Ford Focus RS Forum banner

New RS oil options from Ravenol

8K views 63 replies 16 participants last post by  big jim 
#1 · (Edited)
I just stumbled upon this while shopping for my prescribed LSD gear oil:

Ford Focus RS Motor Oil Change Kit - 2016-18 - 2.3L Ecoboost - Race Oil 5w50

Magic words: exceeds Ford WSS-M2C931-C



Ravenol also make the Racing Gear Oil that works with transverse synchro gearboxes and plated LSD, which is very rare as the gearbox synchros and diff plates share the same oil with quasi-opposite requirements, as well as a DGL 75w85 GL5 LS (Ford WSS-M2C942-A) for the RDU, a SLS 75w140 GL5 LS (Ford WSL-M2C192-A) for the PTU and an MTF-3 75w (Ford WSS-M2C200-D2) for the RS gearbox with standard or helical diffs, so they now offer a full complement of Ford-spec-compliant lubricants for our cars.

I use the Ravenol Racing Gear Oil with my carbon synchros and Drexler plated LSD ever since they were installed about 45,000km ago and both works smoothly and as intended to this day.
 
#4 ·
Thanks for finding this.
I couldn't find many oil analysis for his oil (1). The website also doesn't go into much detail about what's in the oil. The analysis does mention a lot of zinc, so this might not be the best if you still have cats in your car. That's why it's probably listed as a "racing" oil. The calcium levels also seemed high.
If it doesn’t list the API rating of SP it shouldn’t be in an Ecoboost engine, period.
You guys really are something else. The oil meets Ford WSS-M2C931-C, an oil spec Ford developed for that engine, but you second-guess both Ford and the oil manufacturer with your self-proclaimed wisdom? 🙄🫣
 
#3 ·
If it doesn’t list the API rating of SP it shouldn’t be in an Ecoboost engine, period.
 
#11 ·
No, not just putting out info, it’s false “info”. People make their own choices unless they’re leftistards.
 
#12 ·
#14 ·
#21 ·
You’re correct, almost. It’s certainly better than SN, but it still has calcium, just less of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hyperlite03
#27 ·
To be fair Ford does not know everything.
Think back to when they got rid of the 7.3 diesel they literally told international they knew more about building a new 6.0. How did that work out for them.
Just saying! They have a lot of people with degrees and computer models that don’t necessarily translate to real life.
 
#28 · (Edited)
Ford can make mistakes, of course. For all the decisions they make, mistakes are pretty rare. But when people use those rare mistakes to say you can't trust their recommendations - Or that you definitely should ignore them...That's a whole new level.

And honestly, there is a huge difference between reliability issues, which are normally due to manufacturing process issues, and engineering specifications.

Using your example, maybe it was a mistake for Ford to decide they could engineer a better diesel engine than International could. But that doesn't mean a guy on an Internet forum, that read a few articles in his spare time, knows more about building diesel engines than Ford! But somehow, that's the conclusion some people are making.

TLDR; saying random posters don't know more than Ford /= Ford being perfect
 
#33 ·
Thanks for making my point.

The engineering team that wrote the white paper for the oil spec are useless, because other people made mistakes once, and one guy you talked to at GM was wrong. Got it.
Well I can tell you for sure the engineers get it wrong also. How might I know well since my uncle was a high level engineer at Dana. It’s very common for engineering departments to differ on what they think will work only to have a senior engineer or beam counter override them. Sometime right sometimes wrong.
You point is no more or less valid. Plus some people oN the forums have a true passion and the ability to learn. Much more then the guy who mails in his work.
Bottom line is ford has had know issues and just because it doesn’t meet a spec doesn’t mean it won’t work. Also just because it meets the spec doesn’t mean it’s the best oil.
 
#32 ·
I tried smoothing things out a bit on this thread earlier, but :censored: it! I'm throwin' gas on it now!

Hey! Who remebers that great Ford success story THE AMAZING EXPLODING PINTO/S! [best band I ever saw! :LOL: ]


 
#35 ·
I'm not going to say anything except for, everyone should just use what they feel they should for why they feel they should and stop fussin. The world is full of critics, I caught myself in this same situation not too long ago. People are passionate about what they feel is right and others just trust what their life experiences told them.

I think as long as there are oil threads, there will always be this, who's right, who's wrong. In the end who truckin cares? Let's all just enjoy the car we all share, shared, or are looking to share, and try being a bit kinder to your fellow enthusiasts. It's ok not to agree, people are going to have different beliefs, let it go!
 
#38 ·
Just the facts, no “feels”.

I know that’s hard to fathom in these libtard times where feels, rather than facts, are their priority…
 
#37 ·
Wait, what? You don’t use fram? They spend more on ads than they do on the filters so they must be great, right? LOL
 
  • Haha
Reactions: morbid
#39 ·
Just trying to help, I come from an independent thought most times. There are facts sure, but what people feel they want to put into their engine is on them in the end. I will agree the people that do what they want to and are free to do, should not tell people feelings as facts. Have documentation available to prove/disprove, parties accept/agree/not agree, and move on. It isn't something to fight about, I feel like it's Ford vs Chevy all over again. The rivalry goes a bit extreme at times.
 
#40 ·
To be clear I’m saying use what you want but the argument of saying ford is the end all be all on things is not true. I only own fords or things owned by ford. But I know they have steered people wrong. Just look at the 3.5 threads.
Ford recommend oil does not take fuel well and they create timing chain issues most others don’t have with better oils.
But I also think more choices are better. So bring on new oils.
 
#42 ·
I can see now why spindle… er, axle has the opinions he does. He’s still stuck in the 30s, just a bit before(!?) such things as high-speed electronic engine controls and gasp “alien technology” such as direct injection, spark ignition designs where the fuel is injected directly into the cylinder at around 2000 to 3000 psi while the mixture is already under high compression.

Mazda sold the first generation of these engines in their Mazdaspeed3 & 6 vehicles beginning back in 2006. They correctly labeled it DISI. Ford owned about 30% of Mazda at the time.

Anyway, spindle…, er axle will never come up to speed(!) on modern technology because he’s already made up his mind based on obsolete data and conjecture on his part.

That’s quite ok as really old people generally hate new technology. The folks reading about turbocharged direct injection engine issues should ignore ol’ spindle… er axle because he is literally irrelevant to the factual data.
 
#43 ·
I can see now why spindle… er, axle has the opinions he does. He’s still stuck in the 30s, just a bit before(!?) such things as high-speed electronic engine controls and gasp “alien technology” such as direct injection, spark ignition designs where the fuel is injected directly into the cylinder at around 2000 to 3000 psi while the mixture is already under high compression.

Mazda sold the first generation of these engines in their Mazdaspeed3 & 6 vehicles beginning back in 2006. They correctly labeled it DISI. Ford owned about 30% of Mazda at the time.

Anyway, spindle…, er axle will never come up to speed(!) on modern technology because he’s already made up his mind based on obsolete data and conjecture on his part.

That’s quite ok as really old people generally hate new technology. The folks reading about turbocharged direct injection engine issues should ignore ol’ spindle… er axle because he is literally irrelevant to the factual data.
All this coming from the guy with three engines on the floor in large puddles of oil and still not knowing the difference between knock and pre-ignition 🤡 Go back to school and learn something if you can, or if you want a more contemporary treatment read Irvin Glassman’s “Combustion” then look back at your stupid comments and reflect upon yourself. I feel like talking about geometry to people not having discovered the wheel yet. Sure there was a bunch of ignorant bozos laughing their ass off at everything they did not understand then, and it’s not different now. Ten pages into the Ricardo you would realize how little you knew about engines, but ignorance is bliss so perhaps it’s better you keep your beliefs where they are, just do us a favor and stop spreading your “wisdom.”
 
#44 · (Edited)
Bless ol’ spindle…, er axles heart. He’s gonna blow an aneurism any second now. I wonder if he/she/it has a “partner” or any children. Likely not…

Anyway, it would likely help him by reading up in LSPI in the forum subject engines. He/she/it hails from the most ****ed update location in the USA, Washington state. You know, Seattle where the loons run the entire city because the bosses won’t let the cops eliminate the DNA errors from the gene pool.
 
#45 ·
Bless ol’ spindle…, er axles heart. He’s gonna blow an aneurism any second now. I wonder if he/she/it has a “partner” or any children. Likely not…

Anyway, it would likely help him by reading up in LSPI in the forum subject engines. He/she/it hails from the most ****ed update location in the USA, Washington state. You know, Seattle where the loons run the entire city because the bosses won’t let the cops eliminate the DNA errors from the gene pool.
You still don’t address the fact that you are largely ignorant about engines, which is my point. Licking your tuner’s ass don’t make you an engine expert.
 
#47 · (Edited)
I shouldn’t waste my time with a reply, but I’m the “tuner”. I’ve been tuning and racing cars and bikes since the early 70’s. Yes, I’ve broken a few parts over the years, but I KNOW what I’m talking about as I’ve been doing it for decades.

I am one of the few that had a direct part in developing the aftermarket flash tuning capability for the Mazda DISI. I was one of the first to use piggyback tuning to discover the real reason within the ECU that caused the aftermarket to become stuck on a plateau with the power output.

You can type whatever ignorant response you want, but nothing can change the facts about LSPI and the effect on turbo direct injection.

It’s such a big problem for turbo direct injection that Ford later included both port and direct injection on the actual high-output 3.5 V6 engines in the GT and the Raptor. Many aftermarket tuners are installing add-on port injection to oem direct injection as well. Get smart axle or get the f*ck off this forum. You’re a plague on truth.
 
#49 ·
I shouldn’t waste my time with a reply, but I’m the “tuner”. I’ve been tuning and racing cars and bikes since the early 70’s. Yes, I’ve broken a few parts over the years, but I KNOW what I’m talking about as I’ve been doing it for decades.

I am one of the few that had a direct part in developing the aftermarket flash tuning capability for the Mazda DISI. I was one of the first to use piggyback tuning to discover the real reason within the ECU that caused the aftermarket to become stuck on a plateau with the power output.

You can type whatever ignorant response you want, but nothing can change the facts about LSPI and the effect on turbo direct injection.

It’s such a big problem for turbo direct injection that Ford later included both port and direct injection on the actual high-output 3.5 V6 engines in the GT and the Raptor. Many aftermarket tuners are installing add-on port injection to oem direct injection as well. Get smart axle or get the **** off this forum. You’re a plague on truth.
No, you don’t know what you are talking about and that’s precisely my point. You confuse pre-ignition and knock, you would not pass engine calibration 101. I don’t know what you think you discovered, not do I care, and port + direct injection is not a solution for LSPI, but how would you know that since you don’t know what pre-ignition is? LSPI is a problem that is easily avoided. Ford should have close to ten million EcoBoost engine out there by now and all other major manufacturers have some form of GDI engine in production, so probably tens of millions of engines in total, and gasoline direct-injection has been around for more than 80 years including on forced-induction engine producing thousands of horsepower. If LSPI was such a problem, we’d know. It’s mostly an excuse for tuners who don’t know what they are doing, which was my point all along.
 
#50 ·
Bless your heart spindle…, er axle. I’ll just stop responding to you now. Another fact that I’ve learned for certain over my many years is that you can help simple ignorance when people want to learn, but there is no limit to stupid, so you “win”, I’m out.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: JamoRS
#55 ·
That just proves it was about cleaner valves not lspi. Lspi was not and never had been an issue with the 3.5 as also all are autos. So why would ford spend money to fix a nonexistent problem.
Or they have carbon issues that are causing warranty and longevity issues. Hence spend money to fix that.
Can they all have lspi yes but the port injection was all about the valves.
I actually remember reading a statement from ford on that being the move to port injection. I’ll swe if I can track it down again
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top