Lets post our opinions on some gadjet oils-OTC

Messages
1,933
Location
Oklahoma
Am curious if some of you are like me,many gadjet oils produced and available at Walmarts and elsewhere,marketing hype for the most part in my opinion and the same opinion would be many of these could be removed off the shelves to make room for oils that deliver the same or better protection,again,use the name brands,just our opinions anyway [Smile]
 

Patman

Staff member
Messages
21,989
Location
Oakville, Ontario
I just wish they would take Castrol Syntec off the shelves of Walmart, and put Schaeffer in there instead! [Smile] The sad thing is, I've seen better oil analysis results with Castrol GTX than I have with Syntec, yet GTX is less than half the price. Syntec is a huge ripoff in my opinion.
 
Messages
4,107
Location
Savannah, GA
What about the majority of synthetic blends, especially Castrol Syntec Blend. People pay alot more for these blends "thinking" that they are getting the best of both worlds, a 50/50 mix of dino and synthetic, when the blend is really only 10-30% synthetic. [Patriot] -Joe
 
Messages
5,069
Location
Saratoga, NY
Joee, it's actually worse than that. Since Syntec isn't REALLY a synthetic, you're getting some Group II base mineral oil blended with 10%, 15% or 20% Group III mineral oils ... for $2.30+ Yes a total rip off. [Roll Eyes] --- Bror Jace
 
Messages
961
Location
Tacoma ,WA
as to the gadget oils, I posted a similar question a few weeks ago but it got lost..... I asked if anyone has done any scientfic testing of teflon additives or moly additive ...IE a before and after oil analysis...never got an answer except "You won't find much support for them here" That wasn't my question , I wanted to know if any had done actual real life testing of the snake oils ...with analysis to back up the claim that they do or don't do anything. I did purchase a bottle of Tufoil for the heck of it( It is in the Guiness Book of World Records for the worlds most slippery substance) I am about to drain out my 30000+ Mile Mobile one , to put in some fresh Delvac 1 ...I may sample it to see what it did to the moly level and the wear ##
 
Messages
961
Location
Tacoma ,WA
Bob I have read that article before and once again, though many sources can be quoted that it doesn't work..they seem to be anicdotal (sp) in nature just as the positve testimonials seem to all be ..I want to see an oil analysis to prove or disprove the point. BTW I too am very sceptical in reguards to any benifites, but we are all just blowing a lot of smoke if we can't prove that it doesn't work in a real world application....Kind of like the moly additive people on this board and some manufactures seem to be favoring...does it really do anything ...I know that one of the guys just bought some Moly Slip ...will be interesting to see some analysis
 
Messages
5,069
Location
Saratoga, NY
I saw some text which referred to an analysis which showed elevated wear metals despite modest increases in power and fuel economy. I believed they figured the particles of PTFE caused local lubricant starvation. I don't know how this actually would work ... but I stay away from all PTFE products. --- Bror Jace
 
Messages
961
Location
Tacoma ,WA
Yeah I saw that as well...but no specifics..we will see I am sending off a sample tomorrow, as I changed my oil tonight , 32934 miles on it ...3400 of those miles with Tufoil in the crankcase. I honestly only expect to see more moly in the analysis...not less wear levels.
 
Messages
1,874
Location
Ocala, Florida
Deepsquat, I can tell you don't want to believe any of the studies done by many, and seem to be having a hard time accepting the fact that there is many chemists that have done an excellent job assembleling good oils that do not need these magic bullets. So on that note, please understand that you may not see much if any difference in the oil analysis. If there is, I'd suspect more the oil having higher oxidation #'s than anything. This stuff doesn't normally promote wear, but what it does is cause pitting of the yellow metals and unless you pull your motor apart to examine them before and after, your test's could show excellent #'s and I'd not ever consider putting it in mine as I don't want to risk bearing failure. This is one thing that briggs and straton had found when they did their little test on ptfe is how the machine running the ptfe had actually pitted the yellow metals where the other that ran with standard oil showed no such evidence. Anyway, I'll be interested in seeing your results. bob
 
Messages
3,683
Location
Chattanooga, TN
I used Tufoil in my 85 Volvo for about a year at least. At 80,000 miles I had to replace the main bearings. I believe it was due to Tufoil but could never prove it! Additives are Snake Oil for the most part and since then I avoid them like the West Nile Virus.
 
Messages
485
Location
Montgomery, AL
quote:
Originally posted by deepsquat: Yeah I saw that as well...but no specifics..we will see I am sending off a sample tomorrow, as I changed my oil tonight , 32934 miles on it ...3400 of those miles with Tufoil in the crankcase. I honestly only expect to see more moly in the analysis...not less wear levels.
I look forward to seeing analysis numbers but I wonder what we will gain from yours. How can you tell if wear was caused by 32K on the oil or 3.4K on the Tufoil? Tufoil might have helped but how will we know if the first 29K was without it?
 

MolaKule

Staff member
Messages
21,599
Location
Iowegia - USA
"BTW I too am very sceptical in reguards to any benifites, but we are all just blowing a lot of smoke if we can't prove that it doesn't work in a real world application....Kind of like the moly additive people on this board and some manufactures seem to be favoring...does it really do anything ...I know that one of the guys just bought some Moly Slip ...will be interesting to see some analysis..." For a discussion on Moly Slip: http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000004 I can tell you that the #132 does works. I am currently testing it on Kohler and B&S and Chev. 350's engines. If used in moderation, it will coat parts and reduce friction and wear. Kohler's and B&S power my hydraulic systems and I have seen higher compression, easier starting, and when the engine is placed under load, the autothrottle barely changes position. When I say use in moderation, I use 0.5 to 1.0 oz. per quart so as not to thicken the oil beyond the original oil's viscosity. It does not affect the oil's viscosity like original formula STP. When placed in oil, it immediately goes into solution and mixes readily. Oil starvation with PTFE is entirely possible since anytime a soild exists in the oil, it "displaces" or "takes the place of" an equivalent volume of oil.
 
Messages
349
Location
Quebec, Canada
quote:
Originally posted by deepsquat: ....Kind of like the moly additive people on this board and some manufactures seem to be favoring...does it really do anything ...I know that one of the guys just bought some Moly Slip ...will be interesting to see some analysis
Deepsquat, I had a virgin sample of MolySlip analyzed just to ease Patman down, since I felt like he's going to explode or something (I think he's Moly deprived or going through Moly withdrawal) [Big Grin] Also, I used the product before in my old VW A2 Jetta Turbo-Diesel - not noticing any discernible difference (and this was in the middle of winter too). Unfortunately, I recently switched cars and recently tried Havoline 5W40. If I were to do a MolySlip sample, I would at least run a virgin & baseline used oil analysis of both Havoline and Delvac 1 5W40 before using it. Then try what MolaKule suggested which was add only 10ml instead of the full 300ml. If it'll make you feel any better, I'll run to my local Crappy Tire and get a virgin analysis of Slick 50 (or another SnakeOil that you are more interested in). At least we'll know what's inside these things. Unfortunately, however, my local analysis lab only tests for common items such as zinc, calcium, phosphor, etc. (as you have seen in my MolySlip virgin analysis). How much PTFE is actually added in it, I highly doubt I will get that answer from Hewitt/CAT. Regards, Oz
 
Messages
5,336
Location
London, AR
Deepsquat, In my opinion the Tufoil will have no effect on your oil or oil analysis. It only contains 1% PTFE and it will be filtered out by your bypass filter. The rest of the additive is 30%-30wt oil, 30%-PAO, 30%-di-ester and 9%-trace additives. I am not sure how your Moly will go up, as you stated, as it is not an ingredient of Tufoil. Also 1% PTFE of an 8oz bottle of additive is so small that it is a non-entity in this case. As I stated in the beginning, IMHO [ September 12, 2002, 10:11 AM: Message edited by: 59 Vetteman ]
 
Messages
961
Location
Tacoma ,WA
quote:
Originally posted by jjbula:
quote:
Originally posted by deepsquat: Yeah I saw that as well...but no specifics..we will see I am sending off a sample tomorrow, as I changed my oil tonight , 32934 miles on it ...3400 of those miles with Tufoil in the crankcase. I honestly only expect to see more moly in the analysis...not less wear levels.
I look forward to seeing analysis numbers but I wonder what we will gain from yours. I have posted my results of a 22000 mile analysis and of a 30000 mile analysis on the same oil(it is in very good shape) the oil that I put the tufoil in is the same as the oil that the other 2 samples came from...I changed my bypass filter and added the Tufoil and topped of with more Mobile 1 5w 30. How can you tell if wear was caused by 32K on the oil or 3.4K on the Tufoil? Tufoil might have helped but how will we know if the first 29K was without it?

 
Messages
961
Location
Tacoma ,WA
quote:
Originally posted by BOBISTHEOILGUY: Deepsquat, I can tell you don't want to believe any of the studies done by many, and seem to be having a hard time accepting the fact that there is many chemists that have done an excellent job assembleling good oils that do not need these magic bullets. So on that note, please understand that you may not see much if any difference in the oil analysis. If there is, I'd suspect more the oil having higher oxidation #'s than anything. This stuff doesn't normally promote wear, but what it does is cause pitting of the yellow metals and unless you pull your motor apart to examine them before and after, your test's could show excellent #'s and I'd not ever consider putting it in mine as I don't want to risk bearing failure. This is one thing that briggs and straton had found when they did their little test on ptfe is how the machine running the ptfe had actually pitted the yellow metals where the other that ran with standard oil showed no such evidence. Anyway, I'll be interested in seeing your results. bob
Bob, I am not trying to start an argument here [HAIL 2 U!] You are the oil guy [Big Grin] My point is that almost everyone agrees that it doesn't work .( I myself don;'t think they do anything) But no one has been able to post any proof...I have made the claim that my Gulf Coast filter works , and I have proved it with analysis(and have seen many other analysis on other boards) that i have posted (yeah I know, some of you doubt the vailidity of the extended drain , as I change out the filter once every 3000 or so miles, and replace a quart of oil) I am just looking for the same skeptisism for the response that is doesn't work (would be looking for the same if everyone said it does work). In searches that I have ran basically all I find are the same Briggs and Stratton study quotes and the Nasa source quoted...so everybody trashes the snake oils ....but everyone uses the same 2-3 papers to defend thier stance ...but I have yet to see one oil analysis quoted...and isn't that what this forum is about ...analysis to back up the "fact" that our oil or oil change interval is correct?? I mean this is how we know that synthetic do a better job then almost all dino oils ...all I am looking for is real honest to goodness labratory proof...(Yeah I know one sample is not "proof" ..but we have to start somewhere...as no one else has any real world "proof") [I dont know]
 
Top