FINALLY! MolySlip E Virgin Sample Analysis Report...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 24, 2002
Messages
349
Location
Quebec, Canada
The moment most of you have been waiting for! Here is the virgin sample of the MolySlip E Oil Supplement found on the shelves of Crappy Tire.

Manufacturer: MolySlip
Product: MolySlip 'E' Oil Supplement 300ml Can
Date Processed: 08/21/2002
Chemical Lab: Hewitt/CAT - Montréal, Québec
Sample Status: New, never been used inside engine.
Sample amount: approx. 125ml

Numbers expressed are in parts per million (PPM) except for Viscosity:

Copper: 0
Iron: 50
Chrome/Chromium: 1
Lead: 0
Aluminum: 156
Silicon: 59
Molybdenum: 9069
Sodium: 17
Magnesium: 0
Tin: 0
Boron: 0
Nickel: 0
Zinc: 1975
Calcium: 4621
Phosphor: 1052
Potassium: 3
Water: NIL
Viscosity @ 100C: 22

Comments by Hewitt/CAT: "Iron, Aluminum, and Silicon are high for a new additive. We recommend you to refer to your dealer for a safe use of this additive in your engine."

There you go guys! I think the high amounts of Aluminum and Iron are strictly coming from the can that the additive came from. Unfortunately, it's hard to tell unless MolySlip re-markets this product using plastic bottles.

Here are some pics that I posted a while back:

 -


Oil sample taken.
 -


 -


 -


What do you think guys?

Regards,

Oz

[ August 21, 2003, 01:12 PM: Message edited by: Patman ]
 
Have you decided if you're gonna run this additive? I'd love to see an analysis with this mixed with 4 or 5 quarts of oil and run for a few thousand miles. I wonder if that elevated silicon level would still show, or when diluted with the rest of the oil would it be much more normal? It also looks like they've mixed it with a very thick viscosity of oil, which is strange because I emailed them and they said the carrier oil was 10w30. Why would they even bother putting it in a carrier oil? Why not just package it in a smaller bottle without that carrier oil? Is there a technical reason for why they do that, or do they simply want to make it look like you're getting a bigger bottle for your money?

[ August 22, 2002, 11:24 AM: Message edited by: Patman ]
 
As I suspected, it contained much more than just moly in suspension. It has a huge concentration of moly and a LOT of ZDDP.

I theorize the aluminum comes not from the can, but from an antiwear additive called alkoxy aluminum; similar to the borate AW's.

The silicon may not be sand, but a high level of anti-foam. If it is in a concentration much too high. If it is anti-foam, it should have only shown up as about 1-3 ppm.

Since the concentration of additives are so high, I would not use more than 10ml per oil change.

In fact, this stuff looks more like an additive CONCENTRATION that a blender would receive from an additive company.

What concerns me is there may be some "antagonistic" effects between the Moly and ZDDP, since the ZDDP is in such high concentration.

I think the analysis was correct, CONTACT THE DEALER FOR USAGE.

And if you do use it, have an oil analysis done at 1k after addition.
 
Patman -> I don't mind trying this product. However, I am recently in transition in trading my Protege for an Acura. So, my Protege Delvac analysis has been cancelled. I'll have to restart with the Acura equipped with the B16A 1st gen. I'm thinking of running Delvac 1 twice on the Acura first before adding the MolySlip - which would be on the third. I guess Delvac would be a good choice since it does not carry any Moly in it. Also, after speaking with one of the lab coats of Hewitt, he said the concentration of Aluminum, Iron, and Silicone will be diluted - since only 300ml of MolySlip will be mixed with 3.7 litres of motor oil. I'm assuming this goes for the additives as well, especially the Moly. I wouldn't be surprised if the reading of the Moly will be in the hundreds after adding it with motor oil.

MolaKule -> Let me get this straight. You want me to run the Delvac 1 for roughly 4000km, then add MolySlip, and run it for 1000km, drain and analyze?

Regards,

Oz
 
Hey,

Don't sweat it, guys! I've been wanting to do this all along anyway. I think the cost of the analysis is pretty cheap and worthy, rather than going to an out-of-town lab. Although, I really would've liked at least Terry to have conducted the test as he may have filled us in on more info (again, I had a hard time with the Hewitt Lab Coats).

Actually, maybe Bob and/or Terry can comment on the results above - especially concerning MolaKule's assessment of the additives possibly reacting against the MOS2.

Regards,

Oz
 
offtopic.gif
Patman -> I'm getting a 1991 Acura Integra GS. The engine has been swapped with a 1st gen. B16A. People will call me crazy, but I just love 'em G2 Integras...

grin.gif


Oz
 
Molakule, but wouldn't it be diluted when mixed with oil?...so added to 5L of oil, it would now be 546ppm. Around what Red Line has, IIRC.
 
What I am suggesting to anyone who may want to use this MolySlip is to use only 10ml max per application (10 ml/ 4 liters of oil). Then do an oil analysis at 1k miles after addition to oil, no matter what the oil or engine miles.

To tell you the truth, I would feel much safer with the Schaeffer's additive #132 if I were to add any moly additive at all.

Most of the ZDDP's supplied by the chemical companies are blended in as an ester and when ester concentrations are high, you may effect seal swell.
 
Jason,
"Molakule, but wouldn't it be diluted when mixed with oil?...so added to 5L of oil, it would now be 546ppm. Around what Red Line has, IIRC."

The problem is that your oil already has ZDDP and most likely that concentration is just right for the formulation. Adding more ZDDP might create an even greater antagonistic effect for the the Moly. Antagonistic effects means that the ZDDP might attack the MOs2 and render it incapable of attaching to the metal and creating that important "organometallic film" for
boundary lubrication.

My personal opinion is that the amount of moly should be in the range of approx. 80 ppm to 450 ppm and anything higher is just, well, overkill.
 
It's definitely nice to get analysis results on virgin samples of stuff like this! Thanks Oz!

cheers.gif


By the way, what Acura are you getting? Is it new? If it's not new, be sure to use Auto-rx on it to clean out the previous owner's oil mistakes!
tongue.gif
 
Oz.
Thanks for running the Moly test but as Molakule suggests,easy does it with the stuff reason why?I have a Canadian aquaintance that used it in just a 79 350 Chevy Corvette Motor,,now he burns a quart of oil evey 500 miles. Did not use near that much oil before. Does he have contributing factors he is not telling me? I do not know. A mind reader I am not just don't imo throw caution to the wind here. Thats a pretty healthy dose of additive it looks to this untrained eye.And why so much silicone added?10-15 seem would have been plenty. Again,this looks to be a concentrate .

[ August 25, 2002, 06:49 AM: Message edited by: dragboat ]
 
Manufacturer's of engine oils spend gazillions of dollars developing, refining and testing oil base stocks and additives to come up with a superior oil. That said. A finished engine oil is very much like that of a cake mix. Say a cake mix calls for 2 eggs; we then add 10 eggs to the cake mix. We will no longer have a cake, as we know it, with this new formulation. The same is very much true with engine oils. Many times they are a very finely balanced blend of additives and if that balance is disrupted by the addition of "more this, more that' the whole is now less than what we started with. Especially so with the newer Group II and Group III base stocks as they are much less chemically amenable to increased additive packages..
On top of all this is the fact that by adding additives to a complete formulation, you have now made a new chemical and the original manufacturer of the oil is going to deny any responsibility for the new chemical product; i.e. his oil additized..
Bottom line: just buy good high quality oils and you will have 'the best' that money can buy..
George Morrison, STLE CLS
 
I'm with George. The variations in chemical formulations, as Molakule also mentions, can seriously disturb what was originally designed into the oil.
 
The folks doing oil formulating typically have Phds in organic chemistry or chemical engineering and decades of experience. What makes you think you can add a can of snake oil and improve on their best work? Here's another way to look at it ...do you think someone can come in off the street and do your job better than you can without any specific training?

If you want a better oil, get a top of the line synthetic or very high quality petroleum oil like Schaeffers. Don't start playing organic chemist in your garage ...you may not like the end result.

TooSlick
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top