whats the best motor oil for an lt1? - Page 2 - LS1TECH - Camaro and Firebird Forum Discussion

Notices
LT1-LT4 Modifications 1993-97 Gen II Small Block V8

whats the best motor oil for an lt1?

Old 09-17-2009, 08:40 PM
  #21  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
 
Smoke Em's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: RI
Posts: 720
Default

what weight would be better for when it gets warm 10w30 or 10w40
Smoke Em is offline  
Old 09-17-2009, 09:39 PM
  #22  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,998
Default

You should ask what DATA guys are baseing their recommendations on.

Most are baseing their choices on advertizement.
96capricemgr is offline  
Old 09-17-2009, 09:54 PM
  #23  
On The Tree
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Newport NC
Posts: 153
Default

The OP didn't say, but if you have the factory oil cooler, it can clog and lower your oil pressure. I removed mine, and while my oil pressure was not low, it did cause my oil pressure to go up. Just something to think about, also the oil cooler is a total waste IMHO.

tia

andy schuck
andysc is offline  
Old 09-17-2009, 10:11 PM
  #24  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (8)
 
baalic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Amarillo
Posts: 1,211
Default

Originally Posted by Smoke Em View Post
what weight would be better for when it gets warm 10w30 or 10w40
10w30 is probably as thick as I would dare in my vehicles, 10w40 is going to weigh 10w cold and 30w warm... 10w40 is 10w cold 40 warm.... 40 weight oil is kinda a lot in today's engines imo but if you lived somewhere like Arizona, 10w40 would probably work a tad better I guess, but you would have to be like, death valley or Arizona desert i would think. At least on a modern gas powered engine.
baalic is offline  
Old 09-17-2009, 11:10 PM
  #25  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (35)
 
StealthFormula's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Philly Suburbs
Posts: 4,573
Default

I use to run Mobil 1 5W-30 for years in both my LT1's and worked fine for me. I did some research and Amsoil seemed to be the top dog and since my dad became a dealer we've been running Amsoil 0W-30 in my LT1 and in both my parents LS2's. We've been running the Amsoil for awhile now and based off our experience with it, it's safe to say that it's been working out a little better than the Mobil 1 was. It's expensive but you get what you pay for.
StealthFormula is offline  
Old 09-17-2009, 11:22 PM
  #26  
TECH Enthusiast
 
stevo9389's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Clearwater
Posts: 644
Default

i run 5w-30 conventional of whatever is on sale.
stevo9389 is offline  
Old 09-17-2009, 11:43 PM
  #27  
ADM
TECH Resident
 
ADM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 772
Default

After I run the cheapest dino oil I can find for the first few hundred miles after the rebuild, I will be running Toyota motor oil, 20w50. Its the same I used to lube my cam before installing it, and the lifters were cleaned and then soaked in it as well.
ADM is offline  
Old 09-17-2009, 11:44 PM
  #28  
Banned
iTrader: (12)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oregon Grown
Posts: 4,370
Default

Mobile 1 here
Elliott's94Z is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 05:30 AM
  #29  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (8)
 
gregrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 6,000+ feet
Posts: 5,132
Default

Originally Posted by 96capricemgr View Post
You should ask what DATA guys are baseing their recommendations on.

Most are baseing their choices on advertizement.


Agreed 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000%


Motor oil is the WORST possible subject when it comes to this as well.
gregrob is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 08:54 AM
  #30  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (8)
 
baalic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Amarillo
Posts: 1,211
Default

Originally Posted by gregrob View Post
Agreed 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000%


Motor oil is the WORST possible subject when it comes to this as well.
I base mine off of what I observe first hand. I always calculate mpg among other things. I am very **** retentive when it comes to my cars. Also on SPEED channel "forgot the actual show" they ran a LS1 Camaro with conventional oil vs Royal Purple and saw an increase in like 7 or 8 hp on the dyno..... They confirmed you do get a little bit more out synthetic then conventional oil.

My "data" ....trial and error. Then making comparison vs what other have done and noticed. When's the last time someone saw a Royal Purple ad on TV??? I never have. But the local race shop here swears by it, which is how I came to test it.

just my 2 cents.
baalic is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 10:18 AM
  #31  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,998
Default

Originally Posted by baalic View Post
I base mine off of what I observe first hand. I always calculate mpg among other things. I am very **** retentive when it comes to my cars. Also on SPEED channel "forgot the actual show" they ran a LS1 Camaro with conventional oil vs Royal Purple and saw an increase in like 7 or 8 hp on the dyno..... They confirmed you do get a little bit more out synthetic then conventional oil.

My "data" ....trial and error. Then making comparison vs what other have done and noticed. When's the last time someone saw a Royal Purple ad on TV??? I never have. But the local race shop here swears by it, which is how I came to test it.

just my 2 cents.

That is fine for a racecar with frequent oil changes. Did they do any MEASURED testing of how the oil worked after a few thousand miles? Wear metal content and such??

Far as the scared of 10w40 thing that is just ignorance. The LT1 shipped outside the US was sometimes spec'd for 15w-40. The North American oil specs are CAFE driven NOT necessarily what is best for the engine.

You are just proving the ignorance surrounding oil "information".
96capricemgr is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 10:21 AM
  #32  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
 
Smoke Em's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: RI
Posts: 720
Default

i dont care about the name, i'm looking for the weight
Smoke Em is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 10:34 AM
  #33  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (35)
 
StealthFormula's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Philly Suburbs
Posts: 4,573
Default

Originally Posted by baalic View Post
I base mine off of what I observe first hand. I always calculate mpg among other things. I am very **** retentive when it comes to my cars. Also on SPEED channel "forgot the actual show" they ran a LS1 Camaro with conventional oil vs Royal Purple and saw an increase in like 7 or 8 hp on the dyno..... They confirmed you do get a little bit more out synthetic then conventional oil.

My "data" ....trial and error. Then making comparison vs what other have done and noticed. When's the last time someone saw a Royal Purple ad on TV??? I never have. But the local race shop here swears by it, which is how I came to test it.

just my 2 cents.
I've seen alot of data on motor oil and engine parts wear and whatnot and I've noticed Royal Purple to be quite poor. I have heard of people picking up a couple horse power with it but based off the data I've seen it appears that Royal Purple puts a strong emphasis on marketing which most people unfortuantely fall for. I'm in Marketing myself and trust me it can sort of be corrupt. You can actually find Royal Purple ads on tv alot especially if you watch certain car shows. If you look online there are many tests done by universities etc., just letting you know that there are some better alternatives out there that you could test and see if they work out better for you.
StealthFormula is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 10:39 AM
  #34  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
 
Smoke Em's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: RI
Posts: 720
Default

is 10w40 going to hurt a stock motor???? why would someone not even dare to put 10w40 in an lt1???
Smoke Em is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 11:42 AM
  #35  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (9)
 
buffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kzoo, MI
Posts: 2,289
Default

btw seafoam isn't going to do much cleaning inside the engine unless you have some really gunked up stuff. Because of it's properties, when oil hits near boiling point, most of it will burn off, so this "thinning" reasoning is for the most part false.

Also MOTOR oil contains way more detergents than ATF. ATF was recommended because it is Thin. a synthetic 5w20 would do more for cleaning then ATF would. This is like the 1000 thread in a year about motor oil.
buffman is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 11:43 AM
  #36  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (5)
 
sepno77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 605
Default

man iv used 10-30, 10-40, 0-30, 0-40, 15-40 is what i have in right now and all work fine. iv used conventional, blend, and mostly synthetice and imo they all the same thing. oil is oil. i think from now on im actully gonna use blend cause coventional seems a lil thick and syn is a lil on the thin side so blend might be just right in wight and price. o i also think conv gets dirtyer then syn
sepno77 is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 12:09 PM
  #37  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (8)
 
gregrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 6,000+ feet
Posts: 5,132
Default

I'm gonna repost something from another thread, save typing it twice

Truth in Advertising: BP v. Royal Purple

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.
My buddy has also personally tested some of their diesel oil offerings and when compared against normal DELO 400 conventional diesel engine oil, via a back-to-back blackstone lab report, the iron level skyrocketed with Royal Purple in the engine, indicating increased and excessive wear.

When switched back to normal DELO 15-40 conventional, the wear/iron levels returned to normal.

Royal Purple has made bogus bs claims for years and has a lot of diehard fans who don't have one ounce of data to support their claims. Those who have tested it in the real world though, find a different story. That is why I choose not to use it, I prefer not to deal with lying manipulative companies.

Hence my comment RP-IS-JUNK.
gregrob is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 02:25 PM
  #38  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (9)
 
buffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kzoo, MI
Posts: 2,289
Default

Originally Posted by sepno77 View Post
man iv used 10-30, 10-40, 0-30, 0-40, 15-40 is what i have in right now and all work fine. iv used conventional, blend, and mostly synthetice and imo they all the same thing. oil is oil. i think from now on im actully gonna use blend cause coventional seems a lil thick and syn is a lil on the thin side so blend might be just right in wight and price. o i also think conv gets dirtyer then syn
dude oil is not just oil in regards to motor oil, but think whatever you want.
buffman is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 03:22 PM
  #39  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Tyler, Tx
Posts: 1,377
Default

I've used Mobil 1 10w-40 Synthetic for 100k since the rebuild.... its fine. I have the same oil pressure now as the day it was built. I've also had the valvetrain apart at 80k and it looked completely new. I usually ran a Fram HP4 Long Filter, but recently switched to Mobil 1 filters after seeing some lab tests...

Hope this helps whatever is going on.
RickyMartinZ28 is offline  
Old 09-18-2009, 03:27 PM
  #40  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
leadfoot4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Webster, NY
Posts: 4,579
Default

I'm currently running 10W-40 (in the summer), since it seems to keep the Comp 875R lifters a little quieter.
leadfoot4 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: whats the best motor oil for an lt1?


Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: