Lubegard Heavy Duty Engine Protectant VOA

Status
Not open for further replies.
63 ppm of sodium diluted as prescribed at 3oz/qt. in your EcoBoost is about 5.9ppm additional for a full sump. Hardly anything to write home about.

As far as the calcium, maybe one of the tribologists can comment if there are different calcium’s that do not react for LSPI, or if the phosphorus/ester/moly types can offset calcium. While I like seeing proof, if Lubegard said unsolicited that it is designed to combat LSPI, based on their track record with other additives I’m inclined to believe them. I did ask several followups of Lubegard so we’ll see what they say.
 
^^^Yes, I also would like to hear from our VERY knowledgeable tribologists on here about the possibility of those interactions/offsets, as well as the frequency of occurrence of LSPI depending on the amount of calcium and sodium in conjunction with a given level of NOACK volatility.

i.e.; is a NOACK below 7.0, combined with low calcium, say below 800 ppm (with some magnesium in the mix to make up for it being lower, which, if I understand correctly, does NOT have an LSPI promoting effect?), and a sodium level below 5, ALWAYS going to be less LSPI prone than any other combos possible?
21.gif
 
Another email to Lubegard. BioTech and Heavy Duty Engine Protectant are the same thing, just different package sizes.

Me: Pat, I really appreciate your reply on the phosphorous content. One other question though as I am quite the noob on the chemistry side; I read several people discussing ester-based engine oils as having very good cleaning properties while obviously not being as ‘harsh’ as something like an engine flush. So if you don’t mind, if you could answer a couple quick questions and I’ll be a very satisfied customer!

1. Are Bio/Tech and HD engine protectant (HDEP) the same product just packaged differently? If not, what are the main differences since the website does not explicitly state them?

2. Are the esters in Bio/Tech & HDEP the kind that will help remove varnish and sludging over time? What is Lubegard’s best product with these goals in mind?

3. If I am looking at extending my drain intervals while maintaining TBN and active cleansing agents, what is Lubegard’s best product for that?


Lubegard: We always appreciate positive interest in our engine oil supplement Bio-Tech. We have acquired quite a following for this product both domestically and internationally. It is designed to work with the additive package in the engine oil you select for your regular service. It will enhance the additive pack in the oil and will provide protection when the additive package in the oil does not provide the desired properties or placement to prevent wear and reduce friction. It will also extend the oxidative stability of the oil reducing varnish and deposits allowing extended oil change intervals and lessening the detrimental effects of additive depletion engine oils often experience. Your questions:
1. They are the same product packaged differently for applications with larger oil sumps than passenger cars and light trucks.
2. The esters will work to prevent sludge and deposits but is not designed to remove them. The mineral base oils are more the source of concern.
3. The Bio-Tech is our best engine product and will extend drain intervals.

Pat Burrow
 
Originally Posted By: SubieRubyRoo
Molakule, I read your link after posting my update. They seem to be in line with each other; does Lubegard’s explanation seem to agree to your trained eye?

Oh and thanks for the link; you always post the best stuff we probably would never know to look for!


You're welcome.

Yes it does as the chemistry I mentioned earlier, the phenol, isopropylated phosphate is a phosphate ester.

My guess is they are using the above chemistry with their LXE esters and a few other selected chemistries to make this brew.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SubieRubyRoo
63 ppm of sodium diluted as prescribed at 3oz/qt. in your EcoBoost is about 5.9ppm additional for a full sump. Hardly anything to write home about...



As far as responses from ILI, you'll most likely get the dumbed-down responses generated by marketing and legal in order to protect their IP.

As far as sodium as seen in certain formulations, have no fear:
Quote:

Sodium 2-mercaptobenzothiazole can be used as a metal deactivator to keep metals from reacting with other compounds, and to help retard oxidation.

Some sodium compounds such as sodium dibutyl dithiocarbamate (SDDC) are used as another anti-wear agent in lieu of conventional AW compounds. SDDC shows a low fricton coefficient with good polarity since being a dithio-type compound, has sulfur atoms for polarity enhancement.


https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2764914
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SubieRubyRoo
63 ppm of sodium diluted as prescribed at 3oz/qt. in your EcoBoost is about 5.9ppm additional for a full sump. Hardly anything to write home about.

As far as the calcium, maybe one of the tribologists can comment if there are different calcium’s that do not react for LSPI, or if the phosphorus/ester/moly types can offset calcium. While I like seeing proof, if Lubegard said unsolicited that it is designed to combat LSPI, based on their track record with other additives I’m inclined to believe them. I did ask several followups of Lubegard so we’ll see what they say.


Most likely they are using the calcium-carbonate salicylates.
 
I'm not exactly sure what each of those compounds are or how they interact, but again, thanks for the info Mola! I hope this thread is helpful for others because it's certainly been a learning experience for me!
 
When I saw the word mercaptobenzothiazole a bell rang in my head from my pharmacy days. It’s a old old substance used for skin irritation and for treating hot spots on pets. Sulfodene is one brand.

Also used for vulcanizing rubber when that was popular.

Molakule never fails to educate us in the ways of oil.
 
i was wondering the same if the heavy duty and the bio tech. the same? i called lubegard and they said the two are exactly the same product. they made the qt. size bottles for the trucks lg. sumps.
 
So, per this VOA there's 2444ppm of moly in LG Biotech but the product description states it contains no MoS2.

So what gives??... and would this amount of Phos be harmful to the cat's?
 
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
So, per this VOA there's 2444ppm of moly in LG Biotech but the product description states it contains no MoS2.

So what gives??... and would this amount of Phos be harmful to the cat's?



I believe they state that there are no solid forms of moly. This is supposed to be tri-nuclear.
 
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
So, per this VOA there's 2444ppm of moly in LG Biotech but the product description states it contains no MoS2.

So what gives??... and would this amount of Phos be harmful to the cat's?


The moly is probably MoDTC. Whether it's dinuclear or trinuclear, only they know.

The phosphorus is from phosphate ester which isn't going to be harmful, especially when diluted down.

I still say if you feel like you need to add something to your oil to make it "better", then you should use better oil. I'd be more concerned about additive clash with different chemistries than cat poisoning.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
So, per this VOA there's 2444ppm of moly in LG Biotech but the product description states it contains no MoS2.

So what gives??... and would this amount of Phos be harmful to the cat's?


The moly is probably MoDTC. Whether it's dinuclear or trinuclear, only they know.

The phosphorus is from phosphate ester which isn't going to be harmful, especially when diluted down.

I still say if you feel like you need to add something to your oil to make it "better", then you should use better oil. I'd be more concerned about additive clash with different chemistries than cat poisoning.

Agreed..I rarely put anything in the crankcase besides the lube. I may on occasion run a bottle of Rislone and I've tried MMO in the past...but addys in the crankcase are not a regular thing for me.

The reason why I ask is I have used LG bio a couple times and have a couple bottles I got on sale from Amazon. I was just wondering about what appeared to be a discrepancy in re to the moly.

So this di and tri forms of moly has the same AW properties of MoS2 but just it's just in a different form...am I getting that right?
 
Last edited:
Based on what a formulator who used to post here said about MoS2 in motor oil, I concluded that it is useless. MoDTC is clearly not useless based on many studies and the fact that so many motor oils use it.
 
Originally Posted by JAG
Based on what a formulator who used to post here said about MoS2 in motor oil, I concluded that it is useless. MoDTC is clearly not useless based on many studies and the fact that so many motor oils use it.

Then how do addy mfgs get away with using MoS2 and making the claims about AW protection? Seems to me if it were useless as you say (i genuinely don't know the diff) then these mfgs would be ripe for a class action lawsuit??
 
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by JAG
Based on what a formulator who used to post here said about MoS2 in motor oil, I concluded that it is useless. MoDTC is clearly not useless based on many studies and the fact that so many motor oils use it.

Then how do addy mfgs get away with using MoS2 and making the claims about AW protection? Seems to me if it were useless as you say (i genuinely don't know the diff) then these mfgs would be ripe for a class action lawsuit??

Good question and I can only guess at the answer.
 
MoS2 settles out of suspension if it sits for a while (usually after a few days). It does get churned back up again once the engine is started again. Even with the best distribution, it's less effective than MoDTC. It's like advertising a bottle of straight water as a solvent. It isn't wrong.
 
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
MoS2 settles out of suspension if it sits for a while (usually after a few days). It does get churned back up again once the engine is started again. Even with the best distribution, it's less effective than MoDTC. It's like advertising a bottle of straight water as a solvent. It isn't wrong.

Lol...I had that discussion once with someone who'd never taken a chemistry class. I gave up..

Good analogy
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Ok so here is the VOA!
[...]
Thoughts?

Very... revealing. For first I have read COMPLETLY the PR-story about the founder/corporate history, Biotech LXE-Technology (technology?) and and and. Ok.

And ensuing, I see a crude adds cudgel with tons of phosphorus, moly and boron? There goes? Please teach me about my misinterpretation (?)
 
Last edited:
It has been said many many times here that a analysis will not reveal all the components. Same goes for the SDS though the Lubegard SDS does show more than some.

I find it interesting that the Ester is derived from canola oil, hence the Biotech part of the product name.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top