Liquid titanium , another Slick 50 ( PTFE ) ?

[odie]

Years ago used SLICK 50 for most of the cars we owned ( used , not new ) . Put it in the engines , manual tranny , automatics , and power steering . Had an '86 CHEVY Nova ( Corolla ) that reached 270,000+ miles before engine went . Would put it in every 33,000 miles . Never had any issues for any of the applications .

 

[Klutch9]

I'd say no, since titanium is substituting for other soft metals/additives in add packs nowadays. It seems to be a legitimate additive. It's not a snake oil IMO, but I can see why the name 'liquid titanium' might make it seem that way.

 

[chubbs1]

I think this stuff is the real deal. Testing done by COP, shows their Kendall GT-1 oil improving MPG. Now you have to take it with a grain of salt when the tests are done by the marketer but Mobil Super 5k has it and they don't even mention it. You could go out on a limb and say if it was hype why would a major co like XOM use it and not advertise it. I think the stuff is for real.

 

[Jeff_in_VABch]

I prefer the liquid ball bearings.

 

[OilProfessor]

The Professor claims that this is a marketing gimmick.

 

[chevrofreak]

Originally Posted By: OilProfessor
The Professor claims that this is a marketing gimmick.


I claim that The Professor is clueless, especially since Exxon-Mobil doesn't even advertise that their Super line of oils contains it. How can it be a marketing gimmick if it isn't even mentioned?

 

[Klutch9]

Originally Posted By: chevrofreak
Originally Posted By: OilProfessor
The Professor claims that this is a marketing gimmick.


I claim that The Professor is clueless, especially since Exxon-Mobil doesn't even advertise that their Super line of oils contains it. How can it be a marketing gimmick if it isn't even mentioned?


I agree. Look at some UOA's and VOA's for oils containing titanium. Are they better than oils not containing titanium? Might a different additive perform the same or better than titanium? That's up to you. Point is: titanium works well. And last time I checked, the titanium additive in oils is/was never touted as some be-all-end-all miracle-in-a-can additive (like snake oils usually are). It's just advertised as something that works well.

 

[dwendt44]

It's the marketing that makes it sound 'fishy'. It is a legitimate additive, among many.
Won't hurt/might help.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: dwendt44
It's the marketing that makes it sound 'fishy'.


I agree completely. I don't doubt it has its benefits. However, their marketing is not designed to "sell" it to people like BITOGers. It's designed to catch the eye of someone at the shelf who might be wavering and impressed by something new.

I wouldn't compare it to Slick 50 at all. This is something a lot of the big players are getting involved in. Slick 50 was a totally different animal, with Du Pont even disapproving. Slick 50 was an additional product - an aftermarket additive, not part of the additive package.

 

[odie]

There's QUAKER STATE high mileage with SLICK 50 . Wouldn't that be considered an additive ? I think it's been discontinued .

 

[Robenstein]

Yeah QS HM used to have "with Slick 50" advertised on the bottle, but they put that idea to bed a while back.

 

[CATERHAM]

It's just a cheap substitute for moly that was discussed in the following thread:

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/2440948/

 

[cchase]

If it were a marketing gimmick, they would be better served to call it "hybrid polymer nano-titanium particles" or "now with iTitanium".

 

[Robenstein]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
It's just a cheap substitute for moly that was discussed in the following thread:

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/2440948/


To me cheap always implies low quality. Indeed I think Titanium should be more like a more cost effective or inexpensive anti wear additive. And if it protects well and costs less, and those cost savings make for a really good oil at an attractive price, I say more power to Kendall and those using it.