Restore and Protect; How does it clean?

[schvartzvald]

I called Valvoline and they said that they never tested it’s ability to remove lead. I run a GM 2.0 LSJ factory supercharged engine open loop with larger injectors and more boost on leaded fuel. No Catalytic converter and run off road only. Lead can build up in tiny oil passages like piston squirters I am told. What is in the Restore oil that cleans? I need to find out if it will remove lead deposits.

HELLO! Just my 2c, I have a 97 infiniti Q45, a VK41 engine with 297K miles, it was using a quart every thousand or so for years now, I had the mechanic fix the knock sensors (it was running rich prior coking up the motor) anyway I am on my 4th oil change using Valvoline R&P, last time it was down 1 quart in 3460 oil change interval. I also dont see the grey puff at full throttle anymore. Anyway just my experience, ill stick w/the R&P grade until something better comes along.

 

[MolaKule]

I appreciate your input in this topic, very interesting, if you have the time can you explain why this p66 rep says they won’t use synthetic base oils with leaded fuels? Is he dumbing something down for the audience? Is this marketing? I would love to use an oil that could handle 100LL and allow me to start without preheat below 10F, but that would take a synthetic, I think. The Aeroshell 50/50 blend 15W-50 seems to be the best I can get for cold temps at the moment.

Did you see the error in the presentatiion at about 2:00? Jet engines use a Group V, 5 cSt POE base oil, not a 10W40. This guy needs to go back to school to learn the difference between aviation diesel engines and jet turbine engines.

If P66 doesn't use any synthetic base oils, they must use a boatload of special ashless dispersants, since it's the dispersants that keep the salts and crud in suspension. Possibly they feel the Group II base oils provide some extra solvency for the Anti-Wear TPP, dispersants, and VIIs. Apparently their multigrade formulation philosophy is different from Shell and Mobil.

Multigrade Oils: AeroShell 15W-50 (50 percent synthetic);
Exxon Elite 20W-50 (25 percent synthetic);
Phillips X/C 20W-50 (0 percent synthetic) according to

https://www.savvyaviation.com/wp-content/uploads/articles_eaa/EAA_2011-01_all-about-oil.pdf

 

[2.7ecoboostFordBronco]

Did you see the error in the presentatiion at about 2:00? Jet engines use a Group V, 5 cSt POE base oil, not a 10W40. This guy needs to go back to school to learn the difference between aviation diesel engines and jet turbine engines.

If P66 doesn't use any synthetic base oils, they must use a boatload of special ashless dispersants, since it's the dispersants that keep the salts and crud in suspension. Possibly they feel the Group II base oils provide some extra solvency for the Anti-Wear TPP, dispersants, and VIIs. Apparently their multigrade formulation philosophy is different from Shell and Mobil.

Multigrade Oils: AeroShell 15W-50 (50 percent synthetic);
Exxon Elite 20W-50 (25 percent synthetic);
Phillips X/C 20W-50 (0 percent synthetic) according to

https://www.savvyaviation.com/wp-content/uploads/articles_eaa/EAA_2011-01_all-about-oil.pdf

Thanks for responding. No I didn't catch that since I have had limited dealings with piston powered aviation diesels, I just figured he was talking about the Mercedes based Austro piston-diesel engines that Diamond Aircraft use (they are designed to use Jet-A fuel AFAIK).

The author of your linked article prefers "mineral oil" over semi-synthetic. He claims synthetics "don't benefit these engines the way they do automotive and turbine engines". For now my airplane flight manual specifically says the use "Aeroshell 15W-50 or equivalent" so I use that, although I do add Ed Kollin's camguard at the specified ratio. Interesting insight into philosophies, the additives, and their function, it is much appreciated. I'm dealing with what I believe to be sticky exhaust valve guides on startup with a 500 hour lycoming and am trying to figure out what went wrong, or if oil played a role.

 

[D1dad]

How does the sunset?
How does a posi trac rear end work?
It just does!

 

[kschachn]

Thanks for responding. No I didn't catch that since I have had limited dealings with piston powered aviation diesels, I just figured he was talking about the Mercedes based Austro piston-diesel engines that Diamond Aircraft use (they are designed to use Jet-A fuel AFAIK).

The author of your linked article prefers "mineral oil" over semi-synthetic. He claims synthetics "don't benefit these engines the way they do automotive and turbine engines". For now my airplane flight manual specifically says the use "Aeroshell 15W-50 or equivalent" so I use that, although I do add Ed Kollin's camguard at the specified ratio. Interesting insight into philosophies, the additives, and their function, it is much appreciated. I'm dealing with what I believe to be sticky exhaust valve guides on startup with a 500 hour lycoming and am trying to figure out what went wrong, or if oil played a role.

Again, it’s not the base stock it was an inadequately or improperly additized formulation.

Besides, synthetics today are predominately Group III bases which are chemically similar if not identical to Groups I and II. The difference comes in the viscosity level and lowered level of contaminates. Not chemical structure.

 

[2.7ecoboostFordBronco]

Again, it’s not the base stock it was an inadequately or improperly additized formulation.

Besides, synthetics today are predominately Group III bases which are chemically similar if not identical to Groups I and II. The difference comes in the viscosity level and lowered level of contaminates. Not chemical structure.

That’s what I believe too, just trying to figure out why there are so many mechanics/“experts” advocating to use mineral oil only bases and even straight weight oils when PAO blends are readily available. It seems that their additive packages are all very similar ashless dispersants, but maybe not. Maybe it is a complete misconception based on deficiencies with the additive package that came with the discontinued mobile AV-1 full synthetic?

 

[JohnnyJohnson]

Well it has to be intellectually smart AI molecules!

 

[MolaKule]

For now my airplane flight manual specifically says the use "Aeroshell 15W-50 or equivalent" so I use that, although I do add Ed Kollin's camguard at the specified ratio. Interesting insight into philosophies, the additives, and their function, it is much appreciated. I'm dealing with what I believe to be sticky exhaust valve guides on startup with a 500 hour lycoming and am trying to figure out what went wrong, or if oil played a role.

Ed's CamGuard should help, but you won't know if you have a sticky valve guide (morning sickness) until the engine is inspected by a qualified A&P mechanic.

https://aslcamguard.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Why-CamGuard.pdf

 

[loneryder]

I can’t find it with the search tab tonight. Why do you and several others have to be so snarky in your reply posts?

I was trying to figure out what this additive might be. I looked into the patents filed by Aramco, the research they did at KAUST (a university in Saudi Arabia), then I looked at patents filed by Afton. I picked Aramco and Afton because I figured it wouldn't use an additive sold or controlled by Shell or Exxon, and I figured since VRP came out after the Aramco acquisition of Valvoline (2023), that Aramco might start using a patented process in its own oils vs letting someone else use it on a licensing basis.

Searching for terms like deposits, piston rings, cleaning, additives, oil consumption, IIIH test parameters -- I looked at the last 15 years of patents. There are hundreds, if not thousands. I don't have the technical background to parse this in detail or really much at all, so I can only offer the most low level summary of what I think might be possible candidates for this cleaning agent.

There were several patents specifically dealing with nanoparticle additives, physical abrasives in other words, and some patents regarding dispersants specifically to disperse carbon particles. The nanoparticle patents discussed uniquely shaped atomic arrangements to manufacture gentle abrasives for removing engine deposits that would remove engine deposits over time. Several patents looked at the friction reducing properties of them, but a few patents looked specifically at chemical additives that were specific to reducing deposits.

So it makes me wonder if the "gentle cleaning" and "up to 4 oil changes" thing discussed in the marketing isn't using something like a uniquely formed abrasive compound that doesn't increase friction and wear on relatively smooth metal surfaces, but in the right combinations of heat and pressure, when in contact with relatively rough surfaces (like carbon deposits) forms a scrubbing action. This, paired with some sort of dispersant specific for microscopic carbon particles, allows these sooty bits to remain in suspension. The nanoparticle size is extremely small, so it won't get caught by the filter, but if it can break off pieces of carbon and gunk, that will get captured by the filter if it cannot remain suspended in the oil. The fact that the VRP cleaner works best on piston ring deposits, and there was no mention or reports of much varnish removal, might hint at this being a novel abrasive that needs high temp / pressure. Areas of engine varnish people see under valve covers and cams are not high pressure, high temp areas like piston rings. And I am guessing the layer of varnish on engine parts is much smoother, at the microscopic level, than piston ring deposits. Hence why varnish removal doesn't happen as well as piston ring deposits.

All of this stuff, these additives, work in concert with the overall additive package of the oil. Because this isn't a Dexos approved oil, which would require submission of the full ingredient list, suggests there's some key synergy between the total additive package beyond just throwing some nanoparticles into the oil. Hence why I think Valvoline / Aramco hasn't requested Dexos certification. They don't want the secret to get out.

I'm sorry...I neglected to include the original poster of this post. This is a C&P of a post by SimpleSyrup.

Last edited: Jan 29, 2025

 

[buster]

I was trying to figure out what this additive might be. I looked into the patents filed by Aramco, the research they did at KAUST (a university in Saudi Arabia), then I looked at patents filed by Afton. I picked Aramco and Afton because I figured it wouldn't use an additive sold or controlled by Shell or Exxon, and I figured since VRP came out after the Aramco acquisition of Valvoline (2023), that Aramco might start using a patented process in its own oils vs letting someone else use it on a licensing basis.

Searching for terms like deposits, piston rings, cleaning, additives, oil consumption, IIIH test parameters -- I looked at the last 15 years of patents. There are hundreds, if not thousands. I don't have the technical background to parse this in detail or really much at all, so I can only offer the most low level summary of what I think might be possible candidates for this cleaning agent.

There were several patents specifically dealing with nanoparticle additives, physical abrasives in other words, and some patents regarding dispersants specifically to disperse carbon particles. The nanoparticle patents discussed uniquely shaped atomic arrangements to manufacture gentle abrasives for removing engine deposits that would remove engine deposits over time. Several patents looked at the friction reducing properties of them, but a few patents looked specifically at chemical additives that were specific to reducing deposits.

So it makes me wonder if the "gentle cleaning" and "up to 4 oil changes" thing discussed in the marketing isn't using something like a uniquely formed abrasive compound that doesn't increase friction and wear on relatively smooth metal surfaces, but in the right combinations of heat and pressure, when in contact with relatively rough surfaces (like carbon deposits) forms a scrubbing action. This, paired with some sort of dispersant specific for microscopic carbon particles, allows these sooty bits to remain in suspension. The nanoparticle size is extremely small, so it won't get caught by the filter, but if it can break off pieces of carbon and gunk, that will get captured by the filter if it cannot remain suspended in the oil. The fact that the VRP cleaner works best on piston ring deposits, and there was no mention or reports of much varnish removal, might hint at this being a novel abrasive that needs high temp / pressure. Areas of engine varnish people see under valve covers and cams are not high pressure, high temp areas like piston rings. And I am guessing the layer of varnish on engine parts is much smoother, at the microscopic level, than piston ring deposits. Hence why varnish removal doesn't happen as well as piston ring deposits.

All of this stuff, these additives, work in concert with the overall additive package of the oil. Because this isn't a Dexos approved oil, which would require submission of the full ingredient list, suggests there's some key synergy between the total additive package beyond just throwing some nanoparticles into the oil. Hence why I think Valvoline / Aramco hasn't requested Dexos certification. They don't want the secret to get out.

Last edited: Jan 29, 2025

Good analysis. Thanks for sharing your ideas. You could be on to something.

It's definitely somewhat of a game changer.

 

[Hohn]

I was trying to figure out what this additive might be. I looked into the patents filed by Aramco, the research they did at KAUST (a university in Saudi Arabia), then I looked at patents filed by Afton. I picked Aramco and Afton because I figured it wouldn't use an additive sold or controlled by Shell or Exxon, and I figured since VRP came out after the Aramco acquisition of Valvoline (2023), that Aramco might start using a patented process in its own oils vs letting someone else use it on a licensing basis.

Searching for terms like deposits, piston rings, cleaning, additives, oil consumption, IIIH test parameters -- I looked at the last 15 years of patents. There are hundreds, if not thousands. I don't have the technical background to parse this in detail or really much at all, so I can only offer the most low level summary of what I think might be possible candidates for this cleaning agent.

There were several patents specifically dealing with nanoparticle additives, physical abrasives in other words, and some patents regarding dispersants specifically to disperse carbon particles. The nanoparticle patents discussed uniquely shaped atomic arrangements to manufacture gentle abrasives for removing engine deposits that would remove engine deposits over time. Several patents looked at the friction reducing properties of them, but a few patents looked specifically at chemical additives that were specific to reducing deposits.

So it makes me wonder if the "gentle cleaning" and "up to 4 oil changes" thing discussed in the marketing isn't using something like a uniquely formed abrasive compound that doesn't increase friction and wear on relatively smooth metal surfaces, but in the right combinations of heat and pressure, when in contact with relatively rough surfaces (like carbon deposits) forms a scrubbing action. This, paired with some sort of dispersant specific for microscopic carbon particles, allows these sooty bits to remain in suspension. The nanoparticle size is extremely small, so it won't get caught by the filter, but if it can break off pieces of carbon and gunk, that will get captured by the filter if it cannot remain suspended in the oil. The fact that the VRP cleaner works best on piston ring deposits, and there was no mention or reports of much varnish removal, might hint at this being a novel abrasive that needs high temp / pressure. Areas of engine varnish people see under valve covers and cams are not high pressure, high temp areas like piston rings. And I am guessing the layer of varnish on engine parts is much smoother, at the microscopic level, than piston ring deposits. Hence why varnish removal doesn't happen as well as piston ring deposits.

All of this stuff, these additives, work in concert with the overall additive package of the oil. Because this isn't a Dexos approved oil, which would require submission of the full ingredient list, suggests there's some key synergy between the total additive package beyond just throwing some nanoparticles into the oil. Hence why I think Valvoline / Aramco hasn't requested Dexos certification. They don't want the secret to get out.

I'm sorry...I neglected to include the original poster of this post. This is a C&P of a post by SimpleSyrup.

Last edited: Jan 29, 2025

It’s definitely removing varnish in my van and there’s no way it is abrasive cleaning since it’s cleaning the tops of my rocker arms.

 

[MM8]

What did we ever do when we drove around with leaded gas?

I've never heard of lead deposits coming from oil or causing any blockage or harm. I did, however, see a lot of lead fouled spark plugs.

The vast majority of cars were carbureted, the standard oil change interval was 3,000 miles, and sparkplugs got changed every 12,000 miles - that's what we did.

 

[MolaKule]

All of this stuff, these additives, work in concert with the overall additive package of the oil. Because this isn't a Dexos approved oil, which would require submission of the full ingredient list,

No, just because a Dexos oil is mentioned it doesn't mean a full formulation list of additive chemistries is required. I know of no situations for any EO where this is required.

I think the abrasive nanoparticle theory for cleaning is nonsensical for EO formulations.

The cleaning additive chemistry has to breakup carbon bonds and then allow the dispersant to disperse and carry the carbon into the oil. The estolides are very good at doing this.

suggests there's some key synergy between the total additive package beyond just throwing some nanoparticles into the oil. Hence why I think Valvoline / Aramco hasn't requested Dexos certification. They don't want the secret to get out.

For a definition of Varnish, see post #10:

Post in thread 'Lacquer and Varnish'

Apr 4, 2004

Yep, we're talking about engine related deposits since the questions says something about engines.

Laquer and varnish deposits are two different deposits.

Keep going guys, you're on the right rack.

• MolaKule