Originally Posted By: PimTac
Didn't the Japanese manufacturers get a variance from that TEOST test due to the fact they use tons of moly in their 0w-20 oils which would fail? Has there been a connection between high moly content and increases in build up? It would seem that piston cleanliness especially rings and lands are the most susceptible in engines today.
I don't have an inside track on this one. The Japanese push to remove Teost on 0W20s probably happened after I escaped from the asylum.
However I am wondering if Moly got blamed from a problem it didn't actually cause? I say that because although I never tested Moly at the kind of levels (1000 ppm-ish) you sometimes find in Japanese oils, if I ever did run into Teost problems, Moly was always one of the additives I'd reach out for first as a fix.
Maybe just maybe, high levels of Moly got conflated with high levels of neat PMA VII and Moly got the blame because PMA doesn't flag itself up up on a standard oil analysis. Interesting...
Didn't the Japanese manufacturers get a variance from that TEOST test due to the fact they use tons of moly in their 0w-20 oils which would fail? Has there been a connection between high moly content and increases in build up? It would seem that piston cleanliness especially rings and lands are the most susceptible in engines today.
I don't have an inside track on this one. The Japanese push to remove Teost on 0W20s probably happened after I escaped from the asylum.
However I am wondering if Moly got blamed from a problem it didn't actually cause? I say that because although I never tested Moly at the kind of levels (1000 ppm-ish) you sometimes find in Japanese oils, if I ever did run into Teost problems, Moly was always one of the additives I'd reach out for first as a fix.
Maybe just maybe, high levels of Moly got conflated with high levels of neat PMA VII and Moly got the blame because PMA doesn't flag itself up up on a standard oil analysis. Interesting...
Last edited: