LiquiMoly

MoS2 doesn't work, that's for sure. They, however, will sell it for as long as someone is willing to buy it.

Oh the stuff works there is no no doubt about that, when I was using it decades ago it really made in difference in engine noise in my Unimog, it was very quiet with the LM MoS2 but the oils of that time were crap. It is the side effect of falling out of suspension and the advent of better soluble moly compounds that made me give up on the stuff.
As far as putting white graphite in the oil, no thanks I will pass.
 
BioTech (or Heavy Duty Engine Protectant if you like saving money) is a superior product over MoS2 in every way, including cost. MoS2 will fall out of suspension and create a "sludge" of sorts on the bottom of the pan, and is quite literally the only thing in the can from LM. BioTech not only has a better form of moly, it also has phosphorus and boron, is ester-based, has a viscosity in the lower range of a 20-weight oil, and actually has some TBN so it's not just diluting the add pack of your base oil.

All that being said, any additive (or oil for that matter) will only at best delay an engineering or materials issue. It will never fix an inherently poor design. Best of luck though!

I don't think any of us can say which is a superior product. How would you really tell. They can both be pure snake oil for all I know. I do know MoS2 has been marketed and sold for automotive use for decades. I'm not doubting anyone's home-brewed test here. I enjoy reading/seeing other people's experiences. If it did indeed sludge up and destroy engines, there would have been some class action suit and discontinuation of the product long ago. There's no way who ever owns LiquiMoly would assume the liability.
 
By superior, I meant BioTech uses esters, a better, soluble form of moly, and also boosts phosphorus for AW properties. LM MoS2 is, IIRC, a "colloidal suspension" made of insoluble moly, and Trav had a thread where he documented a moly "sludge" on the bottom of the oil pan after using that product. I never said it was true sludge, or that it destroyed engines. It simply doesn't stay suspended in the oil, and therefore can't provide any benefit if it's not where the areas of high pressure and heat are in the running engine.

As far as whether either one provides any real "benefit" other than ego stroking for the buyer, I can't say. Trying to gauge "benefit" off of the "well I used it and my engine didn't blow up" is hardly proof of benefit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JTK
By superior, I meant BioTech uses esters, a better, soluble form of moly, and also boosts phosphorus for AW properties. LM MoS2 is, IIRC, a "colloidal suspension" made of insoluble moly, and Trav had a thread where he documented a moly "sludge" on the bottom of the oil pan after using that product. I never said it was true sludge, or that it destroyed engines. It simply doesn't stay suspended in the oil, and therefore can't provide any benefit if it's not where the areas of high pressure and heat are in the running engine.

As far as whether either one provides any real "benefit" other than ego stroking for the buyer, I can't say. Trying to gauge "benefit" off of the "well I used it and my engine didn't blow up" is hardly proof of benefit.
Having a single user (have there been a few? if so add s on the end) that posted a pic of an oil pan after sitting for a while is hardly proof of an issue either. It's no different that the K&N battle threads here - one person posts a ****ty UOA w/r to silicon and now all K&Ns ruin engines.
 
I don't think any of us can say which is a superior product. How would you really tell. They can both be pure snake oil for all I know. I do know MoS2 has been marketed and sold for automotive use for decades. I'm not doubting anyone's home-brewed test here. I enjoy reading/seeing other people's experiences. If it did indeed sludge up and destroy engines, there would have been some class action suit and discontinuation of the product long ago. There's no way who ever owns LiquiMoly would assume the liability.
Bingo.
 
Having a single user (have there been a few? if so add s on the end) that posted a pic of an oil pan after sitting for a while is hardly proof of an issue either. It's no different that the K&N battle threads here - one person posts a ****ty UOA w/r to silicon and now all K&Ns ruin engines.
Heh. Trav's one of the most respected members on the board. Maybe try searching for the thread and read it before you bash the data point. He started off wanting to like it and had good initial results.

And as far as your K&N post, yes, it is documented that the K&N filter oil can easily ruin a MAF if you overapply it, and yes, more dirt is ingested into the engine. Just because failure doesn't happen today doesn't mean detrimental things aren't happening.
 
Heh. Trav's one of the most respected members on the board. Maybe try searching for the thread and read it before you bash the data point. He started off wanting to like it and had good initial results.

And as far as your K&N post, yes, it is documented that the K&N filter oil can easily ruin a MAF if you overapply it, and yes, more dirt is ingested into the engine. Just because failure doesn't happen today doesn't mean detrimental things aren't happening.
I've read the post/searched/seen it thanks - no bashing here, it's a datapoint and as we should all know, single data point don't make a dataset. So well respected member equals can't question? On the K&N, this isn't the post for it (there are plenty in the air filter section) clearly but I have great UOAs with a K&N on multiple vehicles and have never had a MAF issue so how does that work? My single data point has as much clout as the others that show they cause issues.
 
I've read the post/searched/seen it thanks - no bashing here, it's a datapoint and as we should all know, single data point don't make a dataset. So well respected member equals can't question? On the K&N, this isn't the post for it (there are plenty in the air filter section) clearly but I have great UOAs with a K&N on multiple vehicles and have never had a MAF issue so how does that work? My single data point has as much clout as the others that show they cause issues.

JHZR2 did a fallout test and found it does fallout of suspension. It did fallout in the engine I removed the pan from, that is not a data point that is a simple fact. I used MoS2 decades ago and it worked but I ever had the pan off that engine so I didn't see anything, it certainly did no harm that I could tell but did it really do any good and would would it improve when used with a modern engine oil?
Hey listen if you want to use this useless product in todays oils IMHO have at it, it makes no difference to me.
 
JHZR2 did a fallout test and found it does fallout of suspension. It did fallout in the engine I removed the pan from, that is not a data point that is a simple fact. I used MoS2 decades ago and it worked but I ever had the pan off that engine so I didn't see anything, it certainly did no harm that I could tell but did it really do any good and would would it improve when used with a modern engine oil?
Hey listen if you want to use this useless product in todays oils IMHO have at it, it makes no difference to me.
Yes, it fell out in your pan and that is a data point and is fact. To say that anyone who uses MoS2 will have fall out and it will remain as a sludge in your oil pan and not get re-suspended is not a fact based on this single situation which was the point of my comments. Didn't your car sit for a while and only get moved a short distance before checking? What if you had driven it 50 miles? I used it once just as a why not. The oil that came out shimmered from the grey MoS2 which was clearly in the oil. I'm going with there isn't a sludge in my oil pan from this on a daily-driven vehicle. I don't disagree with you in that this isn't really necessary in a modern engine with modern oils.
 
Beside the old style MoS2 additiv, LM carries two more modern addtives:
Motor Protect, wich contains mainly Tungsten, and Ceratec, wich contain a mix of Molybden and Boron.

We all now that Tungtsen, Molybden and Boron ar not Hokus-Pokus, no snake oil, but very good anti wear addtives.
It is up to you to decide if you want to use it. LM recomends a dosage of 6% ceratec to the engine oil; thats a little bit to much, around 3% should be enough.

Here is a VOA where you can see how much Moly and Boron is added to a oil by adding roughly 4% ceratec:

 
what does that mean?
FCP has a 100% replacement guarantee on everythign they sell (a few exceptions) and that actually includes returning your used oil from one of their kits. You buy a LM kit for $60. Use the kit. Buy a new LM kit. Return the old kit (I use a USPS large flat-rate box for $21) and get your $60 back. FCP's return policy w/r to oil has been discussed ad-nauseum here on BITOG in various posts and in all corners of the car enthusiast interwebs. You can go to their site and read up on it or watch their YouTube videos where they show oil being returned. TLDR: yes it's real, no FCP won't go out of business by offering this, yes it's ok to ship/mail used oil (not hazardous), no it's not shady or taking advantage, yes, FCP understands this and allows it the replacement of motor oil.
 
Last edited:
Beside the old style MoS2 additiv, LM carries two more modern addtives:
Motor Protect, wich contains mainly Tungsten, and Ceratec, wich contain a mix of Molybden and Boron.

We all now that Tungtsen, Molybden and Boron ar not Hokus-Pokus, no snake oil, but very good anti wear addtives.
It is up to you to decide if you want to use it. LM recomends a dosage of 6% ceratec to the engine oil; thats a little bit to much, around 3% should be enough.

Here is a VOA where you can see how much Moly and Boron is added to a oil by adding roughly 4% ceratec:

Check the oil analysis at ~29K for Ceratec and ~35K for MoS2 (right-most one, there are two as I did a duplicate that interval...one before and one after using LM's Proline engine flush. Analysis for this report is for Molygen so that has the tungsten-based "MFC" in it - you have to request that one/pay extra for it.

40K UOA.jpg
 
First track day last weekend at VIR in VA. Private Audi Club event. Two large sponsors (New German Performance and GMP Performance) provided track support as well as having race teams/cars there. All sponsored by Liquimoly complete with swag/merch tables etc. Great folks. I have been beaten up in several Liquimoly threads here on BITOG for saying I like to support an oil brand and businesses that support the VAG enthusiast community, well this is why. My f. brake took a dump and I needed some work after a few runs - the NGP guys got me all sorted at the track saving my second day of a great 20th wedding anniversary gift from my wife. Does LM play into that? Sure. They provided sponsorship dollars (in return for that swag/merch table, stickers on everything, etc,) that helped those companies be there and without them, I would have been screwed. Does this make LM superior motor oil vs. M1/Castrol/Penzoil? Of course not. But I didn't see Walmart there doing track repairs either. As a footnote, Advance Auto did save my @ss by having rotors for my VW in stock 20 min from the track so kudos to those guys too!
 
"Avoid using aftermarket oil additives – Store shelves are littered with aftermarket additives that promise to increase fuel economy, reduce wear or restore an old engine to like-new. Adding them to your oil disrupts the oil’s chemistry and may reduce its ability to protect your engine. When you’re using a good motor oil, there’s no need to modify it with an aftermarket additive."

This from a Oil Manufacturer some on here seem to frown on. But, it seems to make sense to me. The above paragraph is the last paragraph from the article I've posted below.

 
Back
Top