Royal Purple
#1
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Royal Purple
Is this stuff as good as everyone says it is? Just watched Horsepower TV and on a 00' LS1 Camaro base HP on dyno was 302, after oil,gear,and tranny fluids were switched to Royal Purple, the dyno reported a 8hp gain up to 310hp now. Thats not bad if it works on every vehicle, and not just the sports cars.
#4
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
That dyno data can be normal variation. You need to average at least 10 dyno pulls before and after. So many variables, it'* nearly impossible to tell if the Purple is responsible.
#5
Senior Member
Certified GM nut
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't trust it in the slightest. I mean heck look at what happened to the other guys claiming wild things other than "meh, its oil" :
Slick 50: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1997/07/slick.htm
Z-Max: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2001/02/speedwaycmp.pdf
Prolong: http://www.ftc.gov/os/1999/11/prolong.do.htm
Duralube: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1999/05/duralub2.htm
STP oil treatment: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1995/12/stp.htm
Motor-Up: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/03/motorupanalysis.htm
Castrol: http://www.ftc.gov/os/1999/12/castrol.do.htm
Shell 1999: http://www.ftc.gov/os/1999/09/shellconsent.htm
Shell 2000: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/01/shell.do.htm
EDIT: A summary for those of you who don't spend 9hours of your day reading FTC demands of oil companies
Every one of these companies was ordered by the FTC, after review and analysis of claims, to cease and desist all claims of:
1. Improved fuel economy
2. Improved cold-start protection
3. Improved acceleration or power
4. That they contain superior chemicals that allow such claims
Some got more than others but thats the basis for all of them.
AMSOIL did a dyno test of a bunch of different oils. Of course theirs came up as best (which I ignore) but its interesting to note that Royal Purple was rated 7th place.
Slick 50: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1997/07/slick.htm
Z-Max: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2001/02/speedwaycmp.pdf
Prolong: http://www.ftc.gov/os/1999/11/prolong.do.htm
Duralube: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1999/05/duralub2.htm
STP oil treatment: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1995/12/stp.htm
Motor-Up: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/03/motorupanalysis.htm
Castrol: http://www.ftc.gov/os/1999/12/castrol.do.htm
Shell 1999: http://www.ftc.gov/os/1999/09/shellconsent.htm
Shell 2000: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/01/shell.do.htm
EDIT: A summary for those of you who don't spend 9hours of your day reading FTC demands of oil companies
Every one of these companies was ordered by the FTC, after review and analysis of claims, to cease and desist all claims of:
1. Improved fuel economy
2. Improved cold-start protection
3. Improved acceleration or power
4. That they contain superior chemicals that allow such claims
Some got more than others but thats the basis for all of them.
AMSOIL did a dyno test of a bunch of different oils. Of course theirs came up as best (which I ignore) but its interesting to note that Royal Purple was rated 7th place.
#10
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because that is what I am interested in, and really didnt read any of those long *** articles. Just read the summary by Dr.Jay
Here is the link on what I am talking about....
http://www.royalpurple.com/prodsa/prodsua.html#bu1
See what I mean? AMSOIL did a dyno test of a bunch of different oils. Of course theirs came up as best (which I ignore) but its interesting to note that Royal Purple was rated 7th place.
http://www.royalpurple.com/prodsa/prodsua.html#bu1