Talking of additives
Talking of additives
Author
Discussion

Andy chimaera

Original Poster:

1,463 posts

190 months

Thursday 12th May 2011
quotequote all
my gear box oil perhaps could do with changing and maybe do an oil change as well even though its cleanish, any one rate good old 'slick 50' as an additive for engine and gearbox just for extra protection?

M@H

11,298 posts

303 months

Thursday 12th May 2011
quotequote all
I wouldn't put slick 50 anywhere near any of my cars !


fromtheinterweb said:
Currently, the most common and popular oil additives on the market are those that contain PTFE powders suspended in a regular, over-the-counter type, 50-rated petroleum or synthetic engine oil. PTFE is the common abbreviation used for Polytetrafloeraethylene, more commonly known by the trade name "Teflon," which is a registered trademark of the DuPont Chemical Corporation. Among those oil additives we have identified as containing PTFE are: Slick 50, Liquid Ring, Lubrilon, Microlon, Matrix, Petrolon (same company as Slick 50), QMl, and T-Plus (K-Mart). There are probably many more names in use on many more products using PTFE. We have found that oil additive makers like to market their products under a multitude of "private brand" names.
While some of these products may contain other additives in addition to PTFE, all seem to rely on the PTFE as their primary active ingredient and all, without exception, do not list what other ingredients they may contain.

Though they have gained rather wide acceptance among the motoring public, oil additives containing PTFE have also garnered their share of critics among experts in the field of lubrication. By far the most damning testimonial against these products originally came from the DuPont Chemical Corporation, inventor of PTFE and holder of the patents and trademarks for Teflon. In a statement issued about ten years ago, DuPont's Fluoropolymers Division Product Specialist, J.F. Imbalzano said, "Teflon is not useful as an ingredient in oil additives or oils used for internal combustion engines."

At the time, DuPont threatened legal action against anyone who used the name "Teflon" on any oil product destined for use in an internal combustion engine, and refused to sell its PTFE powders to any one who intended to use them for such purposes.

After a flurry of lawsuits from oil additive makers, claiming DuPont could not prove that PTFE was harmful to engines, DuPont was forced to once again begin selling their PTFE to the additive producers. The additive makers like to claim this is some kind of "proof' that their products work, when in fact it is nothing more than proof that the American legal ethic of "innocent until proven guilty" is still alive and well. The decision against DuPont involved what is called "restraint of trade." You can't refuse to sell a product to someone just because there is a possibility they might use it for a purpose other than what you intended it for.

It should be noted that DuPont's official position on the use of PTFE in engine oils remains carefully aloof and noncommittal, for obvious legal reasons. DuPont states that though they sell PTFE to oil additive producers, they have "no proof of the validity of the additive makers' claims." They further state that they have "no knowledge of any advantage gained through the use of PTFE in engine oil."

Fear of potential lawsuits for possible misrepresentation of a product seem to run much higher among those with the most to lose.

After DuPont's decision and attempt to halt the use of PTFE in engine oils, several of the oil additive companies simply went elsewhere for their PTFE powders, such as purchasing them in other countries. In some cases, they disguise or hype their PTFE as being something different or special by listing it under one of their own tradenames. That doesn't change the fact that it is still PTFE.

In addition, there is some evidence that certain supplies of PTFE powders (from manufacturers other than DuPont) are of a cruder version than the original, made with larger sized flakes that are more likely to "settle out" in your oil or clog up your filters. One fairly good indication that a product contains this kind of PTFE is if the instructions for its use advise you to "shake well before using." It only stands to reason that if the manufacturer knows the solids in his product will settle to the bottom of a container while sitting on a shelf, the same thing is going to hap pen inside your engine when it is left idle for any period of time.

The problem with putting PTFE in your oil, as explained to us by several industry experts, is that PTFE is a solid. The additive makers claim this solid "coats" the moving parts in an engine (though that is far from being scientifically proven). Slick 50 is currently both the most aggressive advertiser and the most popular seller, with claims of over 14 million treatments sold. 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."

Remember, PTFE in oil additives is a suspended solid. Now think about why you have an oil filter on your engine. To remove suspended solids, right? Right. Therefore it would seem to follow that if your oil filter is doing its job, it will collect as much of the PTFE as possible, as quickly as possible. This can result in a clogged oil filter and decreased oil pres sure throughout your engine.

In response to our inquiries about this sort of problem, several of the PTFE pushers responded that their particulates were of a sub-micron size, capable of passing through an ordinary oil filter unrestricted. This certainly sounds good, and may in some cases actually be true, but it makes little difference when you know the rest of the story. You see, PTFE has other qualities besides being a friction reducer: It expands radically when exposed to heat. So even if those particles are small enough to pass through your filter when you purchase them, they very well may not be when your engine reaches normal operating temperature.

Here again, the scientific evidence seems to support this, as in tests conducted by researchers at the University of Utah Engineering Experiment Station involving Petrolon additive with PTFE.

The Petrolon test report states, "There was a pressure drop across the oil filter resulting from possible clogging of small passageways." In addition, oil analysis showed that iron contamination doubled after using the treatment, indicating that engine wear didn't go down - it appeared to shoot up.

This particular report was paid for by Petrolon (marketers of Slick 50), and was not all bad news for their products. The tests, conducted on a Chevrolet six-cylinder automobile engine, showed that after treatment with the PTFE additive the test engine's friction was reduced by 13.1 percent. Also, output horsepower increased from 5.3 percent to 8.1 percent, and fuel economy improved from 11.8 percent under light load to 3.8 percent under heavy load.

These are the kind of results an aggressive marketing company like Petrolon can really sink their teeth into. If we only reported the results in the last paragraph to you, you'd be inclined to think Slick 50 was indeed a magic engine elixir. What you have to keep in mind is that often times the benefits (like increased horse power and fuel economy) may be out weighed by some serious drawbacks (like the indications of [?])
Edited by M@H on Thursday 12th May 11:35

Andy chimaera

Original Poster:

1,463 posts

190 months

Thursday 12th May 2011
quotequote all
that answers that one then :-)

M@H

11,298 posts

303 months

Thursday 12th May 2011
quotequote all
Happy to help biggrin

Andy chimaera

Original Poster:

1,463 posts

190 months

Thursday 12th May 2011
quotequote all
is there any truth in some 'experts' opinions V8 develpement included that the moble 1 that tvr recommend is too thin for the rover v8? in which case what about castrol magnatec as an alternative? that doesn't contain PTFE

M@H

11,298 posts

303 months

Thursday 12th May 2011
quotequote all
No real idea on that however Mobil 1 is not just all 0-40, they do 5-30, 5-40 and 5-50 from memory too.

Cheers,
Matt.

Andy chimaera

Original Poster:

1,463 posts

190 months

Thursday 12th May 2011
quotequote all
M@H said:
No real idea on that however Mobil 1 is not just all 0-40, they do 5-30, 5-40 and 5-50 from memory too.

Cheers,
Matt.
yes but it was the viscosity TVR recommended that was too thin, apparently

M@H

11,298 posts

303 months

Thursday 12th May 2011
quotequote all
Understand that smile I was just meaning that you don't have to switch to Castrol if you want a different viscosity, I don't know what TVR originally suggested but I'll wager it was 0-40 (and 0 really is only needed for very cold conditions IIRC)

Andy chimaera

Original Poster:

1,463 posts

190 months

Thursday 12th May 2011
quotequote all
yeah maybe, thanks for you're help guys

bobfather

11,197 posts

286 months

Thursday 12th May 2011
quotequote all
Andy chimaera said:
is there any truth in some 'experts' opinions V8 develpement included that the moble 1 that tvr recommend is too thin for the rover v8? in which case what about castrol magnatec as an alternative? that doesn't contain PTFE
TVR didn't recommend Mobil 1 because it was the best oil for the job. They recommended it because Mobil Oils and TVR have a contractual agreement for this. I'm sure that Mobil 1 is a reasonable choice and I am also sure that there are better oil options out there and that TVR had a very favourable financial arrangement with Mobil Oils

SILICONEKID340HP

14,997 posts

262 months

Thursday 12th May 2011
quotequote all
15w60 is about the best viscosity to go for but can be prity expensive..I use 20w50 Valvoline VR1 racing oil mineral.I may move to a synthetic when the engines done more miles..Another good oil is Millers css 20w60 semi synthetic ..This seems good stuff with plenty of zinc

https://shop.fluidsinmotorsport.co.uk/product/morr...

Edited by SILICONEKID340HP on Thursday 12th May 14:56

Andy chimaera

Original Poster:

1,463 posts

190 months

Friday 13th May 2011
quotequote all
SILICONEKID340HP said:
15w60 is about the best viscosity to go for but can be prity expensive..I use 20w50 Valvoline VR1 racing oil mineral.I may move to a synthetic when the engines done more miles..Another good oil is Millers css 20w60 semi synthetic ..This seems good stuff with plenty of zinc

https://shop.fluidsinmotorsport.co.uk/product/morr...

Edited by SILICONEKID340HP on Thursday 12th May 14:56
sounds like a good shout, cheers, ill try that

M@H

11,298 posts

303 months

Friday 13th May 2011
quotequote all
Yep - I've used Millers Semi Synth in both my S Series cars smile