| BANNED
Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: ??
Posts: 1,237
Thanked: 19 Times
|
Folks, here are a couple of expert opinions on engine oil additives in general: http://skepdic.com/slick50.html http://www.carbibles.com/additives.html
While I too appreciate Finetuning's great enthusiasm and spirit of adventure, it is pretty clear to me that his approach is anything but scientific and fraught with all kinds of dangers.
Quoting one particular passage from the first website: Quote:
PTFE is a solid which is added to engine oil and coats the moving parts of the engine. [SIZE=3]However, such solids seem even more inclined to coat non-moving parts, like oil passages and filters. After all, if it can build up under the pressures and friction exerted on a cylinder wall, then it stands to reason it should build up even better in places with low pressures and virtually no friction.
This conclusion seems to be borne out by tests on oil additives containing PTFE conducted by the NASA Lewis Research Center, which said in their report, "In the types of bearing surface contact we have looked at, we have seen no benefit. In some cases we have seen detrimental effect. The solids in the oil tend to accumulate at inlets and act as a dam, which simply blocks the oil from entering. Instead of helping, it is actually depriving parts of lubricant"[/SIZE] (Rau).
In defense of Slick 50, tests done on a Chevy 6 cylinder engine by the University of Utah Engineering Experiment Station found that after treatment with the PTFE additive the test engine's friction was reduced by 13.1 percent, the output horsepower increased from 5.3 percent to 8.1 percent, and fuel economy improved as well. Unfortunately, the same tests concluded that "There was a pressure drop across the oil filter resulting from possible clogging of small passageways." Oil analysis showed that iron contamination doubled after the treatment, indicating that engine wear increased (Rau).
|
I have cited the above simply to illustrate the dangers inherent in the kind of approach Finetuning is taking. Regarding boric acid as additive, it is a relatively new procedure and there seems to be limited info. Here is a comment from the second website above.
Regards, rks Quote: The squeaky-clean new boys on the block?
Since the initial euphoria over oil additives died down, and with ongoing proceedings against some of the most well-known household names, there's a clutch of new additive manufacturers starting to appear. A lot of them are using something called Boron CLS Bond®. This is based on the intricate crystal lattice structure of hydrated boron molecules. That lattice structure allows the layers of hydrated boron particles to slide virtually friction-free over each other, like the playing cards in a fresh deck, while retaining strength. The ultrafine particles of hydrated boron reach into every metal crevice, lubricating with super-slipperiness as they chemically bond with the host material.
This all sounds well and good, but I'm not a chemist so I can't comment. What does worry me a little is that the chemical starts out as Boric Acid and has to react with air and water to get its chemical reaction going. But what do I know?
A lot of the manufacturers are claiming things like Reduces engine wear by 80%. Sounds familiar doesn't it? Well, like I said, I don't know enough about this to claim otherwise, so if you have any direct experience of one of the following, I'd like to hear about it so I can pad my pages with more informative information. Each graphic links to the website of the manufacturer or distributor of the product in question.
I've linked a couple of Word documents here if you want to read up more on the claims. The first is a basic rundown of what CLS Bond is and the other is a list of people claimed to be using or testing the product. Tech document. People using or testing.
 Dean Brubaker, the president of this organisation, actually contacted me directly to ask if I'd consider giving them some space on my site. Fair play. Again I can't comment one way or another on Motorbond - I've not used it myself. Their site is very comprehensive and it does have a fair amount of technical data to backup their claims. Interestingly, they also have technical data and products for marine engines. These things undergo a different type of stress to car engines - normally more - and so promoting a product for marine use is a good indicator that Motorbond should have done their research well. So if you have used Motorbond's products, please let me know.
My personal views on additives:
Apart from the fact that all the additive manufacturers have been in trouble in the past, and most of them have lost their cases (see above):
My views on engine oil additives are this: the oil companies spend hundreds of millions on research and development in order to make their oils suitable for use in car engines. A standard off-the-shelf engine oil is already stuffed with a cocktail of additives put there by the oil company (see above). By contrast, additive companies spend a couple of million on R&D and an equal amount in PR and advertising to claim that their product (and only their product) will enhance the life of your engine. You're adding an unapproved additive to an already additive-full oil. Spot the problem?
The current trend is the "90% of your engine wear happens at startup" advertising ploy. This fact is absolutely true, but as it happens, it's less to to with "grinding engine parts" and more to do with combustion. When the combustion gases burn, they form acids which are highly corrosive when their vapours condense. These acids collect in the upper cylinder areas where their temperature is raised above their dew point. The acids condense and etch the cylinder walls and piston rings. In reality, this accounts for over 85% of engine wear, the other 15% being down to abrasion. So the adverts are nearly right - most of the engine wear does happen at startup, and it is because of a lack of oil, but it isn't because the oil isn't coating moving parts - it's because it's not transporting these acidic gases away. Having said that, if you start the engine and let it idle for 15 seconds or so before moving off, you can probably add another 100,000 miles to your engine's life without one bottle of additive. This warms the oil up a tad and makes sure it's in all the most vital areas before you start putting a strain on the engine. Most handbooks tell you not to let the engine warm up before driving off (they're referring to the acid corrosion mentioned above), but they mean don't let it reach working temperature. If, however, you insist on starting up and belting off down the road, think of this next time: it takes an average engine around 3 minutes of average driving for the exhaust manifold to reach 300°C. If you blast off and run around at full throttle, right from the word go, that process takes a little under a minute. Think about it - from outside air temperature to 300°C in a minute - what exactly is that doing to the metal in your manifold? Ask anyone who's ever owned an original Audi Quattro - they'll tell you exactly what happens.
I'm not saying that these companies are having us all on, heaven knows there are plenty of statements from companies and private individuals who have reportedly reaped the benefits of these products. But in my experience, it's simply not worth the huge risk of putting the additive in there.
Another perspective:
I received this email from Albert Clark who has, it seems, had first-hand experience of one of the additive products:
I kept hearing about such a product and found a store going out of business that was practically giving it away. I put a quart in two cars: An MGB and a Chevy 305 V-8.
The MGB went 20 miles before a ring stuck causing it to start throwing oil everywhere. A mechanic then messed up when putting new pistons on the old rods and shortly after rebuild a piston froze and threw a rod bearing that ruined the crank, etc.
The Chevy started using a quart every 25 miles immediately after the product was used. I drained it and refilled immediately, but it took engine flush and about 4 oil changes over 2000 miles before oil usage was reduced to a quart every 400 miles. It was using a quart every 800 miles before that. I ended up putting another 60,000 miles for a total of 180,000 miles before rebuild.
I will never recommend such a product to anyone.
The moral? If you're going to care for your engine, do it properly, not in half-measures, and it will look after you for as many miles as you care to drive.
| |
17th June 2006, 00:57
