Rislone Clean Oil Analysis

[Terry]

"VOA/UOAs prove nothing. I find that there are too many people relying on them. How does an analyis prove that there is less contaminents coating your engine? It doesn't. Only an inspection can prove that. A good filter can hide bad oil, and good oil could also hide bad filters. Engine condition can also throw off readings. Toss in driver style and IMO, analysis is overrated"

Additive brands aside;

undummy, I take issue with this quote for this reason, everyday, I ACCURATELY INTERPRET non invasive VOA/UOA, trended,ASTM,SAE testing. Have been for years.

PROPER INTERPRETATION IS THE KEY !

Simultaneously saving the same customer you charge $XX dollars an hour to tear into the engine or component for a cost much higher than $10 to $35 (each) I charge for a trended analysis.

If you are a professional mechanic please share your hourly fee and the total cost to scrape clean or teardown / reassembly charges that I can Identify and possibly chemically repair for pennies on your dollars of repair work.

Even when I find a mechanical problem that requires your expert services I save time and money by CORRECTLY and EFFICIENTLY diagnosing the problem.

NO, oil analysis isn't the answer for every issue or is it perfect but it is a very misunderstood tool that needs to be used by all technicians.

Another nifty aspect of oil analysis is that I can PREVENT AND PREDICT automotive problem symptoms before they cost $100's or $1000's .

There are quite a few of those happy customers on this board so I hope they chime in to share how effective and valuable a $35 oil analysis can be.

I have turned wrenches for years and started that way until the analysis business took over my Fleet repair business. I know what "work" is and salute your contaminated fingernails ! You aren't the only guy on this board that "works for a living" !

For instance Molekule has Advanced degrees in physics and chemistry and can turn a wrench with the best of any of us. He knows what he is talking about and can mathematically diagram it !!!!

He is the aviation equivalent of a TEST PILOT who has great flying skills ( a natural) and can do the math and science to properly express his Art. This is a rare breed and I count it a blessing and privalege to work with him on tribilogical issues related to lubricants !

Bob Winters is a pretty sharp mechanic too ! Types like me though !

One source of your frustration may be that not all that posts here are experts. They may be "learning outloud" or talking over their mechanical heads.

Most are trying to learn and this board was set up to air opinions, accurate and not. Stay with us and keep contributing and be prepared to have your opinions challenged but respected.

Sincerely, Terry

 

[sprintman]

What 'preventive maintenance' would that be??

 

[Stinky Peterson]

Molekule,

You wrote "It contains no cleaning esters. It might contain a purely aromatic solvent, but again, none was detected."

I'm just curious, what did you do to test for aromatics?

Also I can think of quite a few chemicals that will remove sludge and deposits that are not esters. Personally I'm not a fan of oil additives, in my opinion its like adding salt to a cake that has already been baked. However a little low-viscosity oil or solvent can help clean things up. ATF works pretty good and is only a buck a bottle. Of course if good quality filters and oil were used in the first place.

One last thought, if you want esters why not use an ester-based synthetic oil? It will help clean things up.

Stinky

 

[MolaKule]

Stinky wrote:

quote:

---

One last thought, if you want esters why not use an ester-based synthetic oil? It will help clean things up.

---

Great Handle, Stinky, wish I had thought of that one earler.

Ester-based full synthetic oils do have better cleaning abilities than do other oils, but the primary application(s) for esters in formulated MO's is additive solubility, pour point improvement, reduction of coefficient of friction, and improved thermal stability.

Auto-RX contains certain esters that lubricating oils do not have. Those esters have been found to clean better than the MO formulation esters, hence Frank and Nick's formulation.

To the Mechanics and Technicians:

I too learn from your experience(s) when you post in Mechanical Tips and Tricks and other threads. I think we can all learn from each other.

I have rebuilt a number of engines and diffy's for street, stock, and racing. I enjoy modifying engines and machines in an attempt to improve them. I design and build custom Wood Splitters and thorougly enjoy improving hydraulic systems and experimenting with various fluids, including BobzOilz. [I don't do all the welding, however, since I leave that up to a neighbor who has training and experience and has boo-koo welders and expertise for the nitty-gritty jobs and who can lay a bead that is almost unnoticeable].

I also enjoy formulating lubricants for racing and street use, as does Terry Dyson. And BobIsTheOilGuy has a lot of mechanical and lubricant related experience as well.

Lately, I have been working with a local group of mechanics and racing team formulating differential fluids for racing and street. The local shop here rebuilds differentials, but also have their own Modified-Stock cars racing team as well. We formulate, tear-down, and reformulate until we think we have just about the right GL, etc for the application.

So yes, I enjoy getting my hands dirty and also have a wife who thinks I should join Oilaholics Anonymous.

Cheers!

 

[CJH]

Hey MolaKule (or anyone else)-

If you have sludge in your engine, how does it show up on the UOA? What would tip you off to the sludge?

 

[MolaKule]

I think Terry (and maybe TooSlick) had a post on this subject or answered a post on the same subject. You might do a search on "sludge" and hyperoxides.

But I would think higher "trending" of oxidation, nitration, increased viscosity, higher solids counts on the same oil might show this as an indication of potential sludging.

[ May 19, 2003, 10:43 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]

 

[Terry]

[QUOTE Hey MolaKule (or anyone else)-

If you have sludge in your engine, how does it show up on the UOA? What would tip you off to the sludge? [/QUOTE]

Me explaining to you in your UOA conclusions section !

I might even tell you how and why if I was sure you wouldn't steal my secrets of trended oil analysis !

[ May 19, 2003, 11:10 PM: Message edited by: Terry ]

 

[sprintman]

Well we are buying by the case load here in Aussie and clients can't get enough of it even at our inflated prices. The EPA have asked my business partner Ron in Melbourne to do a clean on one of their trucks. They will be emission testing it before and after. Ron owns a forklift maintenance business and as the woirld's greatest pessimist he can't believe what it's doing to these usually abused veghicles. Additive or non-additive it's just symantecs. If you don't like it fine, nobodys asking you to buy it!!

 

[JohnBrowning]

Well I was a tuff sellon Auto-Rx. I never doubted the claims that it clean because of my experince with Redline. I was aware of how powerful esters can be while still being gentle to the alloys in an engine. My initial doubts were on the how typical the photo results were that are shown. I say this because I am a doubting thomas and like to see visual demonstration not numbers on white paper! I am used to most add's haveing disclaimers at the bottom in fine print " Results not typical."! So I pushed for people to send in any photo's they had of before and after. I can say that Auto-Rx does indeed do what it claims to do. I have seen alot of variations though on effectiveness. Some of the variation is surely user error and some I belive is just the variation of the internal engine enviroment in wich it is added to.

I think something that is often forgotten about is that Auto-Rx is good for seals while solvent based cleaners are generaly bad for seals. Auto-Rx is not going to thin the oil or increase wear metals due to oil degradation like cheap solvents will.

One of the main problems with Auto-Rx is that those people that realy know how good the product is are sworn to secrecy. The fleet test and independent studies are not published. I reliase Frank is just protecting his turf from the "Big Dogs". The people in the know are usualy able to coment with complete freedom on other products and this makes it appear like they have an agenda or bias. I had to spend alot of time to this site to figure that one out.

One of the reasons I am about to try Lube Control, Nuetra 132 and 131 is because they have been completely picked apart and independent testing results posted...... Alot of talking and testing.

Sure MMO will clean out some deposits, so will B-12 and kerosine but they mostly attack surface deposits only and are not good on seals or bearings. THey degrade the oils lubricty and are not for routine use. SOlvents have their place but I think history has shown that they must be used with caution in the engine.

So while I am not a proper spokeman for Auto-Rx I can say that it does what Frank claims. I have used solvents for years and none of them produce the same result without causeing any harm.

 

[toyvwbenz]

In the late 80's I used a quart of Rislone in an Oldsmobile 350 V8 which had over 100K miles on conventional motor oil. About halfway through my normal 3000 mile OCI the oil was BLACK. Using Castrol 10W-40 never turned the oil black. Either Rislone has a ingredient that turns black with use or it washed black crud out of that engine. IMHO, it did some serious cleaning. The only difference I was aware of after using Rislone was a reduction in oil consuption. I can only assume that it cleaned the piston ring area.

Regarding your VOA of Rislone, why? A VOA on an engine cleaner makes as much sense as a VOA on a weed killer. Rislone is not a motor oil. It is an inexpensive and readily available engine cleaner.

 

[BlueBird]

"As you can see it is nothing more than a 20 weight mineral oil with very low levels of calcium detergent, some anti-foam" -

Back to the VOA , Im still learing how to read these things, what indicates calcium detergent and anti-foam agents ?

 

[MolaKule]

On the BITOG home page is an article:

http://theoildrop.server101.com/whatisoilanalysis.htm

 

[TallPaul]

Hi folks. I am new to the site and am very interested in this site because for the past 25 years I have dumped a quart of Rislone in my crankcase every oil change. I was challenged on another website and decided to forward the persons data to rislone (their data way below). Here is the response from Rislone. It seems a bit weak though. I am considering quitting this stuff. The fact that they use their existence in the market for 80 years as proof Rislone works is very unscientific, as are all testimonials.

OFFICIAL RESPONSE FROM RISLONE: We have seen this same response before and have asked our tribologist to respond. The following is his comment:
Rislone is an Engine Treatment and not an engine oil and, in fact, I would say it is an Engine Treatment System. Each of its multiple components has been selected to accomplish its original intended purpose, that being creating a cleaner, better performing engine. Rislone has a unique blend of components all selected for this purpose. The formulation integrity has remained unchanged with minor exceptions only implemented to address changing engine requirements and compatibilities of such. While there are detergents in Rislone, they are not the most critical of the various components in Rislone.

The ca and zinc values are less than expected and in a typical motor oil which is correct. Our specifications currently have Zn around 550-600 ppm and calcium is around 1000 to 1100 ppm. There is also a fair amount of a very shear stable viscosity modifier in the package. (J. L. Czerwinski)

I do not know the qualifications or expertise of the person who quotes "you ain't gonna (?) be happy with Rislone Engine Treatment, but it is a product that has been on the market over 80 years. If, as he states "you ain't gonna (?) be happy", I doubt we would have remained in business very long. We have a Testimonial File that would say there are many users of Rislone who are delighted with the product.

Pat Bruesch
Sales Department

Originalo Message :

I was recommending Rislone Engine Treatment on a website and got the following response
"...I have the technical breakdown on Rislone [Engine Treatment]. I would suggest that you don't read it as you ain't gonna be happy. All elements zero except those listed.
Zinc 376 ppm
Phos. 348 ppm
Calcium 781 ppm
Vis @ 100C 9.21 (means it's a 20w mineral oil)
Again, you can get more value out of a cheap bottle of Wallys oil than these mystical additives."

But I always thought Rislone had increased additives, but the zinc shown here is about 1/3 that of normal motor oil, yet your MSD shows 0.1% (1000 ppm) of zinc. Can you folks correct what this fellow said?

 

[KW]

I have used Rislone in the past and it unstuck lifers as advertised. I would use it again.

 

[MolaKule]

Tall,

At the time of testing the ZDDP and calcium levels were as stated. Now they may have modified those levels slightly since the VOA report. Oil and engine producers are attempting to reduce the amount of phosphorus in engine oils, so an add like this will only increase it.

If they are calling the polybutene thickener a shear-stable VII, then we'll call it a draw.

As I responded to others in this thread, why pay $2.50 for some OTC additive that contains about a third of the additives in a $1.09 SL rated OTC fully formulated oil?

I never said it would harm an engine and if people want to continue to use it to "feel good" then it's their money. If you do use any OTC or third party additive, have UOA's done to make sure there is no "in-fighting" with the additives.

My point is that if you run the numbers, it doesn't make economic sense to use either Rislone of CD-2 if you run a SF-SL engine oil with an engine in good mechanical condition.

 

[MolaKule]

If one wanted to use Rislone or CD-2 as flushes then that would be ok.

I just don't like thin solvents thinning down my 30 weight motor oil to a 10 or 20 weight when I know the oil is going to shear and thin at certain times anyway.

 

[TallPaul]

I have an year old MSD on Rislone and, assuming it is the same, it says it is 80-90 percent "severely hydrotreated light or heavy napthenic distillates." Whew! One book I consulted says that liquid naptha is used in cleaning fluid. Other components are 5-10 percent additives like zinc, and 5-10 percent viscosity improvers. The 100C viscosity falls into the 20 weight category, but once they told me it was like a 5w20/25. I put some straight rislone in the freezer. At zero it acts about like some 20 weight motor oil I froze. Seems like a straight 20 oil of some sort. I must say 175,000 of it did not seem to hurt my '84 F150 300 I6 and the guy who bought that truck has it to 200,000 and still running fine but not using Rislone anymore. I may quit the Rislone or just use it toward the end of the oil change. Not sure. Kinda sitting on the fence right now.

 

[csandste]

This thread started out with Rislone being nothing but 20 wt. oil and ended up with it being "severely hydrotreated light or heavy napthenic distillates." Again, it seems like we glorify a limited number of expensive additives while dissing old timers like MMO and Rislone. What I'd really like to see is a couple of UOA's on the same car with the same oil. One with Rislone, one without. I'm not even sure what that would show, since it would dilute the additives and I'm not sure how one would scientifically measure cleaning ability. It just seems like you hold these snake oils to an entirely different standard than Auto RX for example.

 

[MolaKule]

csandste,

quote:

---

... but was simply an invitation for anyone to post their UOA results from Rislone and CD2 (or other products) and then debate the merits/non-merits of the product...

---

As stated above, this is an open invitation to run your own test(s) and submit the results for all to see.

 

[csandste]

Before I run one, what would it show? Do severely hydrated napthanic distallates provide cleaning? do they show up in the UOA? Or would it test out as simply diluted oil with lower calcium and zinc counts?