In the current (3/04) LnG magazine(pg20, Rethink Your Stock Options), Peter Brown, industrial marketing manager of synthetics is discussing their Alkylated Napthalene basestock. He says they performed a Toyota 3E valvetrain wear test with two formulations, a PAO-POE and POE-AN-5 blend, each with 1% ZDDP where the cam lobe wear and rocker pad scuffing ratings of the AN-5 formulation showed significantly less scuffing and wear compared to ester version. He then states: "probably because it is less polar and so the antiwear additives can work better" Earlier in text they talk about AN's lower polarity and weaker oil film haveing less surface affinity, thus leaving a clear field for surface hugging additives such as EP and AW. And that the polarity of esters can be quite high, so they may compete with surface active additives. This seems to contradict everything learned at BITOG, unless I am mistaken. Also goes against logic. But hey he is marketing manager so he has to think of something to prop up their new toy... I understand that esters being more polar and sufactants with excellent solubility actually delivers the additives even better than anything else. The polarity seems like a good thing, getting the additives closer to the metal?? Every thing read at BITOG says it is a good thing as well. They say the AN has good solubility but I think the polarity would have been a good thing... So is polarity good or bad??