Got my order already! Fast shipping from these guys. Thanks! I bought 8 quarts of RP, plus a few other things.

-

 

we'll have the last laugh

 

I also have never heard anything bad about RP. I use it in both my cars and don't really worry. Seem to have good oil pressure even at high rpm so it must be doing it's job I would think.

 

Good price - thanks for the heads-up and the link.

 

Would you , or the other person knocking RP enlighten us & give us a link for proof,not just your opinion?Proof that RP is bad by testing,or other reputable basis.I'm serious I'd like to know if it is that bad or just B/S opinionated heresay.

Without any basis its hard to believe,& wonder why when a product is knocked to be crap & the said product is a sponsor here ,why isn't proof required by this forum site?Afterall its kind of like slander.

Really ,we all would like to know that what we're putting in our ,IMO to me ,a car of a lifetime & a fine machine rivaling exotics costing several times as much,would not be good for it?I only try to put the best in my baby,would'nt want any thing else for it.

 

I think you are not getting any proof about RP being a problem because none exists. I have searched and I can't find anything to prove it is definitively better or worse than Mobil1. My conclusion is that it is a viable option. About the most that you can find is hearsay but nothing that substantiates it as fact. To my knowledge I have never seen a manufacturer or builder that positively states that using any particular brand would void their warranty. It would never hold up in a court because then they would have to prove that the oil was substandard. They always state that the oil has to meet or exceed a certain standard.

To me the accusations here are nothing more than an opinion. Curiously, I found the opposite opinions on other sites. Some suggest that Mobil1 offers the best deal to GM therefore that is why they are chosen. Another suggests that GM is in the business of selling new cars. They do not want an oil that would over-extend the life of a vehicle. The logic being that Mobil1 is a lesser oil thereby not over extending the life of the engine and assisting auto makers in creating a buyer to buy another vehicle in 5 years.

I use both Mobil1 and RP and have about the same amount of faith in either.

 

If you go to bobistheoilguy.com and do a search in the used oil analysis section, you'll find plenty of proof that Royal Purple isn't quite as good of an oil as it's competitors.

I've seen it for many years now, that Royal Purple thins out quite rapidly, going from a 5w30 to a 5w20 in just a few thousand miles (typically about 2000 miles) When I was saying this, a rep from Royal Purple decided that he would send me a free case of oil if I would agree to run their oil in my wife's Honda and get a used oil analysis done. That was a big mistake on their part, as the oil did indeed thin out quite rapidly, and the engine wear numbers were quite a bit higher than any of the other oils I have run in my wife's car. To put it mildly, I was not impressed at all with the performance of Royal Purple, it performed even worse than I expected. I'm getting much better engine wear numbers from Castrol GTX in my wife's Honda than I did with Royal Purple!

 

I'm not sure about the test shown earlier in this post, but I'll add to the fray with these two links. Amsoil uses a "four ball wear test" which they claim is more indicative of normal wear and tear on an engine.

"The 4-Ball Wear Test is a good indication of the wear protection provided by an oil under severe conditions. The smaller the wear scar, the better the protection."

The Dyno test shown here is different, but is worth the read as well. Any test I've ever reviewed (except the one mentioned earlier) showed RP inferior to Mobil 1 and Amsoil.

http://www.performancemotoroil.com/Dyno_test.html

http://www.enhancedsyntheticoil.com/..._vs_AMSOIL.htm

Rossi

 

well someone else did it for me..
this is common knowledge in racing circles

 

Thanx for finally showing something concrete.But both links appear to be adds for Amzoil,& don't really state that RP is inferior enough to make it not warranted for use.Four ball test opposed to the one RP uses ,well maybe thats up to experts here to decide whats more accurate?I just called petro chemical engineer Purdue University Grad , employed in a refinery,& IHO,in oil the industry a "four ball test" is used more for heavier lubricants.,like gear lubes ,& greases.He felt that the falex pin & v block test is more accurate for motor oils, in wear meausuring.

Is " Bob the oil guy" a Petro-chemical engineer?What equipment does he use for his analysis?I don't know if he is the supreme authority on oil or not,but would like some info,on him,I'll investigate.

I used al kinds of motor oils ,RP,M1,Penzoil Platinum,QS Horsepower ,all inclusive,unlike Patman,could'nt tell the miniscule performance differences between them.RP seems to run just as smooth as the others.Of course its not a Honda with 120Hp ,I 'm basing my compairison on but a C5 with a little more ponies.I don't know,I don't do oil analysis on DD cars ,or my C5 every time I change the oil,so who am I to say?Castrol GTX for you Patman,OK,but for my cars its going to be one that meets GM4718M.

IRS man told us so,please don't audit me now!

 

I really would be curious to know what the Purdue grad thinks about molybdenum disulfide and whether or not he thinks it would affect the quality of automobile oils in any way...RP seems to be the only major oil manufacturer using it. See the following:

"Royal Purple uses a different chemistry than most oil producers. They are one of only a handful of marketers using Molybdenum Disulfide (Moly) in their oil formulations.....Some additive chemicals such as Moly may cause adverse conditions when used for long periods. Moly is a processed mineral that is similar in appearance to graphite. Moly has good lubricating properties when used either by itself (in dry power form or as an additive to oil or other lubricants).
Particles of the Moly can come out of suspension and agglomerate. Over time this may actually clog or partially clog oil filters or oil lines and the remainder normally settles in the bottom of the oil pan...."

 

According to Bobtheoilguy's site here is what I saw about Moly. Evidentally new technology is out changing this statement.

"Engineers and scientists have tried for years to use Moly in motor oils but they had been unsuccessful because they could not find a way to keep Moly in suspension. Once Moly was put into suspension it would gradually settle out. It was easy to see it come out of suspension because a black sludge would collect on the bottom of the oil containers. In engines it would settle to the bottom of the crankcase or clog oil pathways and filters.

Engineers have overcome these obstacles. They have developed a process that keeps Moly in suspension and isn't filtered out. Since that time the product has undergone extensive independent testing in labs and in the field for many years to insure that the product stands up to the rigorous needs of today's engines. With the plating action of Moly reducing friction which reduces heat, this helps keep rings free from carbon buildup, prevents blow-by, decreases emission, and extends oil life. "
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/moly.html


PS- I didn't go to Purdue

 

No, GTX is not something I'd run in a C5, as it doesn't have the GM4718M approval, however I was just pointing out that when running RP vs GTX in my wife's Honda, GTX won hands down. In my C5 I run Pennzoil Platinum and it has shown excellent oil analysis results. It's viscosity does not thin out at all and the engine wear numbers are very good.

As far as bobistheoilguy goes, it's not a person, it's a message board. The original founder of the site, Bob Winters, is a Schaeffer oil dealer and his idea was to make a site where people could compare each other's oil analysis results and discuss all different brands of oil (not just the oil he sold) He no longer owns the site, and the new owners are not in the oil industry at all. However that doesn't matter, as the knowledge on the site comes from the many members, and quite a few of them are heavily involved in the oil industry. I've been an administrator on the site since 2002.

 

I'll ask him Rossi 396, & maybe get a reply from RP too.One thing that perplexes me about RP 5W30 is that does'nt met the newest SM standard?

 

How did your Pennzoil Platinum test results compare to say Mobil1 if you had your Mobil1 analyzed? Similar or better? Just curious.

 

PS- I didn't go to Purdue[/QUOTE]

Good,never said you did.You never gave credentials until now. I just stated some credentials of someone who did & has been in the Petro-Engineering field for 20 years.Just for the record of getting some knowlegable input. But as stated onlly on the types & appplications of wear tests,not the additives of any oils.Purdue is & was a top notch Eng. school for decades (probably better ranked 20 years ago).Or do you dispute?

If what milo says is true too, whats the worry?
In summary just use what you want, we 've seen the pro & cons.Always like other points of veiw ,this is informative & I'll digest the pro & cons, & try to make an informative decision.

 

I never ran Mobil 1 in my C5, when I first bought it I put in Castrol Syntec 0w30 (AKA German Castrol) and for the past couple of years I've been running Pennzoil Platinum.

I have seen others post oil analysis reports where they ran Mobil 1 first and then switched to Pennzoil Platinum and the Pennzoil showed better results. The most noticeable change people find is that Mobil 1 shows higher iron levels in their reports compared to most other oils. With Royal Purple they tend to show both higher iron (valvetrain) and higher lead (bearings) than other oils. So Mobil 1 is better than Royal Purple (most oils are better than RP actually!) but Pennzoil Platinum is better than both of them. If I wasn't running Pennzoil Platinum I'd most likely choose Amsoil as my second choice.

 

I see alot about Amsoil but most of what I find is their write ups telling how much better they are. I wondered if they were really good or it was just their marketing team at work.

 

They really are good, the oil analysis results that people get when using this oil have proved that. I don't like their marketing methods though. (especially the hokey 4 ball wear test, which is meaningless in how well a motor oil works inside an engine, because shampoo will actually show great results on that silly test!!!)

 

Here are a few UOA of AMSOIL in forum member cars and my own daily driver CTS-V. Pardon the bias in my website pages, but I am an AMSOIL dealer trying to offset a very expensive hobby - that said, I use AMSOIL because I can't afford to buy new motors and I honestly think it is the best, not because I think I can make a lot of money selling it.
Cadillac CTS-V Used Oil Analysis – Mobil 1 5w30 vs AMSOIL 0w30
Used Oil Analysis Comparison: German Castrol 0w30 vs AMSOIL Series 2000 0w30
Corvette C5 Used Oil Analysis Report – AMSOIL SAE Synthetic 10w30

And for the original topic at hand, and although these are AMSOIL commissioned tests for motorcycle oils and gear lubes, I think they support PATMANs position above. RP was included in both tests and did not fair very well compared to the other lubricants in the study. You'll have to draw your own conclusions as to how well these translate to automotive oils.
AMSOIL Motorcycle Oil “White Paper” (1 MB pdf file)
AMSOIL Gear Lube “White Paper” (2 MB pdf file)