STP 4-Cylinder Oil Treatment

[TallPaul]

This is a complimentary analysis from site supporter/member, “Stinky Peterson” and the Butler Cat Lab:

STP 4-Cylinder Oil Treatment (Red 15 ounce bottle).

Elemental Analysis (ppm)
Copper: 0
Iron: 1
Chrome: 0
Nickel: 0
Titanium: 0
Silver: 0
Lead: 0
Tin: 1
Alum: 0
Silicon: 0
Sodium: 0
Potassium: 0
Moly: 0
Boron: 0
Barium: 0
Calcium: 1371
Magnesium: 5
Mangan: 0
Phosphorus: 1814
Zinc: 1959

Viscosity cSt @ 100C: 108.0

Ferrous Debris: 31

I called STP today and a tech person there told me that the blue bottle, regular STP, has more ZDDP, but not by much, and it is about 500 cSt!

I should note that I also sent a sample of this stuff to ANA Labs (I'd be using Butler Cat, but have these prepaids to use up) so in a couple weeks I will post those results and we will see what the variation is.

Anyway, for about $2 a 15 oz bottle, does this stuff look worthwhile as an additive to boost zddp?

Particularly interesting would be to compare to Synpower Oil Treatment which is $4 a 15 oz bottle, but has more stuff in it. However the two analysis done on it (both on this forum) are quite different:

Parameter: Blackstone VOA/ Unknown VOA ; Valvoline Tech Data

Moly: 3481 / 234 ; not given
Boron: 1367 / 289 ; not given
Calcium: 1719 / 85 ; 1020
Magnesium: 2718 / 24 ; 810
Phosphorus: 2109 / 1578 ; not given
Zinc: 2626 / 1565 ; 2700 ; not given
Vis cSt @100C: 188 / 233 ; 100

As you can see, the Synpower results are very confusing. I would be inclined to trust Blackstone over even Valvoline's data.

 

[fuel tanker man]

Yeah, and the plot thickens... or thins, as it were...

The STP folks told me on two seperate occasions that the viscosity of the STP 4 cylinder oil treatment was 200cst at 100 deg C. That's twice as thick as the product tests out to be...

Paul, didn't one of the folks at STP tell you that the 4 cylinder treatment was 100 cst @ 100 C? Which would pretty much square with Butler's numbers...

Anyway, it looks benign enough. There are VII's in this formula which I guess don't show up in an oil analysis. The tech told me that one bottle of the 4 cylinder treatment would make 4 to 5 quarts of a 10W30 into a 10W40 weight oil. 'Course that was the same guy who said the viscosity was 200cst--so who knows?

Is it possible to get further comment from Stinky regarding this viscosity issue? I was thinking of mixing a half bottle (7.5 ounces) into my motorcycle's 3 quart sump, with 20W50 Havoline. By my bent slide rule calculations

, this would raise zinc by around 72 ppm and phos by around 68 ppm--in an oil with 1030 and 940 ppm of each, respectively.

But get this: The STP guy said not to use this product in a wet clutch application. I asked why. He didn't know (just reading his cue cards I guess). There's no moly in there. What else could be threatening to a wet clutch?

Dan

 

[TallPaul]

Yep, the STP rep I talked to last week said 100 cSt. But then look at the Synpower data above. Both VOAs are around 200 but the company says 100.

Not sure Stinky could tell us any thing more on the viscosity than the VOA results unless he ran it again, but we will see what the ANA results show.

The viscosity blending calculator told me a whole bottle of the 100 cSt would make a 10w30 into a 10w40.

As for the STP phone rep, you may find that some of those folks are more knowledgeble than others, so it pays to call several times throughout the week.

Still I think there is too much VII for the zddp levels you will get. Too bad they discontinued the STP 6000-mile Oil Extender which had zddp and was about as thin as regular oil.

Hey, I just bottled a sample of Synpower Oil Treatment to send Stinky. I notice the Synpower is much darker than the STP and seems to pour a bit faster (tipping in baby food jars at 60F). Am trying in the 45F celler, then the fridge and freezer next.

As for your motorcycle, I just wonder if you could run HDMO 15w40 in it. HDMO has a lot more zddp than PCMO.

 

[ebaker]

GM EOS and Synpower oil treatments look like a better deal, even though they're thicker.
1 oz/qt EOS would add about 170 ppm ZDDP.
1 oz/qt Synpower would add about 45ppm ZDDP and 105 ppm moly.
1 oz/qt of STP would add about 35 ppm ZDDP.

 

[Bobert]

Paul I'm glad you sent in a third sample so it will clear some of the confusion.

Synpower Oil Treatment VOA #2

We know the value for this sample is Saybolt Universal Seconds.

SUS Viscosity @ 210F 188.8

Which actually converts to:

40.6cSt@100C

Synpower Oil Treatment VOA #1

Motorbikes VOA I'm not sure of...(If it is cSt then it certainly doesn't jive with the 2nd VOA above, or the formula has radically changed)

VI @ 100c 232.7
Anyways, lets hope the third sample will clear things up as far as additives and viscosity.

 

[fuel tanker man]

Thanks for all of the work and thought you guys are putting into this.

Maybe the STP 4cyl isn't stout enough to bother with... I don't know.

I like the GM EOS, but what's up with all the sodium in that stuff? Doesn't too much sodium cause corrosion?

Dan

 

[Bobert]

Yeah I guess they round to 210F instead of 212F for whatever reason. I don't think it would change the conversion that much. It is definitely in the 40cSt range at ~100C.

 

[TallPaul]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bobert:
Yeah I guess they round to 210F instead of 212F for whatever reason. I don't think it would change the conversion that much. It is definitely in the 40cSt range at ~100C.

---

Um ah,

, pleas excuse me for butting in back there. You are absolutely right. Why did I not see it was SUS viscosity instead of cSt?

Ok, that is great as my fridge test shows the same thing.

And it appears pretty certain that the main benefit of the STP (and its only a benefit if you want to thicken the oil) is the thickening effect. I will definitely stick with the Synpower.


Thanks Bobert.

 

[fuel tanker man]

Learning much, and much obliged, guys!

By the way, I had a n00b question above, regarding what the sodium was all about in the GM EOS stuff.

Turns out sodium isn't corrosive (I'm sure I was thinking about Sodium Chloride--whole 'nother animal).

Here is a link to a post where Molakule fills us in on sodium in modern oils...

http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000277#000000

Now I'm thinking GM EOS...

Dan

 

[Bobert]

I'm really not sure either VOA on Synpower OT is correct though since the Valvoline PDS says that it is supposed to be 100cSt@100C.

Valvoline Synpower Oil Treatment PDS

Hopefully the third sample you sent in will clear things up.

 

[TallPaul]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bobert:
SUS Viscosity @ 210F 188.8

Which actually converts to:

40.6cSt@100C

---

That would be nice and my refridgerator test seems to bear that out. At temps in the upper 30sF the STP 4-Cyl took over twice as long to pour (tilt baby food jar on side) over as did the Synpower.

However, isn't 210F approx 100C?

(210-32)*5/9 = 98.9

 

[Stinky Peterson]

I reran the viscosity and here is what I got:

109
110
109
110
109
111

If the manufacture says it is 100 then these number are pretty close. They probably use smaller tubes with longer elution times and the results more accurate. We calibrated with a 16 cSt oil and it is not uncommon to see slight differences when testing oils that are a lot thicker.

 

[TallPaul]

STP 4-Cylinder Oil Treatment (Red 15 ounce bottle). FWIW: First number is Butler Cat Labs. Second number is ANA Labs (just analyzed):

Elemental Analysis (ppm)
Copper: 0 / LT 1
Iron: 1 / 2
Chrome: 0 / 1
Nickel: 0 / LT 1
Titanium: 0 /LT 1
Silver: 0 / LT 1
Lead: 0 / 2
Tin: 1 / 1
Alum: 0 / 1
Silicon: 0 / 1
Sodium: 0 / LT 1
Potassium: 0 / LT 1
Moly: 0 / 2
Boron: 0 / LT 1
Barium: 0 / LT 1
Calcium: 1371 / 621
Magnesium: 5 / 3
Mangan: 0 /
Phosphorus: 1814 / 2885
Zinc: 1959 / 2213

LT = less than

Viscosity cSt @ 100C: 108.0 / 89.45

 

[Cutehumor]

can someone explain why phosphorous and calcium be way off from different labs? aren't the same protocols used?

 

[MolaKule]

quote:

---

Still I think there is too much VII for the zddp levels you will get. Too bad they discontinued the STP 6000-mile Oil Extender which had zddp and was about as thin as regular oil.

---

TallPaul has it. These additives are all about thick VII's and increasing the viscosity of the host oil, which may not be a good thing in many cases.

remember, VII's can turn into sludge if subjected to high temps and oxidation.

 

[TallPaul]

Thanks Stinky. I actually have about half the bottle of the STP 4-banger Oil Treatment left, but I don't think it is worth bothering with another analysis. Given what MolaKule says about VII can turn into sludge and since the Valvoline Synpower Oil Treatment looks a whole lot better, I suspect not many will go with the STP.

As for me, I think I will continue my practice of using Redline Oil as an additive. Much safer way to soup your oil IMHO. Sure, there is less zddp, but half a quart of Redline gives you some moly and a nice slug of ester. Would that the Synpower had been formulated with ester or PAO and not a thickener.

For some screwball reason, thick sells.

 

[Stinky Peterson]

There can be some problems running very viscous oils because they must be aspirated through very small tubing and then fed into a nebulizer that creates a very fine mist. The dilution used when preparing the sample can affect the amount delivered to the instrument so we use a 1-8 dilution (1 ml oil - 7 mL kerosene) to help offset the viscosity affect. This works very well for the samples we routinely process but it is possible to lose accuracy with very thick oils.

Another factor that can affect the accuracy is the choice of calibration standards. Ideally standards should be selected that are slightly above and below the expected values. In our case we use 0, 50, 100, 500 for all, 1600 (P & Zn) and 5000 for Ca. The P reading we got was slightly above our high standard of 1600 but is pretty close and should be fairly accurate. The Ca is bracketed by standards and it too should be pretty close. If the results are outside the range of the calibration standards then the results are questionable. Without knowing the standards used by ANA I can't say whether this could be a factor or not.

Another technique uses an internal standard such as cobalt. The instrument measures the amount of of cobalt recovered and then adjusts the results accordingly. One of my colleagues at another lab is testing this method and has noticed that the heavy gear oils will often read about 10% low for the additive elements. He is however using a 1:5 dilution so viscosity will have more affect.

The problem with the results we are seeing is this they are not consistent. If viscosity is causing problems then one lab should be low on all elements and not just a few. It appears that one set of results is wrong. Unfortunately I no longer have the sample so I can't rerun it to verify our results.

One last thing, random errors can and do occur and it is not easy or even possible to detect them in some cases. If the results are questionable the sample should be run again.

[ March 23, 2005, 12:32 PM: Message edited by: Stinky Peterson ]