An interesting observation (MMO vs. TC-W3)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
4,913
Location
Kuwait
I've been running half a pint (225 ml) of MMO at every fill up for the past 6,670 km (4,169 miles) in my Grand Marquis with 91 RON/87 AKI gasoline. I think I've gone though something like three and a half quart bottles of MMO already.

Last week I ran out of MMO and because I run TC-W3 in my Montero, I decided I would use that this time. So I measured exactly 113 ml (3.8 oz) of Pennzoil Synthetic Blend TC-W3 (500:1 ratio) and refuelled with 91 RON/87 AKI.

Roughly 125 km (78 miles) into the tank, I started hearing rattling sounds from the engine under light throttle (detonation). I had to depress the accelerator enough to force a downshift before the detonation would stop. This kept on going for the rest of the tank, and I decided I would switch back to MMO at my next fill up. My fuel economy also went down from an average of 12.5 L/100km (19 MPG) to 14.1 L/100km (16.7 MPG). I also noticed some oily residue left on my exhaust tips.

The detonation continued with the MMO until I was about 300 km (188 miles) into the tank, and then it completely disappeared. I managed to get 13 L/100km (18.1 MPG) out of the first tank of MMO mixed in, and on my second run it went back to the regular 12.5 L/100km (19 MPG). So basically I will continue to run MMO in my Grand Marquis.

That said, if I do decided to run TC-W3 again at some point, does this mean I should run a lesser dose?
confused.gif
Thanks!
 
I'm wondering if you've tried running MMO in the Montero. If so, did it make any difference compared to the TC-W3?
 
Yes, I was running MMO in the Montero before I switched it over to TC-W3. No difference at all, it ran the same on both.

I only switched the Montero over because it has a larger tank (92L/25 gallons vs. 72L/19 gallons) and I require about half the amount of additive (145 ml/4.9 oz. of TC-W3 vs. 295 ml/6.6 oz. of MMO).
 
Very strange. The ratios are consistent. I'm left with two ideas...

#1: There is something going on that the MMO is able to mask, but the TC-W3 can't.

#2: There was going to be an adjustment period with the Mercury, and it never made it through before you went back to the MMO.
 
500:1 is too strong for your use of TC-W3 , try it at 640 : 1 which is the recommended ratio (2 oz per 10 gal. of gas) . I like it better at 768: 1 or even 896: 1 depending on the vehicle . As for MMO the recommended rate is 320:1 (4 oz. per 10 gal. of gas) but I see better results at 426:1 ratio or even 512:1 ratio . Below is a great link that you can use to convert & try different gas to MMO / TC-W3 ratios - it has metric conversion as well ...hope this helps ! http://www.csgnetwork.com/oilfuelcalc.html
 
4 quarts of MMO in 5K starts to get expensive, IMO.
The Ford 4.6 motor in the GM will go 300K with just regular oil changes.
I'm not being a wiseguy but I don't see the point.

PS: I have added MMO (and other additives) to my gas and oil over the years but I'm beginning to think it's a waste of money for the most part.
 
Originally Posted By: rshunter
Very strange. The ratios are consistent. I'm left with two ideas...

#1: There is something going on that the MMO is able to mask, but the TC-W3 can't.

#2: There was going to be an adjustment period with the Mercury, and it never made it through before you went back to the MMO.


Certainly sounds like it. I just couldn't continue using the TC-W3 with all the detonation, which is why I switched right back.

Originally Posted By: ChrisD46
500:1 is too strong for your use of TC-W3 , try it at 640 : 1 which is the recommended ratio (2 oz per 10 gal. of gas) . I like it better at 768: 1 or even 896: 1 depending on the vehicle . As for MMO the recommended rate is 320:1 (4 oz. per 10 gal. of gas) but I see better results at 426:1 ratio or even 512:1 ratio . Below is a great link that you can use to convert & try different gas to MMO / TC-W3 ratios - it has metric conversion as well ...hope this helps ! http://www.csgnetwork.com/oilfuelcalc.html


Thanks very much, I will look into that!
thumbsup2.gif


I think I will start experimenting on the Montero though, which already runs smoothly on TC-W3.

I use MMO at the recommended 320:1 ratio on the bottle. I have played around with the different ratios, and whilst I do not have any scientific results, there hasn't really been a change in fuel economy and 320:1 seems to give the engine more 'punch'. Anything less and it's like you're not using anything. Anything more, and there's a slight drop in fuel economy.

Originally Posted By: pbm
4 quarts of MMO in 5K starts to get expensive, IMO.
The Ford 4.6 motor in the GM will go 300K with just regular oil changes.
I'm not being a wiseguy but I don't see the point.

PS: I have added MMO (and other additives) to my gas and oil over the years but I'm beginning to think it's a waste of money for the most part.


If you're using quality gasoline, yes I agree.
55.gif
The standards of gasoline here date back to 1995 (Euro 2), and there isn't much detergent in it. So I use additives to help keep things clean. The MMO works out to $1.50 a tank, which isn't exactly going to break the bank to be honest. The TC-W3 works out to $1.20 which still isn't bad. A quart of MMO lasts four weeks, whilst the TC-W3 lasts six.

That said, I had the passenger side exhaust manifold replaced on my Montero and my mechanic was very surprised that there was no carbon. It was literally spotless inside, and I have the manifold somewhere down in the basement. Might just take it out and post some pictures. So the TC-W3 has to be doing something.
thumbsup2.gif
 
I wonder if the syn blend is different in makeup, requires different solvents or something else. Ive not noticed such things, but only use 1.5-2oz per tank. I also keep a rotation.
 
When you made the switch, there would be some gas with the previous product stacked on top of the new added product.
I don't know, but what would be the possibility of knocking down on the octane causing ping. Also seeing the product on the exhaust tips - to much product stacked or insufficient combustion tune.
Maybe try a lightened up dose.
And as mentioned, maybe a bad load of gas.

I'm running MMO in my daily driver. I started out at the recommended 4oz/10-Gallons, then went to 3oz/10-Gallons and it seems better. I'm about to try 2oz and see what it does - trying to find out what works best for my daily driver.
 
Are you are running your tank bone dry between fill ups? If not, then adding half a pint of MMO at each fill up will cause you to have a higher MMO/fuel ratio than recommended. I don't know if adding TCW3 on top of high MMO/fuel mixed gas would then cause the problem you noted in the OP, but perhaps it could.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
I wonder if the syn blend is different in makeup, requires different solvents or something else. Ive not noticed such things, but only use 1.5-2oz per tank. I also keep a rotation.


If anything, I would imagine the synthetic blend being better (burns cleaner) than the mineral based Lubri-Matic I used to use.
21.gif


Originally Posted By: Errtt
When you made the switch, there would be some gas with the previous product stacked on top of the new added product.
I don't know, but what would be the possibility of knocking down on the octane causing ping. Also seeing the product on the exhaust tips - to much product stacked or insufficient combustion tune.
Maybe try a lightened up dose.
And as mentioned, maybe a bad load of gas.

I'm running MMO in my daily driver. I started out at the recommended 4oz/10-Gallons, then went to 3oz/10-Gallons and it seems better. I'm about to try 2oz and see what it does - trying to find out what works best for my daily driver.


I always fill up at the same station and use the same pump, but I suppose there's always a possibility of bad gas.

Originally Posted By: ChuckBerry
Are you are running your tank bone dry between fill ups? If not, then adding half a pint of MMO at each fill up will cause you to have a higher MMO/fuel ratio than recommended. I don't know if adding TCW3 on top of high MMO/fuel mixed gas would then cause the problem you noted in the OP, but perhaps it could.


There's usually about 5-10 litres (1.3-2.6 gallons) left by the time I fuel up.
 
I'd agree, but maybe there is a combo of a really good lube with a really volatile solvent to aide in the combustion, which in your engine is not necessary. Or perhaps the MMO has changed your timing and the tcw3 is more "normal"?
 
Not sure on the timing to be honest (my engine doesn't have a knock sensor). Does MMO raise the octane rating?
confused.gif
 
I've used them both separately, and now together. Separately, I found the 500:1 ratio worked well for TC-W3 and same with MMO in that the recommended 4 ounces in 10 gallons worked well. When I combined them, I cut the dosing back after some experimentation, to 3 ounces of MMO and 1 ounce (30 ml) of TC-W3 and this seems to work well. During the first trial of this, it was the TC-W3 dosage it seemed more sensitive to - I could also run 4 ounces of MMO so long as I keep it to 1 ounce of TC-W3, but I'm not seeing any additional benefit from an extra ounce of MMO, with the two combined, so I stick with the 4 ounces total, including the ounce of TC-W3.

I know you're running them separately, but from my own experience I think engines are a little pickier about TC-W3 dosing than MMO dosing; while 500:1 will work fine for most, some may see best results at anywhere from 400:1 to 1000:1.

With TC-W3 I think its best to consider the 500:1 ratio as only a rule of thumb, but experiment a bit to find the best ratio for the particular engine.

I run them both for the better cleaning ability of MMO, while the engine has always sounded and felt smoothest with TC-W3 added (MMO has no effect on the engine sound while TC-W3 has a big effect on mine). I think it also helps lube the fuel pump etc a little better, too, so I see enough separate benefits from them to combine them and - for me - they work well in combination, once I hit upon the right ratio through some brief trial and error.

-Spyder
 
Last edited:
According to my calculations, by the time you added TCW3, you had about 235 milliliters of MMO in addition to the normal recommended dose in your fuel tank. BITOG poster Gary Allan has demonstrated that overdosing with MMO is probably not harmful, but I wonder if the extra half a pint of MMO, in combination with the TCW3, might have caused your ECU to see it as low octane gas, or something else.
 
Falcon:
I didn't realize your gasoline was different over there.
In that case it probably does help.
 
Originally Posted By: ChuckBerry
Are you are running your tank bone dry between fill ups? If not, then adding half a pint of MMO at each fill up will cause you to have a higher MMO/fuel ratio than recommended. I don't know if adding TCW3 on top of high MMO/fuel mixed gas would then cause the problem you noted in the OP, but perhaps it could.


I don't quite follow that logic... foe easy numbers, let's jusy say you dose at 1 gallon mmo per 10 gallons of gas. You have 2 gallons of gas left in your tank when you go to the filling station. You then add the same exact ratio: 1 gallon mmno, 10 gallons of gas.

How has your ratio changed? When you have half a cup of soda and top it off before you leave McD's, is your soda suddenly more syrupy? Sure hope not!!
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: musicmanbass
Originally Posted By: ChuckBerry
Are you are running your tank bone dry between fill ups? If not, then adding half a pint of MMO at each fill up will cause you to have a higher MMO/fuel ratio than recommended. I don't know if adding TCW3 on top of high MMO/fuel mixed gas would then cause the problem you noted in the OP, but perhaps it could.


I don't quite follow that logic... foe easy numbers, let's jusy say you dose at 1 gallon mmo per 10 gallons of gas. You have 2 gallons of gas left in your tank when you go to the filling station. You then add the same exact ratio: 1 gallon mmno, 10 gallons of gas.

How has your ratio changed? When you have half a cup of soda and top it off before you leave McD's, is your soda suddenly more syrupy? Sure hope not!!
smile.gif


When he fills the tank he's not adding the full volume, but just a portion thereof. If he inserts a premeasured quantity of additive, suitable for the full volume, then he is actually increasing the concentration of additive in the tank.
 
I get that, but I hope to heaven that our esteemed BITOG readers arent silly enough to dose based on tank size, and not for the amount of gas actually added to the car!!!!



Quick reality check: we all do understand that when we go the station to get gas, the tank is not COMPLETELY empty unless we coasted in after running out of gas, right? Therefore we are not pumping in a full tank of gas. To continually dose as if we were would be kind of foolish.

So say my car holds 20 gallons of gas. I don't just dump 20 gallon's worth of additive if I add 15 gallons of gas!!!!! What am I missing? Am I the only here that thinks this way?

We have one gentleman sharing his ratios down to very finite detail. I seriously doubt he throws all that work out the window and pours 8 oz MMO in the tank no matter if he's pumping 5 gallons or 20.

I hope I'm explaining what I mean properly. Please let me know if I'm being unclear, or if I'm not understanding this properly. It's been a very long day and I don't doubt that I could be completely missing the point!
smile.gif


Oh, and of course this discussion pertains to continual maintenance doses of a product. Dumping a bottle of Gumout twice a year is a different animal entirely.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top