
Posts: 12,603
Received 1,874 Likes
on
912 Posts
2020 C2 of the Year - Modified Winner
2020 Corvette of the Year (performance mods)
C2 of Year Winner (performance mods) 2019
2017 C2 of Year Finalist
Here's some more real interesting reading on the subject.
http://www.lnengineering.com/oil.html
With all the talk lately about roller lifters and oils...as well as flat tappet cam failure....I found this testing by Valvoline to be pretty interesting too.
http://www.valvoline-technology.com/...%20Galling.pdf
In their opinion...*slick* is not good!!
While it was geared toward diesel engines....you have to remember they have had roller followers forever. There has never really been an issue until the last 5 years or so and now all of a sudden we see more issues than ever,,,even with the *good* diesel oils. Looks like they were chasing the issue a pretty good while back.
In a recent conversation with Performance Research, ML67 was discussing their *ball roller lifter* and roller lifter life in general. One of the interesting things they mentioned was that it was best to run the thickest oil you could get for roller lifter life. He said if you could live with 60wt..then do it!!
http://www.thevalvetrain.com/pages/products.html
Looks like we all get to keep studying here.....
Let me know what you think...
JIM
http://www.lnengineering.com/oil.html
With all the talk lately about roller lifters and oils...as well as flat tappet cam failure....I found this testing by Valvoline to be pretty interesting too.
http://www.valvoline-technology.com/...%20Galling.pdf
In their opinion...*slick* is not good!!
While it was geared toward diesel engines....you have to remember they have had roller followers forever. There has never really been an issue until the last 5 years or so and now all of a sudden we see more issues than ever,,,even with the *good* diesel oils. Looks like they were chasing the issue a pretty good while back.
In a recent conversation with Performance Research, ML67 was discussing their *ball roller lifter* and roller lifter life in general. One of the interesting things they mentioned was that it was best to run the thickest oil you could get for roller lifter life. He said if you could live with 60wt..then do it!!
http://www.thevalvetrain.com/pages/products.html
Looks like we all get to keep studying here.....
Let me know what you think...
JIM
03-14-2007, 01:16 PM
#28
Race Director
this is good news......i will continue to use valvoline VR1 and everyone should stay the hell away from energy conserving oils for our flat tappet c3 vettes
03-14-2007, 03:15 PM
#29
Pro
Thread Starter
Member Since: Apr 2006
Location: Southern California
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 47 Likes
on
25 Posts
Boy this stirred things up, huh.......are we having fun yet?
Jim that was an excellent link to LN Engineering, thanks. In that link, it says:
"The latest API SM standard for car oils calls for a zinc and phosphorus content less than 0.08% to reduce sulfur, carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbon emissions (this contradicts what the Valvoline guy said about SM having nothing to do with zinc/phos).As a result of this mandate, some motor oils now have as little as 0.05% zinc and phosphorus and many of the motor oils we tested did not have the levels as found in, for example, Mobil 1. However, it is worth noting that these new API guidelines do not apply to “racing,” “severe duty,” or any motor oils that do not carry an API “starburst” seal or clearly state for off-road-use only. Motor oils meeting “Energy Conserving I or II” standards should be avoided."
It seems that's where some of the confusion has come from, where API SM called for reduced zinc/phos, BUT then doesn't apply to certain types, even those that don't have the "starburst seal", but would still say SM rated, but with only the API doughnut symbol, etc. Geez, who's on first? Gets rather involved doesn't it?
It would appear that a few things are getting cleared up, and that we are learning something, so that's good.
But back to Valvoline in particular for a moment. Mako 72, could you have your Valvoline contact tell us why, if VR1 does in fact have all that zinc/phos, even more than their other race oils, that it doesn't also say "Not Street Legal". And also why it does not have supporting text that warns of cat damage like the other race oils do? It seems rather misleading to make no mention of those things at all. I think Valvoline is doing a disservice to their customers in this regard. One last thing, since he is an industry insider, could you ask him to provide us with a link to the exact definition/spec for SM, GF-3 and GF-4. I haven't found this to be that easy to come by. That way we could all be on the same page.
Good stuff.........
Jim that was an excellent link to LN Engineering, thanks. In that link, it says:
"The latest API SM standard for car oils calls for a zinc and phosphorus content less than 0.08% to reduce sulfur, carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbon emissions (this contradicts what the Valvoline guy said about SM having nothing to do with zinc/phos).As a result of this mandate, some motor oils now have as little as 0.05% zinc and phosphorus and many of the motor oils we tested did not have the levels as found in, for example, Mobil 1. However, it is worth noting that these new API guidelines do not apply to “racing,” “severe duty,” or any motor oils that do not carry an API “starburst” seal or clearly state for off-road-use only. Motor oils meeting “Energy Conserving I or II” standards should be avoided."
It seems that's where some of the confusion has come from, where API SM called for reduced zinc/phos, BUT then doesn't apply to certain types, even those that don't have the "starburst seal", but would still say SM rated, but with only the API doughnut symbol, etc. Geez, who's on first? Gets rather involved doesn't it?
It would appear that a few things are getting cleared up, and that we are learning something, so that's good.
But back to Valvoline in particular for a moment. Mako 72, could you have your Valvoline contact tell us why, if VR1 does in fact have all that zinc/phos, even more than their other race oils, that it doesn't also say "Not Street Legal". And also why it does not have supporting text that warns of cat damage like the other race oils do? It seems rather misleading to make no mention of those things at all. I think Valvoline is doing a disservice to their customers in this regard. One last thing, since he is an industry insider, could you ask him to provide us with a link to the exact definition/spec for SM, GF-3 and GF-4. I haven't found this to be that easy to come by. That way we could all be on the same page.
Good stuff.........
03-14-2007, 05:41 PM
#31
Race Director
Member Since: Jan 2000
Location: Corsicana, Tx
Posts: 12,603
Received 1,874 Likes
on
912 Posts
2020 C2 of the Year - Modified Winner
2020 Corvette of the Year (performance mods)
C2 of Year Winner (performance mods) 2019
2017 C2 of Year Finalist
That ties into my use of the Red STP. Now wouldn't you think folks who read the label as a 4 cylinder treatment for high revving motors are probably going to fall into the later model stuff with cats on them?
That link shows like 3932 PPM of Zinc and 2115 PPM of Phosphorus in that stuff!! But it also says N/A in the API column. I guess additives don't have to worry about such stuff? No regs? If you add it to motor oil and it kills converter you're on your own I guess?
It doesn't tell us what EOS has in it...but you can infer from the text that it is at least 30-40% more potent than Red STP!!
JIM
That link shows like 3932 PPM of Zinc and 2115 PPM of Phosphorus in that stuff!! But it also says N/A in the API column. I guess additives don't have to worry about such stuff? No regs? If you add it to motor oil and it kills converter you're on your own I guess?
It doesn't tell us what EOS has in it...but you can infer from the text that it is at least 30-40% more potent than Red STP!!
JIM
03-14-2007, 06:06 PM
#32
Melting Slicks
I SENT THIS TO VALVOLINE YESTERDAY:
Quote:
To: VWEBMAIL@Ashland
cc:
Subject: Site feedback from Valvoline.com
The following person submitted a question or comment via the Contact us
form of type Ask Valvoline
Email Address: lcl242@hotmail.com
Comments:
Please respond to this post from the Corvette forum. I have been using Not
Street Legal Racing Oil because of the higher Zn and P content. Your web
site shows VR1 has as much or more of these ingredients. However, the
forum poster, who I quote, says your web site info is wrong. Please let me
know.
"Originally Posted by bobs77vet
whats suspect? are you saying you do not believe the these specs "zinc/phos
.130/.120" what do you base your comments on?
If you've been following along, you'd know that API SM rated oils are the
ones with the lowest zinc/phos levels to protect the cats on modern cars.
Makes no sense to claim race oil levels of zinc in a given oil, when it has
the SM rating. They are mutually exclusive. It would be magic for this to
be the only oil with such high zinc, yet not destroy cats like other oils
would with similar amounts of zinc. Valvoline's other Racing Oils that are
shown with even less zinc, have warnings that they are not street legal,
and can destroy cats if used in street cars. So, if VR1 had that much zinc,
it would also need the same warnings, but it doesn't have them. It couldn't
be street legal API SM oil with a ton of zinc in it. If you look at the
link above, you'll see that 2 independent UOA tests showed it having less
than average zinc/phos, not more, as the Valvoline spec shows. So, no I do
not believe Valvoline's published specs. I'd like to think it was just an
honest misprint on their part."
Please E-Mail me so I can share with my fellow Corvette owners.
Thanks,
Quote
RECEIVED FROM VALVOLINE TODAY:
QUOTE:
From : <feedback@ashland.com>
Sent : Wednesday, March 14, 2007 2:23 PM
<lcl242@hotmail.com>
Subject : Re: Site feedback from Valvoline.com
The oil industry per ILSAC had to only decrease the levels of ZDDP (Zinc)
in certain viscosity to meet new emission standards. The ILSAC rated oils
still have an average of .085 levels of zinc. Testing has shown on standard
OEM set ups that used mild camshafts will still get plenty of protection
from the new rated oils. There is an exception when it comes to extreme
aftermarket applications. If you have a high performance solid lifter set
up with an aggressive cam then you will need to use a quality Racing Oil
such as VR1 or All Fleet Plus Oil for break in and normal usage. These oils
have an increased level of Zinc that will range from .14 to .16 and will
provide plenty of protection. QUOTE:
Also, here is what I sent Royal Purple, along with their reply:
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:lcl242@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 12:14 AM
To: rpautotech@royalpurple.com
Cc: rpindtech@royalpurple.com
Subject: Automotive Questions
Could not findProduct Information on your web site for %/wt% of Zinc and
Phosphorus in your various oils.
Where might I find that information?
Thanks,
ROYAL PURPLE'S REPLY:
From : Kyle Neal <kyle.neal@royalpurple.com>
Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 9:59 AM
<lcl242@hotmail.com>
Subject : ZDDP levels
Larry,
We do not disclose this information. One reason is that there are oil companies that strive on numbers alone and try to make it a numbers game. Well the problem we have with this is that the other oil companies could try and get the same numbers as we have even if their product does not have the same quality and performance gains as ours. This could make a customer think they are buying a great product based on the numbers. If all the numbers on the sheets are the same how would you decide on which oil to choose? Price? All I can tell you is our motor oil exceeds the levels for the API service SL and our MaxCycle and XPR are even beefier than that. Thank you for understanding. What application are you looking to protect? If it is a flat tappet cam or a high performance cam, you will be safe to run any of our oils.
Have a great day.
Kyle Neal
Technical Sales Representative
1 Royal Purple Lane
Porter, TX 77365
281-354-8600 office
713-705-9556 cell
kyle.neal@royalpurple.com
Quote:
To: VWEBMAIL@Ashland
cc:
Subject: Site feedback from Valvoline.com
The following person submitted a question or comment via the Contact us
form of type Ask Valvoline
Email Address: lcl242@hotmail.com
Comments:
Please respond to this post from the Corvette forum. I have been using Not
Street Legal Racing Oil because of the higher Zn and P content. Your web
site shows VR1 has as much or more of these ingredients. However, the
forum poster, who I quote, says your web site info is wrong. Please let me
know.
"Originally Posted by bobs77vet
whats suspect? are you saying you do not believe the these specs "zinc/phos
.130/.120" what do you base your comments on?
If you've been following along, you'd know that API SM rated oils are the
ones with the lowest zinc/phos levels to protect the cats on modern cars.
Makes no sense to claim race oil levels of zinc in a given oil, when it has
the SM rating. They are mutually exclusive. It would be magic for this to
be the only oil with such high zinc, yet not destroy cats like other oils
would with similar amounts of zinc. Valvoline's other Racing Oils that are
shown with even less zinc, have warnings that they are not street legal,
and can destroy cats if used in street cars. So, if VR1 had that much zinc,
it would also need the same warnings, but it doesn't have them. It couldn't
be street legal API SM oil with a ton of zinc in it. If you look at the
link above, you'll see that 2 independent UOA tests showed it having less
than average zinc/phos, not more, as the Valvoline spec shows. So, no I do
not believe Valvoline's published specs. I'd like to think it was just an
honest misprint on their part."
Please E-Mail me so I can share with my fellow Corvette owners.
Thanks,
Quote
RECEIVED FROM VALVOLINE TODAY:
QUOTE:
From : <feedback@ashland.com>
Sent : Wednesday, March 14, 2007 2:23 PM
<lcl242@hotmail.com>
Subject : Re: Site feedback from Valvoline.com
The oil industry per ILSAC had to only decrease the levels of ZDDP (Zinc)
in certain viscosity to meet new emission standards. The ILSAC rated oils
still have an average of .085 levels of zinc. Testing has shown on standard
OEM set ups that used mild camshafts will still get plenty of protection
from the new rated oils. There is an exception when it comes to extreme
aftermarket applications. If you have a high performance solid lifter set
up with an aggressive cam then you will need to use a quality Racing Oil
such as VR1 or All Fleet Plus Oil for break in and normal usage. These oils
have an increased level of Zinc that will range from .14 to .16 and will
provide plenty of protection. QUOTE:
Also, here is what I sent Royal Purple, along with their reply:
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:lcl242@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 12:14 AM
To: rpautotech@royalpurple.com
Cc: rpindtech@royalpurple.com
Subject: Automotive Questions
Could not findProduct Information on your web site for %/wt% of Zinc and
Phosphorus in your various oils.
Where might I find that information?
Thanks,
ROYAL PURPLE'S REPLY:
From : Kyle Neal <kyle.neal@royalpurple.com>
Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 9:59 AM
<lcl242@hotmail.com>
Subject : ZDDP levels
Larry,
We do not disclose this information. One reason is that there are oil companies that strive on numbers alone and try to make it a numbers game. Well the problem we have with this is that the other oil companies could try and get the same numbers as we have even if their product does not have the same quality and performance gains as ours. This could make a customer think they are buying a great product based on the numbers. If all the numbers on the sheets are the same how would you decide on which oil to choose? Price? All I can tell you is our motor oil exceeds the levels for the API service SL and our MaxCycle and XPR are even beefier than that. Thank you for understanding. What application are you looking to protect? If it is a flat tappet cam or a high performance cam, you will be safe to run any of our oils.
Have a great day.
Kyle Neal
Technical Sales Representative
1 Royal Purple Lane
Porter, TX 77365
281-354-8600 office
713-705-9556 cell
kyle.neal@royalpurple.com
03-14-2007, 06:35 PM
#33
Race Director
i like valvoline oil and i have no reason to mistrust there product information......i sue VR1 and will continue to keep using it ...now we need to get the skinny on the "all fleet plus one oil".....maybe its our new secret oil?
03-14-2007, 06:45 PM
#34
Race Director
i wonder why the "all fleet plus one oil" is not on there web site?????? can anybody else find it ? perhaps i missed it
03-15-2007, 02:22 AM
#36
Le Mans Master
I am waiting for a shipment of AmsOil to arrive for my HD and vette. My engine is not raced and has hydraulic lifters so not a race engine. I am only concerned with high temps that is a problem over here. Does anyone have experience with AmsOil ??
03-15-2007, 03:36 AM
#37
CFOT Attention Whore
interesting stuff. makes me wonder why there isn't simply an oil additive that contains the protective package we all would prefer. $5 bottle of additive to 5qts of regular dino oil and everybody is happy.
03-15-2007, 06:12 AM
#38
Race Director
Used to use it a lot, but it is a pain to order and no one stocks it.
Started with a well broken in, flat tappet cam engine around 10,000 miles and used it till over 120,000 mi.
Never ever changed the oil, just filter @4000 and added a quart.
Never had to add in between filter changes and the engine was the only thing that was never touched in that vehicle. Still going strong with other owners AFAIK. Engine never apart so I couldn't really inspect parts.
Switched to Mobil1 since, only because it's an off the shelf item here and do the same filter thing with other vehicles. If places stocked it, I would still use Amsoil.
Also put it in a Briggs and Stratten air cooled 5hp engine about 5 years ago, the sees a lot of hot dirty conditions. Have never changed it or added and it still looks clean.
We call my wife "Mario" around here because the pedal is always to the floor. Loves passing gear. Much tougher than your average driver.
03-15-2007, 09:11 AM
#40
Race Director