I know the directions say to pour it in the fuel tank, but can I add Lucas Ucl in the crankcase like marvel mystery oil and seafoam or no?
Of What Use Is An "Upper Cylinder Lubricant"?
- Thread starter OldCowboy
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: engineer20
I know the directions say to pour it in the fuel tank, but can I add Lucas Ucl in the crankcase like marvel mystery oil and seafoam or no?
Don't add it to your oil, it was not intended to be used that way.
I know the directions say to pour it in the fuel tank, but can I add Lucas Ucl in the crankcase like marvel mystery oil and seafoam or no?
Don't add it to your oil, it was not intended to be used that way.
Originally Posted By: engineer20
Is chevron Techtron useful? I don't think it's an upper cylinder lubricant
Techron is a fuel additive. The principal ingredient PEA cleans deposits in the fuel system, injectors, etc. I don't think Techron provides any upper cylinder lubrication. If you use a Top Tier gasoline you are already getting a dose of Techron/PEA in your fuel system. Like most additives, there are those who swear by it... and those who swear at it.
Is chevron Techtron useful? I don't think it's an upper cylinder lubricant
Techron is a fuel additive. The principal ingredient PEA cleans deposits in the fuel system, injectors, etc. I don't think Techron provides any upper cylinder lubrication. If you use a Top Tier gasoline you are already getting a dose of Techron/PEA in your fuel system. Like most additives, there are those who swear by it... and those who swear at it.
Originally Posted By: OldCowboy
MMO and other products are marketed as upper cylinder lubricants.
Why would the upper cylinder need lubricating?
The valve stems and piston rings are oiled by the engine lube system.
Adding oil to the fuel, even a thin oil, would increase the deposits on the spark plugs, valves, valve seats and piston, resulting in combustion chamber problems appearing sooner.
Can someone explain how these products help?
If the engine uses old pintel style injectors that were made from plain iron and steel then something like MMO will definitely help keep corrosion associated with 10% ethanol to a minimum.
On most newer injectors the internal body and disc is SS and a UCL is of little or no benefit with this type.
As fare as cylinder lubrication goes, i have not seen a cylinder ridge or bore tapers like was common years ago in a long time.
That alone tells the tale, no ridge or taper = no excessive wear..
Metallurgy, ring design, ring tension and coating materials are the biggest contributing factors.
UCL is of no benefit.
With modern engines and injectors you really don't need a UCL just a good PEA injector cleaner once in a while to clean deposits.
Old school engines may benefit though but to what degree i have no idea.
MMO and other products are marketed as upper cylinder lubricants.
Why would the upper cylinder need lubricating?
The valve stems and piston rings are oiled by the engine lube system.
Adding oil to the fuel, even a thin oil, would increase the deposits on the spark plugs, valves, valve seats and piston, resulting in combustion chamber problems appearing sooner.
Can someone explain how these products help?
If the engine uses old pintel style injectors that were made from plain iron and steel then something like MMO will definitely help keep corrosion associated with 10% ethanol to a minimum.
On most newer injectors the internal body and disc is SS and a UCL is of little or no benefit with this type.
As fare as cylinder lubrication goes, i have not seen a cylinder ridge or bore tapers like was common years ago in a long time.
That alone tells the tale, no ridge or taper = no excessive wear..
Metallurgy, ring design, ring tension and coating materials are the biggest contributing factors.
UCL is of no benefit.
With modern engines and injectors you really don't need a UCL just a good PEA injector cleaner once in a while to clean deposits.
Old school engines may benefit though but to what degree i have no idea.
So I guess for a modern engine, Techtron is enough and mmo or Lucas in the fuel tank would offer no benefits
Originally Posted By: Trav
If the engine uses old pintel style injectors that were made from plain iron and steel then something like MMO will definitely help keep corrosion associated with 10% ethanol to a minimum.
On most newer injectors the internal body and disc is SS and a UCL is of little or no benefit with this type.
...
This is useful information. Can you tell us roughly when "newer injectors" made with stainless steel became the norm?
If the engine uses old pintel style injectors that were made from plain iron and steel then something like MMO will definitely help keep corrosion associated with 10% ethanol to a minimum.
On most newer injectors the internal body and disc is SS and a UCL is of little or no benefit with this type.
...
This is useful information. Can you tell us roughly when "newer injectors" made with stainless steel became the norm?
Generally (there are always exceptions) if the injector is plastic bodied the internals are SS and use a disc.
There is no specific year they stopped using metal bodies but later than 04 would be rare.
The larger diameter metal bodied one are usually plain steel and use a needle.
If you look at the bottom picture of an injector need in Redlines technical info that is a needle found in the old style units.
http://www.redlineoil.com/content/files/tech/S1-1 Tech Info.pdf
Keep in mind that SS construction does not exempt them from deposits or varnish from stale fuel, both types can have issues.
The kind of deposits they accumulate are best removed by a PEA cleaner or a solvent like Chemtool for varnish.
When most of the pintel style units were made ethanol laced fuel was not common never mind mandated.
The use of some sort of additive with these may be of benefit. When it comes to additives there is no black and white answer, use the additive that best addresses the condition.
They need an additive that prevents corrosion not one that tries to clean it up after the fact.
Redline in small doses on a regular basis may be the best bet. I cant comment on the effectiveness of MMO, TC-W3, Lucas or other products.
There is no specific year they stopped using metal bodies but later than 04 would be rare.
The larger diameter metal bodied one are usually plain steel and use a needle.
If you look at the bottom picture of an injector need in Redlines technical info that is a needle found in the old style units.
http://www.redlineoil.com/content/files/tech/S1-1 Tech Info.pdf
Keep in mind that SS construction does not exempt them from deposits or varnish from stale fuel, both types can have issues.
The kind of deposits they accumulate are best removed by a PEA cleaner or a solvent like Chemtool for varnish.
When most of the pintel style units were made ethanol laced fuel was not common never mind mandated.
The use of some sort of additive with these may be of benefit. When it comes to additives there is no black and white answer, use the additive that best addresses the condition.
They need an additive that prevents corrosion not one that tries to clean it up after the fact.
Redline in small doses on a regular basis may be the best bet. I cant comment on the effectiveness of MMO, TC-W3, Lucas or other products.
Trav, that is helpful and thorough. Thank you!
well i think ill get back in. just get a V8 from Don. with a duel plane manifold. and put MMO in only half of the cyls. and run it HARD and see what happens.
i just noticed a number of general aviation sites. where many many people use MMO in air craft. iam sure if MMO could / would do harm to a air craft engine they would NOT use it. one of those engines is VERY expensive. would you risk that engine, with MMO, if there was ANY chance it would go south?
Originally Posted By: morris
i just noticed a number of general aviation sites. where many many people use MMO in air craft. iam sure if MMO could / would do harm to a air craft engine they would NOT use it. one of those engines is VERY expensive. would you risk that engine, with MMO, if there was ANY chance it would go south?
Strangely enough, the NTSB cited MMO unfavorably in a crash report. It is unclear if the MMO was the actual cause of the problem, but apparently it was not approved by Lycoming..
I don't think MMO has ever been FAA approved for aircraft use, so it's not clear why the pilot of the down plane was using it. Does this sound odd?
I know from first hand knowledge that the US Air Force used in back in the late 60's - early 70's in the far east for small light observation [piston] planes. They bought the stuff by 55-gallon drum. The Army mooched it from the Air Force for use in stationary engines. I have no clue as to who authorized the Air Force to use it or why, but I think it was used as a fuel buffer or octane reducer.
i just noticed a number of general aviation sites. where many many people use MMO in air craft. iam sure if MMO could / would do harm to a air craft engine they would NOT use it. one of those engines is VERY expensive. would you risk that engine, with MMO, if there was ANY chance it would go south?
Strangely enough, the NTSB cited MMO unfavorably in a crash report. It is unclear if the MMO was the actual cause of the problem, but apparently it was not approved by Lycoming..
I don't think MMO has ever been FAA approved for aircraft use, so it's not clear why the pilot of the down plane was using it. Does this sound odd?
I know from first hand knowledge that the US Air Force used in back in the late 60's - early 70's in the far east for small light observation [piston] planes. They bought the stuff by 55-gallon drum. The Army mooched it from the Air Force for use in stationary engines. I have no clue as to who authorized the Air Force to use it or why, but I think it was used as a fuel buffer or octane reducer.
" the NTSB cited MMO unfavorably in a crash report" i read that report. it was unclear how much MMO was put in the tank. i think someone put WAY to much MMO in. by 500- 1000 times. the FAA or car makers will not approve any additives cause then they will get sued by the other makers of snake oil. its NOT that they have proved that one or the other is bad. cause if a manufacture was to a prove a product you just opened a can of worms. just what i think.
Originally Posted By: morris
" the NTSB cited MMO unfavorably in a crash report" i read that report. it was unclear how much MMO was put in the tank. i think someone put WAY to much MMO in. by 500- 1000 times. the FAA or car makers will not approve any additives cause then they will get sued by the other makers of snake oil. its NOT that they have proved that one or the other is bad. cause if a manufacture was to a prove a product you just opened a can of worms. just what i think.
I agree that the details of usage in the NTSB report are murky. But MMO is not FAA approved, so any quantity would be outside of regs. MMO does not claim to be FAA approved, although it has a following in the aviation world.
" the NTSB cited MMO unfavorably in a crash report" i read that report. it was unclear how much MMO was put in the tank. i think someone put WAY to much MMO in. by 500- 1000 times. the FAA or car makers will not approve any additives cause then they will get sued by the other makers of snake oil. its NOT that they have proved that one or the other is bad. cause if a manufacture was to a prove a product you just opened a can of worms. just what i think.
I agree that the details of usage in the NTSB report are murky. But MMO is not FAA approved, so any quantity would be outside of regs. MMO does not claim to be FAA approved, although it has a following in the aviation world.
weeeeell after 30 years of using MMO iam NOT afraid of it.
I guess I'm one of those old codgers, as I remember when lead was pulled. For a little while, you could get both (I think the three pump choices were premium, regular, and unleaded). Then it was gone altogether.
I'm glad it's gone, but it was a bit of a problem on some of the pre-1970 engines when it happened. Back then, we would use mmo and a few other "top end" lubes in the fuel more for valve seating and lubrication than anything else. It helped, a little. It was especially difficult when lower octane unleaded fuels arrived. Then we had to "lube the fuel", retard timing curves and or fuss with things like water injection to keep 'em running decent . . . or hunt for race fuels on weekends.
I'll still recommend mmo for vintage and antique engines still stock, especially with today's alcohol-laden fuels. It also helps, a little, with the older carbs.
Not sure that mmo is really needed on today's engines and fuel delivery systems, even with the alcohol. There, I think a more modern detergent chemistry like techron can do more overall good than the mid-century chemicals such as mmo or sf.
I honestly don't know why anyone would add either of these to a crankcase for PM. Their reduced levels of lubricity and increased solvency compared to a good motor oil isn't the best tradeoff. I know people do, though.
I'm glad it's gone, but it was a bit of a problem on some of the pre-1970 engines when it happened. Back then, we would use mmo and a few other "top end" lubes in the fuel more for valve seating and lubrication than anything else. It helped, a little. It was especially difficult when lower octane unleaded fuels arrived. Then we had to "lube the fuel", retard timing curves and or fuss with things like water injection to keep 'em running decent . . . or hunt for race fuels on weekends.
I'll still recommend mmo for vintage and antique engines still stock, especially with today's alcohol-laden fuels. It also helps, a little, with the older carbs.
Not sure that mmo is really needed on today's engines and fuel delivery systems, even with the alcohol. There, I think a more modern detergent chemistry like techron can do more overall good than the mid-century chemicals such as mmo or sf.
I honestly don't know why anyone would add either of these to a crankcase for PM. Their reduced levels of lubricity and increased solvency compared to a good motor oil isn't the best tradeoff. I know people do, though.
in 1968 or 1969 Dr. Dean Hill had an article "the no lead myth" in hot rod mag. where he explains that the lead does not come out the tail pipe as lead if it burns with the bromide compound in the chamber. Sooooooooo we was lied to again by the government. surprise surprise!!!!!!!
Originally Posted By: morris
in 1968 or 1969 Dr. Dean Hill had an article "the no lead myth" in hot rod mag. where he explains that the lead does not come out the tail pipe as lead if it burns with the bromide compound in the chamber. Sooooooooo we was lied to again by the government. surprise surprise!!!!!!!
So, what alchemy did he say took place?
Lead Bromide
Lead Bromide MSDS
Ed
in 1968 or 1969 Dr. Dean Hill had an article "the no lead myth" in hot rod mag. where he explains that the lead does not come out the tail pipe as lead if it burns with the bromide compound in the chamber. Sooooooooo we was lied to again by the government. surprise surprise!!!!!!!
So, what alchemy did he say took place?
Lead Bromide
Lead Bromide MSDS
Ed
Last edited:
yep i think thats him. i for got he worked for NHRA. i think he was in charge of making sure the fuel the the racers used at NHRA was legal. i think i read an artical he wrote about what how the fuel is tested. a LONG time ago. DR Hill said that the lead and bromide combined under heat to make a bromide salt. else the lead will not leave the chamber. that comes out white in color. remember the white tail pipes when the engine is running right?
Last edited:
The lead has to come out as lead...unless as was discussed back in the day there is a nuclear reaction taking place
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/2895733/Re:_Study:_New_E15_gas_can_rui#Post2895733
Does it become gold maybe ?
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/2895733/Re:_Study:_New_E15_gas_can_rui#Post2895733
Does it become gold maybe ?
- Status
Similar threads
