Rev-X Testing

[Power Hungry]

Well, we finally got around to picking up a nice little 6.0L so we could really start beating these things and see what they're going to handle. We did some dyno testing relating to calibration differences, but that's for another post. I want to cover here specifically what benefits we saw from adding Rev-X to our oil.

Here are the vehicle specs:

Engine: Late 2004 (2005 style heads)
Mileage: 284,000
Block: Stock
Heads: Head Job (Valves, Guides), Head Studs, Black Onyx Head Gaskets
Turbo: Stock
Injectors: Stock (Some newly replaced, though not sure how many)
Exhaust: Completely Stock (Cat still in place)
ECM: VXBC9N8
TCM: TQBF0NA
FICM: ARZ2AL10

The first thing we did when we purchased the truck was to toss the Inductive Heating (I/H) strategy in favor of a non-I/H version. It simply stands to reason that if the injectors (or specifically, the spool valves) are in good shape, there's no need at all for the inductive heating of the injectors.

Well, I found out on my first cool morning that the I/H strategy was covering up some slight deficiencies and stiction issues with the injectors. Starting was not a problem and the idle was reasonably smooth. However, a short trip up the road revealed an extremely noticeable miss above 25% throttle. This lasted for about 2 miles before the injectors warmed up enough to function correctly. Honestly nothing terribly unexpected from running this particular FICM strategy.

A few days later we got the truck over to the shop and strapped it down to the rollers just so we could see what's what. We did several comparisons with different base ECM and FICM strategy combinations, just to get some real-world numbers. The original VXBC9N8 strategy was a bit of an underperformer, although this what I had expected anyway. I switch to the VXBC6 an found modest improvements which, again, was what I expected.

After a few hours of swapping files in and out, I ended up with a solid 140 HP program that was putting down some pretty impressive numbers:

419 HP at 2800 RPM
820 Ft/Lbs at 2600 RPM
400+ HP from 2600 RPM to redline

Needless to say, I was pretty happy with those numbers and was ready to call it a day. Then a thought hit me. (I know, it's rare ) Just for grins, I grabbed some Rev-X off the shelf, poured it in the engine, and let the engine run for a bit while I checked other fluids, analyzed my earlier datalogs and dyno plots, and cleaned up a bit. After about 30 minutes, I decided to try a couple more runs. Now keep in mind that this vehicle had been running for about 3 hours solid, with the only off time being how long it would take to change programs (maybe 2-3 minutes) so the engine oil and coolant temps were reasonably stable.

I will regularly do a series of three dyno runs, disregarding the first, using the second, and referencing the 3rd for comparitive accuracy. The following dyno plot is done with this format. These are the 2nd run plots for the 140 HP program with and without Rev-X.

(click image to enlarge)


As you can clearly see, the Rev-X has made a significant difference in power through the entire RPM band, especially between 2000 and 2600 PRM. The was a 9 HP and 25 Ft/Lb peak gain, with the 400+ HP mark moving down to 2550 RPM.

What I also noticed (and you can't see on the dyno) is that over the next few mornings my cold running issue had been completely eliminated. The trucks starts up perfectly and I can immediately take off without so much as a skip or hiccup.

I am currently planning to produce some fuel economy results, but I unfortunately do not have any "before" numbers since I hadn't even used 1/4 of a tank before we put the Rev-X in. However, I'm very interested to see what my final economy does come out to... once I settle down and quit playing with the truck.

Up until now, I've been extolling the virtues of Rev-X simply based on the responses and feedback from our customers. In fact, that was how we found out about it in the first place. Now, as a Rev-X user, I must say that I am thoroughly impressed. Will it work for everyone? Who's to say. We've most certainly had non-positive feedback from customers who said it did nothing for them, but those type of feedback were pretty infrequent. In most cases, our customers did notice some positive benefits. I know I'm pretty happy with it.

I hope this information is helpful.

[Jackpine]

How does it work Bill? Any idea if it's a friction or viscosity modifier? I remember when I started using Mobile 1 in my old Mercury Marquis, that I got about a 2 mpg increase, but it had a much lower viscosity rating than the "standard oil" I'd been using. Now, of course, Ford's oil for gas engines is 5W20 as I recall, so there's not much you can do to improve on that.

And, any idea if Rev-X for gas engines is supposed to be as good as what you found for the diesel?

- Jack

[Longshot270]

Jack beat me to it, same question.

Cool info

[Power Hungry]

From what I understand from Dan, it is a combination of both friction modifiers and viscosity stabilizers. For obvious reasons, he wouldn't go into great detail about the chemical properties of the additive, but did explain that it contains many of the base compounds they USED to put in oils years ago and now no longer do to reduce costs.

That's all I really know about it. That, and it worked well for my 6.0L. Now to try it in the Expedition.

[Jackpine]

Originally Posted by Power Hungry

From what I understand from Dan, it is a combination of both friction modifiers and viscosity stabilizers. For obvious reasons, he wouldn't go into great detail about the chemical properties of the additive, but did explain that it contains many of the base compounds they USED to put in oils years ago and now no longer do to reduce costs.

That's all I really know about it. That, and it worked well for my 6.0L. Now to try it in the Expedition.

Please do! That will be of great interest to me.

- Jack

[F-127]

Awesome. I have used and witnessed Rev-X in helping with stiction issues in 6.0 injectors on several vehicles. The 9HP peak gain and overall gain in general is what impressed me. Nice to see some solid testing and results completed. Great work Bill and the rest of the PHP gang.

[cleatus12r]

Originally Posted by Power Hungry

I am currently planning to produce some fuel economy results

It's kind of hard to get accurate numbers when the right rear tire consistently puts on twice the miles that the other three do during a trip to town........

[Longshot270]

Why not fill up the tank, throw it on the rollers and "drive" 50 miles. Then your environmental factors are removed...and you can stop having to buy new tires one or two at a time.

[ToMang07]

Wow, Thanks for the info Bill!

[Power Hungry]

The nice thing about this dyno is that we can "script" a simulated environment and drive hundreds of simulated miles. The only thing we can't really account for is headwind, but grades are no problem at all.

It's our plan to eventually get a good script together and start doing some really in-depth mileage testing, just so we can quantitatively show the benefits of tuning. Combined with datalogging, it will be very useful.