Baseline MPG. Charger RT.

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

But the LX/LC cars from Chrysler are like nothing ever built in this country in years. Mine is 8 years old and solid as a rock, doors still shut like a bank vault.


Sounds like my 30 yo mercedes. Wait, isnt that because the LX/LC is at least somewhat associated with the W210/W211 MB?

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

But the LX/LC cars from Chrysler are like nothing ever built in this country in years. Mine is 8 years old and solid as a rock, doors still shut like a bank vault.


Sounds like my 30 yo mercedes. Wait, isnt that because the LX/LC is at least somewhat associated with the W210/W211 MB?


Despite what you may hear there was a TON of collaboration on the design. It was the first use of hydroformed steel in a sedan, the uniquely stiff chassis is the basis for the super solid car.

Unfortunately the trim and details will never match an older Merc, I've had a couple and their quality was without compromise in the old days. My running gear is really strong, but there are a lot of cheap details due to a tough price point!

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

But the LX/LC cars from Chrysler are like nothing ever built in this country in years. Mine is 8 years old and solid as a rock, doors still shut like a bank vault.


Sounds like my 30 yo mercedes. Wait, isnt that because the LX/LC is at least somewhat associated with the W210/W211 MB?


Despite what you may hear there was a TON of collaboration on the design. It was the first use of hydroformed steel in a sedan, the uniquely stiff chassis is the basis for the super solid car.

Unfortunately the trim and details will never match an older Merc, I've had a couple and their quality was without compromise in the old days. My running gear is really strong, but there are a lot of cheap details due to a tough price point!


No that's what I am saying... It was a collaborative effort, in fact may use some MB parts with 210/211 part numbers as I understand it! It is indeed a good design, leveraging the MB side, which is a good thing IMO. Exactly why I mentioned my old MBs that exhibit that... There is some of that DNA in there!

 

[Clevy]

Well I'm over 5300 miles on the mos2 oil and filter. Changed it out today. I'm going to cut the filter for inspection and will email dermapaint the pics to post on the site so we can all see what 5000 miles and 2 cans of MOS2 look like as far as media loading.
We will see soon enough whether mos2 will load up a filter like that garbage "restore" does.
I never saw any differences in oil pressure as far as hot idle from when the filter was new until today when it was removed nor was there any difference in pressure at 70mph(cruise set always)from new until today.
What that means as far as media loading I cannot say other than nothing changed,which tells me the media didn't load up enough to make any difference whatsoever.
Since adding mos2 I've gained 3mpg average over my baseline testing of 3000 miles.
All I can say is I drove the car the exact same,driving the same roads at the same times. Other than 1 tank where I beat on it(after adding mos2) fuel economy increased across the board.
I calculated each tank according to fuel consumed,then cross-referenced that figure against the mpg the car recorded and both figures were within +\- 0.3mpg,so I've concluded in my charger the mpg gauge is as close accurate as it can be.
So I'm done. 3mpg increase. I saw mpg figures on the factory gauge in the 31 mpg range on the highway whereas before mos2 I think I topped out at 28mpg with a tailwind.
Engine vibrates less at idle using a glass of water on air box as a gauge.
For the 8 bucks a can the stuff costs its a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned. In my very small but consistent window of testing fuel economy increased,as well as engine vibration was lessened enough for me to notice using a glass of water as a guide.
I don't sell the stuff and have no financial interest in its marketing. I'm just a guy trying to wade through a sea of snake oil and I've seen enough with my own eyes,backed up by my wallet to state honestly that the stuff performs as advertised and pays for itself,in my experience in fuel consumption.
It cost me 16 bucks for 2 cans. I gained 3mpg so it took roughly a tank and a half to pay for itself in my 19 gallon tank(rough estimate).
Even if I err on the side of caution and it took 2 tanks to pay for itself that means on this sump fill I saw a return on 16 tanks where the fuel economy remained elevated.
So testing over. If anyone wants to shoot me a pm with any questions regarding my experience please don't be shy otherwise I won't be checking nor updating this thread anymore.
Cera-tec went in today

 

[Sequoiasoon]

Originally Posted By: Clevy

So testing over. If anyone wants to shoot me a pm with any questions regarding my experience please don't be shy otherwise I won't be checking nor updating this thread anymore.
Cera-tec went in today


Then how are we going to know if the Ceratec changes anything for you? I've got the Ceratec in both vehicles now. I just threw new tires on the Sonata so that might impact some. I'm only 300 miles on the oil since putting it in so we'll give it some time. Sequoia I haven't checked as I haven't filled it up in three weeks. School is in now so it's getting a lot of very short trips where it barely reaches warm up temp. Also more idling waiting for kids to finish sports and pick them up.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Sequoiasoon
Originally Posted By: Clevy

So testing over. If anyone wants to shoot me a pm with any questions regarding my experience please don't be shy otherwise I won't be checking nor updating this thread anymore.
Cera-tec went in today


Then how are we going to know if the Ceratec changes anything for you? I've got the Ceratec in both vehicles now. I just threw new tires on the Sonata so that might impact some. I'm only 300 miles on the oil since putting it in so we'll give it some time. Sequoia I haven't checked as I haven't filled it up in three weeks. School is in now so it's getting a lot of very short trips where it barely reaches warm up temp. Also more idling waiting for kids to finish sports and pick them up.


Shoot him a PM I'm sure he'll tell you.

 

[cp3]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
The Charger is really starting to grow on me.


What, like a fungus?

Or do you like it?

I wish I had drove one sooner. Love it! And it's not like the six is real dog either.

Clevy, very cool stuff. Thanx for sharing!

 

[Vikas]

Bravo Clevy for doing your study! It is convincing enough for me. Just out of curiosity, could you provide access to raw data? I am looking for the spreadsheets or graphs over the 5300 miles.

 

[surfstar]

Originally Posted By: Vikas
Just out of curiosity, could you provide access to raw data?


x2

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: surfstar
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Just out of curiosity, could you provide access to raw data?


x2


I posted my mileage and fuel consumed in this thread as a bought fuel. When I got suspended a few weeks ago I calculated mileage based on fuel purchased. What I've posted here is the best I'm able to do because my monthly receipts have already been handed to my accountant for last month.
Originally I planned on running 3000 miles without and 3000 with mos2. I ended up running 5300+ miles with mos2 only because I took an inter-provincial trip and racked up 2000 miles doing it. I got home a few days ago so I decided time for a 0w for winter.
So as far as spreadsheets go take whatever data you can from here.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: Sequoiasoon
Originally Posted By: Clevy

So testing over. If anyone wants to shoot me a pm with any questions regarding my experience please don't be shy otherwise I won't be checking nor updating this thread anymore.
Cera-tec went in today


Then how are we going to know if the Ceratec changes anything for you? I've got the Ceratec in both vehicles now. I just threw new tires on the Sonata so that might impact some. I'm only 300 miles on the oil since putting it in so we'll give it some time. Sequoia I haven't checked as I haven't filled it up in three weeks. School is in now so it's getting a lot of very short trips where it barely reaches warm up temp. Also more idling waiting for kids to finish sports and pick them up.


As far as knowing if cera-tec is doing anything well I wasn't planning on another testing thread. I'm using it to help increase the longevity of the engine. This will be the family hauler indefinitely so I want to help it remain maintenance free as long as humanly possible.
I did the mos2 testing in the charger because it was new to me. I had no idea what it consumed for fuel and I had no history with it so I thought it would be the perfect test mule.
The mos2 testing was for the forums benefit. I just wanted to see for myself if the stuff really did anything,and thought the info would be an asset to the forum if anyone wanted to see real world data before and after.
My car is current beating the 6ers in the fuel economy arena. That fact alone tells me mos2 did something good.
I am using cera-tec for me and not planning on tracking fuel consumption anymore. I've found the on board fuel economy gauge is accurate enough for me and I'm still going to track my tanks fuel economy however now that its getting colder idle times will increase so mileage results won't be a true reflection on distance travelled.
I'm done here. Pm me if I can help with something but I'll no longer be updating this thread.
Thanks for watching. I hope I've helped some of you one way or another.

 

[demarpaint]

Clevy do you see any problems adding Ceratec to an engine that was already treated with MoS2?

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Clevy do you see any problems adding Ceratec to an engine that was already treated with MoS2?


Not really.
Once that mos2 layer wears away because I haven't added more it won't reapply,so I figure the cera-tec will apply its layer once the mos2 has worn off enough.
Or it won't do anything. I can't say for sure because I've never used them in this order before. In my ram I used cera-tec first for a 10000 mile run,then mos2 afterwards.
I'll be sure to inform the forum if there is a negative reaction so no one else does it.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Clevy do you see any problems adding Ceratec to an engine that was already treated with MoS2?


Not really.
Once that mos2 layer wears away because I haven't added more it won't reapply,so I figure the cera-tec will apply its layer once the mos2 has worn off enough.
Or it won't do anything. I can't say for sure because I've never used them in this order before. In my ram I used cera-tec first for a 10000 mile run,then mos2 afterwards.
I'll be sure to inform the forum if there is a negative reaction so no one else does it.


I think you're better off using the Ceratec first like you did. It could take the residual MoS2 a long time to wear off, and you'd have no idea of when that happens. JMO

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Clevy do you see any problems adding Ceratec to an engine that was already treated with MoS2?


Not really.
Once that mos2 layer wears away because I haven't added more it won't reapply,so I figure the cera-tec will apply its layer once the mos2 has worn off enough.
Or it won't do anything. I can't say for sure because I've never used them in this order before. In my ram I used cera-tec first for a 10000 mile run,then mos2 afterwards.
I'll be sure to inform the forum if there is a negative reaction so no one else does it.


I think you're better off using the Ceratec first like you did. It could take the residual MoS2 a long time to wear off, and you'd have no idea of when that happens. JMO


I agree. I should have but I got all gung-ho with this whole mos2 testing idea.

 

[Sequoiasoon]

That's the order I'm doing based on discussion in other threads with both. Never used the M0S2 or Ceratec prior to this. I have 4 cans of M0S2 waiting in the wings. It will be mid next year before the Sequoia gets an OCI and Sonata early next year to add it.

Maybe placebo (probably not). I'm about 500 miles on the Ceratec in Sonata and seems a little smoother running and idling, seems to pull a little better up to redline and is quieter about it. No data on MPG yet. Sequoia got best mileage it ever got on highway trip after about 1000 miles on the Ceratec.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: Clevy

I'm done here. Pm me if I can help with something but I'll no longer be updating this thread.
Thanks for watching. I hope I've helped some of you one way or another.


Many thanks for taking the valuable time to share your experiences.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: Clevy

I'm done here. Pm me if I can help with something but I'll no longer be updating this thread.
Thanks for watching. I hope I've helped some of you one way or another.


Many thanks for taking the valuable time to share your experiences.


+1

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Clevy do you see any problems adding Ceratec to an engine that was already treated with MoS2?


Not really.
Once that mos2 layer wears away because I haven't added more it won't reapply,so I figure the cera-tec will apply its layer once the mos2 has worn off enough.
Or it won't do anything. I can't say for sure because I've never used them in this order before. In my ram I used cera-tec first for a 10000 mile run,then mos2 afterwards.
I'll be sure to inform the forum if there is a negative reaction so no one else does it.


This has been a great thread, but I have to nit-pick this.

MoS2 is fine particles suspended in solution. I did the settling time calculation here:

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/small-particle-mos2-settling-time.163225/

Per Ed Kollin:

Originally Posted By: Edward Kollin

A little information for you. MoS2 forms it's slick surface from the non-interactive exposed sulfur groups. It is NOT reactive towards dispersants/detergents, as it is not acidic. It is difficult to disperse in an oil as the sulfur/sulfur Van der Waal forces cause agglomeration (as well as its low coefficient of friction). I have tested it quite thoroughly at Exxon, as many have done before me, and found it essentially useless in motor oil. It settles out in a similar manner to sub-micron lead chloride particles (when burning leaded fuel). It works very well in grease.


While I may or may not concur with the "useless" part, the thing I have issue with in the OP's quote above is that there is a layer that could be wiped or worn away. I think this is a fine particle, surface-stabilized and dispersed in the oil. It does not create a surface on anything, per se. Rather, it acts like a boundary lubricant or an enhanced lube in the contact points of a lubricant system. As the oil squeezes out in the bearing, the suspended particles help add a bit more of a layer (viscosity of the oil goes up as the load increases, but a solid with shear planes will keep spacing and reduce friction). It is not a chemisorbed layer with true surface interaction that would need to be wiped/solved/otherwise actively removed.

If Ceratec is also a dispersed particle (thought it was fine boron nitride particles??), then its mechanism will be the same as MoS2, neither of which actually "bond" to any surface.

 

[Injured_Again]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Clevy do you see any problems adding Ceratec to an engine that was already treated with MoS2?


Not really.
Once that mos2 layer wears away because I haven't added more it won't reapply,so I figure the cera-tec will apply its layer once the mos2 has worn off enough.
Or it won't do anything. I can't say for sure because I've never used them in this order before. In my ram I used cera-tec first for a 10000 mile run,then mos2 afterwards.
I'll be sure to inform the forum if there is a negative reaction so no one else does it.


This has been a great thread, but I have to nit-pick this.

MoS2 is fine particles suspended in solution. I did the settling time calculation here:

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/small-particle-mos2-settling-time.163225/

Per Ed Kollin:

Originally Posted By: Edward Kollin

A little information for you. MoS2 forms it's slick surface from the non-interactive exposed sulfur groups. It is NOT reactive towards dispersants/detergents, as it is not acidic. It is difficult to disperse in an oil as the sulfur/sulfur Van der Waal forces cause agglomeration (as well as its low coefficient of friction). I have tested it quite thoroughly at Exxon, as many have done before me, and found it essentially useless in motor oil. It settles out in a similar manner to sub-micron lead chloride particles (when burning leaded fuel). It works very well in grease.


While I may or may not concur with the "useless" part, the thing I have issue with in the OP's quote above is that there is a layer that could be wiped or worn away. I think this is a fine particle, surface-stabilized and dispersed in the oil. It does not create a surface on anything, per se. Rather, it acts like a boundary lubricant or an enhanced lube in the contact points of a lubricant system. As the oil squeezes out in the bearing, the suspended particles help add a bit more of a layer (viscosity of the oil goes up as the load increases, but a solid with shear planes will keep spacing and reduce friction). It is not a chemisorbed layer with true surface interaction that would need to be wiped/solved/otherwise actively removed.

If Ceratec is also a dispersed particle (thought it was fine boron nitride particles??), then its mechanism will be the same as MoS2, neither of which actually "bond" to any surface.



User "wag123" wrote this in another thread:

For those of you who have not done this, our host has provided reading material on this website about what MoS2 does and how it works (including electron microscope images of how MoS2 bonds to the wear parts inside an engine). Also, note in your reading that our host endorses the use of Mos2.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/moly-basics/
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/applications-for-lubrication/
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/what-is-blow-by/