Triax Synergy 0w30 SN+

[OVERKILL]

Did you check out the second link? You have to expand with the "more comments" button to get to Triax's reply

Yes. As soon as I see marketing lingo like "regenerating armour" I have to stop reading. You can speak technically about something without turning it into a Power Thirst commercial.

 

[kschachn]

Yes. As soon as I see marketing lingo like "regenerating armour" I have to stop reading. You can speak technically about something without turning it into a Power Thirst commercial.

Indeed, that goes right along with those PDS that list mutually exclusive "suitable for" approvals.

Sometimes it borders on amusing the level of ridiculousness that occurs when certain products such as this are promoted. Apparently now some dood on Reddit is the prime source of technical substantiation for the product. Of course that may be all they have so perhaps it isn't surprising.

 

[garageman402]

Yes. As soon as I see marketing lingo like "regenerating armour" I have to stop reading. You can speak technically about something without turning it into a Power Thirst commercial.

I agree, the "regenerating armor" line is a little over the top. But molybdenum actually acts somewhat that way

 

[garageman402]

Indeed, that goes right along with those PDS that list mutually exclusive "suitable for" approvals.

Sometimes it borders on amusing the level of ridiculousness that occurs when certain products such as this are promoted. Apparently now some dood on Reddit is the prime source of technical substantiation for the product. Of course that may be all they have so perhaps it isn't surprising.

Yes, the sources are vague & reclusive. I believe Triax is a user name on here, who has only posted 3 times. A search for it doesn't turn up anything, but he/she posted in one of the Triax threads in 2017. I can't help wondering if this really is a decent product, but the promotors are less than ideal.

 

[kschachn]

Yes, the sources are vague & reclusive. I believe Triax is a user name on here, who has only posted 3 times. A search for it doesn't turn up anything, but he/she posted in one of the Triax threads in 2017. I can't help wondering if this really is a decent product, but the promotors are less than ideal.

The problem with me at least is that blenders that produce a decent product also produce decent product descriptions and informational literature. My thinking is that if they make up stuff in their literature or are so careless that some information is contradictory then how careless are they with their product? Considering the plethora of products available that do come with accurate information I’m not inclined to rely on “hope”, mystique or Reddit posts as substitutes for proven performance.

 

[OVERKILL]

I agree, the "regenerating armor" line is a little over the top. But molybdenum actually acts somewhat that way

So does ZDDP, it's a self-healing coating that's supposed to act as the last line of defence in boundary lubrication mode. This is just the standard function of AW and FM additives, calling it out as if it's this novel breakthrough is silly.

 

[garageman402]

So does ZDDP, it's a self-healing coating that's supposed to act as the last line of defence in boundary lubrication mode. This is just the standard function of AW and FM additives, calling it out as if it's this novel breakthrough is silly.

Well, salesmen love to sell, LOL I remember a used car salesman in the 80s pointing out the dual master cylinder saying that if the front brakes go out, you still have the back brakes & vise-versa. Um, that's been required starting with model year 1967. But!! That doesn't make the statement untrue.

On another subject, is the higher Moly level being used in some oils enough to compensate for the lower levels of ZDDP? SN & SP are lowering the ZDDP levels to "save" poisoning cats, but I have read that if your engine is not an oil burner, there is no worry about high ZDDP levels.

Triax has both, apparently in high levels. Amsoil is also high in Moly & ZDDP, but at a higher price point.

 

[OVERKILL]

Well, salesmen love to sell, LOL I remember a used car salesman in the 80s pointing out the dual master cylinder saying that if the front brakes go out, you still have the back brakes & vise-versa. Um, that's been required starting with model year 1967. But!! That doesn't make the statement untrue.

On another subject, is the higher Moly level being used in some oils enough to compensate for the lower levels of ZDDP? SN & SP are lowering the ZDDP levels to "save" poisoning cats, but I have read that if your engine is not an oil burner, there is no worry about high ZDDP levels.

Triax has both, apparently in high levels. Amsoil is also high in Moly & ZDDP, but at a higher price point.

AMSOIL has typical levels of ZDDP.

The limits on ZDDP started with SM, and the limit isn't actually on zinc, but phosphorous. It has not changed/been further restricted since then. In fact, phosphorous retention is now a parameter because ZDDP has been identified as being effective in mitigating LSPI.

Moly does not provide the same AW function as ZDDP. Also, there are different versions of moly, that require different treat rates for the same effectiveness. For example, 80ppm of trimer moly may provide the same level of friction reduction as 200pm of traditional dimer moly. Also, moly can have synergistic relationships with other AW/AF compounds that may not show up in a VOA, like borated esters. Some of the borated compounds Mobil uses do in fact work as AW additives like ZDDP and may also be complimentary to it, there are likely many compounds through infineum that XOM and Shell have access to that other blenders don't. XOM also has access to probably the largest slate of base oils and base oil viscosities on the planet through XOM Chemical.

As we can see from the VOA, this oil has standard levels of ZDDP to be SN/SN Plus compliant. Phosphorous is capped at 800ppm.

As I said, just from what we can see on this VOA, the oil looks to be employing a very vanilla additive package, likely supplied by one of the majors.

 

[garageman402]

The problem with me at least is that blenders that produce a decent product also produce decent product descriptions and informational literature. My thinking is that if they make up stuff in their literature or are so careless that some information is contradictory then how careless are they with their product? Considering the plethora of products available that do come with accurate information I’m not inclined to rely on “hope”, mystique or Reddit posts as substitutes for proven performance.

The user name is "TriaxLubes" last post 2018. I ordered some and the shipping address is 753 Port America (Place), Grapevine, TX. Google Map shows a regular warehouse unit with the logo on the window.

Sort of reminds me of when I visited Redline in Benicia, CA. It's just a warehouse as well, free standing, not a unit in a complex. I spoke with a rep inside and asked why they don't have the certifications. He said cost of testing and licensing (or approvals) was a big issue, and that their product is superior to other products, but the formula doesn't meet specifications to be licensed. This was in 2011 or 2012 before the buyout.

I also heard the same about RLI (Renewalble Lubes Inc. in Iowa).

Amsoil has a good reputation on here, but they have the same approval issues yet they are highly regarded. Besides having a good VOA and/or UOA, what else is needed outside of being licensed & approved?

 

[garageman402]

Moly does not provide the same AW function as ZDDP. Also, there are different versions of moly, that require different treat rates for the same effectiveness. For example, 80ppm of trimer moly may provide the same level of friction reduction as 200pm of traditional dimer moly. Also, moly can have synergistic relationships with other AW/AF compounds that may not show up in a VOA, like borated esters. Some of the borated compounds Mobil uses do in fact work as AW additives like ZDDP and may also be complimentary to it, there are likely many compounds through infineum that XOM and Shell have access to that other blenders don't. XOM also has access to probably the largest slate of base oils and base oil viscosities on the planet through XOM Chemical.

So I presume they are touting the high Moly which is probably dimer Moly, as trimer Moly without saying the difference. Moly is Moly, right? Who knew? I would have to assume trimer is more expensive than dimer Moly? Is there any way the distinguish between the two in an analysis?

Even Amsoil has Moly at 220ppm, would it be correct to assume it's dimer?

 

[OVERKILL]

So I presume they are touting the high Moly which is probably dimer Moly, as trimer Moly without saying the difference. Moly is Moly, right? Who knew? I would have to assume trimer is more expensive than dimer Moly? Is there any way the distinguish between the two in an analysis?

Even Amsoil has Moly at 220ppm, would it be correct to assume it's dimer?

Historically, it was just XOM and SOPUS that used trimer, because it was patented by Infineum. However, that patent expired, so I have no idea if other companies started making it or other blenders are using it. Yes, trimer would be more expensive, yes, it's safe to assume both of those companies are using dimer and no, you can't tell what is what on a VOA, the only clue is trimer will typically have lower concentrations.

I don't think they are claiming to use trimer (I see no evidence of that) just goofy advertising that they are using "more" moly, and that must be better, right? I mean, they baited you into it clearly

 

[kschachn]

The user name is "TriaxLubes" last post 2018. I ordered some and the shipping address is 753 Port America (Place), Grapevine, TX. Google Map shows a regular warehouse unit with the logo on the window.

Sort of reminds me of when I visited Redline in Benicia, CA. It's just a warehouse as well, free standing, not a unit in a complex. I spoke with a rep inside and asked why they don't have the certifications. He said cost of testing and licensing (or approvals) was a big issue, and that their product is superior to other products, but the formula doesn't meet specifications to be licensed. This was in 2011 or 2012 before the buyout.

I also heard the same about RLI (Renewalble Lubes Inc. in Iowa).

Amsoil has a good reputation on here, but they have the same approval issues yet they are highly regarded. Besides having a good VOA and/or UOA, what else is needed outside of being licensed & approved?

For one thing Amsoil does not have the same “approval issues” as Triax. Nor does Red Line as neither try to claim they are suitable for incompatible approvals or licenses for the same oil. Amsoil and Red Line are consistent. Amsoil also has actual approvals for some products.

As for the rest of your post I’m not really sure what you’re trying to say there?

 

[garageman402]

Historically, it was just XOM and SOPUS that used trimer, because it was patented by Infineum. However, that patent expired, so I have no idea if other companies started making it or other blenders are using it. Yes, trimer would be more expensive, yes, it's safe to assume both of those companies are using dimer and no, you can't tell what is what on a VOA, the only clue is trimer will typically have lower concentrations.

I don't think they are claiming to use trimer (I see no evidence of that) just goofy advertising that they are using "more" moly, and that must be better, right? I mean, they baited you into it clearly

I know they are not claiming to use trimer, but bigger numbers sell better than little ones. If 80 is good, then 220 is tremendous, right? One would assume the 80 and 220 refer to the same item, but apparently all Moly is not created equal.....

Yes, they baited me, but at a lower price than Amsoil for approx. the same formula, I bit.

 

[OVERKILL]

I know they are not claiming to use trimer, but bigger numbers sell better than little ones. If 80 is good, then 220 is tremendous, right? One would assume the 80 and 220 refer to the same item, but apparently all Moly is not created equal.....

Yes, they baited me, but at a lower price than Amsoil for approx. the same formula, I bit.

I would doubt it's the same formula (unless we are talking about OE or XL, which are cookie-cutter), AMSOIL spends a fair bit on R&D and works with the major additive manufacturers for their non-approved additive packages (the SS lineup). They also run engine sequences and test their products, which is expensive. Smaller blenders typically can't afford that, so they'll run some bench tests and maybe tweak some existing, previously approved formulas bought from one of the majors if they are producing a non-approved product. Of course an approved product (like this one) is totally vanilla. This is where having a knowledgeable in-house formulator is critical, because then you aren't producing cookie-cutter oils (though I don't think there's anything wrong with doing so, as long as you aren't making outlandish marketing claims....).

Base oil selection, well, this is again going to come down to who is putting the formula together. @High Performance Lubricants is extremely up-front with what base oils their products use, and not all of them are blended using the most expensive base oils, it comes down to product application and price point. PAO, AN's and esters are EXPENSIVE, and in order to make money on an oil blended with those bases, they have to charge a fair bit. In many cases, blending a given oil using Group III can be a better choice, if the advantages of PAO and the added complexity it adds to the blending process, aren't relevant to the application.

If you truly believe that Triax is producing a "better" oil, then for your peace of mind, that's all that matters. But so far, I've seen nothing that would substantiate that position, just a lot of marketing language.

Fleet tests are another really nice niche that a blender can get into, providing them with actual performance in service data. XOM runs these, but some smaller blenders can also get into this with long-term contracts and this can go a long way in improving formulation or just verifying existing choices.

 

[garageman402]

For one thing Amsoil does not have the same “approval issues” as Triax. Nor does Red Line as neither try to claim they are suitable for incompatible approvals or licenses for the same oil. Amsoil and Red Line are consistent. Amsoil also has actual approvals for some products.

As for the rest of your post I’m not really sure what you’re trying to say there?

https://www.amsoil.com/t/faq/ scroll down to the bottom to the API approval section.

https://www.redlineoil.com/Content/files/tech/0W30_MO_PROD_INFO_2020.pdf "Recommended for" can you see any actual approval?

I was pointing out that the Redline facility was not much different than the Triax location shown on Google maps. Just basically a warehouse, so from outside appearances there is no difference.

TriaxLubes having a name on this site was mentioned, and I was able to look them up.

Renewable Lubes was recommended to me by a tribologist, they have no approvals either.

If VOAs and UOAs are not a judge of oil quality, then what is? Being approved by an agency? We are on here to find better oils through independent research, including how well they operate in an engine. If a blender or producer does not pay the fee for licensing because of cost, or restriction on using better formulas, and passes on the savings through lower pricing, then why not use it? We have no guarantee that it's not re-refined cat piss, but the analyses should bear that out.

Yes some Amsoil products are approved, but the higher end (expensive) products are not.

Redline focuses on racing, so longevity is not a priority, but they are highly touted so their product sells well. I couldn't justify spending that much on oil that an analysis condemned after 4,000 miles.

Triax is not that expensive, but with a lower base number won't hold up very long, so it's affordable for shorter OCI.

 

[OVERKILL]

https://www.amsoil.com/t/faq/ scroll down to the bottom to the API approval section.

https://www.redlineoil.com/Content/files/tech/0W30_MO_PROD_INFO_2020.pdf "Recommended for" can you see any actual approval?

I was pointing out that the Redline facility was not much different than the Triax location shown on Google maps. Just basically a warehouse, so from outside appearances there is no difference.

TriaxLubes having a name on this site was mentioned, and I was able to look them up.

Renewable Lubes was recommended to me by a tribologist, they have no approvals either.

If VOAs and UOAs are not a judge of oil quality, then what is? Being approved by an agency? We are on here to find better oils through independent research, including how well they operate in an engine. If a blender or producer does not pay the fee for licensing because of cost, or restriction on using better formulas, and passes on the savings through lower pricing, then why not use it? We have no guarantee that it's not re-refined cat piss, but the analyses should bear that out.

Yes some Amsoil products are approved, but the higher end (expensive) products are not.

Redline focuses on racing, so longevity is not a priority, but they are highly touted so their product sells well. I couldn't justify spending that much on oil that an analysis condemned after 4,000 miles.

Triax is not that expensive, but with a lower base number won't hold up very long, so it's affordable for shorter OCI.

Redline is owned by oil giant Conoco Philips, and has been for the last several years. Their "classic" (non approved white bottle) oils look/looked a lot like an SL additive package on steroids, with just more of everything.

In comparison, AMSOIL's formulation seemed to trail Mobil's approach, that is, we'd see Mobil make some major formulation changes, and then a while later, AMSOIL would make similar changes to their premium (SS) product line, but often tweaking certain parts (at least from what we could see in a VOA/UOA) to meet their own performance targets. That shows evolution in formulation in following what the big guys with the huge labs and semi-unlimited budgets are working on, which is a smart move.

Again, on the subject of Triax and other blenders, which products are we talking about? You pointed out Renewable Lubricants, and their lack of approvals, but the Triax product in this thread IS API approved, so it is subject to the constraints of that approval and the components used, just like Redline "Professional" (just rebottled Philips66/Kendall) and AMSOIL's OE/XL lineup. When these are being produced by a small blender, they are going to be cookie cutter products, regardless of the spin by the company selling them.

On non-approved lubricants, this is where the blender can basically do whatever they want, but most lack the resources to develop something entirely from scratch, so they'll buy an additive package from one of the biggies (Lubrizol, Infineum, Afton...etc) and then tweak certain parts of it. This is where having a knowledgeable chemist/formulator on-hand is critical, somebody who is experienced in what does what and what parts of the formulation impact what areas of performance and their side effects in other areas.

Then, as I said, there's base oil selection, and the premium base oils are EXPENSIVE when you aren't XOM Chemical and producing them all in-house. And this is reflected in the sticker price of the finished product. That's why Redline white bottle (majority PAO) has always been expensive, same with AMSOIL's SS product line. There is considerable cost sunk in the product in terms of blending components.

 

[garageman402]

Redline is owned by oil giant Conoco Philips, and has been for the last several years. Their "classic" (non approved white bottle) oils look/looked a lot like an SL additive package on steroids, with just more of everything.

On non-approved lubricants, this is where the blender can basically do whatever they want, but most lack the resources to develop something entirely from scratch, so they'll buy an additive package from one of the biggies (Lubrizol, Infineum, Afton...etc) and then tweak certain parts of it. This is where having a knowledgeable chemist/formulator on-hand is critical, somebody who is experienced in what does what and what parts of the formulation impact what areas of performance and their side effects in other areas.

This is pretty much what was said to me by the Redline rep when I visited them in 2012 (before Conoco). At that time they pretty much had no approved oils (that I remember), and I was asking why. The cost of approvals was a major factor.

Again, on the subject of Triax and other blenders, which products are we talking about? You pointed out Renewable Lubricants, and their lack of approvals, but the Triax product in this thread IS API approved, so it is subject to the constraints of that approval and the components used, just like Redline "Professional" (just rebottled Philips66/Kendall) and AMSOIL's OE/XL lineup. When these are being produced by a small blender, they are going to be cookie cutter products, regardless of the spin by the company selling them.

I was making the point that just because a product doesn't have the approvals, doesn't necessarily mean they are re-refined cat piss. But there has to be a certain amount of trust that they know what they're doing, and not passing an inferior (or potentially damaging) product. I think VOAs give a good idea of what's inside. Honestly, my experience with RLI was bad, not just from using a 5w-20 in a 5w-30 application with catastrophic failure, but I cut open an oil filter, and the element looked like it had been squeezed out in a vise. Dry, no sticking. But a VOA/UOA wouldn't show that.

Then, as I said, there's base oil selection, and the premium base oils are EXPENSIVE when you aren't XOM Chemical and producing them all in-house. And this is reflected in the sticker price of the finished product. That's why Redline white bottle (majority PAO) has always been expensive, same with AMSOIL's SS product line. There is considerable cost sunk in the product in terms of blending components.

From Triax's statements that they were an industrial additive maker now getting into motor oil it seems they may be legit. I heard a similar story in another thread about LiquiMoly making motor oils now. Seems like they are using the same strategy now that highly refined Grp III base can be called "synthetic", and making big claims as Triax is doing. One analysis showed 1ppm of Moly. Some comments indicated M1 or Castrol is the same or better at a way lower price.

I have attached pics of the oil I just received. It was ordered via Amazon on 2/20/22, shipped Monday, 2/21/22, and arrived 2/24/22. The dates stamped on the bottle show "Pro" (produced?) 02142020, and expires 02142032 a 10 years shelf life? LOL. Also note the API donut is gone, but the "Specifications" show API SP. Zoom in bottom of reverse side for dates and lot number.

 

[OVERKILL]

This is pretty much what was said to me by the Redline rep when I visited them in 2012 (before Conoco). At that time they pretty much had no approved oils (that I remember), and I was asking why. The cost of approvals was a major factor.

Redline has never had an approved product under their original white bottle product line, as the additive levels they've used prohibits it for most grades. But I've also read that they don't actually run any of the sequences on their oils to validate performance (unlike AMSOIL) and primarily rely on bench test and race results. Not that this is bad, but it's not as good as running the OEM sequences.

I was making the point that just because a product doesn't have the approvals, doesn't necessarily mean they are re-refined cat piss. But there has to be a certain amount of trust that they know what they're doing, and not passing an inferior (or potentially damaging) product. I think VOAs give a good idea of what's inside. Honestly, my experience with RLI was bad, not just from using a 5w-20 in a 5w-30 application with catastrophic failure, but I cut open an oil filter, and the element looked like it had been squeezed out in a vise. Dry, no sticking. But a VOA/UOA wouldn't show that.

VOA's give you a good idea of what metallic additives are in a product, but not what compounds are used (type of moly for example, type of ZDDP), base oils, or what organic FM's and AW additives might also be in play (like Mobil's use of borated compounds).

Yes, using an unapproved product requires you place your faith in the blender. You've clearly made that leap of faith with Triax, others may not be so inclined.

From Triax's statements that they were an industrial additive maker now getting into motor oil it seems they may be legit. I heard a similar story in another thread about LiquiMoly making motor oils now. Seems like they are using the same strategy now that highly refined Grp III base can be called "synthetic", and making big claims as Triax is doing. One analysis showed 1ppm of Moly. Some comments indicated M1 or Castrol is the same or better at a way lower price.

Liquimoly has made engine oils forever. They are one of the most popular brands in Germany, and yes, they make additives as well, something some might take issue with (I'm personally not a fan of the idea that you are selling a deficient product and can "make it better" with a separate wizard in a can). Yes, LM's product lines are dominated by HC-based products. And no, HC bases are not considered synthetic in Germany, LM's home market, and in fact most oils sold there do not carry the vollsynthetisches label on the bottle because of that.

I have attached pics of the oil I just received. It was ordered via Amazon on 2/20/22, shipped Monday, 2/21/22, and arrived 2/24/22. The dates stamped on the bottle show "Pro" (produced?) 02142020, and expires 02142032 a 10 years shelf life? LOL. Also note the API donut is gone, but the "Specifications" show API SP. Zoom in bottom of reverse side for dates and lot number.

View attachment 90650View attachment 90649

That oil, lacking the API donut, is clearly different from the product the OP had sampled. Are you going to send it off to be analyzed? Would be interesting to see how it differs from his.

Also, not a fan of that "Specifications" section, it should say "Recommended for" or similar there, so that the end user isn't inferring that the product is approved when it in fact isn't.

 

[kschachn]

Why do I get this is only a promotional thread for Triax at the expense of two other blenders?

 

[garageman402]

Why do I get this is only a promotional thread for Triax at the expense of two other blenders?

No promotion necessary, just the facts. If you see this as a Triax promotion, then the facts have spoken.....

I explored LiquiMoly oil, but nothing in it justifies the price, even has very little moly. Redline and Amsoil prices are in the stratosphere.