Just put a pint of MMO in the crankcase of the 528
- Thread starter andyd
- Start date
- Status
Might as well just pick up a jug of Rotella T6 5w40 or Mobil 1 0W40 instead of the thick Franken blend. 20w50 at those temperatures? Seems crazy with what's available in the states these days. Where on earth does one even find 20w50 in the USA? I hope you're not going out of your way to use it and overpaying. I think the MMO was a good idea though, it probably got the viscosity closer to where it should be.
MMO is one of the few "cleaners" gentle enough that I would put it in one of my Bimmers engines, but it is absolutely not going to increase the lubricity of a good oil, especially a good "consumers choice" like M1 0w40, or a boutique track-quality oil like Redline 0/5w40 (what I use).
The only possible way I ssee it doing anything to help protect the engine, aside from its mild cleaning ability (frankly, I have gotten rid of sludge faster using RL, an ester base, than with MMO mixed with a Group 3/Group 4 mix like M1 0w40 in as high a concentration as 20 percent), is that it MIGHT reduce startup wear a little bit in negative temperatures (Fahrenheit).
Frankly, outside of Alaska and a few other places, the relative amount of negative degree Fahrenheit starts to 32F+ starts is so great that for me, I don't think it's worth the possible negatives to run it constantly.
To be clear, I am saying that I see a benefit for cleaning, and for use in gas, but that a clean engine running a top of the line oil will have absolutely no benefit, leaving the only possible outcomes to be either no effects, or the significantly more likely negative effects. Will most people ever see the negative? No, not if it shortens engine life from 300k to 250k, for example, but I would absolutely be livid if I bought a vehicle and the PO didn't disclose that they'd used a bazillion additives, or even just one but constantly. In fact, that happened with my former 1990 E30 Hartge 3.8, a very rare car (a 325is w the the 325is' 2.5L M20 and 5MT pulled and the Euro M5/M6 S38B38 and 6MT swapped in, custom exhaust and Supersprint made headers + Gruppe-N carbon intake manifold + hotter cams and tuned, a full suspension upgrade and LSD, Hartge full interior, and a unique to the car body w F+R bumpers, skirts, widened fenders, front aero lip and rear diffuser, Hartge wing/M3 Mirrors, Recaro's made to spec for Hartge, 3-spoke modified EVO3 steering wheel, Brembo-sourced brakes w 4-piston 324x34mm 2pc front and 2-piston 318x28mm 2pcrear setup, and Hartge "Race" Forged Multipiece Wheels in 17x8 and 17x9... Only a ccouple dozen were made, this was a beautiful Henna Red over a mix of Alcantara and Leather with just 38k miles). I got it, after 5 months of waiting, and the outside was flawless, the interior had not even a crease in the seats, even the underbody and engine bay were flawless.
However, when my mechanic and I opened up the motor to ensure timing was correct, there was a lot of gunk, and it wasn't sludge, in the motor. It felt a lot like what you would imagine burnt stopleak stuff to feel like, but it had that unique smell of MMO.
I called the PO and demanded to know what was put in it, because the ironically meticulously kept and insanely extensive maintenance and records show nothing to explain it.
The response was that a number of products were used to try to quiet down the lifter/valve tick. This included MMO, 3 types of Lucas stuff, and quite literally almost a dozen more. Apparently, the shop doing maintenance said that there's no way that it could be a timing issue, as the valves didn't need adjustment for another 20k miles.
Well, it turns out that after we cleaned up the whole engine, we found that the timing had been off by almost 6 degrees!
The price fortthe car was amended in consideration of this, and I hold no grudge.
I just know that if I hear a seller mention anything beyond the typical Techron/SI-1/etc, I ask for either a sample from the car and send for UOA, or make a deal about cost of a much more extensive PPI.
The Hartge, well, it was one of the most fun cars I've ever owned, up there with a first generation MR2 Supercharged (w track suspension, 15x7 and 15x8 BBS Mesh 3pc wheels (9.5lbs), a giant induction system, and equal length tubular headers into a single 3" mandrel bent exhaust pipe w only one resonator to quiet it exhaust system, shortened pulley for an extra 4.5psi, and front/rear cross-chassis bracing and behind the seats an X-brace; oh, and the already featherweight car had a further 119lbs removed.. 239bhp and 1835lbs, for $4k!).
I regret selling it oh so much...
But, sorry for the reminiscing...
The point is that there's no reason to do what you are wanting to do, as every benefit you expect from this would be had a hundred fold over by simply switching to a proper oil weight.
For true year round use in my BMW's that see year round use, I use 0w40 and occasionally 0w30, never once has it given me any issues.
The only time I use anything above a 5w is with either my E46 M3/E39 M5 and the recommended 10w60 TWS (although I have had some odd results with it, and believe the formula has changed again, to favor the S65 V8 and S85 V10 and newer engines; consequently, I have been using mostly RL 5-10w50 and have had phenomenal results), and with my 328Ci on the track, where I run RL racing spec oil in a 10w40 (no VII/VIM used apparently).
I would not be running a 10w anything in an M52tu/M54/N52, not for daily use. The rod bearings suffer a lot of unnecessary wear as a result of too heavy an oil.
The only possible way I ssee it doing anything to help protect the engine, aside from its mild cleaning ability (frankly, I have gotten rid of sludge faster using RL, an ester base, than with MMO mixed with a Group 3/Group 4 mix like M1 0w40 in as high a concentration as 20 percent), is that it MIGHT reduce startup wear a little bit in negative temperatures (Fahrenheit).
Frankly, outside of Alaska and a few other places, the relative amount of negative degree Fahrenheit starts to 32F+ starts is so great that for me, I don't think it's worth the possible negatives to run it constantly.
To be clear, I am saying that I see a benefit for cleaning, and for use in gas, but that a clean engine running a top of the line oil will have absolutely no benefit, leaving the only possible outcomes to be either no effects, or the significantly more likely negative effects. Will most people ever see the negative? No, not if it shortens engine life from 300k to 250k, for example, but I would absolutely be livid if I bought a vehicle and the PO didn't disclose that they'd used a bazillion additives, or even just one but constantly. In fact, that happened with my former 1990 E30 Hartge 3.8, a very rare car (a 325is w the the 325is' 2.5L M20 and 5MT pulled and the Euro M5/M6 S38B38 and 6MT swapped in, custom exhaust and Supersprint made headers + Gruppe-N carbon intake manifold + hotter cams and tuned, a full suspension upgrade and LSD, Hartge full interior, and a unique to the car body w F+R bumpers, skirts, widened fenders, front aero lip and rear diffuser, Hartge wing/M3 Mirrors, Recaro's made to spec for Hartge, 3-spoke modified EVO3 steering wheel, Brembo-sourced brakes w 4-piston 324x34mm 2pc front and 2-piston 318x28mm 2pcrear setup, and Hartge "Race" Forged Multipiece Wheels in 17x8 and 17x9... Only a ccouple dozen were made, this was a beautiful Henna Red over a mix of Alcantara and Leather with just 38k miles). I got it, after 5 months of waiting, and the outside was flawless, the interior had not even a crease in the seats, even the underbody and engine bay were flawless.
However, when my mechanic and I opened up the motor to ensure timing was correct, there was a lot of gunk, and it wasn't sludge, in the motor. It felt a lot like what you would imagine burnt stopleak stuff to feel like, but it had that unique smell of MMO.
I called the PO and demanded to know what was put in it, because the ironically meticulously kept and insanely extensive maintenance and records show nothing to explain it.
The response was that a number of products were used to try to quiet down the lifter/valve tick. This included MMO, 3 types of Lucas stuff, and quite literally almost a dozen more. Apparently, the shop doing maintenance said that there's no way that it could be a timing issue, as the valves didn't need adjustment for another 20k miles.
Well, it turns out that after we cleaned up the whole engine, we found that the timing had been off by almost 6 degrees!
The price fortthe car was amended in consideration of this, and I hold no grudge.
I just know that if I hear a seller mention anything beyond the typical Techron/SI-1/etc, I ask for either a sample from the car and send for UOA, or make a deal about cost of a much more extensive PPI.
The Hartge, well, it was one of the most fun cars I've ever owned, up there with a first generation MR2 Supercharged (w track suspension, 15x7 and 15x8 BBS Mesh 3pc wheels (9.5lbs), a giant induction system, and equal length tubular headers into a single 3" mandrel bent exhaust pipe w only one resonator to quiet it exhaust system, shortened pulley for an extra 4.5psi, and front/rear cross-chassis bracing and behind the seats an X-brace; oh, and the already featherweight car had a further 119lbs removed.. 239bhp and 1835lbs, for $4k!).
I regret selling it oh so much...
But, sorry for the reminiscing...
The point is that there's no reason to do what you are wanting to do, as every benefit you expect from this would be had a hundred fold over by simply switching to a proper oil weight.
For true year round use in my BMW's that see year round use, I use 0w40 and occasionally 0w30, never once has it given me any issues.
The only time I use anything above a 5w is with either my E46 M3/E39 M5 and the recommended 10w60 TWS (although I have had some odd results with it, and believe the formula has changed again, to favor the S65 V8 and S85 V10 and newer engines; consequently, I have been using mostly RL 5-10w50 and have had phenomenal results), and with my 328Ci on the track, where I run RL racing spec oil in a 10w40 (no VII/VIM used apparently).
I would not be running a 10w anything in an M52tu/M54/N52, not for daily use. The rod bearings suffer a lot of unnecessary wear as a result of too heavy an oil.
And yet per your own post, you were using it at 9 degrees.
BMW has "a reason" for a range of specified oils. There was no reason for using 20W-50 at the temperatures you noted. Actually these days with modern oils there is no reason to use 20W-50 at all.
Originally Posted By: andyd
the 528e s are 25 yrs old and spec 20w 50 down to 32F. I could probably go down to 10W30, but I figure BMW has a reason. I ran my first one to 350K miles on dino 20w50. I see no reason to switch from a winner.
BMW has "a reason" for a range of specified oils. There was no reason for using 20W-50 at the temperatures you noted. Actually these days with modern oils there is no reason to use 20W-50 at all.
Originally Posted By: andyd
the 528e s are 25 yrs old and spec 20w 50 down to 32F. I could probably go down to 10W30, but I figure BMW has a reason. I ran my first one to 350K miles on dino 20w50. I see no reason to switch from a winner.
That is a direct contradiction to your previous post.
"Mine started really hard on the dino 20w50 the other day." That's a winner??
Originally Posted By: andyd
the 528e s are 25 yrs old and spec 20w 50 down to 32F. I could probably go down to 10W30, but I figure BMW has a reason. I ran my first one to 350K miles on dino 20w50. I see no reason to switch from a winner.
"Mine started really hard on the dino 20w50 the other day." That's a winner??
Originally Posted By: andyd
the 528e s are 25 yrs old and spec 20w 50 down to 32F. I could probably go down to 10W30, but I figure BMW has a reason. I ran my first one to 350K miles on dino 20w50. I see no reason to switch from a winner.
Lets keep it simple folks with regards to MMO lubricity:
MMO < diesel fuel < oil lubricity
Yes, MMO will hurt the lubricity of typical motor oils. The transitive property does work here. Does that mean it won't clean? Not at all. It could still have benefits, but lubricity is NOT one of them.
MMO < diesel fuel < oil lubricity
Yes, MMO will hurt the lubricity of typical motor oils. The transitive property does work here. Does that mean it won't clean? Not at all. It could still have benefits, but lubricity is NOT one of them.
Originally Posted By: Kruse
Originally Posted By: Donald
No oil manufacturer not car maker suggests any additives in the oil.
BUT YET...you always put in a plug for ARX whenever you can.
I don't put anything in the oil of my vehicles. I have used ARX in the past. I have talked to Frank (but am not connected to) a few times and he does not strike me as a person would market a useless product. My sense is there are cases where ARX works and cases where it does nothing.
For the most part I expect synthetic oils to keep my engines clean.
Originally Posted By: Donald
No oil manufacturer not car maker suggests any additives in the oil.
BUT YET...you always put in a plug for ARX whenever you can.
I don't put anything in the oil of my vehicles. I have used ARX in the past. I have talked to Frank (but am not connected to) a few times and he does not strike me as a person would market a useless product. My sense is there are cases where ARX works and cases where it does nothing.
For the most part I expect synthetic oils to keep my engines clean.
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Lets keep it simple folks with regards to MMO lubricity:
MMO < diesel fuel < oil lubricity
Yes, MMO will hurt the lubricity of typical motor oils. The transitive property does work here. Does that mean it won't clean? Not at all. It could still have benefits, but lubricity is NOT one of them.
Can you point me to the UOA reports where adding to oil showed it hurt lubricity? The reports I saw were quite good. I saw the TBN hit, but that's about it.
Lets keep it simple folks with regards to MMO lubricity:
MMO < diesel fuel < oil lubricity
Yes, MMO will hurt the lubricity of typical motor oils. The transitive property does work here. Does that mean it won't clean? Not at all. It could still have benefits, but lubricity is NOT one of them.
Can you point me to the UOA reports where adding to oil showed it hurt lubricity? The reports I saw were quite good. I saw the TBN hit, but that's about it.
I would never use MMO... Motor oil today is just to good to add MMO. Just use a good quality motor oil and let her rip. LOL...
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Lets keep it simple folks with regards to MMO lubricity:
MMO < diesel fuel < oil lubricity
Yes, MMO will hurt the lubricity of typical motor oils. The transitive property does work here. Does that mean it won't clean? Not at all. It could still have benefits, but lubricity is NOT one of them.
Can you point me to the UOA reports where adding to oil showed it hurt lubricity? The reports I saw were quite good. I saw the TBN hit, but that's about it.
Sure, right after you point me to a UOA that tests for lubricity.
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Lets keep it simple folks with regards to MMO lubricity:
MMO < diesel fuel < oil lubricity
Yes, MMO will hurt the lubricity of typical motor oils. The transitive property does work here. Does that mean it won't clean? Not at all. It could still have benefits, but lubricity is NOT one of them.
Can you point me to the UOA reports where adding to oil showed it hurt lubricity? The reports I saw were quite good. I saw the TBN hit, but that's about it.
Sure, right after you point me to a UOA that tests for lubricity.
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Lets keep it simple folks with regards to MMO lubricity:
MMO < diesel fuel < oil lubricity
Yes, MMO will hurt the lubricity of typical motor oils. The transitive property does work here. Does that mean it won't clean? Not at all. It could still have benefits, but lubricity is NOT one of them.
Can you point me to the UOA reports where adding to oil showed it hurt lubricity? The reports I saw were quite good. I saw the TBN hit, but that's about it.
Sure, right after you point me to a UOA that tests for lubricity.
You're right badtlc no test for lubricity. Tell you what, show me a bad UOA with MMO. I already know about the slight TBN hit which when cleaning up an engine is meaningless so I'll save you some time finding them. Wouldn't a reduction in an oils ability to lubricate show up in increased wear numbers? Show me a UOA with MMO showing increased wear metals.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Lets keep it simple folks with regards to MMO lubricity:
MMO < diesel fuel < oil lubricity
Yes, MMO will hurt the lubricity of typical motor oils. The transitive property does work here. Does that mean it won't clean? Not at all. It could still have benefits, but lubricity is NOT one of them.
Can you point me to the UOA reports where adding to oil showed it hurt lubricity? The reports I saw were quite good. I saw the TBN hit, but that's about it.
Sure, right after you point me to a UOA that tests for lubricity.
You're right badtlc no test for lubricity. Tell you what, show me a bad UOA with MMO. I already know about the slight TBN hit which when cleaning up an engine is meaningless so I'll save you some time finding them. Wouldn't a reduction in an oils ability to lubricate show up in increased wear numbers? Show me a UOA with MMO showing increased wear metals.
Very few UOA's done with MMO in the crank, but I've seen one or two where the "wear" numbers were as good or better than without it.
Doing one myself is on my "to do" list.
Doing one myself is on my "to do" list.
Originally Posted By: Kruse
Originally Posted By: Donald
No oil manufacturer not car maker suggests any additives in the oil.
BUT YET...you always put in a plug for ARX whenever you can.
Okay, fine. So when there is a discussion about Auto-RX Donald will you still say the same thing in that discussion? If no oil manufacturer or car manufacturer suggests putting any additive into the oil than that goes for Auto-RX also, because it is an additive.
If you are going to condemn the use of additives in motor oil it has to be for all additives. Otherwise if you make an exception for Auto-RX it kind of reflects on your credibility in my opinion.
I believe there are a few oil supplements and engine cleaners that may work. But I think over 90% of the oil supplements and engine cleaners are a waste of money.
Trav says that he was able to clean tarnish off an engine using Mobil 1. Maybe it would be wise for a person to first just try various motor oils such as Mobil 1, Pennzoil Ultra, or Pennzoil Platinum. The maybe move on to using some cleaners in the oil like MMO or Kreen. Those are cheap experiments. Auto-RX is not a cheap experiment, especially when people are being told to use 2.5 times the amount in the directions.
Originally Posted By: Donald
No oil manufacturer not car maker suggests any additives in the oil.
BUT YET...you always put in a plug for ARX whenever you can.
Okay, fine. So when there is a discussion about Auto-RX Donald will you still say the same thing in that discussion? If no oil manufacturer or car manufacturer suggests putting any additive into the oil than that goes for Auto-RX also, because it is an additive.
If you are going to condemn the use of additives in motor oil it has to be for all additives. Otherwise if you make an exception for Auto-RX it kind of reflects on your credibility in my opinion.
I believe there are a few oil supplements and engine cleaners that may work. But I think over 90% of the oil supplements and engine cleaners are a waste of money.
Trav says that he was able to clean tarnish off an engine using Mobil 1. Maybe it would be wise for a person to first just try various motor oils such as Mobil 1, Pennzoil Ultra, or Pennzoil Platinum. The maybe move on to using some cleaners in the oil like MMO or Kreen. Those are cheap experiments. Auto-RX is not a cheap experiment, especially when people are being told to use 2.5 times the amount in the directions.
Last edited:
This thread has morphed into a somewhat interesting thread on the lubricity of MMO rather than a discussion on the OP's use of 20W-50 in 9 degree F weather, and wanting to rectify that situation with a half bottle of MMO.
Oh, and I guess you didn't recall your previous post?
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2027434
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2027434
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
You're right badtlc no test for lubricity. Tell you what, show me a bad UOA with MMO. I already know about the slight TBN hit which when cleaning up an engine is meaningless so I'll save you some time finding them. Wouldn't a reduction in an oils ability to lubricate show up in increased wear numbers? Show me a UOA with MMO showing increased wear metals.
Random question.
You're right badtlc no test for lubricity. Tell you what, show me a bad UOA with MMO. I already know about the slight TBN hit which when cleaning up an engine is meaningless so I'll save you some time finding them. Wouldn't a reduction in an oils ability to lubricate show up in increased wear numbers? Show me a UOA with MMO showing increased wear metals.
Random question.
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
You're right badtlc no test for lubricity. Tell you what, show me a bad UOA with MMO. I already know about the slight TBN hit which when cleaning up an engine is meaningless so I'll save you some time finding them. Wouldn't a reduction in an oils ability to lubricate show up in increased wear numbers? Show me a UOA with MMO showing increased wear metals.
Random question.
Lubricity.
Lubricity of a material cannot be directly measured, so tests are performed to quantify a lubricant's performance. This is done by determining how much wear is caused to a surface by a given friction-inducing object in a given amount of time. Other factors such as surface size, temperature, and pressure are also specified. The greater the wear scar the worse the lubricity. For this reason lubricity is also termed a substance's anti-wear property.
Examples of test setups include "Ball-on-cylinder" and "Ball-on-three-discs" tests.
I got this from Wikipedia.
So once we consider that yes tbn is reduced but wear metals are either unaffected or improve I guess we can infer that lubricity is INCREASED or at worst unaffected if this definition is to be accepted.
So Donald please explain how the lubricity of the lubrication system is somehow hindered or reduced.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
You're right badtlc no test for lubricity. Tell you what, show me a bad UOA with MMO. I already know about the slight TBN hit which when cleaning up an engine is meaningless so I'll save you some time finding them. Wouldn't a reduction in an oils ability to lubricate show up in increased wear numbers? Show me a UOA with MMO showing increased wear metals.
Random question.
Lubricity.
Lubricity of a material cannot be directly measured, so tests are performed to quantify a lubricant's performance. This is done by determining how much wear is caused to a surface by a given friction-inducing object in a given amount of time. Other factors such as surface size, temperature, and pressure are also specified. The greater the wear scar the worse the lubricity. For this reason lubricity is also termed a substance's anti-wear property.
Examples of test setups include "Ball-on-cylinder" and "Ball-on-three-discs" tests.
I got this from Wikipedia.
So once we consider that yes tbn is reduced but wear metals are either unaffected or improve I guess we can infer that lubricity is INCREASED or at worst unaffected if this definition is to be accepted.
So Donald please explain how the lubricity of the lubrication system is somehow hindered or reduced.
Last edited:
However to get back to the thread I agree with the whole idea of why there is 20w-50 in there.
Drain the oil and start over instead of band-aid. The mmo will flash off which then gets you right back to a 20w-50 again. Unless you're trying to clean something up which I then say more power to you.
If the oil is too thick just change the oil to something temperature appropriate.
Drain the oil and start over instead of band-aid. The mmo will flash off which then gets you right back to a 20w-50 again. Unless you're trying to clean something up which I then say more power to you.
If the oil is too thick just change the oil to something temperature appropriate.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
You're right badtlc no test for lubricity. Tell you what, show me a bad UOA with MMO. I already know about the slight TBN hit which when cleaning up an engine is meaningless so I'll save you some time finding them. Wouldn't a reduction in an oils ability to lubricate show up in increased wear numbers? Show me a UOA with MMO showing increased wear metals.
Random question.
Lubricity.
Lubricity of a material cannot be directly measured, so tests are performed to quantify a lubricant's performance. This is done by determining how much wear is caused to a surface by a given friction-inducing object in a given amount of time. Other factors such as surface size, temperature, and pressure are also specified. The greater the wear scar the worse the lubricity. For this reason lubricity is also termed a substance's anti-wear property.
Examples of test setups include "Ball-on-cylinder" and "Ball-on-three-discs" tests.
I got this from Wikipedia.
So once we consider that yes tbn is reduced but wear metals are either unaffected or improve I guess we can infer that lubricity is INCREASED or at worst unaffected if this definition is to be accepted.
So Donald please explain how the lubricity of the lubrication system is somehow hindered or reduced.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but IMHO, the diesel fuel test he linked to, which DOES test lubricity, showed otherwise. And since we know you can't glean any real information on wear from a UOA, I think that being mentioned is a bit of a red herring.
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
You're right badtlc no test for lubricity. Tell you what, show me a bad UOA with MMO. I already know about the slight TBN hit which when cleaning up an engine is meaningless so I'll save you some time finding them. Wouldn't a reduction in an oils ability to lubricate show up in increased wear numbers? Show me a UOA with MMO showing increased wear metals.
Random question.
Lubricity.
Lubricity of a material cannot be directly measured, so tests are performed to quantify a lubricant's performance. This is done by determining how much wear is caused to a surface by a given friction-inducing object in a given amount of time. Other factors such as surface size, temperature, and pressure are also specified. The greater the wear scar the worse the lubricity. For this reason lubricity is also termed a substance's anti-wear property.
Examples of test setups include "Ball-on-cylinder" and "Ball-on-three-discs" tests.
I got this from Wikipedia.
So once we consider that yes tbn is reduced but wear metals are either unaffected or improve I guess we can infer that lubricity is INCREASED or at worst unaffected if this definition is to be accepted.
So Donald please explain how the lubricity of the lubrication system is somehow hindered or reduced.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but IMHO, the diesel fuel test he linked to, which DOES test lubricity, showed otherwise. And since we know you can't glean any real information on wear from a UOA, I think that being mentioned is a bit of a red herring.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
You're right badtlc no test for lubricity. Tell you what, show me a bad UOA with MMO. I already know about the slight TBN hit which when cleaning up an engine is meaningless so I'll save you some time finding them. Wouldn't a reduction in an oils ability to lubricate show up in increased wear numbers? Show me a UOA with MMO showing increased wear metals.
Random question.
Lubricity.
Lubricity of a material cannot be directly measured, so tests are performed to quantify a lubricant's performance. This is done by determining how much wear is caused to a surface by a given friction-inducing object in a given amount of time. Other factors such as surface size, temperature, and pressure are also specified. The greater the wear scar the worse the lubricity. For this reason lubricity is also termed a substance's anti-wear property.
Examples of test setups include "Ball-on-cylinder" and "Ball-on-three-discs" tests.
I got this from Wikipedia.
So once we consider that yes tbn is reduced but wear metals are either unaffected or improve I guess we can infer that lubricity is INCREASED or at worst unaffected if this definition is to be accepted.
So Donald please explain how the lubricity of the lubrication system is somehow hindered or reduced.
Makes sense to me. In simple terms, even a UOA with all its shortcomings would show an increase in wear if the oil's ability to lubricate was compromised. If it didn't show that then a UOA aside from detecting anti-freeze, silicon, and fuel dilution would be just about useless.
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
You're right badtlc no test for lubricity. Tell you what, show me a bad UOA with MMO. I already know about the slight TBN hit which when cleaning up an engine is meaningless so I'll save you some time finding them. Wouldn't a reduction in an oils ability to lubricate show up in increased wear numbers? Show me a UOA with MMO showing increased wear metals.
Random question.
Lubricity.
Lubricity of a material cannot be directly measured, so tests are performed to quantify a lubricant's performance. This is done by determining how much wear is caused to a surface by a given friction-inducing object in a given amount of time. Other factors such as surface size, temperature, and pressure are also specified. The greater the wear scar the worse the lubricity. For this reason lubricity is also termed a substance's anti-wear property.
Examples of test setups include "Ball-on-cylinder" and "Ball-on-three-discs" tests.
I got this from Wikipedia.
So once we consider that yes tbn is reduced but wear metals are either unaffected or improve I guess we can infer that lubricity is INCREASED or at worst unaffected if this definition is to be accepted.
So Donald please explain how the lubricity of the lubrication system is somehow hindered or reduced.
Makes sense to me. In simple terms, even a UOA with all its shortcomings would show an increase in wear if the oil's ability to lubricate was compromised. If it didn't show that then a UOA aside from detecting anti-freeze, silicon, and fuel dilution would be just about useless.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked