My personal experience with MotorKote
- Thread starter FlyingTexan
- Start date
I’ve been wheeling most of my life. I can’t count the number of times I’ve drained water from axles, transfer cases, engines, transmissions etc. Filled with fresh oils and went out the next weekend. Avoiding hydro lock is key. Never heard of Motorkote.
Hey @FlyingTexan , you MAY want to go ahead and do some research. I went ahead and found the SDS for MotorKote Hyper Lubricant, and maybe @MolaKule or somebody else that knows chemical compounds can chime in besides just me finding it on the internet…. But “Alkanes C14-C16 Chloro” is absolutely medium-chain chlorinated paraffins. Don’t trust me, look at the SDS. Marketing doesn’t have to tell the truth, but the SDS sure as heck does!!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorinated_paraffins
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorinated_paraffins
Well I can speak from first-hand experience that I have used motorkote.
It basically reminds me of STP oil treatment.
Yes STP quieted down my older V8s from the'80s.
STP oil treatment was pretty good! It quieted everything down. But engines back then we're pretty loose rattle traps once they got hours on them.
So using the motorkote in my 2016 V6 Toyota 4Runner just seemed non-eventful. I just stuck with a frequent oci.
But for me fresh oil is cheap insurance! Just my two cents here
It basically reminds me of STP oil treatment.
Yes STP quieted down my older V8s from the'80s.
STP oil treatment was pretty good! It quieted everything down. But engines back then we're pretty loose rattle traps once they got hours on them.
So using the motorkote in my 2016 V6 Toyota 4Runner just seemed non-eventful. I just stuck with a frequent oci.
But for me fresh oil is cheap insurance! Just my two cents here
Head and Shoulders shampoo did well in the 1 arm bandit test too! Maybe you can try that.
4:40
RAT540 must be spinning in his bearing.
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2022
- Messages
- 162
I use it and have used it in the past on other vehicles. Its good for a few extra mpg and my engines all last over 300k.
The first time I tried it was on a 2001 Grand Cherokee V8. The parts store guy told me about it when I was picking up oil and filter for an oil change. My wife was in a hospital 200+ miles away and I was drivng back and forth daily. When I hit the interstate I ran it up to 75mph and set the cruise and reset the mpg on the overhead display. When I got off the interstate I checked it each day there and again on the way back and it always got 5 more mpg more than before using motorkote. I kept on using it, way cheaper back then, the engine lasted well over 300k. I ended up giving the jeep away because of the mileage and its probably still on the road. I currently have an 08 jeep 6 cyl with 280,00 something miles and it runs like new. I put motorkote in it every other oil change and tranny fluid change.
Post in thread 'Post your latest oil change' https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/post-your-latest-oil-change.108957/post-6328190
The first time I tried it was on a 2001 Grand Cherokee V8. The parts store guy told me about it when I was picking up oil and filter for an oil change. My wife was in a hospital 200+ miles away and I was drivng back and forth daily. When I hit the interstate I ran it up to 75mph and set the cruise and reset the mpg on the overhead display. When I got off the interstate I checked it each day there and again on the way back and it always got 5 more mpg more than before using motorkote. I kept on using it, way cheaper back then, the engine lasted well over 300k. I ended up giving the jeep away because of the mileage and its probably still on the road. I currently have an 08 jeep 6 cyl with 280,00 something miles and it runs like new. I put motorkote in it every other oil change and tranny fluid change.
Post in thread 'Post your latest oil change' https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/post-your-latest-oil-change.108957/post-6328190
I hadn't heard of MotorKote, but was intrigued and looked it up. It was available at Canadian Tire, but has apparently been discontinued.
However, it did garner very good reviews.
However, it did garner very good reviews.
Now read the reviews about chlorinated paraffins inside combustion engines. Not saying they're bad everywhere, but where the chlorinated paraffins can combine with water, it becomes hydrochloric acid. Nothing like having your engine eat itself from the inside out, eh?I hadn't heard of MotorKote, but was intrigued and looked it up. It was available at Canadian Tire, but has apparently been discontinued.
However, it did garner very good reviews.
There's been debate in this thread as to whether MotorKote does contain chlorinated paraffins. If it does, then I agree, it has the potential to do harm.
I thought in researching MotorKote I'd seen something about it being related to DuraLube, which was popular about 30 years ago but fell out of favour quickly. Did DuraLube contain chlorinated paraffins?
That idiotic wear scar test does not in any way prove what the equally idiotic Ford Boss Me imagines what it does. This has been discussed, dissected and evaluated multiple times on here and yet it keeps popping up like a bad burrito.
Below is a partial repeat of the multiple times I and others have already commented on this useless test.
First off, any test that is intended to provide information about a material property has to be relevant to the system it's being used in. If I make a taste test of motor oil, that's not relevant to ICE operation. This test is not relevant to engine operation as already noted by others in other threads. That's the first fatal flaw.
If you suspend disbelief that the test isn't relevant then the second fatal flaw is the use of non-standardized test equipment and no published test methodology. Why is this important? Well besides making any tests comparable, it also allows the use of pre-calculated statistical analysis of the results. That's the real key to a standard test. If you develop a test outside of the standard then it is now incumbent on the operator to analyze the methodology and results. Ford Boss Me, like the other goofballs that perform this worthless test, do none of that.
This is essential since it will show if your method is even a valid test and will give parameters such as minimum sample size as well as variability, repeatability and reproducibility. They have none of this. The actual ASTM test for gear oils has huge error bars for the results, mostly due to operator variability during the test. Large variability equates to also needing a somewhat larger sample size but again, these county fair hawkers generally perform the test once. But that's only another fatal flaw.
Never are the results presented properly showing the uncertainty in the measurements. This is about the large error bars. If you take the time to take their worthless results and use standard uncertainty then the real result is that all the oils in the test yield indistinguishable results. In other words they all test the same.
But even to get here that requires you to again suspend belief in at least three other aspects of the test. The whole thing is a complete dumpster fire and the last thing it has is any data validity. It has zero. None.
Below is a partial repeat of the multiple times I and others have already commented on this useless test.
First off, any test that is intended to provide information about a material property has to be relevant to the system it's being used in. If I make a taste test of motor oil, that's not relevant to ICE operation. This test is not relevant to engine operation as already noted by others in other threads. That's the first fatal flaw.
If you suspend disbelief that the test isn't relevant then the second fatal flaw is the use of non-standardized test equipment and no published test methodology. Why is this important? Well besides making any tests comparable, it also allows the use of pre-calculated statistical analysis of the results. That's the real key to a standard test. If you develop a test outside of the standard then it is now incumbent on the operator to analyze the methodology and results. Ford Boss Me, like the other goofballs that perform this worthless test, do none of that.
This is essential since it will show if your method is even a valid test and will give parameters such as minimum sample size as well as variability, repeatability and reproducibility. They have none of this. The actual ASTM test for gear oils has huge error bars for the results, mostly due to operator variability during the test. Large variability equates to also needing a somewhat larger sample size but again, these county fair hawkers generally perform the test once. But that's only another fatal flaw.
Never are the results presented properly showing the uncertainty in the measurements. This is about the large error bars. If you take the time to take their worthless results and use standard uncertainty then the real result is that all the oils in the test yield indistinguishable results. In other words they all test the same.
But even to get here that requires you to again suspend belief in at least three other aspects of the test. The whole thing is a complete dumpster fire and the last thing it has is any data validity. It has zero. None.
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Ford Boss Me has made such extreme statements - that I wouldn’t trust him on anything. Those kinds of people are not going to be honest when it’s a Ford problem - not whatever brand of lubricants …
Last edited:
Shampoo does well in the bearing test, too.
So, the relevance of that bearing test is part of what I would question. IF that bearing test was definitive, and all that mattered, then, by all means, run a bit of Johnson & Johnson Baby shampoo in your engine. I mean, it crushes that bearing test, so, it must be good, right?
Or, maybe, perhaps, there is a bit more to what is going on inside an engine than a one-arm bandit bearing test can account for.
Maybe we need more sophisticated testing, that is to say, actual testing like big oil companies do, using several parameters for analysis.
The one-arm bandit is a marketing tool - not a real test.
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Head & Shoulders bcs of the zinc …
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Yes, it’s indeed H&S above the restMy mistake - clearly all shampoos are not created equal - I was looking for some gentle cleansing of any sludge, in a Ph balanced formula with minimal wear…
I linked the SDS up above and copied Flying Texan, who has ignored it after he claimed it didn’t contain chlorinated paraffins.
Check for yourself… “Alkanes C14-C16 Chloro” listed on MK Hyper Lube SDS are medium-chain chlorinated paraffins.
Similar threads
