Royal purple - oil analysis results
 

Just got my oil analysis report on my third oil change.

Notes:
- Ran original Nissan oil for about 1900km (1200 miles);
- Change for REGULAR dyno oil and new Nissan filter (done by dealer which wasn't very keen on putting that oil into the Z...);
- 2800 thru 7000km on Royal Purple 5w30 & K&N filter (1 lapping event);
- 7000 thru 12000km (5k miles thru 8k miles range) on RP 5w30 & new K&N filter (with 2 lapping events). Added less than 1/2 oil quart over that timeframe.

Question:
Does anyone have a clue what causes the magnesium level to be so high???

Most of the break-in wear metals should have been out of your oil system by then, especially if you drove spiritedly up to that point. All wear levels are high for a supposedly awesome synthetic, and the viscosity there isn't great at all for an oil that ought to have at least a 3.5 HTHS rating (I dunno if it does, RP doesn't publicize specs like everybody else).

I would highly suggest switching to a better oil like Mobil 1, Castrol Syntec, Pennzoil Platinum, Red Line, AMSOIL or basically anything else. It honestly doesn't look like Royal Purple is doing too well for your case. I've seen much better UOA's at that mileage from pretty much every other synthetic out there.

Hopefully some people start to wise up about this over-priced, mis-marketed product. Ugh.

Oh, and the magnesium is a "Detergent/dispersant additive"

how do you get that from that chart? everything looks normal and the company even states that the wear levels are normal, and wasnt this after some hard driving?

Compare them to other UOA's on the VQ37, and to universal averages. His copper wear is 3x higher than it should be, for example. Copper comes from one major source in your engine - bearing surfaces. Fact is, any good synthetic should protect better than the universal average. That's what they're marketed to do. I can name at least one that has proven to do so even on a long OCI on the VQ37VHR.

I didn't bother reading into what Blackstone had to say because they are assuming the engine is still breaking in. It's just simply not, not after hard driving, and not after that many oil changes and miles.

Well, i guess the RP fans will not like that comment, but, without any real comparison (meaning others car with the same oil changes frequency, oil type, driving style etc...), it will be tough the state that RP isn't good for the Z...

Other synthetic oil analyses have showed great & poor numbers... Also, the fact that I added my oil cooler when changing my oil (third one) may have increase the values of some indicators.

I did some comparison with other Blackstone reports using RedLine and Ester oil for the 370 (all from this forum) and reports are showing different values for the "Universal average" column... I wonder what makes the average change over such a short time-frame :icon14:...

Any ideas?

Phil

Many tests have shown RP to be a marginal oil, they are selling by their names

+1 for posting a UOA

Esp RP cause I'm currently running it...

Good to see it's not a POS oil like others allude to but doesn't look fantastic either... =/

Hmm what to do...

I have ran RP in my last 2 VQ's with no ill effect. I drive my cars hard (like I stole them) but I doubt it's as hard as "tracked cars". I put little value in these reports. The average consumer has nothing to worry about. Hell, I'll bet you we all could be just fine with dino oils under normal conditions. I remember my folks having cars with 200K running the oils they had back then. Buy your favorite blend and call it a day. There have been a ton of these oils threads that only prove we'll defend are favorite brand(s). That's just my :twocents: :stirthepot:

I agree except there are clearly better oils available than Royal Purple, and for less. It's simply not a good choice if you have other options. Point is, if you're running Royal Purple, you're probably under the illusion you're getting the best already. So such a person, if enlightened, would probably want to go with one of those better options.

For starters, Royal Purple isn't even a real oil company. Honestly, how much do you think they spend on R&D compared to some of the larger oil companies?

I'm very adamant about denouncing and defending various oils, but when I can recommend you 4 separate oils that I KNOW protect even beat-to-hell racing engines with huge bearing spinning design flaws well, you can trust I'm really not that biased and they are probably good oils.

Royal Purple is absolutley a real oil company. They are not originally an automotive oil company. They started in industial oils in the petrochemical industry and were a phenom compared to their traditoinal competition.

Sounds like somebody has a bias against RP. Hmm.. wonder if you use Amsoil or Redline...

No bias, I've used it before in a self-built racing engine and was not pleased. That kind of feedback and opinion is far more involved than anybody else I've seen try to argue in Royal Purple's favor.

And I use neither of those currently.

From what I had read/heard back when I got my 370Z, RP is better when used in a higher temp situation. Normal oil temps not so much. Maybe I heard wrong, idk, but this is why I decided to use RP. I do track days with my car and on the street it gets driven very hard every day, so oil temps, even with a big oil cooler, get pretty high.

UOA and Royal Purple
 

Good Afternoon All,

My name is Chris and I work in the Royal Purple tech department. Another employee came across this thread and brought it to my attention. Certainly we want to know if anyone has a bad experience with a Royal Purple product. We welcome all feedback, good or bad.

I’m concerned that perhaps some judgments are being made without a full understanding of used oil analysis (UOA). It’s a great tool if it is used correctly, and the correct way to use UOA is as a trending tool. A single UOA report, when not compared to other UOA results from the same vehicle, on the same oil, from the same lab is of little benefit. For UOA to be useful, you need a baseline analysis of an unused sample of the oil intended for usage, and you need periodic sampling. A single data point tells nothing of significance and definitely does not show what is 'normal' for a particular engine.

One of the concerns in this instance is the 'Universal Averages' that were reported. What is the standard deviation of the average? Are all of the historical values within a few percent of each other or are they all over the place? Both scenarios can give the same average. An average is useless, statistically, without a standard deviation. By chance does anyone here know how many UOAs this particular lab has performed on used oil from the relatively new Nissan 3.7L engine specifically? Were they all of the samples from factory stock engines? Were they all from daily driven cars? Were some of the samples from highly modified track-only cars? None if this pertinent info is available.

Another concern is the report format. The elements used in additives, and elements that are contaminants or wear metals are not separated and identified. Unless the analyst (and/or the customer) is intimately familiar with that a particular oil, and oil formulation in general, how can normal, or good and bad be determined? Interestingly, everything they show that is supposed to be in the RP 5W-30 is still within our spec, and the viscosity is within American Petroleum Institute (API) and RP specifications. The oil is still in great shape.

My previous position was with Southwest Research so I’ve been intimately involved with, and I'm knowledgeable about lubricant manufacturers, their products and processes. Please be aware that we do not cut corners on materials or manufacturing. Additionally, our QC program is one of the most extensive in the industry.

Please let me know If you have specific concerns with any of our products or if you have any questions about used oil analysis. You can reach me by email at cbarker@royalpurple.com or by phone toll-free at 888-382-6300. Oftentimes, when a customer is not satisfied with RP product, it was contaminated by an aftermarket additive or other fluid, or it was not the correct product for the application. I hope this was of help.

Regards,

Chris Barker
Tech Services
Royal Purple Inc.
www.royalpurple.com

^ RP FTMFW :tup: