Royal Purple. Engine Damage In The Long Term?

cjr1881

Royal Purple is the best oil hands down. Your friends are jealous or ignorant. Probably go hand in hand.

moto_italia

And Porsche went to 15,000 mile interval on oil changes a few years back, on non-turbo cars. 7,500 on turbos.

__________________
Kevin

Dark Sarcasm

oil change intervals should be based on engine revolutions not miles. Your engine oil doesnt affect your tires and your engine revolutions are not counted by the odometer. If you drive 5000 miles almost all highway, running at 2k RPMS or less, then the engine would actually have less revolutions on it than a vehicle driven in stop and go city traffic for 5000 miles. JUst a thought. Now since there isnt an revolutions counter on our cars then I think you should change your oil based on your driving habits, and changing your oil too often doesnt hurt anything.

__________________
wax

Methodical4u

these engines get so hot that even Mobil 1 supposedly breaks down very quickly. I know of some engine builders who have torn down motors and found damaged internals due to lack of proper lubrication from some who were using RP... now does that mean that it's true and that it's not a good oil? No it doesn't, but it's enough that I won't use it. I use AMSoil SS0 0w30 and I get EXCELLENT gas mileage, the engine is more quiet and it feels like it has a bit more zip. It also is claimed to be able to go 25k miles or 1 year for non performance cars that are not driven hard.... my mother had it in her car for a year and I changed the oil and it still looked, felt slick and smelled fresh. It's all I will EVER use.

Methodical4u

no, it's not... and it's proven that it's not... but i'm not going to get into a debate.

Methodical4u

OP, here are some tests from AMSoil's site... and while they are on their site, the tests are claimed to be done by independent labs Royal Purple vs AMSOIL

Royal Purple's Synthetic Oil Advertising Claims Have Been Challenged By BP Lubricants
The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus has recommended that Royal Purple, Ltd., modify or discontinue certain advertising claims for it’s synthetic motor oil.

NAD® News For Immediate Release Contact: Linda Bean 212-705-0129

BP LUBRICANTS CHALLENGES ROYAL PURPLE’S CLAIMS FOR SYNTHETIC MOTOR OIL

NAD Recommends Royal Purple Modify, Discontinue Certain Claims

New York, NY – April 1, 2009 – The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus has recommended that Royal Purple, Ltd., modify or discontinue certain advertising claims for it’s synthetic motor oil.

NAD, the advertising industry’s self-regulatory forum, examined comparative performance and superiority claims in print, broadcast and Internet advertising, following a challenge by BP Lubricants.

Claims at issue included:

• “Independent university and industry tests document the performance gains of using Royal Purple. When compared to leading synthetic and conventional motor oils, Royal Purple typically:”

“Increases horsepower and torque by as much as 3%.”

“Reduces engine wear by as much as 80%.”

“Improves fuel economy by as much as 5%.”

“Fuel economy improvement up to 5% or more.”

“Reduces engine heat by as much as 10%.”

“Reductions in heat of up to 12%.”

“Reduces engine heat by as much as 10%.”

“Reduces emissions up to 20% or more.”

“Reductions in emissions of 20% or more.”

• “Unsurpassed,” “Unparalleled,” “Most Advanced.”

• “Provides Film Strength up to 400% stronger than other motor oils.”

• “Superior oxidation stability...”

• “API/ILSAC Certified.”

In its decision, NAD noted that the advertiser voluntarily agreed to discontinue the claims “most advanced,” “unsurpassed performance” and “unparalleled performance,” steps that NAD found were necessary and proper to avoid confusion in the marketplace NAD noted that it appreciated the advertiser’s participation in the NAD process, especially as a newcomer to the retail automotive industry as it branches out from industrial lubricants. Further, NAD noted that testimonials included in a wide range of auto-enthusiast publications indicate that Royal Purple’s consumers are “vocally appreciative of its synthetic purple engine oil.”

However, NAD noted, anecdotal evidence based solely on the experiences of individual consumers is insufficient to support product efficacy claims, including claims related to horsepower, torque, fuel economy or engine heat. While the advertiser may quote from published articles if it provides clear and conspicuous attribution to the publisher, it may not rely on such articles to support efficacy claims for which it has no reliable independent validation.

Following its review of the non-anecdotal evidence in the record, NAD recommended that the advertiser discontinue the claims “Reduces emissions up to 20% or more.” and “Reductions in emissions of 20% or more” because the studies on which the claims were based are outdated and not consumer-relevant.

NAD recommended that the advertiser discontinue its unsupported claim that Royal Purple motor oil is “API/ILSAC Certified.”

Royal Purple, in its advertiser’s statement, said it “appreciates NAD’s review of the extensive record in this matter as well as the NAD’s recognition of the difficulty the automotive industry has with accurately quantifying performance claims based on bench tests alone as they do not accurately reflect real world results.”

The company noted that, while it believes the “tests and testimonials it supplied as evidence accurately portray the benefits of using its synthetic oil in a wide variety of applications, it defers to the NAD’s position that those tests and testimonials alone are insufficient to support specific performance attribute claims in consumer advertising.”

The company noted, as well, that it has “already made changes to its advertising in accordance with the NAD recommendations and will continue to implement NAD’s recommendations and analysis in developing Royal Purple’s future advertising.”

NAD's inquiry was conducted under NAD/CARU/NARB Procedures for the Voluntary Self-Regulation of

National Advertising. Details of the initial inquiry, NAD's decision, and the advertiser's response will be

included in the next NAD/CARU Case Report.

Methodical4u

April 8, 2009
Truth in Advertising: BP v. Royal Purple

By George Gill

Royal Purple Ltd. was black and blue after BP Lubricants USA took it to task over advertising claims for its synthetic motor oil, finding a receptive audience in the advertising industry’s self-regulatory forum.

The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus recommended Porter, Texas-based Royal Purple modify or discontinue numerous advertising claims for its synthetic motor oil, following a challenge by Wayne, N.J.-based BP Lubricants. The NAD examined comparative performance and superiority claims in print, broadcast and Internet advertising. In some of the advertising, Royal Purple compared its performance to Castrol, Shell, Amsoil and other motor oil brands.

NAD recommended that Royal Purple discontinue its use of consumer testimonials reporting specific performance attributes in the absence of reliable independent evidence showing performance capability.

“Anecdotal evidence based solely on the experiences of individual consumers is insufficient to support product efficacy claims, including claims related to horsepower, torque, fuel economy or engine heat,” the organization stated. “While the advertiser may quote from published articles if it provides clear and conspicuous attribution to the publisher, it may not rely on such articles to support efficacy claims for which it has no reliable independent validation.”

NAD recommended Royal Purple discontinue claims such as “Increases horsepower and torque by as much as 3 percent,” “Reduces Engine Wear by 80 percent,” “Superior Oxidation Stability” and “Provides Film Strength Up to 400 Percent.”

“If industry-standard tests or tests with carefully documented controls were abandoned, there would be no basis whatsoever for making any meaningful claims about the relative efficacy of motor oils,” BP said in its challenge.

NAD recommended that Royal Purple discontinue claims that stated, “Improves fuel economy by as much as 5 percent” and “Fuel economy improvement up to 5 percent or more” because its Environmental Protection Agency testing was inconclusive and the “Oklahoma State Study” and single cylinder Labeco CLR diesel engine testing cited in Royal Purple’s advertising was not relevant. The NAD noted the 1997 OSU Study was “outdated and nothing in the record demonstrated that the formulations of the competitors’ oils were similar to those available for sale on the market today.”

BP Lubricants said it hired the independent laboratory Southwest Research Institute, in San Antonio, to analyze power output of gasoline engines with Royal Purple Oil and with BP’s Castrol oil for comparisons. “The results were provided to the challenger’s expert statistician who was not informed of the identity of the candidate oils,” NAD stated. “The challenger’s [BP’s] expert determined a 0.9 percent difference in power between the oils, which did not rise to the level of statistical significance, and is well below the 3 percent claim made by the advertiser.”

SwRI did additional tests to independently determine the differences in fuel economy, emissions data and engine temperature between Royal Purple and Castrol motor oils. According to SwRI, “there was no statistically significant difference between the fuel economy, emissions data or engine temperature between the two candidate oils,” NAD said.

Following its review of the non-anecdotal evidence in the record, NAD recommended that Royal Purple discontinue the claims, “Reduces emissions up to 20 percent or more” and “Reductions in emissions of 20 percent or more” because the studies on which the claims were based were outdated and not consumer-relevant.

NAD also recommended the advertiser discontinue its unsupported claim that Royal purple motor oil is “API/ILSAC Certified.” Noting that API and ILSAC licenses and certifications have many categories with different meanings, the NAD recommended that the company discontinue its claim that its synthetic oils are “generally ‘API/ILSAC Certified.’”

In fact, no Royal Purple products are certified to current ILSAC specifications.

The American Petroleum Institute licenses its trademarked Service Symbol, or ‘donut,’ for display on qualified engine oils, and also licenses the ILSAC ‘starburst’ logo for oils that meet the auto industry’s latest energy-conserving standards. In API’s online directory of licensees for its Engine Oil Licensing and Certification Program, Royal Purple has a total of 23 passenger car and diesel engine oil products listed, all licensed to use the API donut. Five of these may additionally display the words ‘energy conserving’ within the donut logo, but none of the Royal Purple products are licensable to the current ILSAC GF-4 specification and they cannot display the starburst logo.

Royal Purple also voluntarily agreed to discontinue the claims, “most advanced,” “unsurpassed performance” and “unparalleled performance,” steps the NAD said were necessary and proper to avoid confusion in the marketplace.

“While Royal Purple also believes that the tests and testimonials it supplied as evidence accurately portray the benefits of using its synthetic oil in a wide variety of applications, it defers to the NAD’s position that those tests and testimonials alone are insufficient to support specific performance attribute claims in consumer advertising,” the company said in its response to NAD. “... [Royal Purple] has already made changes to its advertising in accordance with the NAD recommendations and will continue to implement NAD’s recommendations and analysis in developing Royal Purple’s future advertising.”

BP Lubricants did not return phone calls from Lube Report requesting comment on NAD’s decision.

TXSpeedDemon

I've used RP before in my turbo Mazda, didn't like it. Noticed harshness and engine vibration at high RPMs. Made me nervous. Also seemed to lose power although I have no dyno #s to prove that. Switched back to Mobile 1 and have had no problems.

In my Nissan I use Redline. I change it ever 5K miles (about every 9 months). Twice so far and now due for it's third. The previous two times the oil came out looking brand new.

I should also mention my car seemed to burn a lot of oil before using Redline. At the first oil change I gave her (around 1K miles) she was almost 2 quarts low. I didn't check her when I picked her up so it's possible she was just short from the dealer, but haven't noticed any significant loss after switching to Redline.

6MT

i b t l

__________________
Andrew

2009 370Z Sport/Touring 6MT sold
2013 Honda Civic Si coupe D/D

Methodical4u

Yep, AMSoil and Redline are the two top dogs when it comes to oil... though IMO Mobil 1 is quite good.

deuce189

I really don't see it as much better than the other, I've always used mobil one synthetic in all of my vehicles even in my integra GS-r back in the day changed it ever 4k, the engine hydrolocked and had to be pulled and rebuilt. The car had 140k miles on it, always ran mobil one synthetic. My mechanic was amazed that there was not a bit of sludge in the engine other than normal discoloration from and wear from any high mileage vehicle, every thing was coated nicely. Same with my STI when i pulled the stock block for the new built one, always ran mobil 1 synthetic changed every 3.5-4k miles, pulled the heads and the engine still was in very very good shape at 70k miles. I didn't rag on the car but i didn't grandma on it either. Sold that long block to a guy without any complaints or news of it giving him problems.

Anywho, long story short. Mobil 1 Synthetic is great IMO and is very good for the generic. I think people mainly buy stuff like redline or RP for the name. Not saying they don't have that bit of extra for racing purpose, but i personally don't think it far exceeds much over anything else. It's all relative if you ask me.

deuce189

I agree, every engine is built different. Not all of them are going to move and flow oil in the exact same way. That is something I never thought about myself, but i've never owned that many different type of vehicles. I've always been a subaru man

SPOHN

I use sex lube as a additive. But have no lab work on it to prove it works. It reduces the bumping and grinding on the cams.

__________________

theDreamer

What about those short rough runs, does it still reproduce the safe results?

__________________
theDreamer's Z // Fast Intentions // Uprev // GTM // HKS // TEIN
theDreamer's Silvia // URAS // GREDDY
Houston Zs // Facebook // Twitter // Instagram