Why is high Calcium levels a positive?

wemay

Thread starter
Messages
14,042
Location
Kendall, FL
Thanks guys, the comparison to Magnesium was going to be the other direction I headed in. Nice anticipation greg24. So it serves as both, anti wear and detergent agent.
 
Last edited:
Messages
28,123
Location
Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: wemay
Thanks guys, the comparison to Magnesium was going to be the other direction I headed in.
I'm sure Mola and others could explain exactly why, but it seems to me that we see magnesium more often in HDEOs that require both a high TBN and a low SA, such as an ACEA E7/E9 lube.
 
Messages
1,016
Location
UK
High Ca isn't always a positive. It leads to ash, which can block DPFs. Ca and Mg also have different hydrolysis effects. Mg detergents tends to react with water more readily than Ca - I used to develop marine engine oils and Mg detergents were almost unheard of (a lot of engines use centrifugal separators that have a water/oil interface). Ash hardness is also a factor. When I was developing oils for natural/landfill gas stationary powergen engines, ash hardness was a real concern as it could damage valve seats and burn out valves.
 

wemay

Thread starter
Messages
14,042
Location
Kendall, FL
It all has to be balanced quite carefully, seems like. This is why I've since evolved away from the 'Noack is EVERYTHING' position I once, amateurishly, held. Every ingredient, standardized test, approval and certification must be included to determine quality or lack there of.
 
Messages
40,825
Location
Great Lakes
Originally Posted By: wemay
It all has to be balanced quite carefully, seems like.
Absolutely. It's not about any one ingredient or a single spec in particular. It's the overall formulation that needs to work as a whole to address a specific need, such as an mfg certification.
 
Messages
553
Location
Toronto, Canada
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: wemay
It all has to be balanced quite carefully, seems like.
Absolutely. It's not about any one ingredient or a single spec in particular. It's the overall formulation that needs to work as a whole to address a specific need, such as an mfg certification.
This is why I don't like the idea of frankenbrew mixtures of oil. Sure they'll still work but mixing different types of additives from different manufacturers will unbalance everything.
 

wemay

Thread starter
Messages
14,042
Location
Kendall, FL
"Frankenbrews" Yup, another thought altogether. You may not be harming anything since all labels say 'compatible with all conventional and synthetic oil' (the reason i always thought it didnt make a difference), but is changing the chemistry worth it in the longe run? Once or twice, i'm sure it's fine. All the time? Not so sure. Mixing just doesn't appear to be the optimal usage of any oil included in said mix.
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,919
Location
Southeast
Originally Posted By: wemay
"Frankenbrews" Yup, another thought altogether. You may not be harming anything since all oils say 'compatible with all conventional and synthetic... But is changing the chemistry worth it in the longe run? Once or twice, i'm sure it's fine. All the time? Not so sure. Mixing just doesn't appear to be the optimal usage of any oil included in said mix.
You're right, it's the difference between compatible and optimized that everyone misses with Frankenbrews. Sure you can mix oils, but I don't think you are improving anything by throwing two quarts of TGMO in with three quarts of M1 0W-40.
 
Top