A Trip to High Performance Lubricants

Messages
2,187
Location
Arizona
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
The high amounts of moly, ZDDP, and ester counter LSPI despite the high amount of calcium. This is a more effective way of dealing with LSPI.
I believe that Mg is generally more expensive than Ca in the DD package. I further believe _that_ is the primary reason oils have shifted away from Mg toward Ca over the years (decades?). Even in the '80s, we chose an all-fleet oil with higher Mg levels than the 'typical' oils were using at that time, because we believed it to be a technically superior approach.
 
Messages
5,761
Location
New England
Originally Posted by bulwnkl
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
The high amounts of moly, ZDDP, and ester counter LSPI despite the high amount of calcium. This is a more effective way of dealing with LSPI.
I believe that Mg is generally more expensive than Ca in the DD package. I further believe _that_ is the primary reason oils have shifted away from Mg toward Ca over the years (decades?). Even in the '80s, we chose an all-fleet oil with higher Mg levels than the 'typical' oils were using at that time, because we believed it to be a technically superior approach.
It would probably take me a while to track it down, but some time ago I posted a link to a lubrication industry paper that reported that magnesium based detergents had the capability of interfering with the beneficial synergistic effects of ZDDP and MoS2 in motor oil. The fix that was reported for this was the use of a boron based additive, IIRC...the details are fuzzy. Anyway, I took this to be a possible reason for why calcium based detergents were far more prevalent before the LSPI issue raised its ugly head...using magnesium required some extra care in the oil formulation. Just my own thoughts and quite possibly completely wrong and useless...
 
Messages
2,187
Location
Arizona
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted by bulwnkl
I believe that Mg is generally more expensive than Ca in the DD package. I further believe _that_ is the primary reason oils have shifted away from Mg toward Ca over the years (decades?). Even in the '80s, we chose an all-fleet oil with higher Mg levels than the 'typical' oils were using at that time, because we believed it to be a technically superior approach.
It would probably take me a while to track it down, but some time ago I posted a link to a lubrication industry paper that reported that magnesium based detergents had the capability of interfering with the beneficial synergistic effects of ZDDP and MoS2 in motor oil. The fix that was reported for this was the use of a boron based additive, IIRC...the details are fuzzy. Anyway, I took this to be a possible reason for why calcium based detergents were far more prevalent before the LSPI issue raised its ugly head...using magnesium required some extra care in the oil formulation. Just my own thoughts and quite possibly completely wrong and useless...
That would be interesting to read. I assume you mean a Mo compound other than the disulfide(?). I don't think a reputable formulator would put MoS2 in an engine oil, would they? In the timeframe I mentioned, Mg deposits were also reported to be ‘softer' than Ca deposits, another factor in the decision to use the fluids we used.
 

Strjock81

Thread starter
Messages
422
Location
Illinois
Wrapped up a 15k interval on the oil I got on this trip and had a UOA done. Enjoy!


 
Top