REVscene Automotive Forum - Royal Purple, not as good as you think

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)

- Vancouver Auto Chat (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-auto-chat_173/)

- - Royal Purple, not as good as you think (https://www.revscene.net/forums/572378-royal-purple-not-good-you-think.html)

Royal Purple, not as good as you think

Quote:

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.

http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_artic...mW6PM,b1M25KBS

summary: marketing claims didn't go well with the actual result of an independent test.

discusssss

well i dont use royal purple or any other American brand hahaha. but yea its not really surprising im sure most companies do false advertise their products. with there so called lab tests and stuff

A lot of people in the Tech Forums are claiming that Royal Purple works best. I think Xander found that it reduced engine noise and that it stopped ticking from the motor but don't quote me on that. I didn't find Royal Purple to be all that great. My motor ran a lot smoother and better on Mobil 1.

When it comes down to it... oil is oil. Changing it regularly, along with the filter, is the best way to properly maintain your vehicle, whatever your vehicle is.

If you want to pay $20 a litre for it... go for it. For all the "high performance" driving most of you don't do... you may as well get your oil at Wal Mart and save yourself a few bucks.

How is this any different than products like Duralube, Z-Max, The Tornado etc... ??

I'm sure none of those companies can support their claims through independent testing either.

royal purple makes some of the best 2 stroke pre-mix i've ever used in my dirtbikes

cant say anything for car oil though

fuck just when I was going to pop open my stock in my garage.... Anyone wanna buy 4L of Royal Purple 10W30?

I agree that maybe those claims of increased power and fuel economy was probably marketing BS. But some tests have proven RP to have the highest abrasion resistance.

Here's one where it basically destroys the competition.
http://www.animegame.com/cars/Oil%20Tests.pdf

That being said, no single oil brand should be labeled as being the best. Other factors should be taken into consideration like fuel dilution, different temperature conditions etc.

this is for motorcycles but i imagine its relevant to this topic:

http://www.amsoil.com/products/stree...hitePaper.aspx

compairing amsoil, mobil 1, motul, castrol, penzoil, valvoline, royal purple and a few more...

royal purple is pretty well in the bottom 1/4 of the list in most test catagories.

I thought I post this OIL 101 Basic course from FerarriChat.com

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgnshf6g_42hrx9p4ct

Honestly transmission fluids vary from car to car. certain cars run better with certain fluids.

All cars add about 20-40hp after an oil change when playing GT4. :lol:

Instead of increasing horsepower, can't they just say recover loss horsepower?

Royal purple is still BETTER than the other oils, according to BP's third party research facility, as per the following quote:

“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.”

This translates to: +0.9% isn't significant enough to be anything more than negligible. However, it's still undeniable that Royal Purple tested 0.9% better than the competition. And that translates to Royal Purple is BETTER. Whether it's by 0.9%, or 900%, it still beat out BP at least.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RRxtar (Post 6382999)

fuckin' brilliant! of course, a study about amsoil on amsoil's website. thanks for the useful info!!!!

Amsoil is some of the best shit out there. My motorcycles ran better after an amsoil oil change, significantly cooler as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BNR32_Coupe (Post 6383605)

Do you understand what "did not rise to the level of statistical significance" means? It means that there is no difference found to make a claim that one is better than the other.

I don't use any oil that doesn't have the starburst logo on it. Pretty simple, really. This includes royal purple, scamsoil, redline etc. I use Mobil1.

Mobil1 for me. Can't beat 34.99 at superstore for a 4.4L. ;)

As usual, most of you have a nugget of truth, but lack the full picture.

For starters, BNR is right. 0.9% is nearly 1%, and on a 300hp engine that's 3hp just from switching oils. If you're racing, it's a no brainer. It's not negligable as BP claims.

Second of all, Marco, the reason why none of the performance oils like Brad Penn or Royal Purple have a certification label for road usage is that they use a large amount of metal molecules in order to provide superior lubrication and resistance to breakdown of the oil. DOT does not allow these types of oil to get DOT approval and that's why they are marketed as "offroad use only". That does not mean they are a scam. It does not mean they don't perform. It simply means they do not meet DOT standards.

jlenko has a point too; there is no point running premium performance oil in a chevy cavalier that is grandma driven.

However, all oils are not created equal. There is always a best oil for a certain given usage. Everyone has different operating ranges, temperatures, and engines, and you have to pick an oil, and an oil weight, that suits you and your budget the best.

I run Castrol high-mileage 10W30 non-synth in my '97 chevy cavalier.
I run Mobil1 5w50 synth in my dailydriver/track toy 968
I run Mobil1 15w50 in the racecar, and considering trying the Brad Penn next oil change.

pick the right tool for the job.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marco911 (Post 6383672)

Do you understand what "did not rise to the level of statistical significance" means? It means that there is no difference found to make a claim that one is better than the other.

I don't use any oil that doesn't have the starburst logo on it. Pretty simple, really. This includes royal purple, scamsoil, redline etc. I use Mobil1.

Actually, it does mean there is a difference found to make the claim. I don't think you understand it properly, consider editing your post to save RS face

My penis is 0.9" bigger than yours. That means it's still bigger. I don't care if that figure is negligible in your books, the fact is it's bigger.

And yes, not using oils without the starburst logo is pretty simple. I agree. It's more simple than calculating what 0.9% @ 300hp means.

i use ELF full synthetic. imported from Europe!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by BNR32_Coupe (Post 6383605)

Whether it's by 0.9%, or 900%, it still beat out BP at least.

Whether it's an inch or a mile, winning is winning. :haha:

I like my Amsoil :p My auto tranny has never shifter smoother too :p

Quote:

Originally Posted by hamhead (Post 6383863)

i use ELF full synthetic. imported from Europe!!!

For your 1980, naturally aspirated VW ??!!??

Now that's overkill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdizzle_996 (Post 6383680)

Mobil1 for me. Can't beat 34.99 at superstore for a 4.4L. ;)

what ?
when!?

superstore has a tax free event this weekend

hope they have 5w20