Mobil-1 5W-30 Oil & Mobil 1 M1-102 Oil Filter
06-15-17, 02:43 PM
#46
Because of that "break in wear", your data's meaning might be limited to the M1 vs RLI comparison. IOW, the Valvoline might have been able to do better than suggested by the report.
As for 0w20, there is a presumption favoring the engineers and their choice of __w30. Dropping the 5 to 0 doesn't challenge the presumption as much (and can be considered doing better for cold starts).
As for 0w20, there is a presumption favoring the engineers and their choice of __w30. Dropping the 5 to 0 doesn't challenge the presumption as much (and can be considered doing better for cold starts).
Engineers have to factor in worst case instances. The recommendation for a 30 weight comes from the fact they have to assume you will be towing 24/7. If you are not towing 24/7, a 0W20 will perform better, netting less wear and improved fuel economy. I have plenty of Toyota UOA that show a 0W20 performed better in the engine than the 5W30. One guy even posted on a thread here his UOA and I had to point out to him that he's been the recipient of a 0W20 and not a 5W30, courtsey of his dealership not looking up specs. Don't blame them as every engine but the LS and RC-F take 0W20.
06-15-17, 04:35 PM
#47
Well the oil cooler was replaced on that first sample, so the metals came from there. Fuel % by GC shows Valvoline did not perform as well as M1, RLI. This is not something that would have changed during the break in period. VI was low for valvoline as well. I should note I did not post the baseline for RLI on the GC machine. Because it has such a unique blend, it throws GC(fuel %)off by 1.7%, as the gc is reading the corn stock as ethanol fuel. So the total fuel under RLI should have actually been 1.25% for 6400 miles.
Engineers have to factor in worst case instances. The recommendation for a 30 weight comes from the fact they have to assume you will be towing 24/7. If you are not towing 24/7, a 0W20 will perform better, netting less wear and improved fuel economy. I have plenty of Toyota UOA that show a 0W20 performed better in the engine than the 5W30. One guy even posted on a thread here his UOA and I had to point out to him that he's been the recipient of a 0W20 and not a 5W30, courtsey of his dealership not looking up specs. Don't blame them as every engine but the LS and RC-F take 0W20.
Engineers have to factor in worst case instances. The recommendation for a 30 weight comes from the fact they have to assume you will be towing 24/7. If you are not towing 24/7, a 0W20 will perform better, netting less wear and improved fuel economy. I have plenty of Toyota UOA that show a 0W20 performed better in the engine than the 5W30. One guy even posted on a thread here his UOA and I had to point out to him that he's been the recipient of a 0W20 and not a 5W30, courtsey of his dealership not looking up specs. Don't blame them as every engine but the LS and RC-F take 0W20.
And I get that engineers have to factor in multiple possibilities (which probably includes lots of towing or heavy use rather than 24/7, which might suggest a weight higher than 30). This is in contrast to many owners who don't know their own driving conditions well enough to weigh whether to follow a suggested change to 0w20 when the manual says 5w30. At least 0w30 has the simpler appeal of the same 'warmed up" engine viscosity as 5w30 while being 'less thick' in a cold engine.
06-15-17, 08:30 PM
#48
I don't know what the gas chromatography (GC) set up is, but presuming no "uniqueness" in M1 or V that also affects the fuel %, a possible question is if RLI has an additive (or additive combo) that makes an important difference, why isn't any other company doing the same.
And I get that engineers have to factor in multiple possibilities (which probably includes lots of towing or heavy use rather than 24/7, which might suggest a weight higher than 30). This is in contrast to many owners who don't know their own driving conditions well enough to weigh whether to follow a suggested change to 0w20 when the manual says 5w30. At least 0w30 has the simpler appeal of the same 'warmed up" engine viscosity as 5w30 while being 'less thick' in a cold engine.
And I get that engineers have to factor in multiple possibilities (which probably includes lots of towing or heavy use rather than 24/7, which might suggest a weight higher than 30). This is in contrast to many owners who don't know their own driving conditions well enough to weigh whether to follow a suggested change to 0w20 when the manual says 5w30. At least 0w30 has the simpler appeal of the same 'warmed up" engine viscosity as 5w30 while being 'less thick' in a cold engine.
Well 1. RLI is the owner of the patent on their additive. 2. There is less profit margin in making a high quality oil and selling it for cheap, Pennzoil or Motul would sell this oil for $75/gallon based on their pricing 3. the oil companies don't want amazing oils, they want you to keep buying. There are formulas out there that could last 40,000 miles from the 1930's! But that would destroy big oil. A few years back a Jiffy Lube CEO when asked in an interview regarding why they continue to recommend 3,000 mile oil changes, mentioned "because quite frankly if we told people to use their OEM interval, we'd lose $143 million in revenue. 4. RLI was approached by a big oil company(won't name) a while back, they couldn't deliver 200,000 gallons a month from what I recall. RLI is made of a very uniquely modified US grown base stock, not easy to make at large scales. RLI is a little mom and pop shop, they're far from being big, and there is something to be said about selling out to big oil.
I think most owners know whether they hit redline repeatedly and if they tow. If you avoid continuous max rpm's and towing, a 0W20 will deliver superior wear.
06-15-17, 10:00 PM
#49
M1 and Valvoline both return 0.000% on GC as almost 95% of oils. RLI is such a tricky oil to read in UOA because it sets off baselines due to it's corn base.
Well 1. RLI is the owner of the patent on their additive. 2. There is less profit margin in making a high quality oil and selling it for cheap, Pennzoil or Motul would sell this oil for $75/gallon based on their pricing 3. the oil companies don't want amazing oils, they want you to keep buying. There are formulas out there that could last 40,000 miles from the 1930's! But that would destroy big oil. A few years back a Jiffy Lube CEO when asked in an interview regarding why they continue to recommend 3,000 mile oil changes, mentioned "because quite frankly if we told people to use their OEM interval, we'd lose $143 million in revenue. 4. RLI was approached by a big oil company(won't name) a while back, they couldn't deliver 200,000 gallons a month from what I recall. RLI is made of a very uniquely modified US grown base stock, not easy to make at large scales. RLI is a little mom and pop shop, they're far from being big, and there is something to be said about selling out to big oil.
I think most owners know whether they hit redline repeatedly and if they tow. If you avoid continuous max rpm's and towing, a 0W20 will deliver superior wear.
Well 1. RLI is the owner of the patent on their additive. 2. There is less profit margin in making a high quality oil and selling it for cheap, Pennzoil or Motul would sell this oil for $75/gallon based on their pricing 3. the oil companies don't want amazing oils, they want you to keep buying. There are formulas out there that could last 40,000 miles from the 1930's! But that would destroy big oil. A few years back a Jiffy Lube CEO when asked in an interview regarding why they continue to recommend 3,000 mile oil changes, mentioned "because quite frankly if we told people to use their OEM interval, we'd lose $143 million in revenue. 4. RLI was approached by a big oil company(won't name) a while back, they couldn't deliver 200,000 gallons a month from what I recall. RLI is made of a very uniquely modified US grown base stock, not easy to make at large scales. RLI is a little mom and pop shop, they're far from being big, and there is something to be said about selling out to big oil.
I think most owners know whether they hit redline repeatedly and if they tow. If you avoid continuous max rpm's and towing, a 0W20 will deliver superior wear.
RE: your numbered points,
1. if RLI has patented their additive, good! That means that unlike a trade secret, they had to reveal what it is and so everyone can reverse engineer to increase competition.
2. "There is less profit margin in making a high quality oil...." Maybe, maybe not. But that seems to run counter to other observations in day to day economics. For example, Lexus seems to make a healthy profit margin with a higher quality car. Also, I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories.
3. "the oil companies don't want amazing oils, they want you to keep buying. There are formulas out there that could last 40,000 miles from the 1930's! But that would destroy big oil." Maybe, maybe not. One would think a "mom and pop shop" could do quite well putting that mystery oil out there.
"A few years back a Jiffy Lube CEO when asked in an interview regarding why they continue to recommend 3,000 mile oil changes, mentioned "because quite frankly if we told people to use their OEM interval, we'd lose $143 million in revenue." I believe that, but it seems to be about getting people to develop a 3k habit/belief, not necessarily that the oil used won't go 5k or more.
4. ok, good for RLI.
Last, I suspect most owners DON'T know that "whether they hit redline repeatedly and if they tow" has a bearing on the oil they might use, especially when the manual says otherwise.
06-16-17, 09:35 AM
#50
Unused oil out of the bottle isn't necessarily the right 'baseline' (or in scientific terms, the 'control') to use. For example, if heat and pressure on an oil (separate from combustion in an engine) causes it to generate something that leads to an incorrect GC reading under the GC conditions used (which is why the set up matters), then using oil out of the bottle for comparison can lead to an incorrect conclusion.
RE: your numbered points,
1. if RLI has patented their additive, good! That means that unlike a trade secret, they had to reveal what it is and so everyone can reverse engineer to increase competition.
2. "There is less profit margin in making a high quality oil...." Maybe, maybe not. But that seems to run counter to other observations in day to day economics. For example, Lexus seems to make a healthy profit margin with a higher quality car. Also, I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories.
3. "the oil companies don't want amazing oils, they want you to keep buying. There are formulas out there that could last 40,000 miles from the 1930's! But that would destroy big oil." Maybe, maybe not. One would think a "mom and pop shop" could do quite well putting that mystery oil out there.
"A few years back a Jiffy Lube CEO when asked in an interview regarding why they continue to recommend 3,000 mile oil changes, mentioned "because quite frankly if we told people to use their OEM interval, we'd lose $143 million in revenue." I believe that, but it seems to be about getting people to develop a 3k habit/belief, not necessarily that the oil used won't go 5k or more.
4. ok, good for RLI.
Last, I suspect most owners DON'T know that "whether they hit redline repeatedly and if they tow" has a bearing on the oil they might use, especially when the manual says otherwise.
RE: your numbered points,
1. if RLI has patented their additive, good! That means that unlike a trade secret, they had to reveal what it is and so everyone can reverse engineer to increase competition.
2. "There is less profit margin in making a high quality oil...." Maybe, maybe not. But that seems to run counter to other observations in day to day economics. For example, Lexus seems to make a healthy profit margin with a higher quality car. Also, I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories.
3. "the oil companies don't want amazing oils, they want you to keep buying. There are formulas out there that could last 40,000 miles from the 1930's! But that would destroy big oil." Maybe, maybe not. One would think a "mom and pop shop" could do quite well putting that mystery oil out there.
"A few years back a Jiffy Lube CEO when asked in an interview regarding why they continue to recommend 3,000 mile oil changes, mentioned "because quite frankly if we told people to use their OEM interval, we'd lose $143 million in revenue." I believe that, but it seems to be about getting people to develop a 3k habit/belief, not necessarily that the oil used won't go 5k or more.
4. ok, good for RLI.
Last, I suspect most owners DON'T know that "whether they hit redline repeatedly and if they tow" has a bearing on the oil they might use, especially when the manual says otherwise.
The Jiffy Lube point, proves everything I'm saying. Big oil doesn't want you going 25,000K on your oil change. They want you to keep spending money, like Tobacco companies.
There are better formulas out there that can go 40,000k lol It's just like the big pharma companies, there's cures out there for things we don't think possible. But it's about $$$ at the end of the day and answering to share holders, and if you're going to lose $$ making a better product, well you're not going to make that better product.
Yes and no, in regards to the baseline and depending on certain tests. GC measures certain values based on fuels, not oxidation and so forth so heat and oil pressure wouldn't affect GC, Heat and some other variables can affect FTIR, but even then we don't use subtraction, we measure absorbance. FTIR can be a tricky one to read. It is why I mentioned it is the damn hardest oil to interpret on the UOA market. But the GC read is solid.
I always visually inspect, smell and feel the oil when I drain it. When I've pulled the RLI, it's still very yellowish and smells like oil, you almost can't smell the gasoline. From a physical stand point, the oil smells, feels and looks cleaner. While far from equipment, it gives reference. I know of a guy in a lab who's prided himself amongst knowing when samples are diluted by tasting them..........I can confirm he's good but yikes!
06-16-17, 11:48 AM
#51
[1] The Jiffy Lube point, proves everything I'm saying. Big oil doesn't want you going 25,000K on your oil change. They want you to keep spending money, like Tobacco companies.
There are better formulas out there that can go 40,000k lol It's just like the big pharma companies, there's cures out there for things we don't think possible. But it's about $$$ at the end of the day and answering to share holders, and if you're going to lose $$ making a better product, well you're not going to make that better product.
[2] Yes and no, in regards to the baseline and depending on certain tests. GC measures certain values based on fuels, not oxidation and so forth so heat and oil pressure wouldn't affect GC, Heat and some other variables can affect FTIR, but even then we don't use subtraction, we measure absorbance. FTIR can be a tricky one to read. It is why I mentioned it is the damn hardest oil to interpret on the UOA market. But the GC read is solid.
I always visually inspect, smell and feel the oil when I drain it. When I've pulled the RLI, it's still very yellowish and smells like oil, you almost can't smell the gasoline. From a physical stand point, the oil smells, feels and looks cleaner. While far from equipment, it gives reference. I know of a guy in a lab who's prided himself amongst knowing when samples are diluted by tasting them..........I can confirm he's good but yikes!
There are better formulas out there that can go 40,000k lol It's just like the big pharma companies, there's cures out there for things we don't think possible. But it's about $$$ at the end of the day and answering to share holders, and if you're going to lose $$ making a better product, well you're not going to make that better product.
[2] Yes and no, in regards to the baseline and depending on certain tests. GC measures certain values based on fuels, not oxidation and so forth so heat and oil pressure wouldn't affect GC, Heat and some other variables can affect FTIR, but even then we don't use subtraction, we measure absorbance. FTIR can be a tricky one to read. It is why I mentioned it is the damn hardest oil to interpret on the UOA market. But the GC read is solid.
I always visually inspect, smell and feel the oil when I drain it. When I've pulled the RLI, it's still very yellowish and smells like oil, you almost can't smell the gasoline. From a physical stand point, the oil smells, feels and looks cleaner. While far from equipment, it gives reference. I know of a guy in a lab who's prided himself amongst knowing when samples are diluted by tasting them..........I can confirm he's good but yikes!
Regarding 2, are you a chemist? And if you are, do you know how GC works, its pluses and minuses, and how works compared to IR (spectroscopy)? An assertion that heat and pressure equivalent to 5k miles without combustion "wouldn't affect GC" suggests that maybe you aren't. The heat and pressure example is about what is happening to everything (including additives) in the oil. And another point in the example is how to select a good scientific control when testing something.
Science also allows for other possibilities, such as additive(s) in M1 and V allow retention of a little more fuel than the case with RLI.
There's also the possibility that the differences in the 3 fuel % measurements from single UOA tests aren't significantly different (or important) for the typical engine and owner.
Last, I'm not disagreeing with your visual, smell and feel experiences with used oil. I do point out that those (including taste) are subjective, and science is careful about subjectivity.
Btw, there's this: https://bobistheoilguy.com/used-oil-analysis/
Last edited by mylexbaby; 06-16-17 at 12:31 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Gunnut (06-17-17)
06-16-17, 12:26 PM
#52
Regarding 1, oh well, no 'smoking gun' evidence either way.
Regarding 2, are you a chemist? And if you are, do you know how GC works, its pluses and minuses, and how works compared to IR (spectroscopy)? An assertion that heat and pressure equivalent to 5k miles without combustion "wouldn't affect GC" suggests that maybe you aren't. The heat and pressure example is about what is happening to everything (including additives) in the oil. And another point in the example is how to select a good scientific control when testing something.
Last, I'm not disagreeing with your visual, smell and feel experiences with used oil. I do point out that those (including taste) are subjective, and science is careful about subjectivity.
Regarding 2, are you a chemist? And if you are, do you know how GC works, its pluses and minuses, and how works compared to IR (spectroscopy)? An assertion that heat and pressure equivalent to 5k miles without combustion "wouldn't affect GC" suggests that maybe you aren't. The heat and pressure example is about what is happening to everything (including additives) in the oil. And another point in the example is how to select a good scientific control when testing something.
Last, I'm not disagreeing with your visual, smell and feel experiences with used oil. I do point out that those (including taste) are subjective, and science is careful about subjectivity.
Nope! not a chemist, far from it. I have a basic understanding of how GC works, I've never looked hard core into it as I can't begin to understand the readings or interpret them. I'm stuck relying on the values it spits out. The only problem I can see arising is you would have no by products of combustion for the GC to read in peaks although calibration can be a question. I don't know if heat and pressure alone without combustion could cause the GC to detect a fuel spike in the sample. I'll reach out to a tribologist at GM I know and ask him about GC calibration and your comment. However, I have run RLI samples threw the machine 10 times with different weights and such and they always have spat back 1.6-1.75%. Being that I do not have the ability to read the peaks to determine what is what, I have also had to rely on the FTIR readings showing decreasing fuel peaks to verify the GC reading, and also using subjective measures such as physical inspection. On ethanol vehicles, the GC always under reports the fuel % because it is not calibrated for ethanol fuel.
RLI is the hardest oil I have ever read in a UOA, everything about it is off and throws equipment off as you have noticed.
The following users liked this post:
Gunnut (06-17-17)
06-17-17, 04:19 AM
#53
Advanced
Thread Starter
Apparently the RX330 is running slightly cooler with the oil change, Temperature Gauge reading a touch lower.
With the Drain & Fill, Transmission is shifting smoother.
With the Drain & Fill, Transmission is shifting smoother.
06-17-17, 09:14 AM
#54
Dan and MyLex,
Thanks for the spirited debate. I've read all 4 pages with great interest but I'll have to admit a lot of what you've said and the terminology flew over my head higher than a SR-71.
In my garage I have a 05 Suburban 5.3ltr with 240k, a 98 GS400 at 228k, a 04 Harley at 54k and my wife's 05 Rx330 with 30k. I also have a Honda commercial push mower that was built in '89. I've owned it 15 years.
I've had the GS for 10 years and 138k, the Harley since new, the RX since 10/16 and 5k and the 'Burb for 3 months and 6k.
I've always used M1 in everything including the lawn mower. Always used (if price is an indication) a high quality filter. Mostly KN, Mobil 1 or Purolator Boss.
Once a year or every other oil change I've had a uoa done on the GS and Harley. Will do the same on the RX and Burb.
Settled into a routine of changing every 5k on everything except the Harley and mower. The Harley I change quicker only because it is air cooled and can get much hotter than the rest. I installed an hour meter on the mower and change it per manual recommendations.
After reading everything I'm gonna order some RLI for my GS. I really don't stress it tons so I'm gonna try 5-20.
Any experience using it in a Harley?
Thanks for the spirited debate. I've read all 4 pages with great interest but I'll have to admit a lot of what you've said and the terminology flew over my head higher than a SR-71.
In my garage I have a 05 Suburban 5.3ltr with 240k, a 98 GS400 at 228k, a 04 Harley at 54k and my wife's 05 Rx330 with 30k. I also have a Honda commercial push mower that was built in '89. I've owned it 15 years.
I've had the GS for 10 years and 138k, the Harley since new, the RX since 10/16 and 5k and the 'Burb for 3 months and 6k.
I've always used M1 in everything including the lawn mower. Always used (if price is an indication) a high quality filter. Mostly KN, Mobil 1 or Purolator Boss.
Once a year or every other oil change I've had a uoa done on the GS and Harley. Will do the same on the RX and Burb.
Settled into a routine of changing every 5k on everything except the Harley and mower. The Harley I change quicker only because it is air cooled and can get much hotter than the rest. I installed an hour meter on the mower and change it per manual recommendations.
After reading everything I'm gonna order some RLI for my GS. I really don't stress it tons so I'm gonna try 5-20.
Any experience using it in a Harley?
The following users liked this post:
mylexbaby (06-17-17)
06-17-17, 09:18 AM
#55
Pull the dipstick on the tranny and look at the fluid. Bright red and not smelling burnt you should be good to go. Dark and burnt smelling time to drain and fill again. When I bought my 98 GS it was at 90k miles. Fluid was brown and burnt smelling. Tranny seemed fine. Did a drain and fill at every oil change until it was flushed through. Almost 140k later and it still shifts smooth as silk.
06-17-17, 01:32 PM
#56
Dan and MyLex,
Thanks for the spirited debate. I've read all 4 pages with great interest but I'll have to admit a lot of what you've said and the terminology flew over my head higher than a SR-71.
In my garage I have a 05 Suburban 5.3ltr with 240k, a 98 GS400 at 228k, a 04 Harley at 54k and my wife's 05 Rx330 with 30k. I also have a Honda commercial push mower that was built in '89. I've owned it 15 years.
I've had the GS for 10 years and 138k, the Harley since new, the RX since 10/16 and 5k and the 'Burb for 3 months and 6k.
I've always used M1 in everything including the lawn mower. Always used (if price is an indication) a high quality filter. Mostly KN, Mobil 1 or Purolator Boss.
Once a year or every other oil change I've had a uoa done on the GS and Harley. Will do the same on the RX and Burb.
Settled into a routine of changing every 5k on everything except the Harley and mower. The Harley I change quicker only because it is air cooled and can get much hotter than the rest. I installed an hour meter on the mower and change it per manual recommendations.
After reading everything I'm gonna order some RLI for my GS. I really don't stress it tons so I'm gonna try 5-20.
Any experience using it in a Harley?
Thanks for the spirited debate. I've read all 4 pages with great interest but I'll have to admit a lot of what you've said and the terminology flew over my head higher than a SR-71.
In my garage I have a 05 Suburban 5.3ltr with 240k, a 98 GS400 at 228k, a 04 Harley at 54k and my wife's 05 Rx330 with 30k. I also have a Honda commercial push mower that was built in '89. I've owned it 15 years.
I've had the GS for 10 years and 138k, the Harley since new, the RX since 10/16 and 5k and the 'Burb for 3 months and 6k.
I've always used M1 in everything including the lawn mower. Always used (if price is an indication) a high quality filter. Mostly KN, Mobil 1 or Purolator Boss.
Once a year or every other oil change I've had a uoa done on the GS and Harley. Will do the same on the RX and Burb.
Settled into a routine of changing every 5k on everything except the Harley and mower. The Harley I change quicker only because it is air cooled and can get much hotter than the rest. I installed an hour meter on the mower and change it per manual recommendations.
After reading everything I'm gonna order some RLI for my GS. I really don't stress it tons so I'm gonna try 5-20.
Any experience using it in a Harley?
The RLI in a Harley? I can only assume it would perform will, especially since the plant based esters in the formula coat the cylinder walls, but the truth is, I've done very few motorcycle UOA and never got into that aspect. Just because RLI's BioSyn is good, doesn't mean everything else they make is good.........
06-17-17, 02:24 PM
#57
Nope! not a chemist, far from it. I have a basic understanding of how GC works, I've never looked hard core into it as I can't begin to understand the readings or interpret them. I'm stuck relying on the values it spits out. The only problem I can see arising is you would have no by products of combustion for the GC to read in peaks although calibration can be a question. I don't know if heat and pressure alone without combustion could cause the GC to detect a fuel spike in the sample. I'll reach out to a tribologist at GM I know and ask him about GC calibration and your comment.
And the example is about the GC possibly reading something as 'fuel' when it really isn't. That's partly because of how GC works and how misleading readings might happen. Honestly, there might be nothing there, which is why I edited my comment (which crossed with yours) to include
"Science also allows for other possibilities, such as additive(s) in M1 and V allow retention of a little more fuel than the case with RLI.
There's also the possibility that the differences in the 3 fuel % measurements from single UOA tests aren't significantly different (or important) for the typical engine and owner."
The possibility concerning additives can be separate from the heat/pressure possibility.
Hope you are having a good weekend. I'm watching Le Mans.
Last edited by mylexbaby; 06-17-17 at 02:46 PM.
06-17-17, 02:43 PM
#58
Dan and MyLex,
Thanks for the spirited debate. I've read all 4 pages with great interest but I'll have to admit a lot of what you've said and the terminology flew over my head higher than a SR-71.
In my garage I have a 05 Suburban 5.3ltr with 240k, a 98 GS400 at 228k, a 04 Harley at 54k and my wife's 05 Rx330 with 30k. I also have a Honda commercial push mower that was built in '89. I've owned it 15 years.
I've had the GS for 10 years and 138k, the Harley since new, the RX since 10/16 and 5k and the 'Burb for 3 months and 6k.
I've always used M1 in everything including the lawn mower. Always used (if price is an indication) a high quality filter. Mostly KN, Mobil 1 or Purolator Boss.
Once a year or every other oil change I've had a uoa done on the GS and Harley. Will do the same on the RX and Burb.
Settled into a routine of changing every 5k on everything except the Harley and mower. The Harley I change quicker only because it is air cooled and can get much hotter than the rest. I installed an hour meter on the mower and change it per manual recommendations.
After reading everything I'm gonna order some RLI for my GS. I really don't stress it tons so I'm gonna try 5-20.
Any experience using it in a Harley?
Thanks for the spirited debate. I've read all 4 pages with great interest but I'll have to admit a lot of what you've said and the terminology flew over my head higher than a SR-71.
In my garage I have a 05 Suburban 5.3ltr with 240k, a 98 GS400 at 228k, a 04 Harley at 54k and my wife's 05 Rx330 with 30k. I also have a Honda commercial push mower that was built in '89. I've owned it 15 years.
I've had the GS for 10 years and 138k, the Harley since new, the RX since 10/16 and 5k and the 'Burb for 3 months and 6k.
I've always used M1 in everything including the lawn mower. Always used (if price is an indication) a high quality filter. Mostly KN, Mobil 1 or Purolator Boss.
Once a year or every other oil change I've had a uoa done on the GS and Harley. Will do the same on the RX and Burb.
Settled into a routine of changing every 5k on everything except the Harley and mower. The Harley I change quicker only because it is air cooled and can get much hotter than the rest. I installed an hour meter on the mower and change it per manual recommendations.
After reading everything I'm gonna order some RLI for my GS. I really don't stress it tons so I'm gonna try 5-20.
Any experience using it in a Harley?
I don't know how to help other than my rules of thumb which is to change oil/filter regularly with reasonable name brands and letting the old old drain out for at least an hour.
I have been thinking about shifting the oil weight used based on an updated understanding of what is going on in the engine, assuming no really hard running conditions. That update is that most engine wear occurs on starting a cold engine, when oil is the most viscous. IOW, a warm engine running at temp has plenty of lubrication with hot, low viscosity oil.
So for example, I'm thinking about changing the 5w30 oil used in two of our cars to 0w30 because the '0' means less thick oil at low temperatures than '5' oil. The '30' means the same viscosity at warm engine running temperatures.
And I know nothing about motorcycles, so sorry, no help from me.
Back to watching Le Mans for me... Have a good weekend!
06-17-17, 02:59 PM
#59
Separate from how GC works is the question of how to select a control. My comment about heat and pressure is an example of possible considerations for selecting a control for the "fuel %" measurement BUT might lead to a control that is wrong for other things. That's probably the "problem" you see with using it as a control for something like soot.
And the example is about the GC possibly reading something as 'fuel' when it really isn't. That's partly because of how GC works and how misleading readings might happen. Honestly, there might be nothing there, which is why I edited my comment (which crossed with yours) to include
"Science also allows for other possibilities, such as additive(s) in M1 and V allow retention of a little more fuel than the case with RLI.
There's also the possibility that the differences in the 3 fuel % measurements from single UOA tests aren't significantly different (or important) for the typical engine and owner."
Hope you are having a good weekend. I'm watching Le Mans.
And the example is about the GC possibly reading something as 'fuel' when it really isn't. That's partly because of how GC works and how misleading readings might happen. Honestly, there might be nothing there, which is why I edited my comment (which crossed with yours) to include
"Science also allows for other possibilities, such as additive(s) in M1 and V allow retention of a little more fuel than the case with RLI.
There's also the possibility that the differences in the 3 fuel % measurements from single UOA tests aren't significantly different (or important) for the typical engine and owner."
Hope you are having a good weekend. I'm watching Le Mans.
I'm convinced the plant based base stock in the RLI formula is the problem, as every other oil I've tested come back as 0.00% on the GC machine and yet RLI always comes back at 1.6%, I'm trying to get an answer from a tribologist I've e-mailed the gc graphs to. So yes, in RLI's instance it's reading something as fuel that's not fuel, however this does not mean it doesn't establish a baseline that is accurate. In conjunction with a physical evaluation, FTIR reading and reduced enine wear, I "can" conclude that there is less fuel in the crank case.
You can see decreased wear with additional mileage and extremely hard use with the RLI in comparision to the M1, the Valvoline's wear should not be considered as this was residual break in wear. That was my personal sample, there's hundreds of other samples establishing the same. I just can't post others private info.
What does this mean for every owner of a regular vehicle? Well, RLI's ability to increase the seal in the engine's combustion chamber, improves response, fuel economy, power and reduced wear. Fuel in the crank case is responsible for internals going bad and decreased lubrication in extreme pressure areas of the engine, creating wear as we know it. For a stop and go driver, the RLI will handle the fuel aromatics more effectively than other oils. But as some have noted, if you flip your cars fast, then it won't matter. however on a seperate note, for hybrid owners where the engine has high levels of FD and constant start/stop pounding the oil, a quality oil really makes a difference.
As for selecting a control. That as you have noted can vary, it's why I really like to use FTIR in conjunction with GC and KF and a physical eval of the oil, flashpoint also helps identify issues with fuel dilution. It could be a calibration issue but considering the Navy continuously calibrates our GC machine, they really allow no mistakes or miscalibrations to occur. I'd always wondered but you've definately pushed me now to get an answer.
Le Mans, wish I could see it live, nothing like the screaming engines tearing your ears lol
06-17-17, 03:34 PM
#60
No M1 and Valvoline nor RLI have any additives to help "absorb" fuel. there are additives in the formulas to help mix water/fuel in hopes of high temperatures evaporating out the condensation/fuels out through the PCV system. But, with modern fuels, this does not happen as much as one would think and requires long periods of continous driving at a steady rate(highway). The fuel still enters the crank case and that is why RLI works so well, it's high VI and plant based esters coat the cylinder walls and provide a superior seal to M1 and Valvoline.
As for selecting a control. That as you have noted can vary, it's why I really like to use FTIR in conjunction with GC and KF and a physical eval of the oil, flashpoint also helps identify issues with fuel dilution. It could be a calibration issue but considering the Navy continuously calibrates our GC machine, they really allow no mistakes or miscalibrations to occur. I'd always wondered but you've definately pushed me now to get an answer.
Free Le Mans coverage is on youtube. Less complicated than going to France.