What does Liqui-Moly CERATEC do?

Status
Not open for further replies.
just filling up for the last time on a 1500 mile run to Washington d.c.

still hitting about 24 miles per gallon running MoS2.

Using Ceratec or MoS2 to enable extended OCI may justify its cost but peace of mind for some is worth its cost.
 
Originally Posted By: GaleHawkins
After we crossed from IL to WI on to Appleton mpg went from 24 to 26.5. Now on return trip driving 55-65 with some 30 mph towns hitting 26.5.

Will be picking up I-39 soon and will see what it does to mpg.

Starting to wondering if it may take may take MoS2 300-400 miles to fully coat parts. We know from WWII planes MoS2 protected engines for a short period of time after totally loosing engine oil.


Could you provide a source for the WWII use of MOS2?

I can't find any direct sources for the claim.

It would be great to have a military source stating " add x amount of MOS2 to each Merlin oil change."

Thank you!
 
Originally Posted By: GregGA
Could you provide a source for the WWII use of MOS2? I can't find any direct sources for the claim. It would be great to have a military source stating " add x amount of MOS2 to each Merlin oil change."

Look at your library for a volume on Rolls-Royce wartime aircraft engines. I'm guessing they were using it in powdered form - these were dry-sump engines so settling was not an issue. If you could even find a quantity or measure, it might be ounces weight or other dry-measure information.
 
Originally Posted By: GregGA
Originally Posted By: GaleHawkins
After we crossed from IL to WI on to Appleton mpg went from 24 to 26.5. Now on return trip driving 55-65 with some 30 mph towns hitting 26.5.

Will be picking up I-39 soon and will see what it does to mpg.

Starting to wondering if it may take may take MoS2 300-400 miles to fully coat parts. We know from WWII planes MoS2 protected engines for a short period of time after totally loosing engine oil.


Could you provide a source for the WWII use of MOS2?

I can't find any direct sources for the claim.

It would be great to have a military source stating " add x amount of MOS2 to each Merlin oil change."

Thank you!


http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3129860
First post on page 5 of 8 from BITOG site.

http://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/397889-molyslip-additive/
Its use was mentioned but source is only web post.
 
Originally Posted By: GaleHawkins
Originally Posted By: GregGA
Originally Posted By: GaleHawkins
After we crossed from IL to WI on to Appleton mpg went from 24 to 26.5. Now on return trip driving 55-65 with some 30 mph towns hitting 26.5.

Will be picking up I-39 soon and will see what it does to mpg.

Starting to wondering if it may take may take MoS2 300-400 miles to fully coat parts. We know from WWII planes MoS2 protected engines for a short period of time after totally loosing engine oil.


Could you provide a source for the WWII use of MOS2?

I can't find any direct sources for the claim.

It would be great to have a military source stating " add x amount of MOS2 to each Merlin oil change."

Thank you!


http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3129860
First post on page 5 of 8 from BITOG site.

http://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/397889-molyslip-additive/
Its use was mentioned but source is only web post.



Hey, I'm using this in my Jeep 4.0, and have noticed a reduction in noise and a much smoother idle.

BUT,as a fan of WWII warbirds, I can't find any documented sources backing up the claim MoS2 was added to the oil. I spent some time on this yesterday, and it appears the Packard Merlin was only allowed to use straight mineral oil, with no detergents or dispersants to be added.

The only source for the aircraft use is on lubri-Moly's website. Having served in the military, I can guarantee flight line crew chiefs were not dumping in anything that was not specifically covered by Technical Order.

I suggest we drop the claim of MoS2 being used in aircraft unless we can provide a documented source.
 
I wonder if it just might be a moly additive that might have been used/researched during WWII. The MoS2 is of course a brand of a moly additive mfgd by a German company, Liqui-Moly. I too remember someone referencing the use of moly in aircraft engines in WWII but can't remember any specifics. The Germans might have developed something like it for the Luftwaffe. I wonder if Liqui-Moly, being a German company, might have acquired some technical data and developed it into what we know today as MoS2 after the war. Also have you researched the Rolls Royce company as they also built alot of aircraft engines in WWII. Interesting, good luck.
 
Where it is a tale or not I read some posts yesterday that stated the Germans did use MoS2 during WWII but have not seen in from a source that would stand up in a court room. There may have been a story on Liqui-Moly site.
 
Use stated in WW 1 and post WWII

Molybdenum sulfide the basic incredient of the LIQUI MOLY oil additive was discovered in the shops of the US Army in post-war Germany. These shops sold a can under the brand name LIQUI MOLY that contained the liquefied form of the solid lubricant molybdenum sulfide (MoS2). When added to motor oil, this substance ensures emergency running characteristics in the event of a sudden loss of oil. Fighter pilots in World War One had already exploited this property, adding MoS2 to the motor oil in the aircraft engines. This enabled pilots to still land easily even if the oil tank was hit. The rights to the LIQUI MOLY name and the patent for the molybdenum sulfide substance (MoS2) was bought more or less exactly 50 years ago. He founded his company, LIQUI MOLY GmbH, on March 31, 1957
 
We need to ask Liqui-Moly their source for this. I know the Germans document everything. Maybe this was an assembly lube? I also heard MMO was added to the fuel of WWII aircraft, but again I've never seen it documented.
 
I have heard that Germany developed synthetic gasoline in the latter stages of WWII as well. Americans came up with synthetic rubber also. Scientists seemed to be quiet busy during WWII.
 
Originally Posted By: GregGA
We need to ask Liqui-Moly their source for this. I know the Germans document everything. Maybe this was an assembly lube? I also heard MMO was added to the fuel of WWII aircraft, but again I've never seen it documented.


I have seem mention of it being used in lubrication experiments by the Germans during WWII but no documentation of it being used in aircraft engines in the WWII period.
I would say this is probably more a myth than fact.

This is interesting reading.

http://www.dowcorning.com/content/publishedlit/80-3381-01.pdf

Given the fact that LM bought the patent from Molykote i would guess that if anyone was using it as a lubricant in oil it would have been the Americans, there doesn't seem to be documentation of that either.
 
GregGA how to you support the WWII aircraft myth has been "busted" in any shape or form from marketing materials from Liqui-Moly or Molykote?

While we may never get any proof on this subject GregGA we know better than to trust the marketing departments of any company for historical facts.
smile.gif
 
It certainly appears more busted than fact, there is zero documentation for it in the use of aircraft engines that anyone on the board has found or produced.

It all makes for good story telling but there are no facts to back it up. On the other hand there is documentation that it was not available in lubricants till well after WWII.
There is evidence enough that MW 50 (methanol/Water) injection was used.

This is engine used in German fighter during WWII it is the DB 601 used in the ME109 and others.
No mention of MoS2 in the service manual (i will re read it later to be 100% sure). And there is another factor that would make it unlikely to have used MoS2.
Look at the connecting rods, they use needle bearings and as far as i can tell the mains were also.
This alone would probably get them a few extra min time under power if the oil tank was hit even without MoS2. Add to that the question of skidding of needle bearings it seems highly unlikely that MoS2 was used.

http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/engine...-601-und-b.html

MB still has full documentation and even parts list for their engines.

http://www.luftfahrt-archiv-hafner.de/daimler-benz.htm
 
The RR Merlin specs 2472 oil with no mention of moly by the name MoS2 or any other.
These are copies of the original manuals not some company marketing.
I looked though DB, BMW, RR, and still come up with just plain old engine oil, it not even mentioned for the big radials.

personally i think this myth is pretty much "busted" just by the amount of data that is not present to prove otherwise.

http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/en/eng...nce-manual.html
 
Trav, that was the type of documentation I was looking for yesterday. Leave it to a German Master Mechanic to find and link them up:) Thank you sir. Those engines were truly works of art. There are still a few craftsman able to work on them and keep them flying. Roush Aviation is an authorized FAA repair station for the Merlin and has done great work in fabricating improved parts for the great engine.
 
Got to love the font in the MB manual:). I went to the diagram of the conn rod bearings. I have never seen needle bearings used in this application. What other engines used this? Advantages?
 
Their ability to survive on splash lubrication or a mist makes them ideal low pressure systems like old motorcycle engines, 2 strokes and compressors for example.
Whether they were used in these engines for some design or lubrication reason i don't know.
I have had very little experience with this type of crank bearing. Shannow would probably be able to give you a better answer.
 
The oldest info that I can find on MoS2 in motor oil indicates the first successful usage (did not settle out on shut down) was POST WWII. Any use in WWII would at best been experimental at best.

I have to say from all the reading and the cost I think I am more sold on using the MoS2 additive than the Ceratec nano technology.
 
Originally Posted By: GaleHawkins
The oldest info that I can find on MoS2 in motor oil indicates the first successful usage (did not settle out on shut down) was POST WWII. Any use in WWII would at best been experimental at best.

I have to say from all the reading and the cost I think I am more sold on using the MoS2 additive than the Ceratec nano technology.




You have a point there.
When I use mos2 there is always a measurable benefit,in fuel economy and so on.
But cera-tec thus far hasn't done anything that I have noticed to anything as far as the engine is concerned.
Now I'm not saying cera-tec isn't a good product. I'm sure it's having a positive effect as far as wear and so on it's just that I haven't done a tear down since I've started using it.
Mos2 always delivers a noticeable fuel consumption reduction,which leads me to believe that mos2 might be a better product as far as friction reduction is concerned,it's just that it doesn't last like cera-tec is supposed to.
I've got a few cans left in stock and likely won't buy anymore.
But I'm sticking with my mos2.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
Aeroshell 4/41 vs. Liqui Moly Top Tec 1800
Replies
3
Views
574
Cujet
3
  • Locked
Oil additive from a can? What benefits?
Replies
2
Views
1K
dnewton3
T
Liqui Moly in a PowerStroke?
Replies
1
Views
2K
CleverUserName
P
st with mos2 or pup
Replies
6
Views
464
kschachn
I
Liqui Moly Brake Anti-Squeal
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Jetronic
Back
Top