Molybdenum in oil?

[FetchFar]

I like what a Pennzoil rep said in the bitog q&a post:

"Motor oil formulations are a delicate synergistic balance of base oils and additives. When you add in one, you must adjust the amount of another. If an additive was added to specifically increase one area of performance, another area of performance might suffer. The Pennzoil Platinum® Full Synthetic motor oils with PurePlus™ Technology offer Complete Protection. We are confident in the overall balance of our formulation and would not change it to incorporate additional moly."

If only they would release results of the the SN/GF-5/dexos1/etc. tests to the public! Then we could compare which oil sways the compromise in favor of wear, deposits, low-temp viscosity, etc. .... Still, using massive moly might not hurt much and might just do something for start-up and cold-running wear like Idemitsu (and maybe Schaeffer) favors.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
I like what a Pennzoil rep said in the bitog q&a post:

"Motor oil formulations are a delicate synergistic balance of base oils and additives. When you add in one, you must adjust the amount of another. If an additive was added to specifically increase one area of performance, another area of performance might suffer. The Pennzoil Platinum® Full Synthetic motor oils with PurePlus™ Technology offer Complete Protection. We are confident in the overall balance of our formulation and would not change it to incorporate additional moly."

If only they would release results of the the SN/GF-5/dexos1/etc. tests to the public! Then we could compare which oil sways the compromise in favor of wear, deposits, low-temp viscosity, etc. .... Still, using massive moly might not hurt much and might just do something for start-up and cold-running wear like Idemitsu (and maybe Schaeffer) favors.


I have been telling people on this site the same thing since 2002.

Quote:
How much moly is used depends on how much friction modification you want or need, the quality of base oils, and the mix of components in the PI package.

 

[FetchFar]

Well, that certainly makes us not want to throw in some MOS2 lubro-moly, when oil formulators have already given us the synergistic optimal blend, whatever their optimal goal is. I feel a little better in letting Idemitsu or Schaeffer throw in lots of moly, not me.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Hullthumper
Okay what about the effects of Moly on gearcases that call for motor oil but has wet clutch with friction lining. For instance my boats transmission/gearcase/reverse gear calls for Sae 20 CD grade oil but has a cone clutch with a friction material on it similiar to brake lining. Could the moly be too slippery so to speak. Seems that I have read oils with moly should not be used in motorcycles for this reason.

For wet-clutch applications you need special oil of which surface friction falls in a range. JASO has specs categories (MA, MA1, MA2, and MB) with different surface-friction ranges for different motorcycle wet-clutch applications. For transmissions with wet clutches, it's also important to have the right surface-friction range and ATFs will specify the surface-friction range for a given spec.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: FetchFar
I haven't seen anything with as much moly as Mazda SN 0w-20 at 600 ppm. (Schaeffer runs 300 ppm for comparison). Can I assume the Mazda is trinuclear?

I can't see why any formulator would use 600 ppm of trinuclear moly. With a concentration that high, I would assume it is not trinuclear.

Just seems odd that Idemitsu, the makers of Mazda's 0w-20, chooses to depart from conventional wisdom and load it up with 2 to 6 times as much moly as anybody else out there. For example, if MolaKule or any group of tribologist/chemists were to formulate the lowest-wear oil they could, why would they use so much moly (600ppm)? Does Idemitsu know something we don't?

Idemitsu and other Japanese oil companies use Adeka's Sakura-Lube moly, which is old technology and not trinuclear. Adeka Sakura-Lube moly isn't very effective and requires high concentrations to work. This leads to increased ash and engine deposits. Trinuclear moly patented and manufactured by ExxonMobil & Shell's additive company Infineum is a very potent moly, requiring no more than 100 - 200 ppm Mo.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
SOPUS uses Infineum tri-nuclear moly in all of their products.

How do you know, as it's propriety info?

I work with the 5 largest additive suppliers and ten other minor additive suppliers in the world and communicate with their top additive scientists/developers.

I know who supplies additives to Valvoline, EXOM, SOPUS, Castrol, etc.

Quote:
The moly in PYB is probably junk -- a very cheap kind of moly not manufactured by Infineum, hardly effective. You probably get better protection with 50 ppm Mo of Infineum trinuclear moly than with 500 ppm Mo of PYB moly. I am saying it based on my experience with PYB 5W-20 SN in my engine -- I didn't like its performance.

Moly in PYB is junk? I respectfully disagree with your assessment.

Thanks, it's good to know. However, I still have my doubts. I would never call trinuclear moly junk.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Originally Posted By: Hullthumper
Okay what about the effects of Moly on gearcases that call for motor oil but has wet clutch with friction lining. For instance my boats transmission/gearcase/reverse gear calls for Sae 20 CD grade oil but has a cone clutch with a friction material on it similiar to brake lining. Could the moly be too slippery so to speak. Seems that I have read oils with moly should not be used in motorcycles for this reason.

For wet-clutch applications you need special oil of which surface friction falls in a range. JASO has specs categories (MA, MA1, MA2, and MB) with different surface-friction ranges for different motorcycle wet-clutch applications. For transmissions with wet clutches, it's also important to have the right surface-friction range and ATFs will specify the surface-friction range for a given spec.

And to add, for everything else, smaller the surface friction -- as in as close to zero (0) as possible -- the better it is. So, for everything else, moly and other friction modifiers are a good thing.

 

[FetchFar]

You must be referring to Infineum's trimer moly presentation slides ... Based on that, I'd pick a trimer moly oil first. Good info. I like the way they directly address Sequence IVA wear results. ... They also say trimer moly works well with zddp. And that any trimer moly levels above about 60 ppm are sufficient. Nice to know you don't need much.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
You must be referring to Infineum's trimer moly presentation slides ... Based on that, I'd pick a trimer moly oil first. Good info. I like the way they directly address Sequence IVA wear results. ... They also say trimer moly works well with zddp. And that any trimer moly levels above about 60 ppm are sufficient. Nice to know you don't need much.

Yes, that PDF presentation describes the Infineum's patented trinuclear (trimer) moly. Call it trinuclear or trimer. If you are a US president, call it trinucular.

They don't explicitly say that 60 ppm is sufficient but they say ppm levels as low as 50 ppm provide antiwear and friction-modifier benefits. Also, 200 ppm Mo of trinuclear moly activates at a lower temperature than 60 ppm Mo of trinuclear moly according to that presentation.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
For example, if MolaKule or any group of tribologist/chemists were to formulate the lowest-wear oil they could, why would they use so much moly (600ppm)?

I believe that Mola has indicated that above certain concentrations, moly will function as an AW compound, as well as being a friction modifier as it is in lower concentrations.

 

[FetchFar]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: FetchFar
For example, if MolaKule or any group of tribologist/chemists were to formulate the lowest-wear oil they could, why would they use so much moly (600ppm)?

I believe that Mola has indicated that above certain concentrations, moly will function as an AW compound, as well as being a friction modifier as it is in lower concentrations.


Maybe thats what Idemitsu (Mazda moly oil) claims are based on. Wish they would provide some proof to back up their claim of lower wear when the engine is still cold, certainly a critical time to prevent mixed-boundary conditions wear. Yep, as long as lots of moly (600 ppm anyway) doesn't ruin motor oils other nice to have properties, then anti-wear may actually improve.

 

[Garak]

I wouldn't worry too terribly much on the claim. All oils have their marketing claims, some just pushed more than others. If the oil is still approved for the application, I can't see a problem.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Garak
I believe that Mola has indicated that above certain concentrations, moly will function as an AW compound, as well as being a friction modifier as it is in lower concentrations.

Moly is simultaneously an AW (antiwear) additive & an EP (extreme-pressure) additive & an FM (friction-modifier) additive & an antioxidant additive.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: FetchFar
I haven't seen anything with as much moly as Mazda SN 0w-20 at 600 ppm. (Schaeffer runs 300 ppm for comparison). Can I assume the Mazda is trinuclear?

I can't see why any formulator would use 600 ppm of trinuclear moly. With a concentration that high, I would assume it is not trinuclear.


Just seems odd that Idemitsu, the makers of Mazda's 0w-20, chooses to depart from conventional wisdom and load it up with 2 to 6 times as much moly as anybody else out there. For example, if MolaKule or any group of tribologist/chemists were to formulate the lowest-wear oil they could, why would they use so much moly (600ppm)? Does Idemitsu know something we don't?


The so called 'boutique oils' use even MORE moly (of the NON trinuclear variety) than that! Some up to 900-1000 ppm+!

 

[FetchFar]

Originally Posted By: Garak
I wouldn't worry too terribly much on the claim. All oils have their marketing claims, some just pushed more than others. If the oil is still approved for the application, I can't see a problem.


My goal is to identify which oil has the least wear. If I wanted to just use any oil that passed the SN/GF5/dexos1 etc. minimum requirements, that would be as easy as reading the labels. Too bad the specs and performance tests are pass/fail, and not graded publicly. It would be nice to know, for example, which oil is best at the Sequence IVA test. Maybe Idemitsu loads it up with lots of moly and aces that test better than other oils, as their marketing statements seem to imply. (Infineum's trimer moly slide show directly claims to cause very good Seq IVA results.)

 

[FetchFar]

There is one oil company that does use Sequence IVA right on the front of the bottle. Castrol Synblend 5w-30 boasts it got an 18 nm wear score by saying "5x better wear*" and the asterisk noted the Seq IVA test. The high-moly Mazda Idemitsu 0w-20 claims something similar in general statements, and it would be nice to know if they got their results below 18 nm !

 

[KCJeep]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
There is one oil company that does use Sequence IVA right on the front of the bottle. Castrol Synblend 5w-30 boasts it got an 18 nm wear score by saying "5x better wear*" and the asterisk noted the Seq IVA test. The high-moly Mazda Idemitsu 0w-20 claims something similar in general statements, and it would be nice to know if they got their results below 18 nm !


Interesting info. I bought an OCI's worth of the Castrol syn blend 5w30 for the KIA a few weeks ago, but I figured the 5x wear protection stuff was just typical marketing fluff. I went and looked at one of the bottles, sure enough they reference the Sequence IVA test on it.

 

[FetchFar]

Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Interesting info. I bought an OCI's worth of the Castrol syn blend 5w30 for the KIA a few weeks ago, but I figured the 5x wear protection stuff was just typical marketing fluff. I went and looked at one of the bottles, sure enough they reference the Sequence IVA test on it.


Yep, the SN (and SM,SL) wear limits on the IVA are 90 nm (microns) cam wear, so that works out to 18 nm for the Synblend, a good score I think. The only other published Seq IVA result I know of is from the old SM Valvoline Synpower 5w-30, claiming a close 20 nm. Assuming scores like that are typical, don't know. Schaeffer 5w-30 with moly at 300 ppm (high) has a Sequence IIIG result at 1/6 the allowed level, not the same as Seq IVA, but gives us some idea of whats possible at least.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
My goal is to identify which oil has the least wear.

Even knowing the test results may not directly correlate to wear, particularly in different engine families.

 

[FetchFar]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: FetchFar
My goal is to identify which oil has the least wear.

Even knowing the test results may not directly correlate to wear, particularly in different engine families.


All we have is the engine tests. If our search is evidence-based, its the best evidence we have an oil will perform in the mixed-boundary layer valvetrain environment nearly ALL engines have. Interestingly, SN tests use a Nissan OHC I4 for the Seq IVA, and the venerable Buick 3800 V6 for the IIIG, and in both cases wear on the cams are measured. I think they were trying to look at two representative engine types.