CerMet, XADO and Cermax engine treatments

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: zoomzoom
Ok before I hear it is a snake oil I want you guys to read this presentation and do a bit research and then lets have a discussion about this ceramic technology and does it really work in combustion engine.

Enjoy!

http://www.cermetlab.com/CerMet Brochure DT presentation.pdf

That is not a "presentation", that is an advertisement.

"Modifies metal up to several hundred microns deep".
crackmeup2.gif
 
looks like CerMet just got US patent for the technology so there got to be more to it then just advertisement?

I would like to hear from Terry or Molacule on this topic...

Southfield Firm Gets Patent For Nanotech Ceramic Engine Conditioner

Southfield-baesd CerMet Lab Co. said this week it had received a United States patent for a nanoparticle ceramic conditioner product that restores metal and reduces friction in metal-to-metal environments.

The company says the process has proven to significantly improve fuel economy in both diesel and gas-powered engines, as well as provide energy savings in other mechanical devices. Performance and product life are also improved. This is the first product that allows inexpensive ceramic treatment of engines, without disassembly.

The benefits of ceramic parts and coatings, known for nearly 50 years, include increased part longevity, heat reduction, friction reduction, as well as anti-corrosion properties. The Department of Energy states that ceramics have been proven to dramatically improve performance, energy efficiency, power density, and in the case of diesel engines, lower exhaust emissions.

During treatment with CerMet -- an abbreviation of “ceramic-metal” -- engine oil is used to carry CerMet’s microscopic ceramic nano-particles to the friction zones, to bond to the metal surfaces without any disassembly or downtime. A physiochemical process transforms the metal’s surface into an integrated ceramic-metal structure that emulates the properties of pure ceramic and significantly reduces friction with a notable reduction in surface roughness.

The company said SAE J1321 Type II fuel consumption tests performed by independent testing companies worldwide, including Claude Travis & Associates, have verified that the CerMet treatment provides a measurable and repeatable improvement in fuel economy.

And, the company said, major carriers are documenting considerable increases in fuel economy and experiencing high return on investment. In addition to large and small fleet use, other applications with similar findings include engines and gearboxes that power trucks, buses and RVs, as well as marine and other applications. Recently, a city police department acknowledged fuel savings ranging from 10 to 15 percent after applying CerMet.

More at http://www.cermetelab.com, or contact Richard Edwartoski at CerMet, (800) 372-7580, ext. 107.
 
The fact that a product receives a patent does not guarantee it's efficacy or technical merit. A patent just means the product is unique. Patent applications get an average of 8 hours review before grant determination. It doesn't get independently tested during application. A lot of fluff gets pushed through the patent office.
 
Well, true, Kestas ..but the patent process isn't cheap and, if it were a patent on a toaster, it much surely produce "toast".

When I search for Cerma or Cermax I get nothing at the patent office. If I put Cermet in the search ..I get plenty ..but nothing that pertains to engines.
54.gif
 
I did a little searching myself. The Cermet company is not far from where I live. They employ 28 people. The cost of a patent application is peanuts compared with whatever budget they're working with. Any news about their product has been written or relayed by the CEO. They are definitely expecting to make a lot of money off this product.

If they truly have a successful product and want their product to be recognized, they should make themselves busy with the STLE local community. I'll see what I can find out from that route.
 
Yup, that's the inventor (Dmitry Tananko) and the technology. That explains the testimonial in the brocure from D.T. of Ford Motor Company (Dmitry also works at Ford). The testimonial is from the inventor himself, praising what he witnessed from his own product! Weird!!
 
OK, I went through the company pamphlet linked above to pick apart the technical aspects of the presentation.

Though it's very wordy and sounds technical, the information is hollow and really doesn't tell me anything except that it is purported to be a wonderful product. It may impress some people, but for myself, who often reads technical papers (and even peer-reviewed SAE papers), it is unimpressive. The patent has the same read to it.

The electron microscope pictures - something I've done for 25 years - tell me nothing.

The pictures of the roller bearing race being healed are incredulous (I look at bearings on a daily basis). I passed this around to my colleagues for laughs.

The product is supposed to fill in the nooks and crannies on a surface. I should point out that the cylinder walls of a combustion engine are highly engineered and manufactured to a minimum roughness with microreservoirs to hold oil lubricant (even aluminum engines). There is even a particular roughness measurement used for this application. Filling this has the same effect as glazing, and machinists take great pains to rehone the surface to remove glazing.

There is a passage about the 30-micron (0.001") diffusion of silicon in the metal matrix that is supposed to be beneficial. This is nonsense on many levels.

The graph on microhardness uses units of GPa. Being an expert on hardness testing methods, GPa tells me nothing. It is not a hardness unit, and is unheard of in our industry.

>
Nonsense. Hardness is measured using arbitrary, man-made, scales. It's like saying something is twice as hot using the Fahrenheit or Centigrade scale. There is no "Kelvin"-type scale in hardness testing.

All of the other wonderful things mentioned in the brochure sound like the panacea to many of our mechanical woes, similar to the verbage used in other snake oil product. It's a wonder that this product is not on the shelves of every hardware, automotive, drug, and grocery store. It just goes to show that a lot of people are taken in by a wonderful show and presentation and that substance takes a back seat.

Enough research for you, zoomzoom? I'd pick apart your second link but I'm just too busy at the moment (engineering REAL surfaces).
 
Originally Posted By: Kestas
I did a little searching myself. The Cermet company is not far from where I live. They employ 28 people. The cost of a patent application is peanuts compared with whatever budget they're working with. Any news about their product has been written or relayed by the CEO. They are definitely expecting to make a lot of money off this product.

If they truly have a successful product and want their product to be recognized, they should make themselves busy with the STLE local community. I'll see what I can find out from that route.


Kestas maybe you can ask them for a free sample so we can test it here on the forum?
 
wow thanks for looking into it Kestas.

I do wonder would something like this work in manual gearbox?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: zoomzoom
wow thanks for looking into it Kestas.

I do wonder would something like this work in manual gearbox?


zoomzoom,

I can still see you not giving up on this said subject, no?

Think slick-50 MT gearbox additives, with grounded PTFE powder in your gear oil...

48.gif


Q.
 
well company that makes XADO also makes what they call "atomic" synthetic motor oils that meet some pretty strict standards...

according to them 4 quarts of this oil contains equivalent to one tube of XADO engine treatment...so whatever is in XADO passes all these standards for example their 0W-30:

XADO Atomic Oil 0W-30 meets and exceeds the requirements of the highest American and European standards for motor oils for passenger cars.
XADO Atomic Oil 0W-30 SL/CF meets the requirements of specifications
SAE 0W-30
API SL/CF
ACEA A3/B3/B4
XADO ATOMIC OIL 0W-30 SL/CF meets the requirements of the OEM
VW 503.01
VW 502.00/505.00
MB 229.3, 229.1
BMW Longlife
Porsche

Typical properties:
Density at 20 °С, kg/l - 0,854
Viscosity at 100 °С, mm2/s - 11,8
Viscosity at 40 °С, mm2/s - 67,0
Viscosity at -35 °С, mPa s - 6300
Viscosity index - 174
Flash point, °С - 220
Pour point, °С - Easy start temperature, °С - -35
Sulphated ash, wt.- 1,5
Base number, mgKOH/g - 11,8

http://www.atomicoil.com/index.php?lang=eng&page=oil&id=12
 
LOL! *right!*

Just like fram filter packed with slick-50 powder in the media....what's the whole point in doing that?

All I could say is that if you are a sucker (*ahem* believer) of OTC additives that claims the benefit of superman flight(w/o the cape and tight red pant, of course), additives that would boost out-of-this-world emissions out of any ordinary, already EPA approved emissions-controlled IC engine, or promote unrealistic fuel economy boost out of an otherwise healthy, OBD-II compliant vehicle (anything >8% is unrealistic, IMHO), then this XADO oil is for you.

You are more than welcome to debate this anyway you want it (make sure you are armed with scientific facts with research-class test results, not just some kind of Norway Saaab club member testimonials or budtt dyno results).

Me? No thanks. I'm not falling for that. Afterall: money has always been tight in my family and I would rather see my $$ going for a better, sensible cause than feeding the MLM snake oil scheme.

Again, my 2c's worth. You don't have to come back to bash me on this posting (I'll slap myself silly for that...)

thankyou2.gif
 
zoomzoom - there are some products that do as they claim. All have some liability. If they do work, they all cost more than any realized saving can possibly pay for. One item that Terry looked at was Oil Extreme (iirc) and it did produce some fuel economy increases for about 3000 miles. The amount wasn't much ..but measurable ..but the stuff cost $25+ some ridiculous S&H charge making it a very expensive foolish move to spend $30+ to save $8 worth of fuel (if it was that much at the time). It was a chlorinated paraffin.

There's nothing new under the sun. You can do lots of stuff ..pinch of this ..flip over backwards and spit nickles ...tweak there ..bump there..power in your magic potions and powders ..and even if they succeed ..the yield is about enough to buy you a cup of coffee. None of them add up to ever paying their way ..and none of them can be incorporated into a 100k/8 year emissions certification ...or can't be produced and available so that a consumer can readily service it ...or this or that ..

..or it's just plain bee-ssss and looking to make money the neo-mercantile way ....get some investors to put up the cost for promoting a $3 ingredient with an effective ad campaign ..offer them 300% ROI ...dump your product on them ...and hit the road to your resort island. They then have to recover their money from the market and will hope to snag even less savvy "distributors" to dump the stuff in the lap of and get while the getting is good ..etc..etc. There's a whole gang of this type of scam artist (some rather famous or rather infamous) that are wealthy in that caliber of thieves. It's like a religion. They sell "faith". The rest comes from the "believer" who's invested himself in the church. Meanwhile the pastor is driving around in a BIG CAR and telling you how great the experience is that you're living under his guidance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
Modern Turbo Engine Reliability and Durability
3 4 5
Replies
88
Views
5K
wtd
S
My gen 1 3.5 Ecoboost; An inauspicious Start
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
benjy
S
POAT vs IAT coolant: Engine-specific application and differences
2
Replies
22
Views
4K
X15
wwillson
  • Locked
Test drove a Jeep Grand Wagoneer with the high output 3.0L twin turbo
7 8 9
Replies
165
Views
11K
dnewton3
michael007
Something Different - Artificial Graphene Brake Pads from China
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
michael007
Back
Top