Royal Purple 5/30 and 10/30

[Lil bastard]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

In my world, it is good that this is troubling, as there are companies, and RP has demonstrated this for one, that make claims that their products cannot back up, and they subsequently have to withdraw or modify. Another way to put it is that they “got caught”.

Standards exist for a reason; if they are not upheld, you have no idea what you are buying. In the state where I live, some gas stations voluntarily participate in a state run program where a “mystery shopper” buys gas and tests everything from correct delivery volume to octane ratings. The testing body publishes their findings, which include the non participating stations as well. Last quarter, the results indicated that of the 6,000 stations sampled, 3500 (some participating, some not) where out of compliance. Most common issue: Short volume delivery (getting less than one gallon when the pump says one, a neat trick when gas was $4 a gallon), and octane levels well below indicated pump values. Interestingly, one station was actually selling 93 octane out of all of its pumps, regardless of price. In any case, my question would be that if you knew these standards existed, where would you buy your gas…………..?

Apples to oranges. The AECA does not do random retail sampling. If it did then maybe your arguement would be valid.

Standards do exist for a reason and there are just as many political and nationalist reasons for the AECA to exist as there are scientific ones. Especially when one considers the capitalist base of their existence and the fact that their standards are not independently created, but rather are mostly a compilation of other existing standards - just look at all their footnotes.

But, while in some empirical world some ultimate truth may exist, the fact is that all these other oil companies are selling their products and the world's recycle centers are not bulging with an exorbitant number of blown engines attributable to a single oil brand or sector which does not have a particular rating.

There are so many contributing factors to most engine failures that oil, if changed properly, is usually the least of them. Only when oil service intervals are ignored does oil seem to be a significant factor. Driving style, delayed maintenance and such are often much greater factors.

You seem to have a predisposition to worrying about and distrusting Big Brother. On the other hand, you seem to be buying right into their marketing rhetoric.

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by Lil bastard

You seem to have a predisposition to worrying about and distrusting Big Brother. On the other hand, you seem to be buying right into their marketing rhetoric.

If you’re implying that I have “ethics”, you are correct. I distrust those that have proven worthy of distrust, like RP. Mobil 1 reformulated, but had the decency to drop their claims for ACEA ratings, but without doing anything to bring that fact to your attention. In the Cartesian coordinates of ethics, that puts them at “accept, but verify” level. They make some decent products, but you need to do your own homework to be sure the products are what you really want. Their 15W-50 is a good example; used to have ACEA and yielded pretty good UOA. Now it does not have any ACEA, and UOA says it has trouble “staying in grade” between changes in a mildly driven street car (in this case, a Cadillac). Something has changed, and not for the better; but the lack of standards testing ratings implies “caveat emptor”…………

[Lil bastard]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

If you’re implying that I have “ethics”, you are correct. I distrust those that have proven worthy of distrust, like RP. Mobil 1 reformulated, but had the decency to drop their claims for ACEA ratings, but without doing anything to bring that fact to your attention. In the Cartesian coordinates of ethics, that puts them at “accept, but verify” level. They make some decent products, but you need to do your own homework to be sure the products are what you really want. Their 15W-50 is a good example; used to have ACEA and yielded pretty good UOA. Now it does not have any ACEA, and UOA says it has trouble “staying in grade” between changes in a mildly driven street car (in this case, a Cadillac). Something has changed, and not for the better; but the lack of standards testing ratings implies “caveat emptor”…………

Fair enough.

[CJ_Boxster]

I would just like to add that I've used Royal purple 10-40w in my boxster before and it ran great and I've used it on my other vehicles and after about the 2nd-5th oil change I would notice the engines would run alot smoother...

I remember pulling off my valve covers in my old Mustang to adjust the valves seen the rocker arms and metal body of the head were dark brown... as if the years of use had left a brown/blackish stain on the internal engine parts. Months later and 2 oil changes later using Royal Purple, I had to replace the valve cover gasket and i noticed all the internal engine parts under that same valve cover (even the underside of the valve cover) were CLEANNNNNN, no more brown burnt oil and fuel stain was found on the engine.

I mean it looked like a low mileage engine on the inside of the engine on the surface. So I give it my thumbs up especially now that they have 0-40w which is the recommended oil weight.