Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Again NO reputable oil Co. producting producst that would meet ILSAC specs ever put this specific moly (colloidal suspenion aka: mud PUDDLE) into their formulation - and Manufacturers and Oil Co's are looking for
any incremental fuel improvement to be found.
Silly BITOG Group hysteria over NOTHING and something that CAN cause harm in a filtered sump.
Answer this.
Now: Somebody show me at least 2000 miles comparison test during similar climate and fuel and oil blend/grade where they evidenced 0.5 mpg or better using this stuff.
I wouldnt hesistate to use it on house door hinges and as a penetrant or places where dry moly would benefit.
Silly Boyz.
TDS:
http://www.liqui-moly.de/liquimoly/mediendb.nsf/gfx2/1011%20Oil%20Additiv_EN.pdf/$file/1011%20Oil%20Additiv_EN.pdf
I'm doing it right now arco.
I bought that charger. Tracked 3000 miles and the fuel economy for those 3000 miles using m1 5w-20 and a Bosch filter.
I changed the oil last weekend because I passed 3000 miles. New Bosch filter. M1 5w-20 and 1.5 cams of mos2.
Thus far I've definitely gained mileage. 2mpg at least,consistently on the highway and over 2mpg average.
I've put over 600 miles on the mos2 treated oil. I will be cutting the filter as well.
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Answer this.
Now: Somebody show me at least 2000 miles comparison test during similar climate and fuel and oil blend/grade where they evidenced 0.5 mpg or better using this stuff.
I posted that before in this forum:
Quote:
Adding either graphite or MoS2; to an SAE 5W-30 engine oil did not affect oil economy or oil performance, but oil filter plugging was increased in high-mileage cabs. Oil filter plugging increased with increasing engine oil viscosity, filter change interval, and cab mileage.
source here:
http://papers.sae.org/821227/
However, it's not as black/white as some studies showed benefits:
Quote:
The paper provides details of dynamometer, track, fleet, and leased car tests sponsored or conducted during the period 1963-1974. The data show an average improvement of 4.4% in fuel consumption results from the proper dispersion of 1% weight molybdenum disulfide (MoS 2 ) in the engine oil.
Source:
http://papers.sae.org/750674/
Notice the treat rate of
1% solids!
We know that the popular additive LM2009 gives only 0.15% solids at the full treat rate.
You know that study ended in the 70s right jacek.
If oil on its own has come light years since the 70s it stands to reason the additive has been fine tuned to work better.
Or do you think it's the same formula as in the 70s.
I'll keep the charger thread updated with my progress.
Just because its a solid lubricant why is that automatically bad. Ya think maybe these scientists know what they are doing.
I really couldn't care less about what you guys think or believe.
I've seen with my own eyes and I'm being honest in my tracking of data. I've got no agenda and I'm not selling anything. I'm just a guy who sees a product that works and can help anyone get better mileage and lessen the wear and tear on their vehicles which puts less hydrocarbons in the air,and that's something everyone on this planet can benefit from.