Try using 1 oz. per 10 gallons of gas. It is on Amazon in one gallon jugs. Schaeffer Manufacturing 0131C-004S SoyUltra Gasoline Additive, 1 gal. Also try Renewable Lubricants Bio-Plus Injector Cleaner Gas Conditioner, 1 Gallon Jug. Makes my engine run smoother. Use one oz. per 10 or 15 gallons.
gas additive with friction modifiers?????
- Thread starter hyperscion
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: scott30si
Try using 1 oz. per 10 gallons of gas. It is on Amazon in one gallon jugs. Schaeffer Manufacturing 0131C-004S SoyUltra Gasoline Additive, 1 gal. Also try Renewable Lubricants Bio-Plus Injector Cleaner Gas Conditioner, 1 Gallon Jug. Makes my engine run smoother. Use one oz. per 10 or 15 gallons.
So making your engine "run smoother" is the only tangible benefit to the additive?
Try using 1 oz. per 10 gallons of gas. It is on Amazon in one gallon jugs. Schaeffer Manufacturing 0131C-004S SoyUltra Gasoline Additive, 1 gal. Also try Renewable Lubricants Bio-Plus Injector Cleaner Gas Conditioner, 1 Gallon Jug. Makes my engine run smoother. Use one oz. per 10 or 15 gallons.
So making your engine "run smoother" is the only tangible benefit to the additive?
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Does the term "friction modifier" used in ATF fluid mean:-
- Adds More Friction
or
- Reduces Friction
?
"Modifies"
See slides 14 and 21
http://www.slideshare.net/samcheng35380/lubrizol-atfundamentals
Does the term "friction modifier" used in ATF fluid mean:-
- Adds More Friction
or
- Reduces Friction
?
"Modifies"
See slides 14 and 21
http://www.slideshare.net/samcheng35380/lubrizol-atfundamentals
Sorry but when somebody says "modifiers" rather than saying "reducer" or "enhancer", I expect an overlayed graph which shows before and after.
I also see the graph(s) shown has coefficient of friction on the vertical scale and time on the horizontal scale.
There is no fluid made in the world which changes its "coefficient of friction" as a function of "time"! The fluid has no concept of "time". I hope you understand what I am getting at. I buy the concept that there could be more to coefficient of friction than generally known "static" or "dynamic" beings used in classical force body diagrams. I even buy that COF may not be constant (or two) but rather a continuous function. BUT NO WAY IT IS BASED UPON TIME.
I may agree that the guys who made those graphs are smarter than me but they surely do not know how to generate scientific graphs.
I also see the graph(s) shown has coefficient of friction on the vertical scale and time on the horizontal scale.
There is no fluid made in the world which changes its "coefficient of friction" as a function of "time"! The fluid has no concept of "time". I hope you understand what I am getting at. I buy the concept that there could be more to coefficient of friction than generally known "static" or "dynamic" beings used in classical force body diagrams. I even buy that COF may not be constant (or two) but rather a continuous function. BUT NO WAY IT IS BASED UPON TIME.
I may agree that the guys who made those graphs are smarter than me but they surely do not know how to generate scientific graphs.
it's the speed difference that defines the COF in ATF fluid
Originally Posted By: Jetronic
it's the speed difference that defines the COF in ATF fluid
'zackerly...it even says it on the slides.
The thing that takes place over time is an engagement, and as the speed varies, the friction changes.
One manufacturer's requirements and designs require one type of behaviour, and the other a different set.
it's the speed difference that defines the COF in ATF fluid
'zackerly...it even says it on the slides.
The thing that takes place over time is an engagement, and as the speed varies, the friction changes.
One manufacturer's requirements and designs require one type of behaviour, and the other a different set.
did you not once embrace fp60? was that not a cleaner with ucl?
I remember "molabrew"
I remember "molabrew"
thank you. You answered my question. Many thanks.
Originally Posted By: Quest
hyperscion said:Trav mentioned that nowadays, engines are so well engineered/executed the he hasn't seen tapered engine upper cylinder portion when tearing down after a few hundreds of thousands of miles.
Yes that's a fact. I haven't had to use a ridge reamer just to get the pistons out in many years. I recently had the head of a VW AEG 2.0 gas with 200K on it and the cylinder cross hatch was still there, no ridge.
Compression was over 190 psi on all 4 (cold) the head had a crack in it behind a valve pocket, replaced the head, cleaned the injectors, new plugs/wires and timing belt kit and sent it on its way running perfectly.
This is common today, there is zero benefit to running a UCL in a modern FI engine, the biggest problem back in the day as someone pointed out was cylinder wash down from the carb combined with inferior oils (compared to what we have available today), the rings use to get all gummed up and the top ring would get starved of oil.
Electric fuel pumps don't need a lubricant, the bearings are sealed and never contact the fuel, the only real issue with electric pumps is when they loose contact with the fuel and over rev, the fuel also keeps the pump housing cool.
On vertically mounted pumps that have suction from the bottom running very low on fuel can expose the upper part of the housing which contains the rear pump bearing, repeated events can lead to over overheating damage of the pump and long term damage.
Modern injectors only need the fuel for cooling, not lubrication, the old pintel style may have benefited somewhat but not a modern disk type.
Cleaner especially PEA based ones can greatly benefit the injectors by keeping the nozzles clear of carbon deposits, on the older pintel style a solvent type cleaner is usually better in most cases because it works better removing varnish.
On the old injectors a regiment of alternating solvent and PEO type cleaners can benefit both the injector and help keep carbon accumulation in the combustion chamber to a minimum which is a benefit of the PEA.
Both type can help make the engine "feel" smoother because they are changing the burn characteristics of the fuel not because it is reducing friction in the upper cylinder area.
Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: Quest
Originally Posted By: Quest
hyperscion said:Trav mentioned that nowadays, engines are so well engineered/executed the he hasn't seen tapered engine upper cylinder portion when tearing down after a few hundreds of thousands of miles.
Yes that's a fact. I haven't had to use a ridge reamer just to get the pistons out in many years. I recently had the head of a VW AEG 2.0 gas with 200K on it and the cylinder cross hatch was still there, no ridge.
Compression was over 190 psi on all 4 (cold) the head had a crack in it behind a valve pocket, replaced the head, cleaned the injectors, new plugs/wires and timing belt kit and sent it on its way running perfectly.
This is common today, there is zero benefit to running a UCL in a modern FI engine, the biggest problem back in the day as someone pointed out was cylinder wash down from the carb combined with inferior oils (compared to what we have available today), the rings use to get all gummed up and the top ring would get starved of oil.
Electric fuel pumps don't need a lubricant, the bearings are sealed and never contact the fuel, the only real issue with electric pumps is when they loose contact with the fuel and over rev, the fuel also keeps the pump housing cool.
On vertically mounted pumps that have suction from the bottom running very low on fuel can expose the upper part of the housing which contains the rear pump bearing, repeated events can lead to over overheating damage of the pump and long term damage.
Modern injectors only need the fuel for cooling, not lubrication, the old pintel style may have benefited somewhat but not a modern disk type.
Cleaner especially PEA based ones can greatly benefit the injectors by keeping the nozzles clear of carbon deposits, on the older pintel style a solvent type cleaner is usually better in most cases because it works better removing varnish.
On the old injectors a regiment of alternating solvent and PEO type cleaners can benefit both the injector and help keep carbon accumulation in the combustion chamber to a minimum which is a benefit of the PEA.
Both type can help make the engine "feel" smoother because they are changing the burn characteristics of the fuel not because it is reducing friction in the upper cylinder area.
Amen!
- Status