Moly or Calcium. Which is better..does it matter?

[Smokescreen]

I have been seeing a lot of posts lately on moly rich oils even moly additives. There are some really good oils out there that use calcium as their big additive and no moly. Which has more staying power, which protects better, or does it really matter? (I did a search and couldn't see any topics covering this)

I am not looking for a contest of which oil is better here and plead to not have that come into the conversation, but more information about the additive differences, possibly the pros/cons (if any), costs differences, of either one.

 

[Rand]

this is what overall formulation and testing is for.

some oils use moly some dont.

its not directly related to calcium use.

I like moly.. and do think its good but I wouldnt dump a moly additive into an oil that doesnt have moly.. for a street engine anyway.

I think its even better as a gear oil component than a motor oil one.


I would like to say these are my opinions.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Smokescreen
I have been seeing a lot of posts lately on moly rich oils even moly additives. There are some really good oils out there that use calcium as their big additive and no moly. Which has more staying power, which protects better, or does it really matter? (I did a search and couldn't see any topics covering this)

You need to be looking at additive package as a whole which is typically comprised of more then just one ingredient such as moly or calcium. One ingredient taken out of context doesn't really matter.

 

[saberz]

Moly is a sacrificial additive for preventing wear. Calcium is one of a few detergents contained within oil. The two are very different.

 

[demarpaint]

Moly is also a costly additive, so IMO one of the reasons we see less of it is because of cost.

 

[JT1]

Apples to oranges here.

 

[Smokescreen]

So what is the 'equivalent' additive in PP then?

 

[2oldtommy]

Two PP UOA samples I sent to Blackstone in 2007 indicated 45 ppm moly and 47 ppm moly. I thought PP still contained a like amount. Both samples had 5500+ miles. FWIW--Oldtommy

 

[daman]

Originally Posted By: Anies
Moly is a sacrificial additive for preventing wear. Calcium is one of a few detergents contained within oil. The two are very different.

Right, they both have a specificjob to do there both needed to make up a good oil.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: daman

Right, they both have a specificjob to do there both needed to make up a good oil.

So, any oil that does not contain moly is a bad oil?

 

[daman]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: daman

Right, they both have a specificjob to do there both needed to make up a good oil.

So, any oil that does not contain moly is a bad oil?

No,no i knew some one would say that geeeze.

look at your more boutique oil brands they have more moly usually and yes IMO it's a great additive that make a oil better.

most oils have so there must be something to it no?

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: daman
look at your more boutique oil brands they have more moly usually and yes IMO it's a great additive that make a oil better.

But where is the proof that these boutique oils with moly do a better job at preventing engines from blowing up? And is there some study that links oils without moly to cause engine damage or even excessive wear?

Quote:

most oils have so there must be something to it no?

I think there are plenty of oils out there that use add packs which do not rely on moly. I'm just saying, there is more than one way to skin the cat. A ton of moly does not a good oil make.

 

[Smokescreen]

I am a little lost. On a typical UOA we have:

MANGANESE,TITANIUM,MOLYBDENUM,BORON

POTASSIUM,SILICON,SODIUM

CALCIUM,MAGNESIUM,PHOSPHORUS,ZINC,BARIUM

One would normally think that there has to be a detergent group, a wear preventing group and another. They all have their strengths in their individual groups. If an oil could get by with so little moly and still get great results why even bother if you could make up for it with for example a lot less of a couple of different items else and a bigger dose of detergents?

 

[daman]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: daman
look at your more boutique oil brands they have more moly usually and yes IMO it's a great additive that make a oil better.

But where is the proof that these boutique oils with moly do a better job at preventing engines from blowing up? And is there some study that links oils without moly to cause engine damage or even excessive wear?

Quote:

most oils have so there must be something to it no?

I think there are plenty of oils out there that use add packs which do not rely on moly. I'm just saying, there is more than one way to skin the cat. A ton of moly does not a good oil make.

I.....never said it,thats their thinking ask them,oh and proof look in the UOA section there was a UOA before and after with LM and there was a decrease in metals,search for it.

 

[Quattro Pete]

In all honesty, a $20 UOA is not a viable tool for comparing wear from one oil to another. Trend analysis and coolant/fuel contamination is what it's useful for.

 

[daman]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
In all honesty, a $20 UOA is not a viable tool for comparing wear from one oil to another. Trend analysis and coolant/fuel contamination is what it's useful for.

Ohhhh ok now it's not good enough,,lol but it sure is good enough when people want to bash oil's,boy oh boy, lol

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: daman
Ohhhh ok now it's not good enough,,lol but it sure is good enough when people want to bash oil's,boy oh boy, lol

Hey, I'm laughing at this, too. Yet it doesn't stop me from doing an occasional UOA just for the fun of it.

 

[daman]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: daman
Ohhhh ok now it's not good enough,,lol but it sure is good enough when people want to bash oil's,boy oh boy, lol

Hey, I'm laughing at this, too. Yet it doesn't stop me from doing an occasional UOA just for the fun of it.

i hear ya...

 

[Steve S]

Usually oil is blended to meet a certain spec. It is the whole additive package not necessarly the choice of the particular additive. If the blended oil gives the same performance with A)additive package or B)additive package what does it matter?

 

[ottotheclown]

I am on the side of more moly. So is Honda and Toyota. So I guess we have to accept what the experts choose.