Boron/Moly add packs vs sodium

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
89
Location
OK, USA
Based on what I've seen on here. It seems most people prefer SOPUS oils with moly/boron based add packs. I noticed Castrol also has moved over in their synthetic oils to Moly/Boron with some added titanium. Has anyone seen any evidence of them being superior to Sodium based add packs found in Valvoline, Castrol GTX, Royal Purple that usually doesn't have any boron cleaner/moly friction modifiers in them? Or does it boil down to it depending on the type of engine etc.
 
Last edited:
The oils that always are said to be "smooth and quiet" always have a lot of moly. I've also read here on the forum that moly is an expensive additive. I prefer oils with moly.
 
35.gif
 
A number of people here have mentioned that Valvoline runs very smooth and quiet. I've noticed this myself as well. Does it really matter what is in the package as long as it performs well?
 
Here's an article Molakule wrote on sodium adds a number of years ago:

Alternative Detergents Sodium

In the article he mentions SDDC as a possible AW/EP compound with good friction modification that might appear chemically as sodium in UOA's

Whether this compound is used with MS5K, Valvoline et al is anybody's guess but in the absence of other more popular FM's to help achieve GF-5 targets I'm of the mind that's the case.
 
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Infineum reported that one of their studies indicated that sodium based detergents were LSPI accelerants in DIT engines when used in combination with calcium based detergents (magnesium based detergents were found to be LSPI neutral).

http://www.infineuminsight.com/insight/nov-2016/quenching-low-speed-pre-ignition

I liked this paper. The problem is that it applies to that engine. You can't necessarily extrapolate that to your engine
 
Good read thanks for the info. I run GTX HM in 2 of my 3 vehicles which last I checked has no moly or boron. Somehow I missed this article in research trying to compare the different oils and their add packs/detergents.

Originally Posted By: ndfergy
Here's an article Molakule wrote on sodium adds a number of years ago:

Alternative Detergents Sodium

In the article he mentions SDDC as a possible AW/EP compound with good friction modification that might appear chemically as sodium in UOA's

Whether this compound is used with MS5K, Valvoline et al is anybody's guess but in the absence of other more popular FM's to help achieve GF-5 targets I'm of the mind that's the case.
 
Originally Posted By: ndfergy
Here's an article Molakule wrote on sodium adds a number of years ago:

Alternative Detergents Sodium

In the article he mentions SDDC as a possible AW/EP compound with good friction modification that might appear chemically as sodium in UOA's

Whether this compound is used with MS5K, Valvoline et al is anybody's guess but in the absence of other more popular FM's to help achieve GF-5 targets I'm of the mind that's the case.


Very interesting...thanks to you for posting and to Molakule for writing it!
That's one of the things about working with limited information, I don't know if the sodium I see in some VOAs is from detergents or from other types of oil additives...and, I don't know if it's just sodium-based detergents that can affect LSPI, or other sodium compounds, too. Given that sodium does not appear to be a necessary component in a modern motor oil, I just try to avoid it for now. I guess that if I see that an oil with sodium has passed dexos1 Gen 2 (or GF6, whenever that gets going) with an LSPI test, I feel that I can have some confidence that it's still a good choice for my DIT engine.

Originally Posted By: bigj_16
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Infineum reported that one of their studies indicated that sodium based detergents were LSPI accelerants in DIT engines when used in combination with calcium based detergents (magnesium based detergents were found to be LSPI neutral).

http://www.infineuminsight.com/insight/nov-2016/quenching-low-speed-pre-ignition

I liked this paper. The problem is that it applies to that engine. You can't necessarily extrapolate that to your engine


Good point, but I'm probably going to be waiting for a long time to see test results in my particular 2.0l Subie DIT engine. I try to make the best decision I can with limited information...I was aware of and considering LSPI in my oil choices before my car was recalled for it, but that's what really got me thinking that I had to take it seriously as a real world problem and not some sort of unrealistic lab creation.
 
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi

I guess that if I see that an oil with sodium has passed dexos1 Gen 2 (or GF6, whenever that gets going) with an LSPI test, I feel that I can have some confidence that it's still a good choice for my DIT engine.



There's already a number of Valvoline (and Napa) oils with sodium that are dexo1s Gen 2 approved as far as I know..
 
It should be noted that sodium and moly are not mutually exclusive in add packs.
Valvoline Maxlife uses Valvoline's classic sodium add pack but also featured moly until the
most recent reformulation.
Valvoline's API oils seem as smooth as anything else in those applications in which I've tried them
and we have a real engine builder here who has written that he sees unusually clean internals as well
as very low wear in engines that he's torn down that had been run on Valvoline oils.
There are many different routes to the same end.
 
Originally Posted By: ndfergy
Here's an article Molakule wrote on sodium adds a number of years ago:

Alternative Detergents Sodium

In the article he mentions SDDC as a possible AW/EP compound with good friction modification that might appear chemically as sodium in UOA's

Whether this compound is used with MS5K, Valvoline et al is anybody's guess but in the absence of other more popular FM's to help achieve GF-5 targets I'm of the mind that's the case.


I can only imagine someone doing a Google search linked to this post would be thinking. Like what language is that, lol. Anyway you can tell you know your stuff.
 
Sodium based oils are fine but they do seem to find the weak point in engines if the metallurgy is not right in them. Peruse any of the Chrysler/Dodge/Ram boards concerning 5.7 Hemi's and worn cams, the common denominator in most cases is use of sodium add pack based oils like Valvoline.
 
Originally Posted By: Hootbro
Sodium based oils are fine but they do seem to find the weak point in engines if the metallurgy is not right in them. Peruse any of the Chrysler/Dodge/Ram boards concerning 5.7 Hemi's and worn cams, the common denominator in most cases is use of sodium add pack based oils like Valvoline.


I didn't know that about sudium. I have used Valvoline 5W-30 since new in my 2006 Silverado 4.8L LS1. At about 200,000 miles I noticed metal showing up in my filter ( I always cut open filters in all my vehicles). Found two lobes and the corrsponding lifters making metal. I changed the cam and lifters and have put 38,000 miles on it since then. Put the Crane cam made for the LS1 in it and crane lifters as well. I guess I may ask is the Valvoline ok in the engine or should I switch to an oil W/O sodium?
 
Originally Posted By: rotorcraft230

I didn't know that about sudium. I have used Valvoline 5W-30 since new in my 2006 Silverado 4.8L LS1. At about 200,000 miles I noticed metal showing up in my filter ( I always cut open filters in all my vehicles). Found two lobes and the corrsponding lifters making metal. I changed the cam and lifters and have put 38,000 miles on it since then. Put the Crane cam made for the LS1 in it and crane lifters as well. I guess I may ask is the Valvoline ok in the engine or should I switch to an oil W/O sodium?


It is more of an anecdotal observation but it does seem to pop up more often than not when looking at issues like soft cams and exclusive use of Sodium add pack oils in place of Moly based oils.

As for advise on changing oils, I think you have already replaced the weak link with that being the cam and would be fine continuing with Valvoline.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top