oil additives

When I switched yesterday to Mobil 1 synthetic, the mechanic added 2 quarts of Risalone additive, which he swears by; says it will slowly remove engine deposits. I read now that Mobil says not to use additives with Mobil 1. Any thoughts on whether I should just leave it alone until the next regular change, or replace the oil sooner, or even immediately?

As a general question, what does everyone think about additives in general? I've also put some Golden Eagle (I think that's the manufacturer) stop leak product in my transmission and power steering. Its supposed to condition the seals and possibly stop leaks. I think it might be very slightly effective, but I'm not sure. I'm somewhat concerned about the long term effects, however, of whether it might in fact do damage to the seals. I think the product does help my transmission shift smoother.

what kind of car is this?

Not that I think it really matters what kind it is... its all snake oil. Seriously... dont even waste your money on it.

I know one company is getting thier arse sued off b/c of false advertising. I think it was slick 50

[kowached]

There are only 2 additives that I believe in. One is Chevron Techron fuel injector cleaner, which I add every couple of oil changes and see MPG increases a tankful later. The other is Redline water wetter for the cooling system, which keeps the water pump as well "lubed" as a water pump can be, and it also seems to keep engine temps a little lower. I would suggest using a really good synthetic oil by itself in your engine, transmission, and rear axle. Only Amsoil, Quaker State, Pennzoil, and Vavoline, plus a few others are truly "synthetic". Mobil 1 & Castrol Syntec use Group III hydrocracked base stock (utra-refined mineral oil) in their "synthetic" oil, which is good stuff, but not truly synthetic. Do a search on synthetic oil here and you'll see a lot of great information.

I agree a lot of them are "snake oil" I have heard that Slick50 used over long periods makes it a tough to deglaze a cylinder when the time comes as it soaked into the metal deep enough to make deglazing tough. I personally swear by Duralube and use it in ALL my engines including lawnmower etc. I have 5 acres of lawn to maintain and my lawnmower - used for edging - is 20 years old -on it's fifth set of wheels and still the original aluminum block B&S engine that does not burn oil and still has great compression. What really convinced me is my daughter's 89VW diesel. Three years ago in August when she got it - I put in duralube. The valve cover gasket was leaking but I didn't have time to change it so I told her to check her oil every week. As a typical 17 year old girl - she FORGOT. At christmas that year - I had to change a glow plug for her. When I test drove it, there was a loud clunking coming from the engine. It had just started as she never head it. The engine rocked and clunked merilessly. When I checked the oil - the dipstick was dry. When I drained the pan I got 1/2 quart out. I thought the worst. When I disassembled the engine I was shocked to find the mains and shells were NOT EVEN WORN -no marks whatsoever! The rings had a slight razor edge to them - but nothing serious. The clunking was a stuck hydaulic lifter from lack of lubrication. Since it was apart I replaced all lifters, lapped the valves, and put in new mains, shells, rings etc. This engine still runs like new 2 years and 50,000 miles later. What should have been a throw away core I believe was saved by Duralube. Has anyone had bad luck with Duralube??

[Mark DiSilvestro]

Has anyone had bad luck with ANY additives?
Personally, I don't use 'snake oil' but a friend lkes to add a can of STP oil treatment to his '95 BMW 318i when he changes his oil.
IF the stuff doesn't work, that's OK, but is it doing any harm?

Thanks, Mark

making you feel better. Thats it. If adding Durralube et al into your crank case makes you feel better about driving it, maybe it's worth it. HOWEVER, I would seriously stay away from Slick 50 or anything that takes 10 mins to come out of the bottle (engine honey-esque additives). I'll agree with the Die Hard Techies, just change your oil regularly and you'll be ok.

[sweenewl]

I was told a few years, I think at one of our MB clubs tech sessions, not to use additives such as Slick 50 in my 300SD. It was explained that this engine, possible other if not all MB engines inject oil into the bottom of the pistons when they are at the bottom of their stroke. This is done to provide cooling to the piston.

The Slick 50 won't cause any problems until after about 50K miles when it will begin to flake off the interior of the engine. These flakes will clog the ports which inject oil into the pistons.

Can any one confirm this and provide some more details.

Wayne

98 ML320
82 30SD

I have used duralube a few times in my cars. Two times, on a 4 runner and F250 diesel, we thought the tranny was needed replacing, it would slip really really bad and not shift, etc. we changed the fluid and filter, added a quart of duralube tranny fluid conditioner and it worked . so i have to beleive in it.

i never ran my car out of oil so i dont know from first hand expereince on that issue.

[06 K 0020]

Originally posted by kowached
Only Amsoil, Quaker State, Pennzoil, and Vavoline, plus a few others are truly "synthetic". Mobil 1 & Castrol Syntec use Group III hydrocracked base stock (utra-refined mineral oil) in their "synthetic" oil, which is good stuff, but not truly synthetic.

Unfortunately, that is only true for Castrol Syntec. Syntec is NOT a Synthetic PAO/Ester based oil, it is a Group-III mineral oil "chemically pseudo-synthetised" hydrocracking to convert wax impurities (very undesired re sludge) into longer-chained oils without loss of volume thereby maximising profit per raw barrel of material. Owners of Audi, BMW, Porsche & Mazdas have reported black gloops of wax deposits coming out during oil drains which are not good for drain-pan screens or HLAs. Ash content is 1.2%, higher than any of the PAO/Ester based synthetics (<0.5%) and higher even than plain Castrol GTX at 0.7%. Ash forms deposits on valves and sludge, as HLAs will indicate. There are better oils on the market than this, for the same price or cheaper. Unfortunately Mobil taking Castrol to an advertising tribunal merely had the effect of allowing just about anything to be classed as "synthetic" when it's not a Group-IV/V PAO/Ester base. Hope this helps to clarify things a little better.

[placo1]

Im not sure I understood the comments about Castrol Syntec. are you stating that its use can cause future engine problems due to material buildup. I've been using this for years with no signs of problems.

Placo1

[06 K 0020]

Originally posted by 06 K 0020



Owners of Audi, BMW, Porsche & Mazdas have reported black gloops of wax deposits coming out during oil drains which are not good for drain-pan screens or HLAs. Ash content is 1.2%, higher than any of the PAO/Ester based synthetics (<0.5%) and higher even than plain Castrol GTX at 0.7%.

exactly like I stated above. Talk to any M3, 944, TT owner about this. Syntec might be an excellent dino oil, it's just not a true synthetic.

out of curiosity,

Rolls Royce and Bentley recomend Castrol (dino) NOT synthetic and these are $300,000 + vehicles! i could never understand that myself, lol. i was quite shocked actually.

[suginami]

You may find the technical answer on a search on this site, buy I did read a while ago that Castrol was sued by Mobil and others because Castrol was not a true 'synthetic'. Apparently, Castrol is not using the same base as other makers of synthetic oil, but is using dino oil and doing different processing to it.
What I also remember is that Castrol won the lawsuit, which is real disappointing.
I don't know on what technicality they won, but it is very clear that their syntec is not 'synthetic' in the way that it was meant to be.
I've heard so much good mentioned about Amsoil and Mobil that I would use one of these. Amsoil is expensive and harder to buy, but I have technical documents they provided to me that shows their synthetic compared to all the others under all sorts of elaborate laboratory testing, and Amsoil outperformed the others. I also believe reading they invented synthetic oil.
I hope someone with more of a technical background can comment further on this...

ANY quality motor oil sold today, synthetic, hydro cracked or dino have an excellent additive package. The motor oil we have today is miraculously effective as compared to even the very best motor oil of the sixties.

Adding additives beyond what is in the oil is a total waste of money. It REALLY surprises me that your mechanic thinks that Rislone can clean the engine better than Mobil One. Putting in Mobil One is like lowering a miniature cleaning Woman into the crankcase that does nothing but constantly scrub the inside of your engine.

I am curious, did you SEE him pour in this stuff, or did he just tell you that he poured it in. It would be a plausible scam to run by charging someone for this stuff knowing that the Mobil One would clean the engine beyond recognition.

Sorry for the skepticism, but I've seen scams like this run before.

Have a great day,

[kowached]

Below is copy of a posting from this website that I found interesting enough to copy. I wish I had saved the link, but you will find it if you do a search:

First of all, Mobil 1 motor oil was never a 100% true "synthetic" motor oil.

Before the tri-synthetic formulation, the base stock in Mobile 1 motor oil was true 100% synthetic (PAO and ester, Group IV and V base stock). However the 20% or so additives used a carrier oil that is dino. I think there was a footnote on the mobile 1 bottle before. So without the additives, Mobile 1 was a true 100% synthetic oil but with the additives, it is not, technically speaking.

Then Castrol changed its Syntec synthetic oil formulation (by using Group III base stock) without reducing price. I heard the cost to get Group III hydrocracked base stock is about half of what it takes to produce the Group IV or V base stock. Mobile 1 sued Castrol about that but lost in the court. That is why Castrol is till calling its Syntec synthetic even though it uses super refined dino oil.

BTW, the Group III base stock is actually very good. It performs quite similar to the Group IV or V base stock except it has a higher pour point and a lower flash point. Some famous "synthetic" oil using the Group III base stocks are: Castrol Syntec, Chevron Delo 5W-40, Petro Canada, etc.

Now back to Mobile 1. Profit drives the way company behaves. Since Castrol can maximize its profit by using a less expensive base stock, why not Mobile 1? There comes the Tri-Synthetic Series of motor oils. Here is the product description from the Mobile Website:

The Mobil 1 Tri-Synthetic Series motor oils are manufactured from 100% synthetic base stocks. These include polyalphaolefins (PAO) and two other Mobil synthetic fluids which make up the Tri-Synthetic formula. These synthetic base fluids are pure chemicals which do not contain the impurities or waxes inherent in conventional mineral oils.

Yes, the PAO base stock is truly synthetic and is of the Group IV or V base stock. It has no dino content in it. So what are the "two other Mobil synthetic fluids"? It says "which do not contain the impurities or waxes inherent in conventional mineral oil". So what if you remove the impurities or waxes from a conventional mineral oil? That is the synthetic Mobile 1 is talking about here (one of the other two). Hydrocracking removes all these impurities or waxes from conventional mineral oil to produce a super pure Group III base stock. However, this is made from conventional mineral oil, not like the PAO stock which is truly synthetic.