Recent Topics
Reading MSDS, what does this mean?:
by wemay
07/25/14 10:13 AM
Walmart selling opened jugs for disct rate
by wemay
07/25/14 09:31 AM
BP vs Quik Trip gas?
by renegade_987
07/25/14 09:23 AM
Toyota Taxis
by strat81
07/25/14 09:22 AM
Porsche Panamera oil change Redline 0w40 or M1 0w4
by Ndx
07/25/14 09:03 AM
Wet floor under passenger mat, but no smell.
by gr8gatzby
07/25/14 09:00 AM
BMW ATF Lifetime
by 2008wrx
07/25/14 08:53 AM
Vehicle Maintenance
by lugNutz
07/25/14 08:52 AM
Rotella T6 5w-40, 13,015 mi., 2003 Jetta ALH
by R80RS
07/25/14 08:28 AM
QS3614 (Puro Classic) cut open.
by mrsilv04
07/25/14 08:25 AM
Purolator PL25288 cut open.
by mrsilv04
07/25/14 08:19 AM
Amsoil 20W50 5,663 miles in BMW Motorcycle R1100S
by SouthernYankee
07/25/14 07:10 AM
Newest Members
hmmm, ggt1_02, LibertyFlyer, Wordfreak, tjon
50753 Registered Users
Who's Online
96 registered (147_Grain, 05LGTLtd, 1foxracing, 2010_FX4, 285south, 13Tacoma, 8 invisible), 1946 Guests and 230 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
50753 Members
64 Forums
216767 Topics
3411929 Posts

Max Online: 2862 @ 07/07/14 03:10 PM
Donate to BITOG

Page 7 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >
Topic Options
#3265078 - 01/30/14 05:10 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: dino33]
147_Grain Online   content


Registered: 03/11/13
Posts: 1260
Loc: USA
Clevy:

What type or style of inverse oiler are you using? Pics would be helpful (if available).

Top
#3265085 - 01/30/14 05:18 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Triton_330]
Clevy Offline


Registered: 11/11/10
Posts: 6988
Loc: Saskatoon canada
Originally Posted By: Triton_330
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam

RL certification is supposedly the latest & greatest when it comes to TC-W3 oils -- Evinrude specifically states that if their XD100 oil (100:1 ratio) is unavailable, an RL product is to be used. Looking at ad copy alone: "It is certified RL which means it has high film strength for improved lubricity that results in increased engine efficiency, reduced bearing wear and cleaner emissions with less smoke."

Of course, if you browse over to the NMMA site, every single oil listed carries an RL number, so who knows: http://www.nmma.org/assets/cabinets/Cabinet456/2013%20TC-W3.pdf

As for the F-150, I've been running Mobil 1 High Mileage 5w-20 with a Motorcraft FL-820S.


Well shoot, that's kind of confusing. It lists ALL of them as RL's...

It seems to me that it might just be the next gen API spec - like how tc-w2 went to tc-w3. But I could've sworn the bottle I bought only said tc-w3 and didn't say RL, but yet on that list it has the RL. Either way, even if what I bought isn't RL spec (which it could well be), it's not like the tc-w3 non-RL is going to hurt anything. Right?

As for our trucks, one thing I've always wondered is if there really is that big of a deal between running 5w-20 and 5w-30. We have the 2V version, and AFAIK, that (our) generation of F-150 didn't have the ticking problems that the next gen (the 3V) had. I read somewhere that, if not for CAFE (etc.), then the 97-03 F-150s would have been spec'd for 5w-30. There's been some debate on whether or not there was any change in tolerance between 2V and 3V, but honestly, I don't really care. I run 5w-30 and my 2V Triton has never given me troubles. I just wonder, after using 5w-30 for a while, if I could still put in 5w-20 if I wanted to.


And the clearances never changed on the early 4.6 npi head engines to the pi head Romeo engines that went in vehicles until the end of 2000.
In 2001 the power trains started coming from Romeo instead of Windsor and even though they were both 4.6 litre sohc engines there were differences and parts weren't interchangeable between the Windsor and Romeo engines either which for hot rodders sucked because it cut the available parts pool in half.
But with all the changes between the 2000 and 2001 engines their clearances never changed appreciably.
I think it was 2001 when the 20 grade back-spec came out for ford. My oil oil cap said 5w-30 however that may have just been a cap that got mixed up with another.
I thought there was some big conspiracy and so on. I read the cafe requirement and read all the "is my engine going to dissolve threads" along with the comments insisting the "tighter tolerances" were the reason for the change,yet the year prior to the back-spec no new engines were introduced and yes the "tolerances" may have increased but the clearances were the same,and the clearances are what matter,and what get specified.
And to throw a monkey wrench in the thin oil conspiracy the engines using 20 grades were living just as long as their thick oil predecessors.which kinda kyboshed the wearing out faster conspiracy idea.
_________________________
2006 Charger RT
Miles x 2 per oil filter

Top
#3265103 - 01/30/14 05:35 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Clevy]
Triton_330 Offline


Registered: 12/24/13
Posts: 275
Loc: Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: Clevy
as far as using mmo to thin your oil I've never,ever recommended it for that to anyone for that purpose.
I have recommended it for engines that may have deposits forming though.
And I'm using mmo in my inverse oiler on my charger.


Yah, I know that using it to thin the oil isn't really what it's supposed to be used for, but I only put in a pint... My F-150 has the notorious dummy oil pressure gauge that will show no pressure if the psi goes under like 5 or 10 psi (can't remember which one it is for sure). When I went to start up my truck to go to Walmart (thus before adding MMO), the pressure gauge read as no pressure for a long time before finally reading normal about halfway to Walmart. (My campus is only 2.1 miles away from Walmart, so that's basically a mile before it read normal). But, since I probably only have 1000 miles left on my OCI, I'm not too worried about the MMO. It'll clean up my oil, and help with cold starts for a while, but I assume that after a while it'll just vaporize off after driving on the highway enough. Sorry to use it in the way it wasn't intended, but I really don't think a pint of MMO for just 1k left on my OCI will hurt anything.

Originally Posted By: Clevy

If you think sea foam puts on a smoke show its got nothin on mmo.


LOL yah I know. I agree, sea foam's got nothing on MMO. I don't ever really use sea foam anyway.

Originally Posted By: Clevy

PEA is great stuff for helping remove carbon deposits from the combustion chambers and the exhaust valve. It seems to be able to scrub carbon after being burned,or so it seems.


My truck doesn't really have any problems with deposits AFAIK. I just put MMO in the tank sometimes because at home all I have is Casey's gas... I'll just leave it at that haha. But, what would you say about MMO vs, say, lucas fuel additive? In my mind, I don't think I really need the lucas stuff (or any PEA), but if there were more benefits from a PEA than you've stated so far, I might use one every once in a while.

Originally Posted By: Clevy

Anyways be sure to update with any observations. I'm interested in your results,and if any are noticeable.


I intend on going home this weekend, so once I use up the fuel I have now (that I added MMO to), I will use the tc-w3 when I fill back up. (I'm in college - my home is about 1.5 hours away from campus, so I think I should be able to use enough of the fuel to be able to fill up and put in the tc-w3 for the ride back to campus). Would you rather me post the results in this thread, or just send you a PM, Clevy? I'd be fine doing either one. It'll likely be Sunday or Monday when I report back about it.
_________________________
'01 F-150 5.4L ~ 120k mi.
- Mag 1 syn 5w-30 w/MC filter
'89 Camaro RS 305 ~ 47k mi.
- PYB 5w-30 w/AC Delco filter

Top
#3265117 - 01/30/14 05:46 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Clevy]
Triton_330 Offline


Registered: 12/24/13
Posts: 275
Loc: Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: Clevy

And the clearances never changed on the early 4.6 npi head engines to the pi head Romeo engines that went in vehicles until the end of 2000.
In 2001 the power trains started coming from Romeo instead of Windsor and even though they were both 4.6 litre sohc engines there were differences and parts weren't interchangeable between the Windsor and Romeo engines either which for hot rodders sucked because it cut the available parts pool in half.
But with all the changes between the 2000 and 2001 engines their clearances never changed appreciably.
I think it was 2001 when the 20 grade back-spec came out for ford. My oil oil cap said 5w-30 however that may have just been a cap that got mixed up with another.
I thought there was some big conspiracy and so on. I read the cafe requirement and read all the "is my engine going to dissolve threads" along with the comments insisting the "tighter tolerances" were the reason for the change,yet the year prior to the back-spec no new engines were introduced and yes the "tolerances" may have increased but the clearances were the same,and the clearances are what matter,and what get specified.
And to throw a monkey wrench in the thin oil conspiracy the engines using 20 grades were living just as long as their thick oil predecessors.which kinda kyboshed the wearing out faster conspiracy idea.


Well, just to clarify, my 2001 F-150 has the 5.4L Triton. And, on the inside of my door, on the door sticker, it says Windsor right on it. So, I'm not sure what differences there were between the 4.6 and the 5.4... As for the whole debate on the oil grades, I agree about the fact that there are Tritons running both grades, and that they've all lasted the same amount. I have to admit, I got my truck before I was a BITOGer, and had the mindset to run 5w-30, so I did. When became a BITOGer, I had already gotten into the habit of using 5w-30 in my truck and, well, to be totally honest, I guess I just wasn't sure if switching back to 5w-20 would be ok after having used 5w-30 for the time that I did. I mean, being the humble person that I am, I admit that I still am kind of naive sometimes. Do you think it'd be okay for me to switch back to 5w-20 for my next oil change? Or should I just continue running 5w-30. (Or, does it really even matter either way?)
_________________________
'01 F-150 5.4L ~ 120k mi.
- Mag 1 syn 5w-30 w/MC filter
'89 Camaro RS 305 ~ 47k mi.
- PYB 5w-30 w/AC Delco filter

Top
#3265156 - 01/30/14 06:19 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Triton_330]
Ramblejam Offline


Registered: 11/05/13
Posts: 879
Loc: Kentucky
Originally Posted By: Triton_330
it's not like the tc-w3 non-RL is going to hurt anything. Right?


Correct.

Originally Posted By: Triton_330
As for our trucks, one thing I've always wondered is if there really is that big of a deal between running 5w-20 and 5w-30. We have the 2V version, and AFAIK, that (our) generation of F-150 didn't have the ticking problems that the next gen (the 3V) had. I read somewhere that, if not for CAFE (etc.), then the 97-03 F-150s would have been spec'd for 5w-30. There's been some debate on whether or not there was any change in tolerance between 2V and 3V, but honestly, I don't really care. I run 5w-30 and my 2V Triton has never given me troubles. I just wonder, after using 5w-30 for a while, if I could still put in 5w-20 if I wanted to.


5w-20 vs. 5w-30 was, and is, blown way out of proportion.

Personally, I subscribe to the "thin as possible, thick as necessary" mindset when it comes to selecting an oil. With the 5.4L timing chain/tensioner setup, OHC, and high pressure system, I've found a 5w-20 (notably, Mobil 1 High Mileage) to work very well, delivering exceptional cold starts, but also minimal usage and quiet operation at the other end of the temperature spectrum.

Originally Posted By: Triton_330
My F-150 has the notorious dummy oil pressure gauge that will show no pressure if the psi goes under like 5 or 10 psi (can't remember which one it is for sure). When I went to start up my truck to go to Walmart (thus before adding MMO), the pressure gauge read as no pressure for a long time before finally reading normal about halfway to Walmart.


I don't understand -- you have no oil pressure on cold start?

Originally Posted By: Triton_330
But, what would you say about MMO vs, say, lucas fuel additive?


I've ran a couple treatments of Regane High Mileage (PEA cleaner, with a couple of bottles in each tank, so four bottles total) back-to-back, along with a good cleaning of the throttle body (with the appropriate throttle body/air intake cleaner, such as the CRC product I used). Combine that with continued usage of TC-W3, and I'm good to go.

Top
#3265253 - 01/30/14 07:43 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Ramblejam]
Triton_330 Offline


Registered: 12/24/13
Posts: 275
Loc: Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam

Originally Posted By: Triton_330
My F-150 has the notorious dummy oil pressure gauge that will show no pressure if the psi goes under like 5 or 10 psi (can't remember which one it is for sure). When I went to start up my truck to go to Walmart (thus before adding MMO), the pressure gauge read as no pressure for a long time before finally reading normal about halfway to Walmart.


I don't understand -- you have no oil pressure on cold start?


I do have oil pressure, but it is low, and the gauges won't actually display the true psi level (just the Low to High range), and if the psi is like under 10, it just displays as not having any, even though it really does still have oil pressure.

UNLESS... Do you think that there actually is something wrong? The cold start this occurred in was when the outside temp was 20*F with a windchill of like zero. The oil in my truck now is Kendall GT-1 semi-syn 5w-30.

When I start[ed] my truck, the gauge fluctuated between showing normal pressure (half-way-ish between H and L) and then drop to no reading on L. It's like this: I've never seen the pressure read as 1/4 --- it's pretty much either at half-way (normal), or none. I don't know why it does this. It won't display having 1/4 pressure (like, if L=0 and H=1). As soon as the temp gauge reads above C (Cold) by just a little bit, the pressure gauge reads normal for the remainder of operation.


Originally Posted By: Ramblejam

I've ran a couple treatments of Regane High Mileage (PEA cleaner, with a couple of bottles in each tank, so four bottles total), along with a good cleaning of the throttle body (with the appropriate throttle body/air intake cleaner, such as the CRC product I used). Combine that with continued usage of TC-W3, and I'm good to go.


Ok, so, does this PEA have any other benefits than just cleaning, or does it also act as a UCL?
I'm just not sure that I really need the PEA since I will be using the tc-w3 and MMO in my gas. Obviously, the tc-w3 acts as a UCL, and the MMO helps with cleaning (and probably helps a little with fuel stabilization, right?). Does the PEA offer something that using tc-w3 and MMO doesn't offer?


Edited by Triton_330 (01/30/14 07:52 PM)
_________________________
'01 F-150 5.4L ~ 120k mi.
- Mag 1 syn 5w-30 w/MC filter
'89 Camaro RS 305 ~ 47k mi.
- PYB 5w-30 w/AC Delco filter

Top
#3265267 - 01/30/14 07:52 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: dino33]
Clevy Offline


Registered: 11/11/10
Posts: 6988
Loc: Saskatoon canada
Triton.
I don't think PEA has any lubricating effects.
_________________________
2006 Charger RT
Miles x 2 per oil filter

Top
#3265270 - 01/30/14 07:53 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Clevy]
Triton_330 Offline


Registered: 12/24/13
Posts: 275
Loc: Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Triton.
I don't think PEA has any lubricating effects.


Thanks Clevy. I think, then, it'd be alright for me to just stick with using MMO and tc-w3, right?
_________________________
'01 F-150 5.4L ~ 120k mi.
- Mag 1 syn 5w-30 w/MC filter
'89 Camaro RS 305 ~ 47k mi.
- PYB 5w-30 w/AC Delco filter

Top
#3265277 - 01/30/14 08:01 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Triton_330]
Ramblejam Offline


Registered: 11/05/13
Posts: 879
Loc: Kentucky
Originally Posted By: Triton_330
I do have oil pressure, but it is low


How do you know you have low oil pressure? Have you actually hooked up a mechanical gauge to test, or relying upon what you have to make an assessment?

Top
#3265278 - 01/30/14 08:01 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: dino33]
Clevy Offline


Registered: 11/11/10
Posts: 6988
Loc: Saskatoon canada
Triton.
I don't think PEA has any lubricating effects.

PEA is a proven product for cleaning combustion chamber deposits,I don't know that either mmo or tc-w3 have that property and clean when burned.
Tc-w3 and mmo will basically do the same thing in a nutshell and to be honest mixing a fuel additive that contains pea with tc-w3 would accomplish a few things,a multi-purpose additive.
I have been experimenting lately with the prestone line of fuel additives. The labels claim amines in the products.
I mixed a bottle of their fuel system/octane booster with some motomaster tc-w3 and added it to this latest fill up today.
I can't say I notice anything different.
I've got mmo in an inverse oiler on my charger.
Its funny. When that inverse oiler gets completely drained I can feel slightly less pep in the pedal when operating at light pedal pressures. It's almost like the engine has just that bit more "snap" with mmo in the inverse oiler.
I've used a bunch of different stuff in my inverse oiler too. I think they would be ideal for a direct injection engine. Never again paying for manual cleaning valves.
_________________________
2006 Charger RT
Miles x 2 per oil filter

Top
#3265349 - 01/30/14 09:04 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Triton_330]
Ramblejam Offline


Registered: 11/05/13
Posts: 879
Loc: Kentucky
Originally Posted By: Triton_330
UNLESS... Do you think that there actually is something wrong?


Obviously, something isn't right. I'm assuming there are no apparent issues indicating low oil pressure, and this is solely a sender/gauge issue.

Originally Posted By: Triton_330
Does the PEA offer something that using tc-w3 and MMO doesn't offer?


Documented proof of efficacy. http://www.redlineoil.com/content/files/tech/S1-1%20Tech%20Info.pdf

The idea here is to use a PEA-based product to get everything clean, and then use TC-W3 which should keep new deposits from forming, while offering the benefit of fuel system lubrication.

Top
#3265393 - 01/30/14 09:52 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Clevy]
Triton_330 Offline


Registered: 12/24/13
Posts: 275
Loc: Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam

How do you know you have low oil pressure? Have you actually hooked up a mechanical gauge to test, or relying upon what you have to make an assessment?


Well, I'd assume if it didn't have pressure, I would be able to hear/feel/realize that my truck is running badly. But, it was running seemingly fine, no oddball noises, normal throttle response, etc... I don't think I'd have been able to drive a mile without incidence if there was a serious lack of pressure.

Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Originally Posted By: Triton_330
UNLESS... Do you think that there actually is something wrong?


Obviously, something isn't right. I'm assuming there are no apparent issues indicating low oil pressure, and this is solely a sender/gauge issue.


So, if this is true - that it's a sender/guage issue - need I worry? Or not?

Originally Posted By: Ramblejam


Documented proof of efficacy. http://www.redlineoil.com/content/files/tech/S1-1%20Tech%20Info.pdf

The idea here is to use a PEA-based product to get everything clean, and then use TC-W3 which should keep new deposits from forming, while offering the benefit of fuel system lubrication.


Hmmm... Well, I will use it sometime just to see what happens. I don't doubt it works, as a simple glance at the link was enough, but MMO is cheaper ounce per ounce. But, like I said, sometime in the future I'll run some, in combo with the tc-w3.

Originally Posted By: Clevy

PEA is a proven product for cleaning combustion chamber deposits,I don't know that either mmo or tc-w3 have that property and clean when burned.
Tc-w3 and mmo will basically do the same thing in a nutshell and to be honest mixing a fuel additive that contains pea with tc-w3 would accomplish a few things,a multi-purpose additive.
The labels claim amines in the products.
I mixed a bottle of their fuel system/octane booster with some motomaster tc-w3 and added it to this latest fill up today.
I can't say I notice anything different.
I've got mmo in an inverse oiler on my charger.
Its funny. When that inverse oiler gets completely drained I can feel slightly less pep in the pedal when operating at light pedal pressures. It's almost like the engine has just that bit more "snap" with mmo in the inverse oiler.


Like I said, I do believe that it works... but what are amines? And as for your inverse oiler --- So, you run all 3 (PEA, tc-w3, and MMO) at once? I wouldn't mind trying that, but TBH, I really don't have the money for doing it habitually. I mean, haha, I'm in college.
_________________________
'01 F-150 5.4L ~ 120k mi.
- Mag 1 syn 5w-30 w/MC filter
'89 Camaro RS 305 ~ 47k mi.
- PYB 5w-30 w/AC Delco filter

Top
#3265430 - 01/30/14 10:39 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Triton_330]
Ramblejam Offline


Registered: 11/05/13
Posts: 879
Loc: Kentucky
Originally Posted By: Triton_330
So, if this is true - that it's a sender/guage issue - need I worry? Or not?


It's not exactly ideal, is it.

Originally Posted By: Triton_330
but MMO is cheaper ounce per ounce.


I'd certainly hope so. Have you bothered taking a look at the MSDS for MMO? Remember as well that the PEA product isn't for continual usage in this application, but solely to get everything clean (as a good starting point).

With that said, don't get carried away with additives -- spend time making sure all the various vehicle systems/components have been serviced and are operating properly.

Top
#3265465 - 01/30/14 11:35 PM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Ramblejam]
Triton_330 Offline


Registered: 12/24/13
Posts: 275
Loc: Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Originally Posted By: Triton_330
So, if this is true - that it's a sender/guage issue - need I worry? Or not?


It's not exactly ideal, is it.

Originally Posted By: Triton_330
but MMO is cheaper ounce per ounce.


I'd certainly hope so. Have you bothered taking a look at the MSDS for MMO? Remember as well that the PEA product isn't for continual usage in this application, but solely to get everything clean (as a good starting point).

With that said, don't get carried away with additives -- spend time making sure all the various vehicle systems/components have been serviced and are operating properly.


Oh dear... believe me, if my truck was having problems I'd know it. It could well just be the blistering cold. I never have any oil pressure warnings during the spring, summer, or fall - but in the winter if it gets cold enough, then I would expect the blood (oil) to be a little thick, no? So, I am not worried by it.

And when did I ever give the implication that I was going to get carried away with additives? I'm not. I don't have the money to do it in the first place even if I wanted to (but I don't want to).

As for spending time making sure everything is serviced and whatnot... I am constantly doing that. Both out of OCD, and because I'm a gearhead and I just like doing it.

So, no worries on any of the above.

Anyway - yes, I have seen MMO's MSDS. I know that the PEA is stronger, better stuff, but I have experience with MMO and I trust it. What are all the brands of PEAs out there? As far as some quick googling has showed me, it seems like Gumout, STP, Lucas, Star Tron, Techron, Bardahl, Amsoil, Redline, and even Valvoline all offer a fuel additive with PEA in it. I'd bet there's even more than that, too. So, following that, it seems like there's quite a few options to choose from when buying some PEA...
_________________________
'01 F-150 5.4L ~ 120k mi.
- Mag 1 syn 5w-30 w/MC filter
'89 Camaro RS 305 ~ 47k mi.
- PYB 5w-30 w/AC Delco filter

Top
#3265701 - 01/31/14 08:51 AM Re: Upper cylinder lube vs. oil additives [Re: Clevy]
dave5358 Offline


Registered: 04/25/13
Posts: 447
Loc: North Bend
Originally Posted By: Clevy
I've got mmo in an inverse oiler on my charger.
Its funny. When that inverse oiler gets completely drained I can feel slightly less pep in the pedal when operating at light pedal pressures. It's almost like the engine has just that bit more "snap" with mmo in the inverse oiler.

It's not a good idea to leave it drained. It wears the metering seat in the oiler and disturbs the engine vacuum (as in 'leak'). If you are out of MMO or whatever, then disconnect the oiler and plug the hose to the engine.
_________________________
2006 Forester XT
2008 Corolla LE

Top
Page 7 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >