Titanium & Moly Synergy?

[DV0993]

Hi all,

Thinking of hitting Castrol Edge 0w40 with a dose of ceratec.

Wondering if there is any synergy with the titanium additive in Edge (or alternatively, adverse effects) associated with doing so?

 

[OVERKILL]

Hi all,

Thinking of hitting Castrol Edge 0w40 with a dose of ceratec.

Wondering if there is any synergy with the titanium additive in Edge (or alternatively, adverse effects) associated with doing so?

What do you think you are going to gain is the better question? This seems to predicate on the assumption that the Castrol product is, by itself, deficient, and needs "help", no?

 

[DV0993]

What do you think you are going to gain is the better question? This seems to predicate on the assumption that the Castrol product is, by itself, deficient, and needs "help", no?

You are right - The assumption is that I'll gain additional protection.

My intention is to use the Ceratec I have already purchased in a suitable oil. According to LM it will leave behind a chemical coating that will last a certain amount of time. (Not sure how accurate this statement is - Or how it compares to a "boron loaded" oil)

 

[Greasymechtech]

If you're going to use it, then use it. Don't expect anything.
I would think that if you need anything added to your oil, then you need a better oil.
Castrol 0w40 works well enough for me all by itself.
Synergy... just a fancy marketing term. Adverse effect is a lighter wallet.

State the year/make/model/engine/interval... and a picture of the oil grade recommendations from the owners manual.

Moly/boron addict?

Liqui Moly — SPEEDiagnostix

This week we are looking at a wear protection product.

www.speediagnostix.com

 

[OVERKILL]

You are right - The assumption is that I'll gain additional protection.

My intention is to use the Ceratec I have already purchased in a suitable oil. According to LM it will leave behind a chemical coating that will last a certain amount of time. (Not sure how accurate this statement is - Or how it compares to a "boron loaded" oil)

I expect you've reaped the biggest benefit already at this juncture, which is a slightly lighter wallet. That said, it's not going to hurt anything either.

 

[dubber09]

I see about 3% in gas savings with Ceratec while running 5w-30 oil, you should see a bit better % number with 0w-40 oil.
Even if the ceramic coating lasts 30K km, that's gonna save me more in gas than Ceratec cost me.

Also, Ceratec doesn't have Moly in it but 'ceramic' which sticks to metal effectively coating it to decrease friction and wear. LM doesn't recommend adding Moly and Ceratec at the same time as Moly also sticks to metal and when both ceramic (from Ceratec) and Moly additives are in oil suspension they would clump up and get trapped by oil filter thus cancelling their purpose. IMHO, the bigger benefit of Ceratec is metal parts longevity while slight gas mileage improvement doesn't hurt either.

 

[RDY4WAR]

Hi all,

Thinking of hitting Castrol Edge 0w40 with a dose of ceratec.

Wondering if there is any synergy with the titanium additive in Edge (or alternatively, adverse effects) associated with doing so?

My thoughts on this...

Best case scenario = You only make your wallet a little lighter.
Worst case scenario = You get additive clash and end up worse off than without the supplement.

My motto is this... "If you need to add something to your oil, you're using the wrong oil."

 

[RDY4WAR]

I see about 3% in gas savings with Ceratec while running 5w-30 oil, you should see a bit better % number with 0w-40 oil.
Even if the ceramic coating lasts 30K km, that's gonna save me more in gas than Ceratec cost me.

I find that highly unlikely. With control of all variables, the best you could possibly hope for with any formula is ~1%, probably slightly less. That would be using the most robust anti-friction formula you could possibly make with several different moly-complexes, titanium oxides, ionic liquids, and other friction reducers all working in synergy, with the oil as hot as you could reasonably run it. The difference in the friction reduction is miniscule compared to the drivetrain parsitic losses, rolling resistance in the tires, brake drag, aerodynamics, and so on... all of that pales in comparison to the biggest variable in fuel economy of them all... your right foot.

If you actually saw a 3% difference, the most likely case is you acknowledging that it's there and thus paying more attention to your driving habits, possibly even subconsciously.

 

[dubber09]

Well, I actually saw better numbers at times up to 7-8% but the avarage is 3% over last 3200 miles.
My work days driving is same route in and out about 22mi each way.

 

[RDY4WAR]

Well, I actually saw better numbers at times up to 7-8% but the avarage is 3% over last 3200 miles.
My work days driving is same route in and out about 22mi each way.

Internal engine friction doesn't even account for 3% of the fuel economy equation so it couldn't have improved it by 3%, much less 7-8%. The most likely case is a placebo effect. You want your purchase to be worthwhile so you (possibly subconsciously) are watching your fuel economy, staying out of the gas as much, and THAT is what's improving your fuel economy. Not the supplement.

 

[dubber09]

My driving didn't change, you are welcome to come up with any explanation you want.

 

[OVERKILL]

I find that highly unlikely. With control of all variables, the best you could possibly hope for with any formula is ~1%, probably slightly less. That would be using the most robust anti-friction formula you could possibly make with several different moly-complexes, titanium oxides, ionic liquids, and other friction reducers all working in synergy, with the oil as hot as you could reasonably run it. The difference in the friction reduction is miniscule compared to the drivetrain parsitic losses, rolling resistance in the tires, brake drag, aerodynamics, and so on... all of that pales in comparison to the biggest variable in fuel economy of them all... you're right foot.

If you actually saw a 3% difference, the most likely case is you acknowledging that it's there and thus paying more attention to your driving habits, possibly even subconsciously.

Yep, if OEM's could increase fuel economy by 3% (which is more than what they see going to thinner oils) with just an additive, they'd be all over that like stink on pig poo.

From Mobil, with respect to their AFE lineup, going from a heavier oil to one of these:

Mobil 1 0W‐20 and 0W‐30 Advanced Fuel Economy synthetic motor oils deliver up to 2 percent fuel economy improvement* and can save drivers more than $400 on gasoline over the life of their vehicles. That's a savings of about six cents per gallon of fuel. A typical passenger car with a 20‐gallon gas tank can go up to nine more miles on a tank of gas when using Mobil 1™ Advanced Fuel Economy in either 0W-20 or 0W-30. That equates to up to 250 more miles per year under typical conditions.

*Fuel economy improvement is based on a comparison versus those viscosity grades most commonly used and a potential 2 percent fuel economy improvement. Actual savings are dependent upon vehicle/engine type, outside temperature, driving conditions and your current engine oil viscosity. Savings estimates are based on a gasoline cost of $3 per gallon, average fuel economy of 22.5 miles per gallon, annual mileage of 12,500 and lifetime mileage of 150,000.

That's a 0.45mpg gain at most.

 

[dubber09]

How much do you think an average Joe is willing to pay for a 5L jug, $100+? Even if it saves $$$ later in long run?... Marketing is working wonders. Auto manuf's don't want engines or cars to last, we live in a 'pay pay pay and pay some more' world. They want us to buy more and often.

I do understand it's hard to believe in 3% gas savings, I wasn't even skeptical, I just wanted to try and see for myself. I didn't care about 'lighter wallet' sh1t, I could afford this as long as it didn't kill my car. It worked for me with '14 'tage and I did 'Ceratec' Forte after that too. No regrets so far.

 

[smkooq]

What do you think you are going to gain is the better question? This seems to predicate on the assumption that the Castrol product is, by itself, deficient, and needs "help", no?

Well isn’t this assuming that the Castrol product is formulated to maximize its potential versus maximizing profit?

Unless we can prove that the ceratek is pure snake oil, the product claims of Ceratek and reputation of its company has more value than someone’s assumption.

 

[RDY4WAR]

Answer me this.... if Ceratec is so awesome, how come Liqui-Moly doesn't use it in their own oils?

 

[Greasymechtech]

Oils have additive limits to meet specs or test results. So, they can't blindly license an oil overdosed with everything possible.

 

[OVERKILL]

Well isn’t this assuming that the Castrol product is formulated to maximize its potential versus maximizing profit?

So Ceratec isn't manufactured to provide an additional revenue stream for Liqui-Moly then?

Unless we can prove that the ceratek is pure snake oil, the product claims of Ceratek and reputation of its company has more value than someone’s assumption.

I must say I find this little paradox amusing. Castrol is implied to be motived only by profit, so we justify the use of the additive to address some perceived deficiency. Liqui-Moly, also an oil company, is somehow not motivated only by profit (they are altruistic), and to imply otherwise is an affront to their reputation.

At the end of the day, oils are fully formulated products that have to meet a variety of different performance criteria for a myriad of parameters. This is made even more difficult through the inclusion of multiple rigorous OEM approvals, something this oil has many of. This means that the additive and base oil selections are a balancing act to meet all of those, sometimes conflicting, requirements, and do so at a reasonable cost. Top-treating the product with an additive may, under the best of circumstances, improve performance in one area, but this is almost assuredly to the detriment of performance in another. As @RDY4WAR alluded to, there is a reason the constituents of these treatments aren't included in fully formulated products.

With additives there is no approval process. There are no SAE requirements, ACEA protocols or API sequences. You are taking the manufacturer's word that their motivation extends beyond that of a simple additional revenue stream as does the benefit. Additionally, you must accept that regardless of how diverse oil formulation is across manufacturers, grades, approvals and specifications, that somehow the claimed benefit of this product manages to be universal.