I'm seeing people lately act like if an oil is reformulated with less moly it is no longer as good, or if it is lacking it, then it's an inferior product. I'm not sure I follow the logic.
Why do people get all excited about moly?
- Thread starter JonnyHotcakes
- Start date
- Status
I agree. People get too nutzo over moly. Oh, be prepared for attacks from moly lovers. You may have stepped on their sacred schlongs.
(I need to provide a little cover: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH MOLY)
(I need to provide a little cover: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH MOLY)
I believe the Military did the original work in the 1940s when trying to find solution to engine oil wear. Molly proved to be a solution (easy to find and cheap) that would fortify the miserable straight weight oil of that time. The myth carries on today that it is only great additive.
So, Eddie, Molly was easy to find and cheap? Does she know you talk like this about her?
Originally Posted By: hate2work
So, Eddie, Molly was easy to find and cheap? Does she know you talk like this about her?
Oh,only you hate2work....
(breaking up the monotony right??)
So, Eddie, Molly was easy to find and cheap? Does she know you talk like this about her?
Oh,only you hate2work....
Last edited:
it has been a basis of this community from establishment. http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54&Itemid=62
I luv Molly, and Molly luvs me...la...laaa...ha..
Actually, I'm more worried about ZDDP luvers than that of Moly.
Q.
Actually, I'm more worried about ZDDP luvers than that of Moly.
Q.
This presentation shows a 20-40% reduction in friction and wear by adding Moly DTC, or "nanoparticles"
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/1511442/
But the key to me is 20-40% reduction over what? If over bare bones dino, I can believe it. But I think for a well formulated oil with a strong additive package I don't think you can't say Moly is necessarily better because the chemists have balanced the ingredients to work together. For example, M1 0w40 uses small amounts of moly, shaeffers in moderate amounts, and redline high amounts (in some formulations).
Some of these witches brews are amazingly complex and the ingredients are carefully balanced. So just adding a moly additive f.e. may be beneficial to one oil, say bare bones dino (I'm guessing here) but may not for another oil, say an oil like biosyn that uses antimony similarly to moly as I understand it, ZDDP, and even copper as additives. These additives are all in competition with each other. This CRODA slide illustrates this:
I hate to say it, but you almost have to have "faith" that the formulator knows what they are doing and there use of moly, or not, as part of their "pallete" of addtives they use in their own brew is the right thing for them based on the total package.
Another reason I think the different between oils is so small now is that the basic proportions of ZDDP to detergent etc. have all been worked out (and of course common req. by API etc.) and the "lowest" levels of oils nowadays is not that bad. The highest levels of oils are occupied by those oils where the chemists are really fine tuning and tweaking the additives, basestocks, and the complex interactions between them. These are my impressions based on my limited level of knowledge anyway.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/1511442/
But the key to me is 20-40% reduction over what? If over bare bones dino, I can believe it. But I think for a well formulated oil with a strong additive package I don't think you can't say Moly is necessarily better because the chemists have balanced the ingredients to work together. For example, M1 0w40 uses small amounts of moly, shaeffers in moderate amounts, and redline high amounts (in some formulations).
Some of these witches brews are amazingly complex and the ingredients are carefully balanced. So just adding a moly additive f.e. may be beneficial to one oil, say bare bones dino (I'm guessing here) but may not for another oil, say an oil like biosyn that uses antimony similarly to moly as I understand it, ZDDP, and even copper as additives. These additives are all in competition with each other. This CRODA slide illustrates this:
I hate to say it, but you almost have to have "faith" that the formulator knows what they are doing and there use of moly, or not, as part of their "pallete" of addtives they use in their own brew is the right thing for them based on the total package.
Another reason I think the different between oils is so small now is that the basic proportions of ZDDP to detergent etc. have all been worked out (and of course common req. by API etc.) and the "lowest" levels of oils nowadays is not that bad. The highest levels of oils are occupied by those oils where the chemists are really fine tuning and tweaking the additives, basestocks, and the complex interactions between them. These are my impressions based on my limited level of knowledge anyway.
I believe moly is a last step protection.
Normal oil characteristics work until there is extreme pressure that squishes it out. Then moly or other additives come into play.
Normal oil characteristics work until there is extreme pressure that squishes it out. Then moly or other additives come into play.
who has alot still in the oil???over 200?if moly was a last step protection i sure would want it my oil.
I feel I should perhaps contribute to this thread. But on second thought, --
- Status
Similar threads
