Thanks for posting this, Matt. It just validates my
decision, in the early 70s, to stop using the "special"
oils described herein! In using them, I discerned no
tangible benefits.

Jay


MM>[[from a series of messages in the FidoNet HOMEPWR Echo Conference]]

MM>Is That Additive Really A Negative?
MM>Article and Photos by Fred Rau, ROAD RIDER/August 1992/Pg 15

MM>   Information for this article was compiled from reports and studies by
MM>the University of Nevada Desert Research Center, DuPont Chemical Company,
MM>Avco Lycoming (aircraft engine manufacturers), North Dakota State
MM>University, Briggs and Stratton (engine manufacturers), the University of
MM>Utah Engineering Experiment Station, California State Polytechnic College
MM>and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Lewis Research
MM>Center.

MM>   Road Rider does not claim to have all the answers. Nor do we care to
MM>presume to tell you what to do. We have simply tried to provide you with
MM>all the information we were able to dredge up on this subject, in hopes
MM>it will help you in making your own, informed decision.


MM>You Can't Tell The Players Without A Program

MM>   On starting this project, we set out to find as many different oil
MM>additives as we could buy. That turned out to be a mistake. There were
MM>simply too many available! At the very first auto parts store we
MM>visited, there were over two dozen different brand names available. By
MM>the end of the day, we had identified over 40 different oil additives for
MM>sale and realized we needed to rethink our strategy.

MM>   First of all, we found that if we checked the fine print on the
MM>packages, quite a number of the additives came from the same
MM>manufacturer. Also, we began to notice that the additives could be
MM>separated into basic "groups" that seemed to carry
approximately the same
MM>ingredients and the same promises.

MM>   In the end, we divided our additives into four basic groups and
MM>purchased at least three brands from three different manufacturers for
MM>each group. We defined our four groups this way:
MM>   1.) Products that seemed to be nothing more than regular 50-rated
MM>engine oil (including standard additives) with PTFE (Teflon TM) added.
MM>   2.) Products that seemed to be nothing more than regular 50-rated
MM>engine oil (including standard additives) with zinc dialkyldithiophosphate
MM>added.
MM>   3.) Products containing (as near as we could determine) much the same
MM>additives as are already found in most major brands of engine oil, though
MM>in different quantities and combinations.
MM>   4.) Products made up primarily of solvents and/or detergents.

MM>   There may be some differences in chemical makeup within groups, but
MM>that is impossible to tell since the additive manufacturers refuse to
MM>list the specific ingredients of their products. We will discuss each
MM>group individually.


MM> The PTFE Mystery

MM>   Currently, the most common and popular oil additives on the market are
MM>those that contain PTFE powders suspended in a regular, over-the-counter,
MM>type 50-rated petroleum or synthetic engine oil. PTFE is the common
MM>abbreviation used for Polytetrafluoroethylene, more commonly known by the
MM>trade name "Teflon," which is a registered trademark of the DuPont
MM>Chemical Corporation. Among those oil additives we have identified as
MM>containing PTFE are: Slick 50, Liquid Ring, Lubrilon, Microlon, Matrix,
MM>Petrolon (same company as Slick 50), QMl, and T-Plus (K-Mart). There are
MM>probably many more names in use on many more products using PTFE. We have
MM>found that oil additive makers like to market their products under a
MM>multitude of "private brand" names.

MM>   While some of these products may contain other additives in addition
MM>to PTFE, all seem to rely on the PTFE as their primary active ingredient
MM>and all, without exception, do not list what other ingredients they may
MM>contain.

MM>   Though they have gained rather wide acceptance among the motoring
MM>public, oil additives containing PTFE have also garnered their share of
MM>critics among experts in the field of lubrication. By far the most
MM>damning testimonial against these products originally came from the
MM>DuPont Chemical Corporation, inventor of PTFE and holder of the patents
MM>and trademarks for Teflon. In a statement issued about ten years ago,
MM>DuPont's Fluoropolymers Division Product Specialist, J.F. Imbalzano said,
MM>"Teflon is not useful as an ingredient in oil additives or oils used for
MM>internal combustion engines."

MM>  At the time, DuPont threatened legal action against anyone who used
MM>the name "Teflon" on any oil product destined for use in an internal
MM>combustion engine, and refused to sell its PTFE powders to any one who
MM>intended to use them for such purposes.
(Continued to next message)

---
 þ OLXWin 1.00b þ Teamwork is vital. It gives you someone else to blame.