Supposedly Ceratec hangs around well past a single oil change interval, so if you do indeed use it, you're "stuck" with it for a while.
Help with oil decision! BMW M3
- Thread starter domer10
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: dparm
Supposedly Ceratec hangs around well past a single oil change interval, so if you do indeed use it, you're "stuck" with it for a while.
Yes apparently 50k a while lol.
Supposedly Ceratec hangs around well past a single oil change interval, so if you do indeed use it, you're "stuck" with it for a while.
Yes apparently 50k a while lol.
Or maybe you just tell us why you think you need it?
Originally Posted By: domer10
No, it doesn't, but you people who advise to use against it feel free to show me evidence as why no one should use ceretec and mos2, If we who use it need to provide concrete proof as to it working, feel free to provide concrete proof as to it being harmful. Like I said I will do a before and after on my end.
Originally Posted By: domer10
No, it doesn't, but you people who advise to use against it feel free to show me evidence as why no one should use ceretec and mos2, If we who use it need to provide concrete proof as to it working, feel free to provide concrete proof as to it being harmful. Like I said I will do a before and after on my end.
How are you measuring wear?
Originally Posted By: domer10
Im hoping less wear numbers, as stated above it does seem to do that with laying a protective coating on all friction parts. I did see increase in MPG in ram, 1.5-2mpg, but I'm not in it for that, if i can prevent less wear on my engine than thats allI care about, I like to take care of my things.
Originally Posted By: domer10
Im hoping less wear numbers, as stated above it does seem to do that with laying a protective coating on all friction parts. I did see increase in MPG in ram, 1.5-2mpg, but I'm not in it for that, if i can prevent less wear on my engine than thats allI care about, I like to take care of my things.
Out of all the claims an additive might make, this has always been the one I just don't understand. The coefficient of friction of any motor oil is near zero already. And besides, the majority of drag in an engine isn't frictional loss due to the oil.
Originally Posted By: domer10
I never said they left anything out, just adding something to aid in less friction.
Originally Posted By: domer10
I never said they left anything out, just adding something to aid in less friction.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Out of all the claims an additive might make, this has always been the one I just don't understand. The coefficient of friction of any motor oil is near zero already. And besides, the majority of drag in an engine isn't frictional loss due to the oil.
Originally Posted By: domer10
I never said they left anything out, just adding something to aid in less friction.
What are you missing.......or not comprehending. Im not using it for anything but soley the purpose of less wear. Im not measuring it, haven't done any tests, have I felt a change yes......seen a change in mpg yes. You don't like it don't use it, want proof, do your own study. I am content using it, I believe it works, as do others.
Out of all the claims an additive might make, this has always been the one I just don't understand. The coefficient of friction of any motor oil is near zero already. And besides, the majority of drag in an engine isn't frictional loss due to the oil.
Originally Posted By: domer10
I never said they left anything out, just adding something to aid in less friction.
What are you missing.......or not comprehending. Im not using it for anything but soley the purpose of less wear. Im not measuring it, haven't done any tests, have I felt a change yes......seen a change in mpg yes. You don't like it don't use it, want proof, do your own study. I am content using it, I believe it works, as do others.
It certainly isn't causing any harm, if anything I think it makes a quality oil that much better. Now come at me with "do you have any proof" questions.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Out of all the claims an additive might make, this has always been the one I just don't understand. The coefficient of friction of any motor oil is near zero already. And besides, the majority of drag in an engine isn't frictional loss due to the oil.
Originally Posted By: domer10
I never said they left anything out, just adding something to aid in less friction.
True but a little closer to ZERO is a little better perhaps?
Both Ceratex and Archoil AR 9300 and perhaps AR9100 not only reduce the friction BUT enhance heat transfer from the motor oil to the oil cooler so people report a few degrees cooler motor oil.
I think #1 reason to use this nano technology is to stop metal to metal contact risk on start up or due to an oil pump failure to pick up oil in some driving cases.
It was clear on tear down as noted above the metal contact surfaces where coated. Now I am not going to drain the oil run the engine but some claim to have done so and showed the parts on tear down.
Guy lost oil due to loose filter change but Ceratec protected.
The only time I would use this nano technology would be in an engine, air compressor, etc that I did not want to be without. If I was leasing a car then I would just keep the money in my pocket.
Out of all the claims an additive might make, this has always been the one I just don't understand. The coefficient of friction of any motor oil is near zero already. And besides, the majority of drag in an engine isn't frictional loss due to the oil.
Originally Posted By: domer10
I never said they left anything out, just adding something to aid in less friction.
True but a little closer to ZERO is a little better perhaps?
Both Ceratex and Archoil AR 9300 and perhaps AR9100 not only reduce the friction BUT enhance heat transfer from the motor oil to the oil cooler so people report a few degrees cooler motor oil.
I think #1 reason to use this nano technology is to stop metal to metal contact risk on start up or due to an oil pump failure to pick up oil in some driving cases.
It was clear on tear down as noted above the metal contact surfaces where coated. Now I am not going to drain the oil run the engine but some claim to have done so and showed the parts on tear down.
Guy lost oil due to loose filter change but Ceratec protected.
The only time I would use this nano technology would be in an engine, air compressor, etc that I did not want to be without. If I was leasing a car then I would just keep the money in my pocket.
Assuming that link is truthful, does anyone know what would happen if the same scenario happened without the additive? Someone needs to test it for a comparison.
Originally Posted By: GaleHawkins
Guy lost oil due to loose filter change but Ceratec protected.
Originally Posted By: GaleHawkins
Guy lost oil due to loose filter change but Ceratec protected.
Well you did say that you were hoping for "less wear numbers". I only asked how wear was being measured.
Originally Posted By: domer10
It certainly isn't causing any harm, if anything I think it makes a quality oil that much better. Now come at me with "do you have any proof" questions.
Originally Posted By: domer10
It certainly isn't causing any harm, if anything I think it makes a quality oil that much better. Now come at me with "do you have any proof" questions.
Im pulling a sample out but like I stated I never took a sample pre-ceratec.....I think Gale's post should act as a bit of proof of a barrier being laid on the surface areas of the metals that heat up. Therefore that barrier acts as protection, which in theory would protect the contact surfaces. So now after I drain this oil, the barrier that is left behind will wear down, instead of the metal surfaces, Hence less wear.
And I can get I can get the castrols made in belgum and germany how do those compare to mobil 0w40?
Originally Posted By: domer10
Im pulling a sample out but like I stated I never took a sample pre-ceratec.....I think Gale's post should act as a bit of proof of a barrier being laid on the surface areas of the metals that heat up. Therefore that barrier acts as protection, which in theory would protect the contact surfaces. So now after I drain this oil, the barrier that is left behind will wear down, instead of the metal surfaces, Hence less wear.
While my visual/touch inspection is not concrete proof for nano technology additives like Ceratec or Archoil AR9300 or AR9100 oil additives I do have a background as a redneck farm boy rebuilding engines as a kid, training and work experience years ago in tool and die and have earned an OD degree from SCO in Memphis TN.
The test engine was a blown engine due to the former owner running it without oil due to a blown oil cooler line on the 325 Polaris oil/air cooled engine. Running with no oil took out the crank and connecting rod. I do not plan to run either of the 325 ATV's without oil but SHOULD another line blow (both machines have new set of lines from NAPA by the way) I expect the nano technology will give a short period of some protection without motor oil.
I do feeling from tear down of an engine after it idled for 10+ hours with Ceratec added per the bottle label the produce that Ceratec does what Liquid Moly states it will do.
Remember this test engine was put back together with a chewed up crank rod journal with a used connecting rod and a STANDARD size rod bear inserts. We did not split the crank case but used emery cloth strips through the hole left when the cylinder was removed. We removed the connecting rod from the top side so we did not have to split the case to remove the connecting rod in this engine.
If one does not see Liquid Moly as a maker of only snake oil then why would someone think the company lies about its products?
I would not have expected the hack job with a very bad crank would have ran for 11 hours even at idle with the best motor oil. Mobil 1 High Mileage 10W-40 was the base oil we used in this Ceratec test to see if it does coat the parts and it did it very well.
At idle I am not sure how long it would have ran but after 10 hours I got bored and started loading it and revving it and it started to knock.
I computed the engine rotated about a million times so I was ready to see the tear down results plus I had paid $10 for the used connecting rod and I did not want to spin the bearings and damage it.
At the age of 63 with a life long history with engines and machines I was glad I learned about nano technology oil additives about six months ago. I think they are a larger advancement in lubrication than was over dino motor oil.
Additives for crankcases that hold 100 gallons of motor oil. I think they are new to consumer market and have mainly been into fleet sales historically.
http://www.liqui-moly.de/liquimoly/produ...voiladb=web.nsf
For some reason I could not hyper link this Liqui Moly link for Ceratec. It can be sourced from many web sites. I got some from Amazon and a NAPA store ordered me some.
Im pulling a sample out but like I stated I never took a sample pre-ceratec.....I think Gale's post should act as a bit of proof of a barrier being laid on the surface areas of the metals that heat up. Therefore that barrier acts as protection, which in theory would protect the contact surfaces. So now after I drain this oil, the barrier that is left behind will wear down, instead of the metal surfaces, Hence less wear.
While my visual/touch inspection is not concrete proof for nano technology additives like Ceratec or Archoil AR9300 or AR9100 oil additives I do have a background as a redneck farm boy rebuilding engines as a kid, training and work experience years ago in tool and die and have earned an OD degree from SCO in Memphis TN.
The test engine was a blown engine due to the former owner running it without oil due to a blown oil cooler line on the 325 Polaris oil/air cooled engine. Running with no oil took out the crank and connecting rod. I do not plan to run either of the 325 ATV's without oil but SHOULD another line blow (both machines have new set of lines from NAPA by the way) I expect the nano technology will give a short period of some protection without motor oil.
I do feeling from tear down of an engine after it idled for 10+ hours with Ceratec added per the bottle label the produce that Ceratec does what Liquid Moly states it will do.
Remember this test engine was put back together with a chewed up crank rod journal with a used connecting rod and a STANDARD size rod bear inserts. We did not split the crank case but used emery cloth strips through the hole left when the cylinder was removed. We removed the connecting rod from the top side so we did not have to split the case to remove the connecting rod in this engine.
If one does not see Liquid Moly as a maker of only snake oil then why would someone think the company lies about its products?
I would not have expected the hack job with a very bad crank would have ran for 11 hours even at idle with the best motor oil. Mobil 1 High Mileage 10W-40 was the base oil we used in this Ceratec test to see if it does coat the parts and it did it very well.
At idle I am not sure how long it would have ran but after 10 hours I got bored and started loading it and revving it and it started to knock.
I computed the engine rotated about a million times so I was ready to see the tear down results plus I had paid $10 for the used connecting rod and I did not want to spin the bearings and damage it.
At the age of 63 with a life long history with engines and machines I was glad I learned about nano technology oil additives about six months ago. I think they are a larger advancement in lubrication than was over dino motor oil.
Additives for crankcases that hold 100 gallons of motor oil. I think they are new to consumer market and have mainly been into fleet sales historically.
http://www.liqui-moly.de/liquimoly/produ...voiladb=web.nsf
For some reason I could not hyper link this Liqui Moly link for Ceratec. It can be sourced from many web sites. I got some from Amazon and a NAPA store ordered me some.
Originally Posted By: domer10
So Im thinking Mobil 1 Ow40 for 2002 Bmw M3, only has 50000 Kilometeres so thats about 30 mi or under, also when I was at napa saw Liqui Moly and Mobil 1 15w50 which also caught my eye, whatever I run will be with a dose of CERATEC as well. I know it calls for 10W60 Castrol but I'm not a fan of it. I won't be tracking it, at most spirited runs down the twisty country roads and in town cruising. Give me your thoughts! [img:center][/img] /Users/domenic/Desktop/$_20-2.JPG/Users/domenic/Desktop/$_20-1.JPG/Users/domenic/Desktop/photo 2.JPG
There are no viscosity options on the M regardless of ambient temps. Autodata reads like this.
All temperatures
10w60 Synthetic
API SL/ACEA A3
in other words, don't go off piste with the viscosity!
100's of calculations were made by the engineers that designed every component in your engine to make sure they are operating in the right viscosity oil with the right pressure, flow and the additive pack to protect it. There are loads of 10w-60's meeting that spec now though so you have choice, Castrol is tried and tested.
So Im thinking Mobil 1 Ow40 for 2002 Bmw M3, only has 50000 Kilometeres so thats about 30 mi or under, also when I was at napa saw Liqui Moly and Mobil 1 15w50 which also caught my eye, whatever I run will be with a dose of CERATEC as well. I know it calls for 10W60 Castrol but I'm not a fan of it. I won't be tracking it, at most spirited runs down the twisty country roads and in town cruising. Give me your thoughts! [img:center][/img] /Users/domenic/Desktop/$_20-2.JPG/Users/domenic/Desktop/$_20-1.JPG/Users/domenic/Desktop/photo 2.JPG
There are no viscosity options on the M regardless of ambient temps. Autodata reads like this.
All temperatures
10w60 Synthetic
API SL/ACEA A3
in other words, don't go off piste with the viscosity!
100's of calculations were made by the engineers that designed every component in your engine to make sure they are operating in the right viscosity oil with the right pressure, flow and the additive pack to protect it. There are loads of 10w-60's meeting that spec now though so you have choice, Castrol is tried and tested.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
