IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant

Status
Not open for further replies.
Archoil AR8400 is what you want
wink.gif
 
OK. Here is a post I put on another forum. Not scientific. Purely personally perceived results. And I was biased to want them.******

OK. Can you say slicker than snot on a door knob?

I cleaned off the outside while burnishing it with a rag.

Did some burnishing on internals that I could easily reach. Racked the action maybe 30 times. Dry fired around 30 times.

Went outside and put a mag through it. Now this is freshly returned from a Cajun Gun Works full trigger job. When I got it back is was noticeably better than when I sent it.

Better trigger. Smoother and moved rearward for ease of use. CGW lubed the moving parts but not the slide or associated things like that . They used no MoS2 at my direction.

1 Mag. Non-descript ammo. WOW. Slide is very noticeably easier to operate than with original lube. And with un-lubed CGW spring weight reduction. My wife may now be able to operate the slide when she gets home. Trigger action: original, not bad - I could live with it. After CGW, much better - smoother crisper. After IF WS2, WOW WOW. Like glass. Slide, trigger, hammer, everything. And the IF WS2 lube has not really had time to do it's surface bonding thing. As it breaks in is should get better.

This is the greatest stuff since Hoppes #9. Yes, I know, that is not a lubricant. But it was a seminal gun maintenance product. I also seem to be getting new hair growth where it touched my skin. And sex is much better. ;D O0
 
I just used the mineral oil base straight out of the bottle. The material is pretty thick, so I am guessing there is not a lot of oil.

I was going to try alcohol, but the material, as supplied, seemed to work. I may try another carrier more suitable for thinning oil after I have some experience. I am not sure that the raw material is suitable for creeping into the tight spaces.
 
alternety,

Send me a PM with your address and I will send you a surfactant (FOC) that you can try with your WS2 to see if it suspends better.
 
Maybe it would be good to mix a solvent with the mineral oil so it's not as viscous initially, and as the solvent evaporates over time, the viscosity and the WS2 concentration will increase.

Edit: I wrote the above before seeing Molakule's nice offer.
 
Last edited:
JAG, I was/am thinking carriers. My initial effort with the IF WS2 out of the container seems to allow reasonable penetration. A solvent would address the carrier oil. The IF WS2 itself does not dissolve.

For the powder form of the non-IF I have used 99% alcohol with success. For the mineral oil based IF WS2, that might work. But another solvent could be desirable. It is hard to tell if the material has thoroughly penetrated the necessary interfaces. I have considered Kroil. But all I have is SiliKroil.

I have contacted MolaKule about his generous offer. I am pleased to get one of the real experts interested.
 
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Their 0W-30 (or 0W-20) Racing might have been even better, but it may have a slightly lower TBN than their 'street' line up, so possibly not as good for extended drains.
frown.gif


I believe the VIs in the same grade are very close between the racing and street labelled oils.


Actually, the racing oils have the same additive pack as the longlife oils (BMW LL04, MB 220.51, etc). TBN is reported around 11, though Polaris is coming back in the mid 9's with virgin oil. Tons of detergents. It is designed to be an endurance oil. Kind of like 300V or Amsoil Dominator. Good news is the NT more than offsets the affects of the detergents, as far as friction. Wish we could make some without a high detergent pack for some of the professionals. Our gear oils are being tested in Mooresville right now, by whom I can't say but it would surprise folks. I'd love to get some low detergent NT stuff into their engines for testing.

Anyway, we may actually have some good news for you, specifically, in a few months. Can't elaborate.

Molekule, if you are ever down this way, let me know and I'll buy you a beer. I've not been back here in a while, was searching for a link that I posted a while back, but can't find it, and saw that this thread was 16 pages, and had been somewhat active, so I checked back.
 
Alternety is now experimenting with the Surfactant I sent him and my own formula gun oil.

He has had some eye problems so he should be responding after the procedure.

Keep him in your thoughts and prayers.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: 67King
Anyway, we may actually have some good news for you, specifically, in a few months. Can't elaborate.


^^^IF this was for/directed at me, could it possibly be a VERY high VI 0W-30/40 NT engine/race oil, or a very thin (< 8.0 cSt @ 100* C) PAO/POE NT GL-4 MTL???
21.gif
 
I do wish Millers would offer a thinner MTF than the gear oils they currently have, can't use their oil in most of the French gearboxes because they're very fussy about oil weight in terms of gearchange quality.
 
Im dumping my Millers nt 75w90 and going back to a 50/50 mix of mt90 and mtl in a few hundred miles, i seem to remember it shifted smoother, quiter and faster with redline.. ill find out soon if theres a measurable buttdyno difference, or if it was just my memory playing tricks on me.
 
Olas - Keep in mind that the effect of using a lubricant with the Nano WS2 is a semi-permanent surface layer of the WS2. Going back to a non-IF WS2 lubricant and measuring results is an apples to pears comparison.

You may or may not get better performance with the non-nano (like you remember), but there will be that IF WS2 bonded to the surface that you can not ignore in your evaluation of "going back". Using a nano WS2 (or to a lesser extent any WS2) is pretty much a one way street. It will be there essentially forever.

Basically, you can compare results going from regular oil to a WS2 oil; but not vice versa.
 
So if I switch to Valvoline Synpower 75W-140 in the rear axle, how long will I have the residual effects/benefits of the NT Millers, forever?? (67 King is this true??)
21.gif
 
It forms a molecular bond to the surface.Very strong forces, with very short range (Van derwhals) hold it there. Than material is extremely slippery and very hard. Just Google it. It fills the spaces in the surface of the target material.

It is used in some applications as a "permanent" lubrication. Fairly low level air blast is sufficient to embed it in the target material.

I don't know how long it will last. But potentially a rather long time. It effectively builds a new wear surface.

And, of course, you will never have dandruff again.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: alternety
Olas - Keep in mind that the effect of using a lubricant with the Nano WS2 is a semi-permanent surface layer of the WS2. Going back to a non-IF WS2 lubricant and measuring results is an apples to pears comparison.

You may or may not get better performance with the non-nano (like you remember), but there will be that IF WS2 bonded to the surface that you can not ignore in your evaluation of "going back". Using a nano WS2 (or to a lesser extent any WS2) is pretty much a one way street. It will be there essentially forever.

Basically, you can compare results going from regular oil to a WS2 oil; but not vice versa.


Eventually the WS2 will shear off due to mechanical shearing forces, as do many solid additives.

The RL MTL or Amsoil MTG will probably be a better oil for a manual tranny.

Many blenders lack an understanding of manual transmission internals and the effects of various friction modifiers on those internals.

When more than one type of friction modifier is involved, it is usually a case of antagonism among the friction modifiers.
 
Mola,

i cant disagree with anything you come out with, but, yoire saying one should be better for my applixation than the other..if they're both 75w90 gl4 it shouldnt make a difference, right? unless redline use a better add. pack?
 
Originally Posted By: Olas
Mola,

i cant disagree with anything you come out with, but, yoire saying one should be better for my applixation than the other..if they're both 75w90 gl4 it shouldnt make a difference, right? unless redline use a better add. pack?


Not at all. A I was suggesting using either fluid but as long as you are mixing both 50/50 that should be fine.
 
Mola, what would you suggest to 'thin out' either Red Line MTL, or Amsoil MTF, down into the 8.0 to 8.5 cSt @ 100*C range for my T56??

This Ravenol MTF-2 just is NOT cutting it.
frown.gif


Would the Pentosin MTF-2 be any better, or is it just way too similar to the Ravenol to make any difference, even when just using a liter or so to 'cut' either of the two American made manual gearbox fluids?
21.gif


(I would usually just use Red Line D4 to thin out the MTL, but you and many others on here just blast this out of the water, even in a very low mix ratio.
wink.gif
)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top