Justto add another brand to compare,I use Castrol Syntec. I first sports car when I was a teen was a 85 Turbo Shelby Charger. Back in the days, Chrysler was the underdog in performance cars and was a domestic leader in 4 cylinder technology. Castrol back then always advertised their oil for high revving high compression small displacement engines. So I switched to Castrol and liked it ever since. Now they have full and blend synthetic but I always go for the full synthetic. My 5.9 been running clean on castrol full syntec for the past 80k miles I have on my 5.9 so far. And am very satisfied.

 

I wish these oil companies would compare against each`other.I keep seeing commercials for Mobil 1, Amsoil, Q Power/Torque, Penzoil Platinum,etc... The say "compared to the leading brand" I want to see actual horsepower/torque results, engine wear, protection, failure rate, etc.

 

Since when and where does it state that on your website???

I live in Texas close to Humble (where RP started at before they moved to Porter), so you and your name isn't new to me. I also work in an oil analysis lab that used to test RP oil.

 

Royal Purple ----> [sm=owned.gif]ha ha ha. Well das, the guy wouldn't give me any answers either, not even a consultation so go figure. Oh and as far as the oil companies that "compare" their oil, if my memory serves me correctly they usually say in their commercials "...when compared to the leading conventionaloil..." which means they're comparing it to Walmart's $0.89-a-quart special, or whatever conventional is selling the most. So it's a misleading no-brainer when they say that in their commercials.

I want to see someone make a synthetic commercial and say what we all would like to hear, like: "Hey we tested our oil and the top 5 other leading fully synthetics in 5 different cars in all types of driving and conditions. Our oil outperformed all of them in viscosity and anti-wear consistency anddetergent reliability. Our oil contributed to better MPG in all of the vehicles compared to the others. The internals of every motor looked newer and cleaner than all the other oils used. Our oil lasted over 300,000 miles and was still better than everyone else's straight out of their bottles. Our oil doesn't cost $8 a quart. In fact, our oil just plain-*** kicked the **** out of every oil and every driver used in the test. We gaurentee our oil will last longer than you will, or your money back. If for some reason you buy our oil and your bearings ever take a ****, we'll send Eva Longoria out to your house in a string bikini to personally swap out the motor in your car with a new one, at our expense."

Now that's a sales pitch.

 

Hell that would have me convinced. Especially the last part.

 

I don't think that the people at RP were expecting this responce from their advertisment.

 

Hey guys,

I only represent Royal Purple. I’m not employed there and I don’t have all day to sit here and respond to your questions. So, give me some time to get to them.

In regards to oil companies comparing to one another, here is a link (www.highperformanceprose.com/RoyalPurple/Oil Tests.pdf ) to test results the Street Commodores did a few months ago. It compares many brands like Pennzoil, Mobil, Red line, Castrol, Valvoline, Royal Purple, and a few others to one another. This is 100% independent.


PTschafer, why don’t you contact Royal Purple’s tech department at rpautotech@royalpurple.com and let them know what is going on. I have no way of telling you anything about it.

 

Those test pictures reminds me of the days when Duralube was a big advertiser since the slick 50 days. Duralube even claims a big prize to the oil company that can come up and stick their claim with duralube or something like that. I wonder what happened to duralube? don't recall still seeing this product on the shelf.

 

Quality Companies are now 'backing up'
their claims about products by doing
official tests.

It would be reassuring if Royal Purple
would join this trend, as has
Lubrizol (official manufacturer of Chrysler ATF+4)
and Goodyear:

Goodyear goes by the book with Fuel Max test

When Goodyear introduced its new Unisteel tires with Fuel Max technology last
year, and claimed that they were more fuel-efficient than its older designs,
the company invited the press to come to its San Angelo Proving Grounds in
Texas and observe an SAE/TMC Type II fuel consumption test, pitting old
against new.

In this case, two identical tractor-trailers - a control rig and a test rig
with the same powertrain, mileage, horsepower, GCW, tires, pressure, etc. -
were fitted with removable, portable fuel tanks, which were weighed before and
after identical runs of at least 28 miles at the exact same highway speed.
Fuel consumption was measured by tank weight, and the two rigs were compared
as a baseline. Three runs, which must produce results within 2 percent of each
other, were made. In this case, the two rigs' fuel consumption figures were
consistently within 1 percent of each other.

Next, the test was repeated, with the control rig unchanged, and the test
truck fitted with the component to be tested - in this case, the new tires.
Over the course of three runs, with results within 2 percent of each other,
the test truck had consumed about 7.5 percent less fuel per run.

Claim made, point proved, case closed.
end quote

Lubrizol test

http://tinyurl.com/2wezxo

 

PTschafer, I'd say your results are not only anomalous but at odds with an overwhelming number of anecdotal 'web-accounts' as well.

Mind you I'm not casting aspersions on your account directly, but you're either pretty quick to spread false information or not afraid to speak confidently about things you don't have direct knowledge about.

Royal Purple *IS* a group IV synthetic, like Amsoil. Began as such and hasn't changed. Mobil 1 however is *NOW* (after losing their lawsuit) a group III synthetic (I guess they figure why spend the extra money). Your emphatic tone coupled with your bad information makes me somewhat leary about accepting your anomalous account of 'black water' I have to admit, no offense intended but try looking at it from an independent third party point of view.

Speaking of which, while I've used RP in the past (seemed to work fine, I can't say much about it really) I've also used Mobile 1, Redline (also a group IV if you're looking for one) and Amsoil. I pretty much run Amsoil in everything now because (and only because) my friend sells it and I can get it in motorcycle, gear lube, trans, and everything else I need, all in one order and he drops it off on my back porch while I'm at work. That's the big competative advantage there, whoopee. If he sold Royal Purple or Redline I'd be buying that.

The web is so full of 'oil debate' its really, really not funny anymore. The idea that any of this stuff is mega-better, or mega-worse than anything else is just ridiculous. Black water or no black water. Seems that people have their preferences and others have axes (or stock photos of bearings) to grind.

No one here is in this threadgoing to crack open a mystery of the ages. So if you've got (legit) info, or believable accounts that's one thing. If you'rs just LOOKING for a reason to hammer something cause your dad never did it that way or whatever, then sheesh, I never figured this forum for that sort of stuff.

Truth be told, you keep putting dino in your car every 3k and that engine isn't going to fail due to oil quality. So much more for sythetics (group III *OR* group IV). I mean... c'mon already.

God sorry to rant, but the armchair science was getting to me.

You can delete this now if you like.