Here's the latest with Renewable Lubricants 5w-30 PCMO SHP instead of the Mobil 1 I've been running forever:

 

Can you put the differences into laymen’s terms for me?

 

There's not a lot of solid information from Blackstone. Wear metals are OK, and viscosity is OK, but everything else is suspect because the tests they perform for these things are questionable compared to other labs with ISO certification. Blackstone is convenient for me and reasonably priced, so I've stuck with their analysis, but if I really wanted to know flashpoint, fuel dilution, or water content I would need to use a better lab.

That said, the biggest difference between Renewable and Mobil 1 is the additive package (this is clear in the trace element numbers) and the viscosity - Renewable's viscosity is higher and more stable compared to Mobil 1. The iron numbers I have seen from the wife's GS F are ridiculously low - where my IS has 14, it has 4. I was wondering if this is an engine design issue, or if it is a result of the oil's ability to reduce wear. Since this is my first test with Renewable in the IS, I will be looking for a downward trend in iron. Right now, there's no difference, but the point of these data points isn't what does a single test yield, but how does the engine wear over time. So I'll need a couple more reports to really determine if this oil reduces wear compared to Mobil 1. Right now I can only say it is no worse, but that's just one sample. Time will tell for sure.

 

Did the “discussion” about which filter to use ever get solved? YZZ-A4 or 04152-51010?

Rockauto has a denso that lists the alternative part number as the later? Is it the same?

And I know that Danial dude liked Wix. What’s the best

 

The one that fits and you change routinely. There is zero definitive data available to the public on oil filter performance.

 

Lance,

Any reason you dropped the OCI from 8-10k to 6k? Is this to test Renewable and how long it can go?

 

Isn’t that 5k?

I thought there were some issues with long OCI’s and that Danial guy recommended shorter ones because of excessive wear caused by the long ones.

I’m not sure though. I’ve read the long threads and tried to follow it all, but may have missed something or misinterpreted something.

 

The biggest reason was after seeing iron at 4 ppm in the GS F, I reconsidered running with 24 - 35 ppm with the long change intervals. The best abrasive compounds start with good lubricants, and iron is abrasive, so I decided I wanted to reduce the level of abrasiveness in my oil.

 

I just got my report back. My first one on this car. Appears to be ok.

 

Here's the latest. Looking good as always. Also seeing a tiny drop in iron with Renewable Lubricants PCMO SHP 5w-30. Can't be bad.

 

Nice report as always. Question for you, as I recently read through the whole oil thread with Daniel in it. You seemed pretty convinced RLI was the way to go with oil and that was a few years ago. Why did you only recently make the change from M-1?

Also, I'm not seeing the major drop in iron like Daniel said would happen. I know RLI has tested extremely well, such as on Rat's blog, but I wonder if there is a certain amount of protection that can be utilized by an engine before any excess protection is useless. I feel like your consistent UOAs seem to show that.

 

It's not a recent change, this is my third report using Renewable Lubricants. Two have been PCMO SHP, with the one in the middle on PCMO HD, all 5w-30. Daniel was pretty adamant about the PCMO HD being the better of the two, but when Rat tested it and oxidation started at 245 degrees, I decided it wouldn't be good for track days where I've seen 275F oil temps. I use SHP exclusively in all three of my cars now, even the Supra which has been run on Red Line for a very long time. I know for sure the Supra has fuel dilution issues because AFR at WOT is 10.x:1 - way off the 13.25:1 that would be ideal, and even way off 12.5:1 which would normally be considered very conservative.

Is there an amount of protection that is "useless?" Sure. That's a lot of why I say QSUD isn't a bad choice at all. The only way you'll feel the pain of "overprotection" is in your wallet if you're buying very expensive oil but don't need it. QSUD is ridiculously cheap and competes with some of the "best" oils RAT has tested. He runs QSUD and has for a long time. On the flipside of that coin, if you absolutely need every bit of protection the oil can offer (drain plug falls out and your oil is all over the road, not in your engine while climbing a steep hill) you won't think you've overspent even a dime. I'll take $50 oil changes over rebuilding an engine all day, any day. You just have to figure out what works for you and your budget.

 

I understand what you're saying but that's not quite what I'm getting at. What I mean by "useless" extra protection is that RLI has been shown to provide better protection in testing that Mobil 1 yet I'm not seeing any improvement in your metals from your UOAs. If the RLI truly is providing your engine better protection, why don't the metals in your UOAs shoe that?

 

Great question. Here's the biggest reason for RLI - the cam chain tensioner on the driver's side is unstable on startup with Mobil 1. It isn't with RLI. I don't want to break a cam chain, so RLI is a much simpler fix than replacing the cam chain tensioner. You can see a YouTube video with the noise in question. I posted it there quite a while ago.

The load capacity difference between RLI and Mobil 1 is trivial in the grand scheme of things and RAT acknowledges this on his site. He says if two oils are within 10% of each other, they're functionally equals based on sample, test procedures, and variability over which the consumer has zero control. If you'd like to believe every batch of oil produces the exact same numbers, I'd say your expectations far exceed what is realistic. Had I gone from Brad Penn oil to RLI, I would definitely expect to see a wear metal difference. From Mobil 1 to RLI isn't a big stretch, so I don't expect to see a big difference. That said, every time I start my car and don't hear the random noise from the tensioner not doing its job, I get happy. It did it for years, and just recently a member in Australia broke the cam chain on the driver's side where this tensioner lives - Lexus has a revised part based on an LSB for Europe (does not exist here in the US), so I am particularly sensitive to being sure this does not turn into a problem for me.

Add to this a very good friend of mine ran Mobil 1 in his GS 430 and had random performance issues that disappeared when he switched from Mobil 1 to the Toyota brand engine oil. I am far from convinced Mobil 1 is good in Toyota engines. I can say I bought all the parts to replace the tensioner, and only changed my mind about doing it when the reality of the level of effort reared its head AND I hadn't heard the noise since switching to RLI.

 

That makes total sense and I complete understand why those reasons would get you to switch. I'm glad it fixed your tensioner noise. As to your response about why no change in wear metals, this is where I struggle to take Daniel's posts at his word. It seemed he swore RLI would make a massive difference in your metals and fuel dilution, and maybe your reduction in cam change noise is enough proof, but his other claims of Shell being the only good has and Wix XP being the best oil filter gave me quite a bit of question to his suggestions. I understand he has expertise due to his job, which I don't know exactly what he does, but the Wix XP for example has been stated to be 99% efficient at 35 microns which is far from the best filtration. But then I go back to my question of "useless" protection and how much small of particle filtration can actually helps motor longevity (such as Wix's 99% at 35 microns vs Fram Ultra 99% at 20 microns).