Addatives - Don't do it!
Discussion
I see this topic arise frequently and would like to put forward the Chemists view - Scary stuff and the main reason we neither recommend nor sell these magic addatives. Use a decent oil as it has plenty of the right addatives!
General Remarks on Chlorinated Additives.
A number of ‘add-on’ additives intended to improve the performance of commercially available automotive lubricants have been marketed in recent years, under such names as ‘Xxtralube ZX-1’, ‘Metol FX-1’, ‘PPL Anti-Friction’ and ‘Activ-8’.All such products share the following characteristics with ‘X-1R Friction Eliminator’:-
1)They all contain chlorinated paraffin ‘exteme pressure’(EP) compounds first used in the 1930s in heavily-loaded industrial gearboxes, and in some automotive transmission applications, mainly hypoid gears.
2)They all corrode copper-based alloys at moderate temperatures, easily exceeded in all engine, and most transmission applications.This problem was recognised in the 1930s, and chlorinated compounds were never used in transmissions with bronze bearings or gears. No responsible manufacturer ever suggested using them in engines where their increasing activity at high temperatures could lead to piston ring corrosion and bore glazing. (For the same reason, modern ‘hypoid’ additives are not used in engines, even though they are much safer than any chlorinated additive.)
3)X-1R Friction Eliminator and its clones are based upon very outdated technology, which was abandoned by responsible lubricant manufacturers for automotive transmission uses in the 1950s. Chlorinated compounds still find applications in metal working, but their use is on the decline because of health and safety considerations.
4)When burnt, chlorinated paraffins produce corrosive hydrochloric acid, and organo-chlorine compounds including the highly poisonous phosgene gas. Apart from these corrosion and health hazards, with petrol engines the deactivation of exhaust catalysts is also a problem.
5)Unfortunately, these additives give spectacular results in simple EP test machines such as the ‘Falex’. As a marketing ploy, a demonstration of this type looks impressive to those not aquainted with the above facts. Also attractive is the low cost of chlorinated compounds, allowing profits of several thousand percent to be made.
Cheers
Guy
General Remarks on Chlorinated Additives.
A number of ‘add-on’ additives intended to improve the performance of commercially available automotive lubricants have been marketed in recent years, under such names as ‘Xxtralube ZX-1’, ‘Metol FX-1’, ‘PPL Anti-Friction’ and ‘Activ-8’.All such products share the following characteristics with ‘X-1R Friction Eliminator’:-
1)They all contain chlorinated paraffin ‘exteme pressure’(EP) compounds first used in the 1930s in heavily-loaded industrial gearboxes, and in some automotive transmission applications, mainly hypoid gears.
2)They all corrode copper-based alloys at moderate temperatures, easily exceeded in all engine, and most transmission applications.This problem was recognised in the 1930s, and chlorinated compounds were never used in transmissions with bronze bearings or gears. No responsible manufacturer ever suggested using them in engines where their increasing activity at high temperatures could lead to piston ring corrosion and bore glazing. (For the same reason, modern ‘hypoid’ additives are not used in engines, even though they are much safer than any chlorinated additive.)
3)X-1R Friction Eliminator and its clones are based upon very outdated technology, which was abandoned by responsible lubricant manufacturers for automotive transmission uses in the 1950s. Chlorinated compounds still find applications in metal working, but their use is on the decline because of health and safety considerations.
4)When burnt, chlorinated paraffins produce corrosive hydrochloric acid, and organo-chlorine compounds including the highly poisonous phosgene gas. Apart from these corrosion and health hazards, with petrol engines the deactivation of exhaust catalysts is also a problem.
5)Unfortunately, these additives give spectacular results in simple EP test machines such as the ‘Falex’. As a marketing ploy, a demonstration of this type looks impressive to those not aquainted with the above facts. Also attractive is the low cost of chlorinated compounds, allowing profits of several thousand percent to be made.
Cheers
Guy
riveting said:
What about moly slip? Is that good or bad?
Not too good really, it’s not chlorinated paraffin, it’s a few pence worth of heavy moly disulphide powder in a few pence worth of oil. It is fairly harmless, but no benefit. Being heavy, it centrifuges out in crank oilways and can cause blockage. (Claims about running for miles with an empty sump are fraudulent.)
Cheers.
Guy.
I was going to ask about Prolong (which I use)but then I found this:
www.ftc.gov/opa/1999/09/prolong.htm
Doh!
It also ties in with analyses of Mobil 1 in the US which showed incredibly low levels of contaminants and metal particles in oil after 5000 miles. In short, stock oil seems to do a fantastic job all on it's own.
www.ftc.gov/opa/1999/09/prolong.htm
Doh!
It also ties in with analyses of Mobil 1 in the US which showed incredibly low levels of contaminants and metal particles in oil after 5000 miles. In short, stock oil seems to do a fantastic job all on it's own.
This is the contents of Molyslip
Iron: 50
Chrome/Chromium: 1
Aluminum: 156
Silicon: 59
Molybdenum: 9069
Sodium: 17
Boron: 0
Zinc: 1975
Calcium: 4621
Phosphor: 1052
Potassium: 3
Why do you want to add a second additive package to oil already blended to form a synergistic combination of additives that work well with the base oil.
Iron: 50
Chrome/Chromium: 1
Aluminum: 156
Silicon: 59
Molybdenum: 9069
Sodium: 17
Boron: 0
Zinc: 1975
Calcium: 4621
Phosphor: 1052
Potassium: 3
Why do you want to add a second additive package to oil already blended to form a synergistic combination of additives that work well with the base oil.
I couldnt agree more, oil companies spend a fortune blending addative and detergent packs for oil, as with everthing else they come in varying qualities, the best addatives are saved for the true synthetics these days. By introducing a second addative pack you run the risk of upsetting the original addative pack contained within the oil, effectively achieving nothing and shorting the life of the oil.
Oil comapanies can think of not much else other than money so if these addatives were any good, they would be doing it themselves.
Cheers
Guy.
Oil comapanies can think of not much else other than money so if these addatives were any good, they would be doing it themselves.
Cheers
Guy.
opieoilman said:
What about moly slip? Is that good or bad?
Not too good really.(Claims about running for miles with an empty sump are fraudulent.)
Cheers.
Guy.
Do you have any proof of that Guy? Reason I ask is that I'm old enough to remember reading about a test either conducted or surpervised by AA/RAC back in the 70s.
Basically, they used two 3 litre Capris, one of which had been treated from new (or first service) with Molyslip, the other with good quality oil.
Both cars were given identical use. After x,000 miles they were taken to a test track, the sumps were drained and they were driven with no oil.
After x miles they came back in. The engine in the untreated car was rattling badly with shot bearings, but the engine in the treated car was still running OK.
Apparently after they refilled the sump it sounded just as good as before and there were no oil pressure problems.
That's one of the reasons I've been using Molyslip for years.
Mind you, that's in older engines using mineral oils.
Modern synthetics for modern engines are of course better than old mineral oils from 25 years or so back.
All I have is chemical anlasys of these products, and information from Atuomotive Lubricant Chemists, who when you talk to them about these you might as well worship the Devil.
The main application for these is for cutting tools, back in the 70's when this test was done they were using mineral oils and probably basic ones at that, so the high lubrication properties proabaly looked good, remember these people are experts and developing simple tests that are usless but make the product look great.
Without any oil in the engines, they should not have run at all, it is oil that allows the engine to turn.
I am sceptical of that test to be honest.
Cheers
Guy.
The main application for these is for cutting tools, back in the 70's when this test was done they were using mineral oils and probably basic ones at that, so the high lubrication properties proabaly looked good, remember these people are experts and developing simple tests that are usless but make the product look great.
Without any oil in the engines, they should not have run at all, it is oil that allows the engine to turn.
I am sceptical of that test to be honest.
Cheers
Guy.
The problem is that your oil already has ZDDP and most likely that concentration is just right for the formulation. Adding more ZDDP might create an even greater antagonistic effect for the the Moly. Antagonistic effects means that the ZDDP might attack the MOs2 and render it incapable of attaching to the metal and creating that important "organometallic film" for boundary lubrication
Mineral oil add pack
Molybdenum 54
Boron 116
Calcium 2060
Magnesium 4
Phosphorus 772
Zinc 802
Redline (ester based oil) add pack
Molybednum: 600 ppm
calcium: 2600 ppm
phosphorus: 1200 ppm
zinc: 1400 ppm
How does Molyslip know which oil or add pack it will be used with? and Redline is already overkill.
If a curry recipe states 2 teaspoons of curry powder then what happens when you add 10 teaspoons?
Buy a better quality oil and in most cases leave additives on the shelf.
Mineral oil add pack
Molybdenum 54
Boron 116
Calcium 2060
Magnesium 4
Phosphorus 772
Zinc 802
Redline (ester based oil) add pack
Molybednum: 600 ppm
calcium: 2600 ppm
phosphorus: 1200 ppm
zinc: 1400 ppm
How does Molyslip know which oil or add pack it will be used with? and Redline is already overkill.
If a curry recipe states 2 teaspoons of curry powder then what happens when you add 10 teaspoons?
Buy a better quality oil and in most cases leave additives on the shelf.
Good engine oil comes from a well refined base oil, the additives enhance its behavior. I'm no oil expert but you just dont get something for nothing, and if you need to add to it then it must be crap in the first place! I use Silkolene oils in our race engines and my road car, not cheap but but less expensive than low cost oils over a season. There's plenty of other good oils out there I just stick to the product that I trust.
dont forget that us technicians recieve £25 vOuchers every time we fill a book of stamps from flush and additives it's called lets make money from as little as possible im sure these guys who work with oil no what they are talking about,
stick to a decent oil and you cant go far wrong if you want to flush your engine through then just buy more oil and run it and flush it with the oil
its as simple as that
stick to a decent oil and you cant go far wrong if you want to flush your engine through then just buy more oil and run it and flush it with the oil
its as simple as that
I don't know about U.K oil formulation, but I know that in the U.S oil companies have removed most of the ZDDP to meet government mandated catalitic converter 100,000 mile guarantees. This has led to cam failures in older style flat tapet engines. The Harley etc forums are full of complaints. The only oils safe are 'race only'.
I used Moly-slip in my VW bug engine/trans from new with no problems.
Al
I used Moly-slip in my VW bug engine/trans from new with no problems.
Al
Wow, you dug this one up!
Yes true ZDDP has been reduced, it has been on the decline for many years to meet various emmisions etc. However ZDDP is not the only antiwear additive in an oil and any decent oil company will make up the down fall with something else, its not a problem.... Unless of course you are in America it seems.
Cheers
Guy.
Ps The molyslip wont do any harm, it wont really do anything at all except make someone some money.
Yes true ZDDP has been reduced, it has been on the decline for many years to meet various emmisions etc. However ZDDP is not the only antiwear additive in an oil and any decent oil company will make up the down fall with something else, its not a problem.... Unless of course you are in America it seems.
Cheers
Guy.
Ps The molyslip wont do any harm, it wont really do anything at all except make someone some money.
Edited by opieoilman on Wednesday 23 July 16:37
opieoilman said:
turbospud said:
why does just about every garage that services your car want to sell you an engine flush,they even tell you the manufactures recommend them?
Money.
They cost pence to buy trade, and charge a fortune for it.
Good margins.
Cheers
Guy.
why? bloody greed thats why 
and dont even get me started on the prices,but they usually amout to mre than £20+ and thats before VAT is added.Edited by That Daddy on Wednesday 23 July 22:01
Gassing Station | Engines & Drivetrain | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff