(PTFE) Engine Oil Additives

[Martin]

I've been doing a lot of research on PTFE engine oil additives recently
You can read all about PTFE here - it is a remarkable product:
Polytetrafluoroethylene - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Here is a NUlon document detailing the lubricating qualities of PTFE
http://www.nulon.com.au/pdf/FS105%20...s%20of%20PTFE/
While I'm happy to accept all the content of this document as true,
I feel some of the tests are not specific to using PTFE within engine oil

There is a huge list of oil additives using PTFE
E30, Slick 50, DuraLube, MotorUp, Valvoline Engine Treatment, NUlon E30, STP Engine Treatment, zMax, etc

The question is, do these PTFE additives really work and are they safe to use?
Here is a summary of what I've discovered over the last two weeks:

All of the PTFE additives need to be run for 3,000km~5,000km to gain the intended benefits - coating engine parts
It's best to add the product with new oil when performing an oil change

DuPont claim PTFE has to be baked onto parts to gain benefit (they bake PTFE onto piston skirts)
DuPont’s Fluoropolymers Division Product Specialists, J.F. Imbalzano said
“Teflon is not useful as an ingredient in oil additives or oils used for internal combustion engines”.
DuPont even threatened legal action against anyone who used the name “Teflon” on any product destined for use in an internal combustion engine and refused to sell its PTFE powders to any one who intended to use them for such purposes.
After a flurry of lawsuits from oil additive makers, claiming DuPont could not prove that PTFE was harmful to engines, DuPont was forced to once again begin selling their PTFE to the additive producers

In 1983 Nulon modified a Holden Commodore engine which had hydraulic lifters to solid lifters, so it would work without oil
They ran the car around for 5k with the E30 additive and then at a public press event, drained the oil from the sump.
The car was then driven by a motoring author and some other guy (neither from Nulon) from Sydney to Melbourne
At all times the oil light was on showing no oil pressure
The car/engine successfully completed the 1031km journey

This "no oil" demonstration has been done often (in the past) in the USA at motorcycle events.
They show an engine mounted on a test frame running, then drain the oil and restart the engine.
Sometimes these demonstrations include actually riding a bike with no oil.

The Briggs and Stratton company decided to perform a back to back test.
They ran two new engines on test frames for 20 hours, one with a (unspecified) PTFE oil additive
They then drained the oil from both and ran the engines for a another 20 hours
Both engines survived this ordeal - so they were run for a second 20 hour interval without oil
Both engines were then torn down and inspected
both engines suffered from scored crankpin bearings,
the engine treated with the additive also suffered from heavy cylinder bore damage that was not evident on the untreated engine.

There have been numerous successful court actions against additive vendors,
most spectacularly with Slick 50 - they had too many claims and zero proof/evidence
Claims like "90% of wear of occurs at engine start-up" - I've seen oil adverts with that claim!
1996 the USA Federal Trade Commission fined Quaker State-Slick 50 for false advertising.
They said that Slick 50 could not back a single claim and that all government tests showed that Slick 50
did - not- reduce start-up wear
did - not - increase the life of an engine
did - not - reduce friction
Slick 50 is no longer advertising these claims since the government fine

In defense of Slick 50, tests done on a Chevy 6 cylinder engine by the University of Utah Engineering Experiment Station
found that after treatment with the PTFE additive the test engine's friction was reduced by 13.1 percent,
the output horsepower increased from 5.3 percent to 8.1 percent, and fuel economy improved as well.
Unfortunately, the same tests concluded that
"There was a pressure drop across the oil filter resulting from possible clogging of small passageways."
Oil analysis showed that iron contamination doubled after the treatment, indicating that engine wear increased

PTFE is a "solid" and this raises some specific concerns:
In the 80's the PTFE particle size was apparently too large to pass through the oil filter
There are claims the PTFE was being stripped out of the oil by the oil filter and sometimes clogging the oil filter
Non of the current products detail the PTFE particle size

Tests on oil additives containing PTFE conducted by the NASA Lewis Research Center, which said in their report,
"In the types of bearing surface contact we have looked at, we have seen no benefit. In some cases we have seen detrimental effect.
The solids in the oil tend to accumulate at inlets and act as a dam, which simply blocks the oil from entering.
Instead of helping, it is actually depriving parts of lubricant"
There are non specific claims PTFE additives were banded from usage in light aircraft (USA) due to engine siezures
Where does all this lead to - what conclusions can we make?

It's clear PTFE is an amazing product and can be demonstrated to reduce friction.
But issues like it falling out of suspension and clocking oil paths,
potentionally being collected in the oil filter,
and perhaps not being able to bond to engine parts via oil suspension delivery,
and a lack of back to back independant test results - all create reservations.
It's up to every reader/driver to make their own decision.

I've decided to try 2 engine oil additives:
-Liqui Moly Engine protectant $36 (does not specifiy PTFE) in the Skoda Octavia for one oil change
-Nulon E30 $45 in the Mazda3 for one oil change

[Diesel_vert]

Engine oils are a finely mixed balance of base oils and additives. In fact, additives are extensively used by all lubricant manufacturers and are an important component in the make up of almost every engine oil.

However, unless specified or approved, many vehicle manufacturers prohibit the use of off-the-shelf or aftermarket engine oil additives.

For many such products, I find that it is extremely difficult for the end user to objectively quantify what effect it has (positive or negative) on the engine.

I also find that motoring enthusiasts are easily prone to confirmation bias, which you really need to be on top of.

The only real conclusive method of determining wear is by doing an engine tear-down and measuring the relevant components - which is of course, what the vehicle manufacturers subject the lubricant manufacturer's products to when applying for an approval. It is also without a doubt, a very expensive process.

If one believes or assumes that such engine oils need a helping hand by way of aftermarket or off-the-shelf additives, I think it would be better to use an alternative high-quality synthetic engine oil (Amsoil, Redline, etc) - even if they're not approved - before resorting to additives.

Well, that's my view, anyway.

My other philosophy is: if in doubt, don't.

[Martin]

You make some very good points - thanks for contributing

Engine oils are a finely mixed balance of base oils and additives. In fact, additives are extensively used by all lubricant manufacturers and are an important component in the make up of almost every engine oil.

That's a very important fact that I forgot to mention
Oils alone would not work without a careful blend of important additives
Only the (API) SA oils have no additives and are therefore incapable of protecting modern engines
The required additives are needed to:

• Control chemical breakdown (detergent, corrosion, antioxidant, metal deactivators)
• Viscosity modification
• Lubricity (friction modifiers, extreme pressure agents, anti wear agents)
• Contamination control (dispersants, anti foam, antimisting, etc)
• Other (seal conditioners etc)

And when you put an after market additive into your oil, you are messing with this delicate blend
For example, Liqui Moly make a MOS anti friction oil additive
But if you are using a high or full zine engine oil or a race oil it is not advisable to add MOS

The only real conclusive method of determining wear is by doing an engine tear-down and measuring the relevant components - which is of course, what the vehicle manufacturers subject the lubricant manufacturer's products to when applying for an approval. It is also without a doubt, a very expensive process.

Actually they don't do tear down inspections for rating or manufacturer approvals!
It all done in labs now - via simulations and chemical testing
You send away a sample, pay your money, wait a month to get the outcome...

If one believes or assumes that such engine oils need a helping hand by way of aftermarket or off-the-shelf additives, I think it would be better to use an alternative high-quality synthetic engine oil (Amsoil, Redline, etc) - even if they're not approved - before resorting to additives.

Agreed - but VAG users running the long service interval oils don't need to do this.
There are four base oil types that go into all oils, 1 & 2 are mineral, 3 = semi synthetic, 4 & 5 are fully synthetic
There are very few world wide sources for base oils (Singapore has a high quality plant)
In order to meet the long life specifications, a type 4 fully synthetic oil has to be used, the others won't pass the testing
So VAG 504/505/507 users are getting a really good oil product
Whether it's wise to run that out for 15k is another question (I don't)

[Amalgam]

Just Don't Do It !!!

Back in the 90's when I was younger and more naive, I used a Nulon PTFE additive to my brand new Toyota after the 1000km oil change. The car experienced unacceptable oil consumption and luckily for me a short engine was covered under warranty. The service manager mentioned in passing that there was unusual black coating on the cylinder walls and other parts.

I understand that this a sample size of 1.

[Martin]

I did find a story of a guy who did not realize E30 was a petrol only product,
he put it into his diesel engine and this had an unfortunate outcome
Nulon were very good about it and paid for the repairs

[Diesel_vert]

Actually they don't do tear down inspections for rating or manufacturer approvals!
It all done in labs now - via simulations and chemical testing
You send away a sample, pay your money, wait a month to get the outcome...

That's not strictly true. I also should have phrased my original statements better.

It would be correct to say that, for the purposes of granting OEM engine oil approvals, the use of production engines would not usually be part of the process.

However, what I meant to say was that, as part of the OEM oil test sequences, some of those tests involve direct wear measurement from test rigs and/or specific test engines. Some are supposed to reflect the sort of wear patterns expected in the real world, while others are designed or configured to test a specific property or properties of the oil to its limits, and so on.

This is of course, in addition to testing an engine oil's chemical properties, which you have already mentioned.

Agreed - but VAG users running the long service interval oils don't need to do this.

Precisely, which is why I'm always skeptical about off-the-shelf or aftermarket engine oil additives (especially when the consumer is usually unable to verify the claims made by such products).

Regarding long service intervals, how does one define long?

For the benefit of everyone reading this, there are two service regimes for Volkswagen passenger cars:

- Time and Distance regime: fixed intervals of 15 000 km or 12 months (QG0, QG2 or QG3).
- LongLife regime: variable intervals between 15 000 km or 12 months and 30 000 km or 24 months (QG1).

VW 504/507 oils are only compulsory for vehicles on the LongLife regime, or vehicles fitted with a DPF.

To my knowledge, passenger cars delivered to Europe (excluding some countries), the UK and Japan are on the LongLife regime, with the option to switch to the T&D regime by the dealer at the customer's request.

For the rest of the world, passenger cars are delivered with the T&D regime.

There are four base oil types that go into all oils, 1 & 2 are mineral, 3 = semi synthetic, 4 & 5 are fully synthetic

Not exactly.

The API (American Petroleum Institute) divides base stocks into five general categories:

Group I: base stocks contain less than 90 percent saturates and/or greater than 0.03 percent sulfur and have a viscosity index greater than or equal to 80 and less than 120.

Group II: base stocks contain greater than or equal to 90 percent saturates and less than or equal to 0.03 percent sulfur and have a viscosity index greater than or equal to 80 and less than 120.

Group III: base stocks contain greater than or equal to 90 percent saturates and less than or equal to 0.03 percent sulfur and have a viscosity index greater than or equal to 120.

Group IV: base stocks are polyalphaolefins (PAO).

Group V: base stocks include all other base stocks not included in Group I, II, III, or IV.

The lines have been blurred on what can constitute a group III base oil or a synthetic.

The development of GTL (gas-to-liquid) base stocks, unofficially dubbed Group III+, is said to offer most of the performance of a PAO at a reduced cost.

Each base oil has its own advantages and disadvantages, so it would appear that the current trend for synthetic engine oils is to use a mix of group III, group III+, group IV and group V oils.

In order to meet the long life specifications, a type 4 fully synthetic oil has to be used, the others won't pass the testing
So VAG 504/505/507 users are getting a really good oil product

That is also not strictly true.

VW oil specs do not specify a specific base stock. Hypothetically, if a product could pass all of the tests using peanut oil as its base, it would receive the approval.

Most VW 504/507 lubricants are a mix of group III, group IV and group V base oils. What mix or ratio? Who knows - you'd struggle to get much more info out the lubricant manufacturers as it is.

Regardless of the base oil used, it's really the end result that matters, i.e. protect the engine as intended. Motoring enthusiasts often get hung up on the type of base oil used which, in the overall scheme of things, nearly misses the point.

At the end of day, it's the overall package (the base oil/s working in harmony with its additive package to keep the engine performing as VW intended) that really matters.

Whether it's wise to run that out for 15k is another question (I don't)

On the TDIClub forums, data gleaned from the sheer number of UOA reports gave enough confidence for a consensus to form, indicating that TDI engines are doing just fine on a 10 000 mile (15 000 km) interval on a 504/507 oil.

Those with TSI engines aren't so lucky. Last time I looked, not much "data" was around.

Despite this, I can't imagine those with a TSI engine on a 15 000 km or 12 month interval would be disastrous for most motorists, though one could halve that interval (as motoring enthusiasts are prone to do) if they feel so inclined.

Your situation involves a modified engine, which at least gives you some justification to halve the interval.

[brad]

Just Don't Do It !!!

Back in the 90's when I was younger and more naive, I used a Nulon PTFE additive to my brand new Toyota after the 1000km oil change. The car experienced unacceptable oil consumption and luckily for me a short engine was covered under warranty. The service manager mentioned in passing that there was unusual black coating on the cylinder walls and other parts.

I understand that this a sample size of 1.

That was because you added a friction reducer to an engine that hadn't bedded-in yet.

I wouldn't use any engine additives until the vehicle was out of warranty.


/not aimed at you:
Whenever people talk about PTFE I keep remembering when I was racing & a favourite joke was "Lookout you blokes, I've just Nuloned the dipstick & gained 5hp".

The other favourite was "Bondy / Brocky / Moffat / >insert underdog that seemed particularly quick that day< is using additive X in his engine. He doesn't have any of their stickers on the car because they can't afford to sponsor him." This was also often used with Splitfire spark plugs & one of the performance ignition leads. ie: it was always a rumour.

I have used various additives in the past but that was on old Chryslers & other engines that you could drive a truck through the clearances.

I'm less inclined to use additives these days - mainly because nobody has ever proved to me that they make a measurable difference.