Here's a UOA on my 04 SCrew with a 4.6. Miles on engine is 60,976. This test run of oil started with Trop Artic 5w-30. This particular oil was selected because of the percentage of Gp III basestock (60% prox per C-P) and the relatively straight forward add pack. Kinda like a darn good generic type oil with no frills. In addition to it, we tested a "stablized" clorinated napthenic that is available at most Walmarts, or least thats where we found it. The additive is advertized as an engine treatment that employs "space" technology. It is in a yellow bottle but the name, for obvious reasons, will remain unmentioned in this post. Cost is about $12.00 for a 12 oz bottle. So I ran this "space age technology" in my enigne for 3936 miles and I also had a Motorcraft 820-S filter. Here are the numbers:

Iron-18
Cop- 0
Silicon-6
calcium-1520
Phos- 602
Zinc- 687

TBN- 1.2
Fuel- .6
Vis- 9.8cSt@100C

This oil started life with a TBN of 10.6 and is basically toast. The oil has sheared a little but the viscosity is down mostly due to fuel. The fuel mileage on the engine fell 21.05% over the miles. And this additive is suppose to add, not subtract, to the fuel mileage as it is suppose to provide more lubricity resulting in longer engine life, more fuel mileage, and more horsepower. Note the TBN at 1.2. I have run TA oil before with no additives and it held up as good as any. This batch has basically failed. It is due to the type additive. The "stabilizer" in this additive apparently didn't get in the bottle and acids from the clorinated napthenic has cooked the oil. For those that are willing or compelled to put additives in the oil- here's why you don't. Everything your engine needs is already in the bottle of a quality oil. Buy a name brand, change at the recommended intervals, use the recommended viscosity, sit back and enjoy the ride. You don't have to put after market adds in the oil to make them last longer.

A side note: I went to Walmart today to look at some of their oil stocks and this bottle of demons is no longer on the shelf. Go Walmart!

 

Nice info. Good to put the nail in the coffin of the additive myth.

Do we get to guess what it was?

 

Rusty, no guessing on the brand name as I have left the building......okay, I quit my job and would be open for litigation even though I would have actual test and certified results, the cost to defend my position can and would be a killer. The point here is that regardless of the brand, regardless of how long it has been on the market, most, and that is probably in the 95+% range, of the after market additives can and often will be a negative rather than a positive when used in your engine. Folks don't need them even if your grand dad used them forever and he didn't have any problems and swears by them. The oils of today are not any where like the oils of just 10 years ago.

 

You would have done a lot better with the CD-2 Street Legal High Performance Oil Boost (Big Lots for $1 a pint) which has about 4700 ppm zinc and phosphorus, which likely would have provided a longer OCI.

You can't condemn all additives based on bad results from one particular additive. If you used some chlorinated stuff or a teflon additive it would be a very different animal than the CD-2 Oil Boost or Valvoline Synpower Oil Treatment.

 

Marvelous, Flash! Thanks for sharing that with us. It appears the only thing "space age technology" can accomplish is to speed up the demise of good motor oil!

 

10-4!

As always, good info. I have some ideas on what it was, but I'll keep them to myself.

 

NOT all additives use chloro parafin which will degrade into HCL acid at >250F or so.

So not a good additive for a pcmo tho used to be used in railroad diesel oils BUT they are high TBN and checked offten.

A ZDDP type additive would at most help OCI and normally would not cause a problem the trouble is unless you know for sure you can never tell what maybe in any of the "additives" on the market.

That is why I do not like them unless I know for sure what is in there.
But I'm in the industry and can make my own but for a "lay" person aditives are a snake pit.
bruce

 

So, it's not possible for a ZDDP containing additive help poison the catylitic converter? There's a reason these newer oils (SM) reduced the ZDDP content. I could see someone using an additive in a newer engine that, say, burns a little oil. Now, this is Joe 6pack, and he buys two bottles and dumps 'em in at every oil change. More must be better, right? Take it in for emissions testing, and guess what? It fails due to a plugged up converter!

Now, I will admit that a ZDDP type additive is a lot safer than the type that Flash tested for us. But there are *ALWAYS* comprimises when it comes to oil additives. So know what your engine needs, and run that. For guys with older engines and flat tappet cams, run a diesel rated oil so your cam doesn't take itself apart. For newer Fords that need 5w20, run that. You dont need additives!

 

The claim to "space" technology comes from a finished lubricant they market/and sell to the space industry that lubricates the crawler tracks that move the shuttle from the hanger to the launch pad. Kinda strange that the above said additive is not formulated in this fluid. I know this, because I make the fluid. Mike Kelly

 

""So, it's not possible for a ZDDP containing additive help poison the catylitic converter?""
Possible I guess yes PROBABLE no realy high ZDDP oil have been used in mixed fleet for many years I have run 15/40 in all my cars and never have had a fail at smog BUT i supose you could find some guy burning 1 quart every 250 miles in a car NOT maintained well and would his CAT be hurt??? maybe but to me is more of a eviromental/political/ulterior motive deal.
bruce

 

"...but to me is more of a eviromental/political/ulterior motive deal."

I agree. All I ever have heard about cat poisoning is that they think the phosphorus will poison cats, but I don't recall anyone ever showing that to be the case. Seems it is just a hypothesis.

 

And the API would change the oil formulation based on a hypothesis? I find that hard to believe.

Now, I do use the diesel rated oils in my engines too. But in Iowa, there's no emissions testing. If the converter is not working on something I have, I really dont care. But for someone who is not as knowledgeable as the users on here, and might not know the consequences, dumping more ZDDP in might not be in their best interest.

Caveat emptor...

 

I don't know if it's the API that decided to reduce the phosphorus. I thought it was the auto companies who were worried that they would not make the distance with the catylatic converter, which EPA required last something like 100,000 miles.

 

TallPaul is correct the govment leans on auto makers for more higher mileage and less poluting cars then the auto makers lean on oil companies for "better" oils and the API just sorta is care taker.

bruce

 

The automakers may have been the ones to complain, but it still ultimately had to go through the API. Do you think they just do this stuff on a whim? I know if I was in a state where they did inspections, I wouldn't want my catylitic converter going out in 100,000 miles, or even 200,000.