Does Ravenol still use tungsten?

[inquirer]

@chris719
If they were switching to other "better" additives wouldn't they highlight and advertise the fact, wouldn't they make a marketing point out of it? So far I don't think they mention a move to a new substitute.

strangely enough, none of the recently released oils with a valid API SP license display (e.g. ICP) any tungsten levels. Sodium can be detected again in rare cases, but tungsten seems to have been disappeared.

Even if that's true (I have no idea, so I can't comment on the validity of that myself), that's probably another matter unrelated to the Ravenol's situation.
As I already said tungsten vanished from many, if not all Ravenol products and obviously this hasn't anything to do with API rating, as it includes many products which have older ratings.

 

[ArthurArgentum]

where everyone wants to reduce ash formation.

btw, briefly touch upon the topic of ashless. Not because it's a fleeting trend or a matter of fashion, but rather due to tungsten association with ash generation, which is no longer favored.
I have a theory that within this industry, there are limitations to the extent of innovation and novelty that can be introduced. It ultimately stems from the inherent nature of ICEs and their fundamental principles. As a consequence, the industry often finds itself traversing familiar ground, in cycle, reiterating concepts and trends that have already emerged. Pre-ignitions have been encountered in the past, and there was a time where everyone wants to reduce ash formation, etc.
Mobil consistently utilized the 702 antioxidant in their PAO oils until the 2010s, as it remained unrivaled since its inception in the 1960s.

 

[buster]

I have a theory that within this industry, there are limitations to the extent of innovation and novelty that can be introduced. It ultimately stems from the inherent nature of ICEs and their fundamental principles.

Interesting point. I posted a video recently where apparently Mobil found an additive used in the cosmetic industry that was beneficial. They went outside the norm. XOM is fortunate in that they have their own chemical company to do a lot of that research (XOM Chemical).

 

[slacktide_bitog]

Isn't less resistance a bad thing? Anyway, I thought tungsten had the edge in different performance areas compared to molybdenum: https://ws2coating.com/a-comparison-of-tungsten-disulfide-and-molybdenum-disulfide/


I'm waiting for them to add the upgrade on their website.

They HID it

 

[kschachn]

allow me to provide clarification It appears that you are attempting to address the sources of my information. I want to make it clear that I did not claim that all of my data stems from a single source. Furthermore, I would genuinely appreciate and be delighted to come across any new API SP oil that contains tungsten. If you happen to come across such a product, kindly inform me

What does it get you that’s significant?

 

[OilUzer]

Isn't less resistance a bad thing?

I meant to say moly has a very effective resistance to oxidation even though it is less than Tungsten iirc ...

Also real dimer moly will make your engine sound smooooth based on many reports and observations and Japanese car manufacturer spec or recommendations for their oils.

You also see most "superstar" oils have a good chunk of it.
However, that hasn't stopped me from buying Castrol or any other oil without moly especially if on sale. Just saying if you have a noisy engine, try it.

---

 

[TiGeo]

Liquimoly Molygen has tungsten backed with UOA/VOA I ran/posted in appropriate sub-forum. Had to request it for $10 more from BS. This oil has no approvals...only "recommended for".

 

[TiGeo]

LM stopped adding it to SP oils too.

Obsolete additives

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...tive-youd-use-no-comments.258445/post-6510891

This is incorrect. See post above.

 

[chris719]

It’s also simply possible that it’s been a supply chain and/or price issue. Ravenol seems to have removed it in SN formulations already.

 

[ArthurArgentum]

It’s also simply possible that it’s been a supply chain and/or price issue. Ravenol seems to have removed it in SN formulations already.

btw, this is the best explanation (SCM issues/costs) for many world processes in 2023, we always have this explanation as backup