Castrol Formula RS SAE 10W60

[Pleasantville]

I know, I know, oil is an over done question, but any opinions on this stuff?

[dino ferrana]

I believe you have an R500. Don't use this in the R500 it is the wrong spec.

 

I seem to remember something about this particular grade of Castrol not being that good for some reason. Can't remember why or whether it was this oil.

 

Use Comma/Caterham Motorsport oil it was designed for the R500 engine. It is a 5W50 BTW.

[oldbutnotslow]

I’ve used it for most of last year. It is a 10 / 60. My car is used almost exclusively on the track and I found it great particularly in very hot conditions when running back-to-back 30min sessions. I tried the Comma syner 0 and that was way too thin and got rid of it after one track day. Never tried the Comma / Caterham motor sport oil. I suspect that most of the good quality oil will be fine. I get mine from a friend who runs a lubricant specialist company. Cost is about £29 for 4 litres.

I change the oil and filter very regularly so cant comment about extended life.

I am sure that there will be thousands of others who may have different opinions!

 

 

Grant

 

Black and stone chip

here

[dino ferrana]

Syner Z is probably a bit thin for an R500 considering the temperatures they get to. The motorsport oil is however perfect as that is what it is designed for. I wouldn't think the 10W60 does the engine a great deal of good as it is a little thick for a K-Series when cold. I think a 60 rating is excessive even when running in high temperatures.

[Mr Locust]

K series Lotus Elise service manual names Castrol RS 10W60 (and Mobil 1 15W50) specifically as recommended lubricants.

 

Short of putting hours/miles on an engine with oil analysis at regular intervals then a full strip/examination of the engine it comes down to brand loyalties and personal perception of which one is best.

 

If you pick a reasonably classified oil you will probably afford sufficient protection to your engine.

 

No guarantees.

 

Ian

 

Green and Silver Roadsport 😬

[Mr Locust]

Double post-Where'd that come from?

 

Ian

 

Green and Silver Roadsport 😬

 

Edited by - Mr Locust on 11 Dec 2004 17:53:06

[oilman]

It depends what sort of quality you want and whether you wish to pay for the "synthetic" label when it's only a "hydrocracked" oil.

 

I have chemical analysis on this oil and it is of the "hydrocracked" variety so I would say that it's not worth paying the "synthetic" price tag.

 

Personally I would use an ester based oil on track and can recommend the Silkolene PRO range or the Motul 300V range.

 

Specs here: http://www.opieoils.co.uk/lubricants.htm

 

It's perhaps worth reminding people here what I'm talking about when I refer to synthetics. It's down to basestocks and synthetics are superior.

 

A word of caution – You get what you pay for!

 

Below is an article written by John Rowland, Silkolene/Fuchs Chief R & D Chemist for 40 years.

 

Quote:

 

Costs of synthetics vary considerably. The most expensive are the “Ester” types originally only used in jet engines. These cost 6 to 10 times more than high quality mineral oils.

 

The cheapest synthetics are not really synthetic at all, from a chemists point of view. These are in fact specially refined light viscosity mineral oils known as “hydrocracked”. These have some advantages over equivalent mineral oils, particularly in lower viscosity motor oils such as 5w-30 or other oils with a low “W” rating such as 5w-50 etc and they cost about 1.5 times more than good quality mineral fractions. We use several different grades of this base oil, where appropriate.

 

This is the “synthetic” which is always used in cheap oils that are labelled “synthetic”. Yes it’s a cruel world, you get what you pay for!

 

Now, you may ask, why are these special mineral oils called “synthetic”?

 

Well, it was all sorted in a legal battle that took place in the USA about ten years ago. Sound reasons (including evidence from a Nobel Prize winning chemist) were disregarded and the final ruling was that certain mineral bases that had undergone extra chemical treatments could be called “synthetic”.

 

Needless to say, the marketing executives wet their knickers with pure delight! They realised that this meant, and still does, that the critical buzz-word “synthetic” could be printed on a can of cheap oil provided that the contents included a few percent of “hydrocracked” mineral oil, at a cost of quite literally a few pence.

 

So, the chemistry of “synthetics” is complex and so is the politics!

 

The economics are very simple. If you like the look of a smart well-marketed can with “synthetic” printed on it, fair enough, it will not cost you a lot; and now you know why this is the case. But, if you drive a high performance car, and you intend to keep it for several years, and maybe do the odd “track day”, then you need a genuine Ester/PAO (Poly Alpha Olefin) synthetic oil.

 

This oil costs more money to buy, because it costs us a lot of money to make, very simply, you always get what you pay for!

 

UNQUOTE:

 

Cheers

Simon

[edmandsd]

Simon what do you think of Valvoline synthetic blend 10w 60 race oil. You can't get it in the UK but Julian Godfrey uses it in all his turbo cars and swears by it. I've been using it in my n/a BDX and plan to use it in my Hart 420r n/a engine. I predominantly do drag racing and always used to use Valvoline Race 20/50.

 

Cheers

David.

 

Home of HTR700

[oilman]

I can't say that I know much about this oil but the word "blend" is a term used to indicate that it's not a proper synthetic. It's probably group 3 basestock (hydrocracked) rather than group 4 or 5 which are the better oils.

 

Cheers

Simon