I have been doing some research on this product and If it does what it claims it might be worth giving it a shot. It would be used in my short tripper Accord 2.4 with 121K miles. Oil would most likely be TGMO 0w20. I have a couple of questions, would it be best to put this in toward the end of an OCI or is it ok to run with a fresh oil change for 6 months? Filter would either be a Fram Ultra or Honda OEM. Is it possible for this to clog up a high filtration filter like the Fram Ultra? Also would the additive break down and end up sludging up or harming the engine over the full 6 month OCI. Reason I would use this is to help the numerous short trips and starts ups the car sees, so for that split second the engine has no pressure there would be a barrier of protection. Also, would a full bottle be necessary, it would be the first time using it, would it compete with the add pack of TGMO, would it thin or thicken to oil to any degree? I know, lots of quesitons...but thanks as always for the help and expertise guys. This additive seems almost too good to be true.
Liqui Moly MOS2...
- Thread starter gregk24
- Start date
- Status
First, put it in at the beginning of your 6 month oil change. Second, no worries with high efficiency oil filter. The colloidal moly is much smaller than what the filter can catch. Lastly, MOS2 will not sludge up your engine. I use for one year oil changes and no sludge issues with mixed driving. I mean if you far exceed the capability of any host oil, having the moly in there won't prevent or accelerate sludge formation. But 6 months is not too long for any of today's quality oils unless an engine is contaminating the oil excessively for some reason like extremely short trips in very cold weather.
How much benefit over using just the oil is anyone's guess, but I like the potential fuel economy and antiwear and worst case scenario (complete loss of oil pressure) protection.
How much benefit over using just the oil is anyone's guess, but I like the potential fuel economy and antiwear and worst case scenario (complete loss of oil pressure) protection.
Originally Posted By: bmwtechguy
First, put it in at the beginning of your 6 month oil change. Second, no worries with high efficiency oil filter. The colloidal moly is much smaller than what the filter can catch. Lastly, MOS2 will not sludge up your engine. I use for one year oil changes and no sludge issues with mixed driving. I mean if you far exceed the capability of any host oil, having the moly in there won't prevent or accelerate sludge formation. But 6 months is not too long for any of today's quality oils unless an engine is contaminating the oil excessively for some reason like extremely short trips in very cold weather.
How much benefit over using just the oil is anyone's guess, but I like the potential fuel economy and antiwear and worst case scenario (complete loss of oil pressure) protection.
Where is there proof that its too small for the filter to catch? I was just looking at the VOA of the MOS2 and it listed 0.9 for insoluables!
First, put it in at the beginning of your 6 month oil change. Second, no worries with high efficiency oil filter. The colloidal moly is much smaller than what the filter can catch. Lastly, MOS2 will not sludge up your engine. I use for one year oil changes and no sludge issues with mixed driving. I mean if you far exceed the capability of any host oil, having the moly in there won't prevent or accelerate sludge formation. But 6 months is not too long for any of today's quality oils unless an engine is contaminating the oil excessively for some reason like extremely short trips in very cold weather.
How much benefit over using just the oil is anyone's guess, but I like the potential fuel economy and antiwear and worst case scenario (complete loss of oil pressure) protection.
Where is there proof that its too small for the filter to catch? I was just looking at the VOA of the MOS2 and it listed 0.9 for insoluables!
Originally Posted By: gregk24
Where is there proof that its too small for the filter to catch? I was just looking at the VOA of the MOS2 and it listed 0.9 for insoluables!
Greg: Oil filters are tested for efficiency for different size particles. For example Purolator claims '99.9% efficiency for 20 micron particles'. The efficiency drops off sharply as particle size decreases. The same Purolator filter is 'rated' for 10 micron particles which usually means that filter will catch 50% of particles of 10 micron size. By the time you reach 1 micron size particles, oil filter efficiency is pretty close to zero.
MoS2 used in an oil suspension should be in the .2-.3 micron size (or, at least, that's the particle size used in Molykote). And, the particle size may actually reduce (the material breaks up) in use. You would probably need to see an 'after' UOA report to verify this.
Where is there proof that its too small for the filter to catch? I was just looking at the VOA of the MOS2 and it listed 0.9 for insoluables!
Greg: Oil filters are tested for efficiency for different size particles. For example Purolator claims '99.9% efficiency for 20 micron particles'. The efficiency drops off sharply as particle size decreases. The same Purolator filter is 'rated' for 10 micron particles which usually means that filter will catch 50% of particles of 10 micron size. By the time you reach 1 micron size particles, oil filter efficiency is pretty close to zero.
MoS2 used in an oil suspension should be in the .2-.3 micron size (or, at least, that's the particle size used in Molykote). And, the particle size may actually reduce (the material breaks up) in use. You would probably need to see an 'after' UOA report to verify this.
Originally Posted By: gregk24
Reason I would use this is to help the numerous short trips and starts ups the car sees, so for that split second the engine has no pressure there would be a barrier of protection.
Your engine doesn't care and won't wear out prematurely because of this. You use high quality synthetics and will not have a lube-caused issue in your engine's lifespan.
Use MoS2 if you want to try it though - you may still find benefits (smoothness/quiet? mpg?)
Reason I would use this is to help the numerous short trips and starts ups the car sees, so for that split second the engine has no pressure there would be a barrier of protection.
Your engine doesn't care and won't wear out prematurely because of this. You use high quality synthetics and will not have a lube-caused issue in your engine's lifespan.
Use MoS2 if you want to try it though - you may still find benefits (smoothness/quiet? mpg?)
I have good experience with it in my '95 F150 5.8L
Originally Posted By: surfstar
Originally Posted By: gregk24
Reason I would use this is to help the numerous short trips and starts ups the car sees, so for that split second the engine has no pressure there would be a barrier of protection.
Your engine doesn't care and won't wear out prematurely because of this. You use high quality synthetics and will not have a lube-caused issue in your engine's lifespan.
Use MoS2 if you want to try it though - you may still find benefits (smoothness/quiet? mpg?)
I agree, very few oils today would NEED an extra additive, I just thought the extra moly might be of some benefit in one way or another.I was just concerned that it might do more harm than good over the course of a full 6 month OCI.
Originally Posted By: gregk24
Reason I would use this is to help the numerous short trips and starts ups the car sees, so for that split second the engine has no pressure there would be a barrier of protection.
Your engine doesn't care and won't wear out prematurely because of this. You use high quality synthetics and will not have a lube-caused issue in your engine's lifespan.
Use MoS2 if you want to try it though - you may still find benefits (smoothness/quiet? mpg?)
I agree, very few oils today would NEED an extra additive, I just thought the extra moly might be of some benefit in one way or another.I was just concerned that it might do more harm than good over the course of a full 6 month OCI.
Originally Posted By: gregk24
Where is there proof that its too small for the filter to catch? I was just looking at the VOA of the MOS2 and it listed 0.9 for insoluables!
The average particle size is 0.3 microns. Liqui-Moly has provided the information and it has been verified numerous times over the last 40 years.
http://www.liqui-moly.de/liquimoly/mediendb.nsf/gfx2/15EAA17DDA1A968CC12573B4005077A5/$file/1011%20Oil%20Additiv_EN.pdf
Even the most efficient and expensive oil filters will not trap particles under 1 micron in size.
Where is there proof that its too small for the filter to catch? I was just looking at the VOA of the MOS2 and it listed 0.9 for insoluables!
The average particle size is 0.3 microns. Liqui-Moly has provided the information and it has been verified numerous times over the last 40 years.
http://www.liqui-moly.de/liquimoly/mediendb.nsf/gfx2/15EAA17DDA1A968CC12573B4005077A5/$file/1011%20Oil%20Additiv_EN.pdf
Even the most efficient and expensive oil filters will not trap particles under 1 micron in size.
Originally Posted By: gregk24
I agree, very few oils today would NEED an extra additive, I just thought the extra moly might be of some benefit in one way or another.I was just concerned that it might do more harm than good over the course of a full 6 month OCI.
Nah, its from a reputable company and won't do any harm and most reports (or user suggestions?) say that it takes hundreds of miles for the plating effect to take place. A long initial OCI is fine.
I'm likely to use some again in the future to see if I do or don't notice any differences - couldn't really tell last time.
I agree, very few oils today would NEED an extra additive, I just thought the extra moly might be of some benefit in one way or another.I was just concerned that it might do more harm than good over the course of a full 6 month OCI.
Nah, its from a reputable company and won't do any harm and most reports (or user suggestions?) say that it takes hundreds of miles for the plating effect to take place. A long initial OCI is fine.
I'm likely to use some again in the future to see if I do or don't notice any differences - couldn't really tell last time.
Originally Posted By: gregk24
Originally Posted By: surfstar
Originally Posted By: gregk24
Reason I would use this is to help the numerous short trips and starts ups the car sees, so for that split second the engine has no pressure there would be a barrier of protection.
Your engine doesn't care and won't wear out prematurely because of this. You use high quality synthetics and will not have a lube-caused issue in your engine's lifespan.
Use MoS2 if you want to try it though - you may still find benefits (smoothness/quiet? mpg?)
I agree, very few oils today would NEED an extra additive, I just thought the extra moly might be of some benefit in one way or another.I was just concerned that it might do more harm than good over the course of a full 6 month OCI.
It will do no harm, regardless if it's a 6-month OCI or some other duration. Towards the end of your first MoS2 use, you might notice the oil is actually getting lighter in color since much of the MoS2 has attached itself to metal parts.
Your engine won't notice the brief instant in which there is no oil pressure on start-up. A few vehicles (my Subaru!) actually permit you to crank but not start the vehicle to build oil pressure prior to starting, but I don't know anyone who uses that feature. The "engine doesn't care" comment misses the point - most wear on an engine occurs in the first few minutes of operation. The oil may be pumping but it is not lubricating as well as it might. Yes, modern synthetics are much better in the start-up department, but they're not perfect, they do drain down, and they don't flow as well cold as hot.
With either synthetic or dino oil, the accelerated wear at start-up won't make your engine wear out prematurely, in part because car makers factor it into their estimated product life. Terms like 'prematurely' or 'lifespan' are at least as slippery as the oil. Does it mean the warranty period, body-rust-out period or what? If you could reduce or eliminate start-up wear, your engine's 'lifespan' might be significantly increased and MoS2 may do this for you.
After MoS2 has been in the engine for a bit - maybe 500 miles - it forms a plating on bearing surfaces. This plating doesn't drain down into the pan when you stop the engine. On the next start-up, MoS2 is lubricating from the very first movement of the internal parts - about what you would expect from a dry lubricant. So, MoS2 should be of some benefit. Other benefits might include reduced parasitic or friction heat output, more efficient engine, limp-home protection.
Originally Posted By: surfstar
Originally Posted By: gregk24
Reason I would use this is to help the numerous short trips and starts ups the car sees, so for that split second the engine has no pressure there would be a barrier of protection.
Your engine doesn't care and won't wear out prematurely because of this. You use high quality synthetics and will not have a lube-caused issue in your engine's lifespan.
Use MoS2 if you want to try it though - you may still find benefits (smoothness/quiet? mpg?)
I agree, very few oils today would NEED an extra additive, I just thought the extra moly might be of some benefit in one way or another.I was just concerned that it might do more harm than good over the course of a full 6 month OCI.
It will do no harm, regardless if it's a 6-month OCI or some other duration. Towards the end of your first MoS2 use, you might notice the oil is actually getting lighter in color since much of the MoS2 has attached itself to metal parts.
Your engine won't notice the brief instant in which there is no oil pressure on start-up. A few vehicles (my Subaru!) actually permit you to crank but not start the vehicle to build oil pressure prior to starting, but I don't know anyone who uses that feature. The "engine doesn't care" comment misses the point - most wear on an engine occurs in the first few minutes of operation. The oil may be pumping but it is not lubricating as well as it might. Yes, modern synthetics are much better in the start-up department, but they're not perfect, they do drain down, and they don't flow as well cold as hot.
With either synthetic or dino oil, the accelerated wear at start-up won't make your engine wear out prematurely, in part because car makers factor it into their estimated product life. Terms like 'prematurely' or 'lifespan' are at least as slippery as the oil. Does it mean the warranty period, body-rust-out period or what? If you could reduce or eliminate start-up wear, your engine's 'lifespan' might be significantly increased and MoS2 may do this for you.
After MoS2 has been in the engine for a bit - maybe 500 miles - it forms a plating on bearing surfaces. This plating doesn't drain down into the pan when you stop the engine. On the next start-up, MoS2 is lubricating from the very first movement of the internal parts - about what you would expect from a dry lubricant. So, MoS2 should be of some benefit. Other benefits might include reduced parasitic or friction heat output, more efficient engine, limp-home protection.
I'm bummed that either USPS or Blackstone Labs has lost my first UOA with Liqui Moly MOS2.
Sent to Blackstone April 7, and still not received!
Sent to Blackstone April 7, and still not received!
- Status
Similar threads
