^^ Keep us updated.^^
Interesting experience with MMO
- Thread starter Injured_Again
- Start date
- Status
Will do. I'm planning a several hundred mile drive tomorrow, to storm some backroads and do some hiking in the mountains. I'm going to be driving it hard, probably really hard, and it will be a good test to see if the oil consumption, that used to be one quart every 1000+ miles but seems negligible over the last several hundred miles, is really altered by the MoS2.
Our '96 BMW, with somewhere around 120k miles, is next to receive a treatment of MoS2, at its next oil change probably in the next month or so.
Our '96 BMW, with somewhere around 120k miles, is next to receive a treatment of MoS2, at its next oil change probably in the next month or so.
Originally Posted By: Injured_Again
Will do. I'm planning a several hundred mile drive tomorrow, to storm some backroads and do some hiking in the mountains. I'm going to be driving it hard, probably really hard, and it will be a good test to see if the oil consumption, that used to be one quart every 1000+ miles but seems negligible over the last several hundred miles, is really altered by the MoS2.
Our '96 BMW, with somewhere around 120k miles, is next to receive a treatment of MoS2, at its next oil change probably in the next month or so.
I'm interested in knowing if it helped.
Will do. I'm planning a several hundred mile drive tomorrow, to storm some backroads and do some hiking in the mountains. I'm going to be driving it hard, probably really hard, and it will be a good test to see if the oil consumption, that used to be one quart every 1000+ miles but seems negligible over the last several hundred miles, is really altered by the MoS2.
Our '96 BMW, with somewhere around 120k miles, is next to receive a treatment of MoS2, at its next oil change probably in the next month or so.
I'm interested in knowing if it helped.
I drove 380 miles yesterday from the Seattle area to the Windy Ridge area (South side) of Mt. St. Helens and back. It was an absolutely beautiful day, starting out around 60 degrees and ending up around 80 degrees.
The drive down there was 60 MPH interstate freeway where the average speed was 65-67 MPH for about 45 miles, followed by 80 miles of backroads with speed limits generally in the 50-60 MPH range. However, there was a ton of road construction, meaning I sat and waited with the engine idling for probably a total of 15-20 minutes, followed by a lot of creeping along, and maybe 10 full throttle passes on two-lane freeways. I filled up right as I began, and filled up right at the turnoff to the national park road to Mt. St. Helens. 123 miles, 3.465 gallons, 35.56 MPG! I have never gotten more than 34 MPG, and that was with the OEM wheels/tires that were narrower, lighter, and a bit smaller in diameter (meaning the fuel economy calculation would have been more optimistic). That 34 MPG was also a similar drive, but in cool January conditions.
The second part was driving from the gas station up to the Windy Ridge viewpoint, twice, once for the fun of driving these incredibly winding roads quickly, and the second time to stop and enjoy the viewpoints. I filled back up at the same same gas station, at the same same pump even. 90.5 miles, 2.692 gallons, for 33.6 MPG. This tank was mostly 4th gear to the actual road that climbs to the 4100 foot viewpoint, followed by 3rd and 4th gear momentum driving in the 2500-5500 RPM range and high throttle openings on corner exits. On the way down, it was 4th and 5th gear, and lots of coasting.
The last section was all freeway home, a 40 mile section averaging 60 MPH with a few full-throttle passes, followed by a 60 mile section of freeway averaging 75 MPH, followed by a further 60 miles in freeway traffic averaging maybe 40 MPH all together. It was into a headwind, with the A/C running the entire time. 168.2 miles, 5.274 gallons, for 31.9 MPG.
Never had close to this kind of fuel economy since switching to the larger tires, which dropped the MPGs by 10% roughly. I did burn/lose half a quart of oil though. Several times, as I was slowing from rough 50 MPH to 30 MPH with third gear engaged to take a moderately high G corner (estimate 0.7G), I'd get on the gas at the apex and see a big puff of blue smoke. I could not recreate this but letting the engine idle for a few minutes, then blipping the throttle. I think this may be a PCV valve issue.
Otherwise, I'm truly amazed at the fuel economy. The engine is running even a bit more smoothly and quietly now after this trip. I've refilled the half-quart that I was down, will change the PCV valve, and then monitor oil usage again, because it didn't seem to burn any in the several hundred normally driven miles before this trip.
The drive down there was 60 MPH interstate freeway where the average speed was 65-67 MPH for about 45 miles, followed by 80 miles of backroads with speed limits generally in the 50-60 MPH range. However, there was a ton of road construction, meaning I sat and waited with the engine idling for probably a total of 15-20 minutes, followed by a lot of creeping along, and maybe 10 full throttle passes on two-lane freeways. I filled up right as I began, and filled up right at the turnoff to the national park road to Mt. St. Helens. 123 miles, 3.465 gallons, 35.56 MPG! I have never gotten more than 34 MPG, and that was with the OEM wheels/tires that were narrower, lighter, and a bit smaller in diameter (meaning the fuel economy calculation would have been more optimistic). That 34 MPG was also a similar drive, but in cool January conditions.
The second part was driving from the gas station up to the Windy Ridge viewpoint, twice, once for the fun of driving these incredibly winding roads quickly, and the second time to stop and enjoy the viewpoints. I filled back up at the same same gas station, at the same same pump even. 90.5 miles, 2.692 gallons, for 33.6 MPG. This tank was mostly 4th gear to the actual road that climbs to the 4100 foot viewpoint, followed by 3rd and 4th gear momentum driving in the 2500-5500 RPM range and high throttle openings on corner exits. On the way down, it was 4th and 5th gear, and lots of coasting.
The last section was all freeway home, a 40 mile section averaging 60 MPH with a few full-throttle passes, followed by a 60 mile section of freeway averaging 75 MPH, followed by a further 60 miles in freeway traffic averaging maybe 40 MPH all together. It was into a headwind, with the A/C running the entire time. 168.2 miles, 5.274 gallons, for 31.9 MPG.
Never had close to this kind of fuel economy since switching to the larger tires, which dropped the MPGs by 10% roughly. I did burn/lose half a quart of oil though. Several times, as I was slowing from rough 50 MPH to 30 MPH with third gear engaged to take a moderately high G corner (estimate 0.7G), I'd get on the gas at the apex and see a big puff of blue smoke. I could not recreate this but letting the engine idle for a few minutes, then blipping the throttle. I think this may be a PCV valve issue.
Otherwise, I'm truly amazed at the fuel economy. The engine is running even a bit more smoothly and quietly now after this trip. I've refilled the half-quart that I was down, will change the PCV valve, and then monitor oil usage again, because it didn't seem to burn any in the several hundred normally driven miles before this trip.
Thanks for taking the time to share your experience with MOS2. I love the stuff,and the entire brand as a whole. In a market where snake oil is the norm its nice to see an additive that lives up to its claims.
Maybe we should start an mos2 thread,just so it gets all the info in 1 place.
Maybe we should start an mos2 thread,just so it gets all the info in 1 place.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Maybe we should start an mos2 thread,just so it gets all the info in 1 place.
Great idea, and less confusing.
Maybe we should start an mos2 thread,just so it gets all the info in 1 place.
Great idea, and less confusing.
Even though I agree with i_a's findings, I believe the amount of gasoline being added is too small. You need to keep track of the mileage for much longer. When you have gone through hundred cumulative gallon, you can categorically say that your mileage is better.
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Even though I agree with i_a's findings, I believe the amount of gasoline being added is too small. You need to keep track of the mileage for much longer. When you have gone through hundred cumulative gallon, you can categorically say that your mileage is better.
I agree. That's why it was interesting the second fill-up, at the exact same gas station and exact same pump. So, even if that pump underfilled from the gas in the tank originally, resulting in the 35.5 MPG tank, the second fill should have been noticeably worse because it would now fill to an equal level. But it wasn't, which makes me think the 35.5 MPG value was probably pretty close.
But you are right - I will continue driving and monitoring fuel economy over the winter. I have sort of a baseline from last winter, and the driving will be basically identical.
There is no denying, though, that the engine runs so much more smoothly.
Even though I agree with i_a's findings, I believe the amount of gasoline being added is too small. You need to keep track of the mileage for much longer. When you have gone through hundred cumulative gallon, you can categorically say that your mileage is better.
I agree. That's why it was interesting the second fill-up, at the exact same gas station and exact same pump. So, even if that pump underfilled from the gas in the tank originally, resulting in the 35.5 MPG tank, the second fill should have been noticeably worse because it would now fill to an equal level. But it wasn't, which makes me think the 35.5 MPG value was probably pretty close.
But you are right - I will continue driving and monitoring fuel economy over the winter. I have sort of a baseline from last winter, and the driving will be basically identical.
There is no denying, though, that the engine runs so much more smoothly.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: brandonl
Is this safe to run on M1 high mileage full synthetic 10w30?
My car have 134k on now, its a 2003 toyota matrix. Im trying to increase mpg.
THanks
I think I'm among the few who have had statistically significant increases in fuel economy. I am still showing a 5-8% increase in steady state highway fuel economy. My city fuel economy has actually gone down a little bit, due to the cold weather conditions and that I am now accelerating faster and using higher engine speeds.
Living in Indiana, you'd probably see as much or more fuel economy gains by using a lighter weight oil, unless you have some specific reason to use 10w-30. You might try a 5w-20 or 0w-20 instead.
Is this safe to run on M1 high mileage full synthetic 10w30?
My car have 134k on now, its a 2003 toyota matrix. Im trying to increase mpg.
THanks
I think I'm among the few who have had statistically significant increases in fuel economy. I am still showing a 5-8% increase in steady state highway fuel economy. My city fuel economy has actually gone down a little bit, due to the cold weather conditions and that I am now accelerating faster and using higher engine speeds.
Living in Indiana, you'd probably see as much or more fuel economy gains by using a lighter weight oil, unless you have some specific reason to use 10w-30. You might try a 5w-20 or 0w-20 instead.
Originally Posted By: brandonl
Would it good to use 5w20 all year round?
Many/most modern cars, including Toyotas, now recommend 5w-20 for year-around use. There are also some 5w-30 oils that test closer to a 20 weight than a 30 weight, and these are used in high output engines in track usage. So, the oil itself is fine for use in these situations where temps can get up in the 270-280 degree range, which means it will be fine in a car used normally where oil temps never exceed 230-240 degrees.
So if your engine is in good operating condition, and considering that you live in Indiana, I don't see why using a good 5w-20 oil wouldn't work for you. But with an older engine, you probably still have to try it and see. Thinner oils can exacerbate oil consumption, and may alter the way some hydraulically actuated devices, like internal, oil-pressure driven timing mechanisms, work.
I use 5w-30 in my 151k mile Miata and wouldn't hesitate to use a 5w-20, except that I'm often running this engine to redline under full throttle, and so just feel better with a very slightly thicker oil.
Would it good to use 5w20 all year round?
Many/most modern cars, including Toyotas, now recommend 5w-20 for year-around use. There are also some 5w-30 oils that test closer to a 20 weight than a 30 weight, and these are used in high output engines in track usage. So, the oil itself is fine for use in these situations where temps can get up in the 270-280 degree range, which means it will be fine in a car used normally where oil temps never exceed 230-240 degrees.
So if your engine is in good operating condition, and considering that you live in Indiana, I don't see why using a good 5w-20 oil wouldn't work for you. But with an older engine, you probably still have to try it and see. Thinner oils can exacerbate oil consumption, and may alter the way some hydraulically actuated devices, like internal, oil-pressure driven timing mechanisms, work.
I use 5w-30 in my 151k mile Miata and wouldn't hesitate to use a 5w-20, except that I'm often running this engine to redline under full throttle, and so just feel better with a very slightly thicker oil.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
