Amsoil Dominator ( 15w-50 ) is what i use in a highly modded VG30DETT ( 500rwhp 300zx Twin Turbo) .....only oil i have used that maintains good oil pressure when pushed !!
Moly Level In Engine Oil
- Thread starter FranklinJL
- Start date
O.K. but would that high moly additive leave any deposits inside your engine, hence would make it dirty?
Also, I've heard very good impressions about Liqui Moly Cera Tec, which is ceramic oil additive. That one might a better choice over the MoS2 additive.
It doesn't need to be exactly molybdenum disulfide. I just gave it as an example.
The thread in general is about moly in the oil. It could be different a moly compound.
The general observation is that the moly % is low in todays oils.
My general question that nobody answered yet is - Does more moly makes your engine dirty?
The thread in general is about moly in the oil. It could be different a moly compound.
The general observation is that the moly % is low in todays oils.
My general question that nobody answered yet is - Does more moly makes your engine dirty?
Carlostrece
$100 Site Donor 2025
Can there be too much moly?
It’s probably impossible to answer with a binary yes/no for every engine in every environment with every combination of moly compound combined with every combination of additives and base oils. I’m sure a formulator could intentionally make an oil that resulted in engine deposits if they used sufficient amounts of a molybdenum compound that had a propensity to form deposits. It’s kind of like asking will smoking a marijuana cigarette turn a human into a drug addict?
It is interesting to look at redline’s product lines. In their unconstrained “high performance” line they use 600 ppm moly. What compounds? We don’t know.
In their OEM/professional line bearing API and Dexos licenses, the Moly is cut down to half, about 300 ppm. It goes down to 200 ppm for the Euro approved ones with tougher deposit tests. Did these deposit tests require this reduction? Is it simply cost savings for the lower tier product line? Do the two lines use the same type of moly compounds? I doubt we will ever know.
So without hiring SWRI to A/B these oils, or starting your own accredited engine test lab, I guess we will never find out, and any backyard/garage testing can’t be controlled for enough variables and biases to ever be deemed valid or definitive enough to draw conclusions. What we can do is use oils that did pass OEM approval tests, or pass tests to obtain industry licenses. Otherwise you can trust the marketing material and/or bench testing of blenders outside those realms.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yes, that's why it's best to stick with a fully formulated oil that has the level of AW and FM additives properly balanced.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
We were over this in a previous thread and I comment on this same assertion you made.
No, moly doesn't make an engine dirty.
You are going to see reduced/restricted levels of moly in API-compliant oils because of TEOST 33C, which we recently had a conversation about, as this test tends to respond poorly to moly. TEOST 33C is supposed to correlate with turbo bearing deposits, but OEM's have found extremely poor correlation and many have developed their own tests due to this.
This is why oils like Driven, HPL, Redline...etc use high levels of moly with impunity, because they don't need to be compliant with the API specifications.
As an aside, I just look a quick glance at the ACEA specifications and they don't appear to include TEOST...
Carlostrece
$100 Site Donor 2025
I looked in the Acronyms sticky thread and didn't find AW or FM. What do those mean?
AW= Anti-wear. FM=Friction modifier.
Carlostrece
$100 Site Donor 2025
Not sure if this is relevant, but traditionally there was (maybe still is?) a continuum of oil purposes and formulations.
At one end of the continuum was racing oils that were formulated for extreme short-term protection in harsh, high performance racing conditions (high heat, high rpm, turbos, high torque and HP), but with short OCI.
At other end of continuum was oils formulated for extended OCI (high in cleanliness and longevity), but not suitable for racing or high performance.
In between those extremes were ordinary oils formulated for ordinary use in ordinary cars for ordinary OCI.
That's how it used to be, IMO. In modern times, some modern highend oils are beginning to blur those lines. I think some modern highend oils might now be formulated to fit (or almost fit) into 2 (of those 3) categories at the same time, IMO.
It might be that the amount and type of moly is part of that?
What do you think?
Anyone please feel free to agree, or to politely correct me, if you think I'm wrong. I said politely because historically these type threads can become needlessly rankorous. We're all just trying to discuss oil to learn, teach, or a combination.
At one end of the continuum was racing oils that were formulated for extreme short-term protection in harsh, high performance racing conditions (high heat, high rpm, turbos, high torque and HP), but with short OCI.
At other end of continuum was oils formulated for extended OCI (high in cleanliness and longevity), but not suitable for racing or high performance.
In between those extremes were ordinary oils formulated for ordinary use in ordinary cars for ordinary OCI.
That's how it used to be, IMO. In modern times, some modern highend oils are beginning to blur those lines. I think some modern highend oils might now be formulated to fit (or almost fit) into 2 (of those 3) categories at the same time, IMO.
It might be that the amount and type of moly is part of that?
What do you think?
Anyone please feel free to agree, or to politely correct me, if you think I'm wrong. I said politely because historically these type threads can become needlessly rankorous. We're all just trying to discuss oil to learn, teach, or a combination.
Last edited:
This hour-long video of LSJr giving a talk to the Porsche Club of America gives his views on oil additives (hint: never if not part of the oil's formulation).
As an aside, I just look a quick glance at the ACEA specifications and they don't appear to include TEOST...
Is there an oil that has VW 504, MB 229.5X, Porsche C30/40 approval or even Dexos 1G3 license with more than say, 300 ppm Molybdenum?
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
d1G3 is co-approved with the API approval, so I would assume no.
You'd be looking for a low/mid SAPS oil without a current API approval, which will be challenging to find.
Edit, closest I've been able to find is an A3/B4 oil that's API SP with 234ppm moly:
https://www.oil-club.ru/forum/topic/75967-novus-dynamic-5w-30-api-sp-acea-a3b4-svezhee-2022/
Last edited:
It looks like focusing on the moly ppm does not really much, as the efficacy depends on the molecule being used
Actually even so, the testing method can report vastly different molly amounts on the same oil. I don`t remember where I have seen this, but I think it was a HPL product(?) that showed >2x difference on the molly level depending on which oil testing lab used, and that forum member sent out samples to 3 seperate labs
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yes, different labs, which use different analyzing technics, will show you different concentrations of different components. IIRC, it was the lab LSJ uses that showed a very different result from the other labs.
Sure, but oils with VW 504 and Porsche C30/40 approval, that from what I read do not require TEOST 33C (but do have some pretty demanding in-engine deposit tests) do not have high ~300 ppm Molybdenum on an inductively coupled plasma spectrographic analysis. It seems that VW & Porsche do not require TEOST 33C while MB 229.52 does.
Possibilities:
1. Since most VW/Porsche marketed oils also want to have the MB approval, they have to keep Mo low just to pass TEOST 33C for MB approval
2. 504/229.5/Porsche oils can’t pass the in-engine deposit tests or non TEOST bench tests with that much Mo
3. It’s not economical for blenders to use that much Mo
4. There is some other testing or regulatory reason to restrict Mo to < ~300 ppm unrelated to deposits.
5. If I’m understanding your argument: The Porsche/VW oils are still potentially using high Mo but it won’t show up on an ICP spectrographic analysis?
So I don’t think we will ever definitively know the answer to the question “does more moly make your engine dirty?” without, for instance, paying however many hundreds of thousand of euros it costs to submit something like HPL supercar oil to Porsche to see how it does.
What do you mean that VW/Porsche marketed oils also want to have the MB approval?
Also any molybdenum compound will be decomposed in the plasma and will appear as molybdenum atoms. Any of them.
Show these spectrographic analyses that have a >2X difference in results on the same sample please. Different blends, sure based on the treat rate of the specific additive. But no way on the same sample. ICP plasma temperatures are extremely high and decompose even the most stable oxides.
I just mean that for economy of scale, it would seem logical to pursue both VW/Porsche and MB approval with one blend to alleviate the extra cost of having a dedicated blend for each.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Where are you seeing that 229.52 requires TEOST 33C? Because I'm not seeing that in the Afton handbook. My takeaway has been quite different from yours, and that is the fact that all of the oils we are likely to find are also API approved, which necessarily limits their moly content due to TEOST 33C.
Oils like Motul 300V, Drive DT40, HPL Supercar...etc that aren't API approved and don't pretend to be, but ARE geared toward specific Euro approvals, even going as far as being based on approved additive packages, tend to have much higher levels of moly.
Similar threads
