Additive curious?

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: MolaKule

It wasn't a rhetorical question.



In any event. You claim to be a formulator. And we're here to learn from the experts. If price were no object. What would the formula look like?

It's hard for me to believe you are satisfied. As an engineer myself, I'm never completely happy with a design. Always looking for improvements. Always wanting to tweak.



Exactly. IMO every oil formulation could be made better. Price and profit margins are very big factors, and have a big impact on the quality of the finished product. That can also be said for anything that is produced and sold.

 

[dave5358]

Originally Posted By: gman2304
Clevy, Is the mos2 similar to the friction free 3000?


Probably not. I looked around the net for more information on Friction Free 3000 and the best I could find was the marketer's link. It seems that the main ingredient is 'elemental lead' particles in the 5-15 micron size range. Note that this reference is primarily an advertisement - not an independent analysis or anything remotely close to that.

I did a bit of searching for 'elemental lead' and the best I could find was this information from Washington University, listed under an environmental health category (it's not good for your health). It would seem that this is simply lead - the stuff they used to put in paint to make kids go blind. I could find no references to lead as a lubricating compound, so someone will have to jump in on that.

As for MoS2 used as an oil additive, it is normally an oil suspension of very fine molybdenum particles, in the .2 - .3 micron range. Molybdenum is the most popular dry film lubricant in use today, used as assembly paste, in bullet molds, in high pressure greases, in hydraulic systems, etc. There is a fairly extensive body of knowledge on this product. It has been in use for the last hundred years or so, mostly as an industrial lubricant.

MoS2 used as an engine oil additive is a bit more recent, but at least dates back to WWII (aircraft application to provide lubrication in case of oil loss). VW of America prescribed it as a way to reduce oil temperatures and reduce the risk of oil failure in air-cooled Beatles. Dow Corning Corporation made the product sold by VW, and Dow Corning still sells this product under their Molykote name in South America.

At least two issues with MoS2 are settling (the particles settle out of the oil suspension) and coloration (it turns your oil black or very dark gray). The first might concern the engineers - the latter might be of concern to the marketers. Powdered molybdenum disulfide in 2-3 micron size is readily available, even on eBay. In this size or smaller particles as used in oil suspensions, it is unlikely to clog or restrict an engine oil filter.

At least one popular German motor oil made by Liqui-Moly contains MoS2 and many popular motor oils, including Castrol Edge and Mobil 1, contain molybdenum in some form or other (organic molybdenum or perhaps MoS2, since oil analysis does not reveal the exact form of molybdenum in use). Love it or hate it, MoS2 is hardly an unknown commodity.

 

[dave5358]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Exactly. IMO every oil formulation could be made better. Price and profit margins are very big factors, and have a big impact on the quality of the finished product. That can also be said for anything that is produced and sold.


And, it might be more than just profit margins, although they are clearly important to the oil companies. You or I might love MoS2 as an oil additive, but an oil company might not want to sell a product that had to be shaken before use. Or, how about a product that made your oil turn black? The fine folks in the marketing departments of big oil companies really do get a seat at the decision table.

Still on MoS2, one of it's undisputed benefits is 'limp home protection'. But how often do you take a bullet in your sump? Maybe it depends on the neighborhood you live in, but oil companies may simply not want to advertise that kind of feature.

 

[kschachn]

So if I use the product, how long can I drive under load with an empty oil pan?

Originally Posted By: dave5358
Still on MoS2, one of it's undisputed benefits is 'limp home protection'. But how often do you take a bullet in your sump? Maybe it depends on the neighborhood you live in, but oil companies may simply not want to advertise that kind of feature.

 

[dave5358]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: dave5358
Still on MoS2, one of it's undisputed benefits is 'limp home protection'. But how often do you take a bullet in your sump? Maybe it depends on the neighborhood you live in, but oil companies may simply not want to advertise that kind of feature.


So if I use the product, how long can I drive under load with an empty oil pan?


Under load? Maybe to the edge of the road. Maybe 3 or 4 minutes, maybe more, maybe to the next off-ramp. There used to be a TV add for an additive product containing MoS2 wherein they drained the oil on camera, then drove the vehicle for 28 miles. So there! As I recall, the unlucky WWII airplane pilot got 3 or 4 minutes flying time - but that was enough time to land under power.

The devil is in the details. If you lose your oil, you lose a critical cooling function within the engine. Lubrication is not really the issue (and if you doubt that, simply consider an electric motor which has no pressure lubrication at all). If the weather is cool and you unload the engine and your cooling system is working well, you might make 20 miles. For the WWII pilot, the weather was always cool, his engine was low compression (about 6:1), his engine water cooling system was still working and the only power he needed was to power auxiliaries and make one final landing maneuver.

Subaru EJ engines (including the EJ255 in my vehicle) occasionally suffer from oil pickup tube failure, said to result from brazing flux residue left on the part during manufacture. This is a known issue, but it mostly occurs outside the warranty period, so Subaru has been relatively indifferent to the problem. When the pickup tube cracks or breaks, the result is almost always catastrophic engine failure. MoS2 should prevent catastrophic engine failure if you shut the engine down promptly. You could also replace the oil pickup tube with an aftermarket part. You could also do both.

Nomex suits give race car drivers and helicopter pilots about 30 seconds of protection in a crash. MoS2 should give you 30 seconds of protection.

p.s. I had to drive out to Union City, Ohio this morning. When I left home, it was -4 degrees. When I rolled into Union City, it was -18 degrees. At that temperature, there's no telling how far I could have gone!

 

[TrevorS]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: MolaKule

It wasn't a rhetorical question.



In any event. You claim to be a formulator. And we're here to learn from the experts. If price were no object. What would the formula look like?

It's hard for me to believe you are satisfied. As an engineer myself, I'm never completely happy with a design. Always looking for improvements. Always wanting to tweak.



Exactly. IMO every oil formulation could be made better. Price and profit margins are very big factors, and have a big impact on the quality of the finished product. That can also be said for anything that is produced and sold.


LOL. This is funny. Clearly Molakule was talking in the context of adding off the shelf additives to fully formulated oils. What do additives contain and do that oil does not is a different question to how could oils be better.

And clearly some oils are better than others, mostly situationally dependent, but there is no oil or car manufacturer that says to use additives to make your oil better. They certainly may suggest you use different oils depending on your circumstances.

Of course oils can be better and their development goes hand in hand with engine development which is why additives are less and less relevant. But current oils appear to be up to the task of what current engines are asking of them. As engine tech develops, surely current oils will need to be developed more. I am sure hundreds of engineers are working on this right now and Molakule will know a bunch of things he can't share with us.

I am sure engineers are figuring out how to extend drains even longer, how to reduce viscosity even further and how to improve performance and longevity at start up and warm up temperatures. These technological challenges and advancements are nothing to do with the question of whether oils are missing the magical qualities if snake oil.

 

[bvance554]

Originally Posted By: gman2304
but i'm probably going to continue using the additive and see what happens.


Wouldn't it be more interesting to stop using the additive and see what happens? Your engine may scoff and wheez at you, and refuse to move since the oil no longer clings to its metal parts. Or you may just get another 162,000 miles without it.

 

[turtlevette]

Originally Posted By: TrevorS
These technological challenges and advancements are nothing to do with the question of whether oils are missing the magical qualities if snake oil.


I don't see the distinction.

A quart of top of the line motor oil contains a base oil and a number of "snake oil" additives that a group of engineers think make the perfect package.

What is the target?

Every auto on the market. And mostly new engines.

Why can't an educated end user make decisions based on need, configuration, use etc. to add additional elements of protection or reinforce additives already in the oil.

For example my rear main is leaking and just installed a performance flat tappet, and will be racing the car on a track next month. I'd simply add a can of ZDDP, rear main seal stop leak, and 10W-60 top off to get my custom brew.

 

[kschachn]

To the edge of the road? 30 seconds? I think you could do that with normal oil, don't you?

And end up with the same seized engine, right?

Originally Posted By: dave5358
Originally Posted By: kschachn

So if I use the product, how long can I drive under load with an empty oil pan?


Under load? Maybe to the edge of the road. Maybe 3 or 4 minutes, maybe more, maybe to the next off-ramp. There used to be a TV add for an additive product containing MoS2 wherein they drained the oil on camera, then drove the vehicle for 28 miles. So there! As I recall, the unlucky WWII airplane pilot got 3 or 4 minutes flying time - but that was enough time to land under power.

The devil is in the details. If you lose your oil, you lose a critical cooling function within the engine. Lubrication is not really the issue (and if you doubt that, simply consider an electric motor which has no pressure lubrication at all). If the weather is cool and you unload the engine and your cooling system is working well, you might make 20 miles. For the WWII pilot, the weather was always cool, his engine was low compression (about 6:1), his engine water cooling system was still working and the only power he needed was to power auxiliaries and make one final landing maneuver.

Subaru EJ engines (including the EJ255 in my vehicle) occasionally suffer from oil pickup tube failure, said to result from brazing flux residue left on the part during manufacture. This is a known issue, but it mostly occurs outside the warranty period, so Subaru has been relatively indifferent to the problem. When the pickup tube cracks or breaks, the result is almost always catastrophic engine failure. MoS2 should prevent catastrophic engine failure if you shut the engine down promptly. You could also replace the oil pickup tube with an aftermarket part. You could also do both.

Nomex suits give race car drivers and helicopter pilots about 30 seconds of protection in a crash. MoS2 should give you 30 seconds of protection.

p.s. I had to drive out to Union City, Ohio this morning. When I left home, it was -4 degrees. When I rolled into Union City, it was -18 degrees. At that temperature, there's no telling how far I could have gone!

 

[dave5358]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: dave5358
Originally Posted By: kschachn

So if I use the product, how long can I drive under load with an empty oil pan?


Under load? Maybe to the edge of the road. Maybe 3 or 4 minutes, maybe more, maybe to the next off-ramp. There used to be a TV add for an additive product containing MoS2 wherein they drained the oil on camera, then drove the vehicle for 28 miles. So there! As I recall, the unlucky WWII airplane pilot got 3 or 4 minutes flying time - but that was enough time to land under power.

The devil is in the details. If you lose your oil, you lose a critical cooling function within the engine. Lubrication is not really the issue (and if you doubt that, simply consider an electric motor which has no pressure lubrication at all). If the weather is cool and you unload the engine and your cooling system is working well, you might make 20 miles. For the WWII pilot, the weather was always cool, his engine was low compression (about 6:1), his engine water cooling system was still working and the only power he needed was to power auxiliaries and make one final landing maneuver.

Subaru EJ engines (including the EJ255 in my vehicle) occasionally suffer from oil pickup tube failure, said to result from brazing flux residue left on the part during manufacture. This is a known issue, but it mostly occurs outside the warranty period, so Subaru has been relatively indifferent to the problem. When the pickup tube cracks or breaks, the result is almost always catastrophic engine failure. MoS2 should prevent catastrophic engine failure if you shut the engine down promptly. You could also replace the oil pickup tube with an aftermarket part. You could also do both.

Nomex suits give race car drivers and helicopter pilots about 30 seconds of protection in a crash. MoS2 should give you 30 seconds of protection.

p.s. I had to drive out to Union City, Ohio this morning. When I left home, it was -4 degrees. When I rolled into Union City, it was -18 degrees. At that temperature, there's no telling how far I could have gone!


To the edge of the road? 30 seconds? I think you could do that with normal oil, don't you?

And end up with the same seized engine, right?


I don't think that I (or anyone else) can predict with certainty what the outcome will be. Which, incidentally, may be why oil companies don't want to go there. I do note that Liqui-Moly does mention limp-home protection in connection with their motor oil. I'm not sure how they define this. I would predict that you would be better off (and never worse off) under any situation, with MoS2 in your oil. That said, consider some possibilities:

- Situation 1: Suppose you cut the engine the instant you lose oil pressure. You could easily coast to the edge of the road or beyond with minimal internal engine damage. You could do this with or without MoS2 in the oil.

- Situation 2: If you had MoS2 in your oil (actually, attached inside your bearing journals), you could probably drive to the edge of the road or maybe to the next crossover or exit with little chance of damage.

The key is engine heat. You no longer have flowing oil to dissipate the engine heat so your only option is to minimize that heat. Stay off the throttle, keep all possible load off the engine, keep your speed down. You could probably drive to the next off ramp, and maybe beyond. But just because you might be able to drive "28 miles," like the guy in the TV ad, is no reason to try it. Get to a shoulder or ramp and call a flatbed - probably a better (and safer) option than instantly cutting the engine.

Engines seize because of heat. Minimize the heat - reduce the chance of seizure. The molybdenum will continue to lubricate things quite well - even better than motor oil alone. The motor oil has probably drained out.

Here are a few other considerations:
- A low compression engine might survive this ordeal better than its high compression cousin - lighter bearing loading. And some engines have a much more robust big end (e.g. 5 main bearings instead of 3).
- The engine might survive but your turbo-charger might tank - the heat issue, again. The turbo is spinning at 100,000 rpm which probably doesn't help.
- What were you doing immediately before the pressure loss? Just cruising along? Climbing a three-mile 7% grade up Allegheny Mountain? You could probably survive either situation, but the survival odds are not equal.

Finally, your original question asked "...drive under load". Answer: the molybdenum doesn't care. It's an EP lubricant. It will stay in place and continue to provide lubrication, right up till the time your engine seizes from heat.

 

[spasm3]

I see Mola's point, what is left out of a good oil. But i also have to believe its blended to a price point. What if the price point was not a worry, if the sky is the limit, what would oil formulas look like?

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: MolaKule

It wasn't a rhetorical question.



In any event. You claim to be a formulator. And we're here to learn from the experts. If price were no object. What would the formula look like?

It's hard for me to believe you are satisfied. As an engineer myself, I'm never completely happy with a design. Always looking for improvements. Always wanting to tweak.



Start a new thread in another forum and I will be happy to answer your question. And I am sure there are other lubricant engineers and formulators who will have additional views.

Your question has been answered before many years ago but because there are many new members, this should be an interesting discussion.

I am never satisfied with the status quo which is why I attempt to improve on each formulation with the available components within my grasp.

I am fortunate to be able to work locally with mechanics and trade schools so tearing down components before-and-after-the-fact gives me good feedback on potential formulations. I also use my own two "mules" in the experiments. So I am also a gearhead which in my view, is not a derogatory term.

But I am also a realist and have a sense of what the market will bear.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: TrevorS
These technological challenges and advancements are nothing to do with the question of whether oils are missing the magical qualities if snake oil.


I don't see the distinction.

A quart of top of the line motor oil contains a base oil and a number of "snake oil" additives that a group of engineers think make the perfect package.

What is the target?

Every auto on the market. And mostly new engines.

Why can't an educated end user make decisions based on need, configuration, use etc. to add additional elements of protection or reinforce additives already in the oil.

For example my rear main is leaking and just installed a performance flat tappet, and will be racing the car on a track next month. I'd simply add a can of ZDDP, rear main seal stop leak, and 10W-60 top off to get my custom brew.



What do you mean by "Snake Oil Additives?"

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: spasm3
What if the price point was not a worry, if the sky is the limit, what would oil formulas look like?


Probably better than they do now. But it begs the question, are the vast majority of people the oil companies have in their target market willing to pay for it? I'd say no.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: TrevorS
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: MolaKule

It wasn't a rhetorical question.



In any event. You claim to be a formulator. And we're here to learn from the experts. If price were no object. What would the formula look like?

It's hard for me to believe you are satisfied. As an engineer myself, I'm never completely happy with a design. Always looking for improvements. Always wanting to tweak.



Exactly. IMO every oil formulation could be made better. Price and profit margins are very big factors, and have a big impact on the quality of the finished product. That can also be said for anything that is produced and sold.


LOL. This is funny. Clearly Molakule was talking in the context of adding off the shelf additives to fully formulated oils. What do additives contain and do that oil does not is a different question to how could oils be better.

And clearly some oils are better than others, mostly situationally dependent, but there is no oil or car manufacturer that says to use additives to make your oil better. They certainly may suggest you use different oils depending on your circumstances.

Of course oils can be better and their development goes hand in hand with engine development which is why additives are less and less relevant. But current oils appear to be up to the task of what current engines are asking of them. As engine tech develops, surely current oils will need to be developed more. I am sure hundreds of engineers are working on this right now and Molakule will know a bunch of things he can't share with us.

I am sure engineers are figuring out how to extend drains even longer, how to reduce viscosity even further and how to improve performance and longevity at start up and warm up temperatures. These technological challenges and advancements are nothing to do with the question of whether oils are missing the magical qualities if snake oil.


Appreciate your comments.

The only thing I would add is that additives become more important as engine operating conditions become more constrained.

The newer GroupII, GroupIII and III+ oils, plus new PAO's, plus new polymer esters will all add to enhanced engine protection with new and improved additive packages.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: TrevorS
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: MolaKule

It wasn't a rhetorical question.



In any event. You claim to be a formulator. And we're here to learn from the experts. If price were no object. What would the formula look like?

It's hard for me to believe you are satisfied. As an engineer myself, I'm never completely happy with a design. Always looking for improvements. Always wanting to tweak.



Exactly. IMO every oil formulation could be made better. Price and profit margins are very big factors, and have a big impact on the quality of the finished product. That can also be said for anything that is produced and sold.


LOL. This is funny. Clearly Molakule was talking in the context of adding off the shelf additives to fully formulated oils. What do additives contain and do that oil does not is a different question to how could oils be better.

And clearly some oils are better than others, mostly situationally dependent, but there is no oil or car manufacturer that says to use additives to make your oil better. They certainly may suggest you use different oils depending on your circumstances.

Of course oils can be better and their development goes hand in hand with engine development which is why additives are less and less relevant. But current oils appear to be up to the task of what current engines are asking of them. As engine tech develops, surely current oils will need to be developed more. I am sure hundreds of engineers are working on this right now and Molakule will know a bunch of things he can't share with us.

I am sure engineers are figuring out how to extend drains even longer, how to reduce viscosity even further and how to improve performance and longevity at start up and warm up temperatures. These technological challenges and advancements are nothing to do with the question of whether oils are missing the magical qualities if snake oil.


Yes. What is todays oil missing that yesteryears mystery concoction adds? And how does it affect todays oil chemistry?

In other words, what is Motorcraft full synthetic 5W50 missing that would cause me to even contemplate an additive?

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule


I am never satisfied with the status quo which is why I attempt to improve on each formulation with the available components within my grasp.

I am fortunate to be able to work locally with mechanics and trade schools so tearing down components before-and-after-the-fact gives me good feedback on potential formulations. I also use my own two "mules" in the experiments. So I am also a gearhead which in my view, is not a derogatory term.

That makes a lot of sense to me. May of us like to tweak things it can be a rewarding and enjoyable hobby for some, and end up being a lucrative profession for others.

Since the title of this thread is "Additive Curious", I'm wondering if this is this how Molabrew was born? I remember a few years back it was spoken about often here. IIRC it was Schaeffers #132 and LC20 mixed together, something you concocted [?], or assisted others in [?]. I don't remember the portions or the reasoning, or any of the facts which is why I'm asking. Unfortunately the search engine only goes back 1 year now, there was a time it went back 5 years. Anyway it was highly respected here, [myself included] and derived from what some might consider snake oils, since they were additives the DIY'er could buy and add to any well formulated oil. I never tried LC20. I did use Schaeffers #132, has its place and a good following here. There were other additives, less costly than LC20 used in conjunction by some to thin #132 as well. Thanks.

 

[MolaKule]

Quote:
I'm wondering if this is this how Molabrew was born? I remember a few years back it was spoken about often here. IIRC it was Schaeffers #132 and LC20 mixed together, something you concocted [?], or assisted others in [?]. I don't remember the portions or the reasoning, or any of the facts which is why I'm asking. Unfortunately the search engine only goes back 1 year now, there was a time it went back 5 years. Anyway it was highly respected here, [myself included] and derived from what some might consider snake oils, since they were additives the DIY'er could buy and add to any well formulated oil. I never tried LC20. I did use Schaeffers #132, has its place and a good following here. There were other additives, less costly than LC20 used in conjunction by some to thin #132 as well. Thanks.


I think the Molabrew was worked on before 2001 when Bob Winters asked me to come up with something to help BITOGERS using a Schaeffer's product.

The #1 goal was to help BITOGERS reduce oxidation and sludging of conventional oils back when many oils were not of the quality of oils we have today. These oils were not quite extended OCI oils and lacked some oxidation and friction modification.

The number 2 goal was to not increase viscosity of the host oil by any significant amount, because the old Blue Bottle STP had a bad reputation and we didn't want to duplicate that situation.

So the MolaFrankenBrew was about 75% LCD20 and 25% Schaeffer's #132.

With today's oils, I don't think it is any longer needed.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Quote:
I'm wondering if this is this how Molabrew was born? I remember a few years back it was spoken about often here. IIRC it was Schaeffers #132 and LC20 mixed together, something you concocted [?], or assisted others in [?]. I don't remember the portions or the reasoning, or any of the facts which is why I'm asking. Unfortunately the search engine only goes back 1 year now, there was a time it went back 5 years. Anyway it was highly respected here, [myself included] and derived from what some might consider snake oils, since they were additives the DIY'er could buy and add to any well formulated oil. I never tried LC20. I did use Schaeffers #132, has its place and a good following here. There were other additives, less costly than LC20 used in conjunction by some to thin #132 as well. Thanks.


I think the Molabrew was worked on before 2001 when Bob Winters asked me to come up with something to help BITOGERS using a Schaeffer's product.

The #1 goal was to help BITOGERS reduce oxidation and sludging of conventional oils back when many oils were not of the quality of oils we have today. These oils were not quite extended OCI oils and lacked some oxidation and friction modification.

The number 2 goal was to not increase viscosity of the host oil by any significant amount, because the old Blue Bottle STP had a bad reputation and we didn't want to duplicate that situation.

So the MolaFrankenBrew was about 75% LCD20 and 25% Schaeffer's #132.

With today's oils, I don't think it is any longer needed.


Thanks. So was it the LC20 that was doing the work, and the #132 was keeping the oil's viscosity? Did the #132 serve any other purpose in the mix?

 

[MolaKule]

Not exactly, the #132 added some Antimony which was a friction reducer, anti-wear, and anti-oxidant agent as well.

It had one of the first polymer esters available in an OTC additive.