Oil & Filter Thoughts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by StevieC
My point was that if Chrysler needed Moly


Apparently they thought hemi would "benefit" from moly as they have a large PPM added to PUP 0w40, yes? No TSB, or Requirement in the spec, just a benefit from it. If you want to hover around and toss the "minimum" requirement and hope your lifters dont wipe you Cam that is your business. But I'd rather use the maximum protection seeing how FCA seems to think it is a "benefit" and if the lifters wipe out my Cam I know I did all I could to stop it. Using the absolute minimum standards like these joke moly level aint it. I roll with FCA, 260ppm PLUS on moly level. In fact, my oil doubles that.
 
The formulation of Valvoline Advanced full synthetic and Modern Engine have molybdenum in all of them now being sold 40-100 ppm.... It was a change related to going away from sodium... Magnesium was not in Valvoline oils prior to this latest change. Now it is in there has well. All of that is related to LSPI.... and API SN plus... Thus any of the oil bought within the last year from Valvoline has the new formulation in it. The Valvoline Advanced full synthetic and VME oils.

Valvoline white bottle and Maxlife do not have molybdenum in them... These two oils do not have sodium in them anymore. And they now utilize magnesium instead of high dosing of calcium. Again related to LSPI...

Chevron Havoline has 90-120 ppm of molybdenum. Mobil 1 has 50-90 ppm of molybdenum.
Quaker State has 90-120 ppm of molybdenum.
Pennzoil has 60-150 ppm of molybdenum.
Castrol has 80-130 ppm of molybdenum.

All of these blenders did this to help replace other additives that caused LSPI and also to help with the new timing chain wear testing has well.
 
Burla doesn't seem to know there are different forms of moly. All he can do is maintain his argumentative posture.

Besides, there are other additives besides moly that perform the same job. The consumer type Analysis will not pick these up. Organic Friction Modifiers.
 
If a gasoline engine has mechanical problems using a dexos1 Gen2, SN Plus certified oil (regardless of the level of moly), it's not a lubrication issue but an engine design issue.
 
Originally Posted by PimTac
Burla doesn't seem to know there are different forms of moly. All he can do is maintain his argumentative posture.

Besides, there are other additives besides moly that perform the same job. The consumer type Analysis will not pick these up. Organic Friction Modifiers.


You want to make this about me, and not the Ram engineers, then you win? Ok pim tack you win, congrats, I read the moly bible from Shaefers back in forth and know more about moly then any other additive in oil as I was researching to solve a problem as you know. Turns out I helped 50 ram trucks and counting because of a theory I had based on that research. Which is what I was trying to do with the OP help him with some good info. Apparently no matter what I post you just want to dump on it. Last time in timing chain wear you were wrong as well, once again many people repeating the research that I had said on viscosity. You should go back to ignoring me, because this constant desire to dump on my personally is giving away your credibility. Note, the OP already is on board with moly, don't wait til page 200 to some some other thing about other friction modifiers supposedly as good as moly.
 
I emailed the Ram Engineers, I told them that Pim tack wasn't impressed with the 260ppm moly level for the hemi specific oil. There was no reply, but I'm sure they will get back to me, I'll let you know.
 
Originally Posted by bbhero
The formulation of Valvoline Advanced full synthetic and Modern Engine have molybdenum in all of them now being sold 40-100 ppm.... It was a change related to going away from sodium... Magnesium was not in Valvoline oils prior to this latest change. Now it is in there has well. All of that is related to LSPI.... and API SN plus... Thus any of the oil bought within the last year from Valvoline has the new formulation in it. The Valvoline Advanced full synthetic and VME oils.

Valvoline white bottle and Maxlife do not have molybdenum in them... These two oils do not have sodium in them anymore. And they now utilize magnesium instead of high dosing of calcium. Again related to LSPI...

Chevron Havoline has 90-120 ppm of molybdenum. Mobil 1 has 50-90 ppm of molybdenum.
Quaker State has 90-120 ppm of molybdenum.
Pennzoil has 60-150 ppm of molybdenum.
Castrol has 80-130 ppm of molybdenum.

All of these blenders did this to help replace other additives that caused LSPI and also to help with the new timing chain wear testing has well.


Thank you for post, very informational and educational.
 
Where's the documentation from Chrysler that says oil for the Hemi needs to have 260 ppm moly or more?
 
As a side benefit to lower coefficient of friction, Moly is an lspi quencher as well. So oils going forward will likely all have moly or shall I say should have it, but I'd still want 75ppm to receive maximum friction reduction benefit as well as whatever level is a lspi quench With the goal of gf-6 not having moly is the worst play for any oil that is a general use oil. If it was a bad idea not having moly with gf-5, it is horrible to not have it in gf-6. And Kudos to the oils like Amsoil SS and other oils like PUP 0w40 that have increased their moly levels. More is better all the way up to 700ppm. Hey Pim Tack, are you "better" options also lspi quenchers?
 
Originally Posted by burla

Apparently they thought hemi would "benefit" from moly as they have a large PPM added to PUP 0w40, yes? No TSB, or Requirement in the spec, just a benefit from it.


Except the issue that has been observed on the 5.7L doesn't appear to exist on the 6.4L. As I noted before, my dealer has changed zero cams in the SRT's. And this of course goes all the way back to when the SRT 0w-40 was Mobil 1 0w-40, which had less moly in it than the higher Noack SRT 0w-40.

I'm not sure if it was FCA or SOPUS that decided on the moly level in the SRT oil. It was a quickly drafted product to replace M1 0w-40 after the takeover. Moly levels and types seem to vary by formulator, and given SOPUS and XOM co-own Infineum, they are probably using the same moly in their products.
 
That isn't even close to correct, visit Ram Forum and pose the question if you are interested past this. With respect to the info you have, I know several people that suffer the same issues with the 6.4 and the 5,7, it isn't mds related.
 
Last edited:
No problem.

I will say I was pleased to see the molybdenum back in Chevron Havoline and Valvoline Advanced full synthetic... .
As a side note... Warren oil uses molybdenum in their synthetic blend oils... 60-90 ppm. And Smitty's uses it has well in their Super S motor oil... 40-60 ppm. So, not only the "big" guys use it.
And like PimTac said... The structure and exact molecular make-up of the molybdenum can make a big difference has well. In other words a little could actually go a very long way. I bet Mobil 1 and Pennzoil both use a form of molybdenum that has that characteristic.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by burla
That isn't even close to correct, visit Ram Forum and pose the question if you are interested past this. With respect to the info you have, I know several people that suffer the same issues with the 6.4 and the 5,7, it isn't mds related.


My info comes from the guys wrenching on them, at a dealer that has sold a massive amount of SRT's. What part isn't even "close to correct"? If you are going to slam my post at least be specific as to which part you are taking issue with.

And why in the [censored] would I go to RAM forums to get SRT info? Or are you perhaps conflating the non-SRT 6.4L and the SRT 6.4L?
 
My herd it from "someone" doesn't match your herd it from someone. I guess the difference would be, I've heard it from a lot of someones. Maybe heavier viscosity is helping the 6.4 have less, but they certainty are victims of hemi tick and cam fails as noted on both hemi forums.
 
like this chap

One guy two cam fails both 6.4, what are the odds? What would be nice is if BITOG regulars would stop commenting on this one issue as if you are experts, you aren't, and you give out bad info because you are more interested in some type of battle or something. The info I give is solid and based on hundreds of hemi owners. Like fight a different battle, one that you may be an expert on or bring value to. Or bother yourself to study this before commenting. You one box fits all will not serve hemi owners.
 
Originally Posted by burla
My herd it from "someone" doesn't match your herd it from someone. I guess the difference would be, I've heard it from a lot of someones. Maybe heavier viscosity is helping the 6.4 have less, but they certainty are victims of hemi tick and cam fails as noted on both hemi forums.


Yeah, I've heard it from a lot of someones too, they are all mechanics at two separate Chrysler dealers. They literally work on these things every day. They've done cams on the 5.7L's, though it is, as noted on here, not an overly common problem, but one that does happen from time to time. On the other hand, these same guys, despite the incredible amount of SRT's the dealers have sold, have never had to do a cam in one. That's a rather significant difference.

And yes, I'm of the mind that the heavier oil and perhaps the fact that the SRT engine has a different camshaft, are a contributing factor.

If we were to poll this board, the one we are on presently, where there are a number of us that own or have owned SRT 6.4L's as to whether they have the tick or have had a cam replaced, compared to those that own or have owned 5.7L's, how do you think that would look results-wise? I think they'd be pretty similar to the scope of the issue as presented by the guys wrenching on them.
 
Originally Posted by burla
like this chap

One guy two cam fails both 6.4, what are the odds? What would be nice is if BITOG regulars would stop commenting on this one issue as if you are experts, you aren't, and you give out bad info because you are more interested in some type of battle or something. The info I give is solid and based on hundreds of hemi owners. Like fight a different battle, one that you may be an expert on or bring value to. Or bother yourself to study this before commenting. You one box fits all will not serve hemi owners.


That's not an SRT 6.4L.

It would be nice if the resident bitog [censored] would drop his bloody attitude in these exchanges as if he's God's bloody gift to the bloody Chrysler HEMI engine. You aren't, and you come off as a [censored], constantly, and it is getting pretty God-[censored] old.
 
Yeah, tell that to the guy who bought two 6.4's and had them both have cam fails. The largest point in this silly conversation is there is no downside to using hearty oils. At least at that point you have done what you could. mic drop, carry on
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Corneileous
Oil for 2018 Ram 1500 Hemi
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
4K
Corneileous
N
Particles in oil (religiously changed)
Replies
15
Views
791
Graham Piccinini
D.R.S
5.7 Chevy oil
Replies
10
Views
628
Bear906
0
oil for 08' F 150 5.4L V8
Replies
7
Views
317
bdcardinal
W
Oil Filter Change Interval Clarification/Input
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
Wat_MPG
Back
Top