You want moly?
- Thread starter Mystic
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Quote:
Not being a wiseguy but... If moly is so great for the engine, why is it mostly removed from many major brands?
In many street brands the moly used is the tri-nuclear moly chemistry and one doesn't need as high a level wrt to the other additives used.
RLI has a booster additve for racing applications:
http://www.renewablelube.com/TDS/89000 Bio-SynXtra Engine Booster Pak.pdf
Thanks. When I look at a standard SN UOA I see a tiny bit of moly, how would I know how much tri-nuclear moly exists in the sample? Or is a UOA the wrong tool?
Quote:
Not being a wiseguy but... If moly is so great for the engine, why is it mostly removed from many major brands?
In many street brands the moly used is the tri-nuclear moly chemistry and one doesn't need as high a level wrt to the other additives used.
RLI has a booster additve for racing applications:
http://www.renewablelube.com/TDS/89000 Bio-SynXtra Engine Booster Pak.pdf
Thanks. When I look at a standard SN UOA I see a tiny bit of moly, how would I know how much tri-nuclear moly exists in the sample? Or is a UOA the wrong tool?
Originally Posted By: LeakySeals
Not being a wiseguy but... If moly is so great for the engine, why is it mostly removed from many major brands?
Really?
Amsoil only recently started using it,and Mobil's top lines use it,and pennzoil uses it,as well as Quaker state.
And last time I looked red line was absolutely loaded with the stuff. In fact off hand the only oil companies I can think of not using it is valvoline and Castrol however Castrol may be using it to some degree in some of their oils.
I thought for an oil to qualify for the "resource conserving" stamp they had to use some form of friction modifier to aid in using less fuel. The only friction modifier I can think of off hand that is widely accepted was moly.
Am I missing something?
Some formulators are trying other adds due to the cost of moly,such as titanium which lowers their cost to produce.
So which companies are trying to ditch moly exactly?
Not being a wiseguy but... If moly is so great for the engine, why is it mostly removed from many major brands?
Really?
Amsoil only recently started using it,and Mobil's top lines use it,and pennzoil uses it,as well as Quaker state.
And last time I looked red line was absolutely loaded with the stuff. In fact off hand the only oil companies I can think of not using it is valvoline and Castrol however Castrol may be using it to some degree in some of their oils.
I thought for an oil to qualify for the "resource conserving" stamp they had to use some form of friction modifier to aid in using less fuel. The only friction modifier I can think of off hand that is widely accepted was moly.
Am I missing something?
Some formulators are trying other adds due to the cost of moly,such as titanium which lowers their cost to produce.
So which companies are trying to ditch moly exactly?
Read closely, closer still. I'm looking at UOA's from major brands. In many cases its much lower than it used to be. Why? That is the question. Do you have the answer?
Random..
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/pp-5w-20-3k-miles-2008-jeep-wrangler.197985/
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/2007-toyota-sienna-mobil1-0w30-8-776-mi.185393/
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/amsoil-aff0w-40-5064-miles-2011-acadia.190606/
Compared to..
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/caterham-blend-uao-long-oci.197846/
If the difference is tri-nuclear moly, where is it? What am i looking for?
Random..
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/pp-5w-20-3k-miles-2008-jeep-wrangler.197985/
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/2007-toyota-sienna-mobil1-0w30-8-776-mi.185393/
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/amsoil-aff0w-40-5064-miles-2011-acadia.190606/
Compared to..
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/caterham-blend-uao-long-oci.197846/
If the difference is tri-nuclear moly, where is it? What am i looking for?
Last edited:
What has more Moly, Redline or Shaeffers? What oil has the most of all brands?
Redline is supposed to have a lot but I don't know how much. Maybe there is a VOA here on Redline. Both Redline and Schaeffer's have been used in auto racing. I have never used Redline oil but I have used an oil supplement they used to make. And I have used some Schaeffer's products. I was very impressed with their oil supplement. That was a long time ago but I kind of remember the Schaeffer's oil being kind of green in color.
When I was young Redline was famous as a racing oil. I have known some guys who were involved in auto racing. There were stories about Redline being used in drag racing cars even if Valvoline or Pennzoil was painted on the side of the car.
I don't think I heard about Schaeffer's oil until I came to this website.
When I was young Redline was famous as a racing oil. I have known some guys who were involved in auto racing. There were stories about Redline being used in drag racing cars even if Valvoline or Pennzoil was painted on the side of the car.
I don't think I heard about Schaeffer's oil until I came to this website.
The Shaeffers VOA I looked up was 285, and I know Redline is triple that in the 800's, at minimum double that. To be honest that is the number one reason I'm running it. My Hemi likes Moly so much it ticks when she isn't around.
Schaeffers has used Moly in their oils since the 60's and it has worked great with Schaeffers penetro and antimony additives to provide extended oil life, lower temps and increased fuel economy. Moly is a proven friction modifier and an excellent anti-oxident. As with all additives there is varying degrees of quality. Schaeffers uses the finest and most advanced. Why don't others use it......$ pure and simple.
Originally Posted By: salesrep
Why don't others use it......$ pure and simple.
+1
Why don't others use it......$ pure and simple.
+1
Moly is getting renewed interest on BITOG. I remember when everyone raved about Havoline for its high moly, back in the day.
I will admit that I added some MoS2 to my vehicles and they seem to be running smoother. Still tracking mpg to see if there's a detectable difference.
I will admit that I added some MoS2 to my vehicles and they seem to be running smoother. Still tracking mpg to see if there's a detectable difference.
From the UAO and VOA I have looked at, most of the A list oils use Moly, but it is also quite surprising some that don't. Castrol syntec was the one that stood out for me. There was a discussion about a guy who had a tick in his engine and he was going on about how good the oil he uses is, and his oil was Castrol syntec and they omit the ingredient that helps metal to metal contact like no other from the information I've looked up. I've looked at several UOA's on CS and most of the time there is zero Moly. Any oil that doesn't have Moly in it aint going in any engine I have, period. Yawl do whatever you like, but I roll with Moly.
Well, maybe there is now an additive that is more effective than moly, such as titanium. There has been some discussion about this. All I know is that Schaeffer's oil supplement really made a difference in how my engine ran. The engine ran much smoother. And that Schaeffer's oil supplement had moly.
If they don't really have a good replacement for the moly than they are probably reducing or eliminating the moly just for cost considerations. But if the moly really will reduce wear and improve fuel mileage maybe it needs to stay in the oil. UNLESS they really do have some additive, titanium or whatever, that is better and cheaper.
If they don't really have a good replacement for the moly than they are probably reducing or eliminating the moly just for cost considerations. But if the moly really will reduce wear and improve fuel mileage maybe it needs to stay in the oil. UNLESS they really do have some additive, titanium or whatever, that is better and cheaper.
red lines oils now have 600ppm
is red line now using tri nuclear moly in their oils?
If it has 600 ppm in it then no they're not.
Which oils do use tri nuclear moly? Why would a higher number in PPM be proof they don't?
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Quote:
According to Molacule, antimony and soluble moly of any type clash, counteract, and compete with each other to the point where it has to be one or the other, but NOT both in an add pack.
I believe this is what I said:
Quote:
As with MoTDC’s, these organic antimony compounds also act synergistically with ZDDP compounds in motor oil. It is believed that sharing of the sulfur and phosphorus atoms contribute to the creation of surface films composed of layers of ferrous sulfate and ferrous phosphate, with the organometallic components depositing a plastic layer of antimony and zinc sulfates and phosphates.
The results were from a scientific study.
RLI uses about 375 ppm of antimony in their current formulations.
THANK YOU for that correction!
But, does this mean that antimony is merely a substitute for the organic moly compounds, and is just a 'waste' of money to use both in an additive pack, OR is it actually harmful, or even destructive when used in conjunction with moly???
Quote:
According to Molacule, antimony and soluble moly of any type clash, counteract, and compete with each other to the point where it has to be one or the other, but NOT both in an add pack.
I believe this is what I said:
Quote:
As with MoTDC’s, these organic antimony compounds also act synergistically with ZDDP compounds in motor oil. It is believed that sharing of the sulfur and phosphorus atoms contribute to the creation of surface films composed of layers of ferrous sulfate and ferrous phosphate, with the organometallic components depositing a plastic layer of antimony and zinc sulfates and phosphates.
The results were from a scientific study.
RLI uses about 375 ppm of antimony in their current formulations.
THANK YOU for that correction!
But, does this mean that antimony is merely a substitute for the organic moly compounds, and is just a 'waste' of money to use both in an additive pack, OR is it actually harmful, or even destructive when used in conjunction with moly???
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
If it has 600 ppm in it then no they're not.
Unless they are using the tri-nuclear moly, and overdosing it like their older formulations??
Yes, I know that after a certain point with this newer moly compound there is NO benefit, and maybe even diminishing returns, but I am just speculating.
I will call Dave next week to see if I can pry this 'proprietary' info out of him!
If it has 600 ppm in it then no they're not.
Unless they are using the tri-nuclear moly, and overdosing it like their older formulations??
Yes, I know that after a certain point with this newer moly compound there is NO benefit, and maybe even diminishing returns, but I am just speculating.
I will call Dave next week to see if I can pry this 'proprietary' info out of him!
dailydriver,that sounds great!i did ask him yesterday and he could not answer my question on trinuclear moly or he did not know what kind of moly is used.i did ask him also if your oil is now just like the rest of the oils out there."he said absolutely not!!! red line oils are far above all other oils!!
Well 200/1,000,000 versus 700/1,000,000 and talking about overdosing seams silly IMO. Anyhow, my choice in oil was because of the UOA's and Redline looks the best in real world application. If there is a better oil I would use it, I could care less about them as a company, but the oil performs exactly how I want it to. I would hope they would choose better Moly if available, but whatever Moly they are using the oil is a great product as is. Group 5 with Zinc and their Moly and the UOA's show the oil is new at extended drain intervals. I think if Redline hired sales people and sponsored the forum, everybody would be running it. There are a very few group 5 oils out there, they should commended on taking the effort in bringing us all true synthetic oil.
Again I ask, what specific oils have the moly you are talking about.
Again I ask, what specific oils have the moly you are talking about.
- Status
Similar threads
