Does diesel oil do more cleaning?

[JAG]

Originally Posted By: SubieRubyRoo
Dang. What a frickin loss. Now I will cry into my cruddy rum and Dr. Pepper, Mola always had great insight. It's a shame the snowflakes ticked him off.

Are you calling me a snowflake?

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: SubieRubyRoo
Garak, all due respect, I don't think we want to confuse "cleaning" with "flushing"... IMHO you can get the same "flushing" effect using even the PQIA warning oils by changing it frequently enough.

That is absolutely true, but we do get people asking how to "clean" sludge out here frequently, so we do have to consider the sludge aspect, too. Now, if someone's concerned about a film of varnish or coking in the baffling under the valve cover or something like that, they're in for some disappointment.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Garak, completely agree. And for the varnish cleaners, Trav had a monumental thread about Kreen for those who actually need "cleaning".

 

[53' Stude]

Well, you angered MolaKule by replying even though the guidelines were laid out in his opening post. Thats probably what did it

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Thanks car51, at least somebody said what everyone was thinking. Kinda hard to have "oil guys" if industry veterans get ticked off and leave this site.

 

[53' Stude]

Originally Posted By: SubieRubyRoo
Thanks car51, at least somebody said what everyone was thinking. Kinda hard to have "oil guys" if industry veterans get ticked off and leave this site.


Sad thing is the guy kept prodding MolaKule like a kid stickin a screwdriver in electrical outlet! Seriously! Read Molakules first opening post for crimes sake

 

[1JZ_E46]

Let’s leave the drama out of BITOG. No one forced Mola to leave. Hopefully he comes back.

Now back to oil talk. I know most HDEOs had a lot of magnesium in them (before d1g2). I’ve read it’s a more effective detergent than calcium? What are the main differences between Ca and Mg in action?

 

[SonofJoe]

Regarding, the differences between calcium & magnesium overbased detergents, it might help if I copy across something I wrote recently in another post (with a bit of editing to make it read better)...

The two commonest forms of overbased detergent additive used in PCMO are 300 TBN calcium sulphonate & 400 TBN magnesium sulphonate. The former contains about 12% Calcium and the latter 9.2% Magnesium (note that only the pure metal part of the additive shows up on a UOA or VOA).

To get a boost of 1 TBN, you need 0.33% of 300 TBN Calcium Sulphonate which is equivalent to 0.0396% (or 396 ppm) of Calcium metal. To get the same 1 TBN boost, you need 0.25% of 400 TBN Magnesium Sulphonate which is equivalent to 0.023% (or 230 ppm) of Magnesium metal.

Things get somewhat complicated but for the sake of argument, imagine all the calcium in 300 TBN overbased calcium sulphonate existing in the form of amorphorus calcium carbonate (CaCO3, aka chalk). Chalk contains 40.1% calcium (as the neat metal). So 300 TBN calcium sulphonate contains roughly 29.9% calcium carbonate and for that 1TBN boost, you're adding 987 ppm of CaCO3. Now imagine all of the magnesium in 400 TBN overbased magnesium sulphonate exists as magnesium carbonate (MgCO3 aka magnesia alba).This contains roughly 28.8% magnesium (as neat metal). So 400 TBN overbased magnesium sulphonate contains roughly 31.9% magnesium carbonate and to get that 1TBN boost, you're adding 798 ppm of MgCO3.

What does this all mean? To me it says that superficially, magnesium looks to be the the more effective provider of acid neutralising base. However both 300 TBN calcium sulphonate and 400 TBN magnesium sulphonate contain roughly one third of carbonate salt (which is probably as much as the neutral soap can colloidally maintain in suspension). When you net it all back to how much carbonate salt you need for 1 TBN boost, both calcium & magnesium are in the same ball park with magnesium being 20% better (which is why you get a somewhat lower Sulphated Ash level with Mg-based detergents).

My personal opinion is that both calcium & magnesium are more alike than they are different. That goes particularly with regard to their 'cleaning ability' which is probably negligible for both.

 

[SonofJoe]

Had a further think about this in the bath...

If you look at things differently, in the case of 300 TBN overbased calcium sulphonate, to get a 1 TBN boost, you're adding 591 ppm of 'carbonate' (presumably as carbonate ions). In the case of 400 TBN overbased magnesium sulphonate, to get that 1 TBN boost, you're adding 566 ppm of 'carbonate'. Given that I'm working with imperfect numbers pulled straight off Google, I rather suspect that 591 & 566 are effectively the same number and that it's the amount of carbonate present that determines how much TBN you get, and not how much metal.

I haven't done the calculations but I would probably expect this carbonate-to-TBN relationship to apply to all metallic detergents be they calcium, magnesium or sodium based or sulphonate, phenate, salicylate or calixerate based. If this is indeed the case, then for a PCMO, where acid neutralisation (as opposed to reaction product or soot dispersion) is your primary objective, then in terms of cost-effectiveness, you're probably best going for the highest TBN 'stuff' which uses the least amount of the cheapest form of soap.

I knew there was a reason I always liked 400 TBN magnesium sulphonate...I think I might at last have figured out why!!

 

[1JZ_E46]

Great response as always, SoJ. Thanks!