OK, I’ve noticed some talk about engine additives and this subject does tend to crop its little head up now and then. Therefore, I am going to share my experiences with you.

 

Firstly, Slick 50. I don’t want to say much about this but last time I heard they were being sued for a number of engine failures and/or false claims about their product? This could be wrong. Does anyone have any further information on this?

 

Secondly, After a great deal of research on engine additives I have found a US based company who specialise in additive/cleaning and servicing products to the automotive industry – BG Products. I have in fact tried and tested some of their products with great results.

 

BG44K – This removes all deposits including carbon deposits from the fuel system, pistons, combustion chambers, etc. Does it work? Put it this way, before I stuck a can of it in my tank I pulled out my spark plugs and shone a torch down the hole to confirm that the top of the pistons were caked in carbon. After a tank full of gas with this stuff I pulled the plugs again and rechecked. I could see the pistons again, silver and very clean! The engine was noticeably smoother, quieter and picked up cleaner. I’m almost sure I have better MPG too.

 

Also, from what I have read there is only one other product on the market that comes close to BG44K and that’s Chevron’s techron. The interesting fact is that Chevron purchase the active ingredient from BG and dilute it down to 4%! BG “own” the rights to the active ingredient used in BG44K and that it is almost 100% active ingredient that you get in a tin of BG44K hence why its so effective

 

The M3 guys also conducted an independent review of this product and the effects of the prolonged use of Optimax fuel. Check the results http://www.m3supercar.com/enginecare.html

 

BG’s Oil flush – I tried that too. Even though my oil was still half-clean I used this stuff as instructed and the oil came out jet black. It must have done something.

 

MOA – Oil additives. Yep, oil additives – this is where most of the controversy lies. Andy Cotton from Powerflow UK (UK BG distributors) readily tours the country promoting BG products. They have a particular test to demonstrate the power of MOA. It goes something like this. Imagine a device with a large bearing being rotated mechanically and a huge steel lever pulling down onto the bearing. The aim is to halt the rotation of the bearing by forcing down on it with the lever.

 

Without any oil and with some force the lever does stop the bearing from rotating ……screeeeeeeech… and a nice score mark as a souvenir. Using synthetic engine oil (he has used Mobil 1, Magnetec and Shell Helix) it takes some force, but the bearing does eventually stop rotating, still leaving some damage to the bearing. Then they try the same synthetic engine oil with MOA added. No matter how hard he tries he is unable to stop the bearing from rotating and there are no signs of damage to the bearing. Period. More importantly, even when removing the oil from the bearing that has been “treated” with MOA-added oil, he is still unable to stop the rotation of the bearing. This is where MOA plays such an important role in cold start protection. Andy Cotton recently did this demonstration in front of a Green Flag audience using Shell Helix FS. The audience is asked to come up with what they think is the best oil available!

 

The big Q: Why aren’t engine oil manufacturers using this kind of technology then?

 

Answer: Because it’s too bloody expensive and they are primarily interested in profit. Besides, their oil already far exceeds the various standards and quality requirements so why would they want to improve it. Its already very good, just not exceptional like it can be. Also, companies that produce engine additives own the patent to their formulas. Therefore, companies like Mobil, Shell etc have to improve on what they already have or come up with a new formula – very very expensive to do. Powerflow can easily demonstrate that adding MOA will improve the quality of any engine oil on the market today.

 

So why aren’t garages using these types of products?

 

Answer: They are! More so in the US but BG is not as well known in the UK yet.

 

BG website: http://www.bgprod.com

 

If you want further info then Contact Andy Cotton at Powerflow on 07711 824993 and mention that Any Archer passed you on. You can also order directly from him.

 

USUAL: (before I get slammed). I am not affiliated to BG or Powerflow in any way. What you do to your car is up to you and at your own risk. What I have told you is from my observations only.

 

Cheers,

 

Andy

I think I saw that same demo on one of the digital shopping channels, although with a differently branded product - very interesting. Whether it is truly representative of conditions in an engine remains to be discussed.

 

Also if it is really that great then wouldn't the manufacturers put it in and recommend it, when the car is first made - that would make very little difference to the cost.

Not sure if it was called MOA but there was a guy at the 1998 NEC car show with the same device so I had a go. Exactly like Anders described.

 

The stuff wasn't cheap and with the regularity that we change our oil, it would be a very costly exercise.

 

Needless to say, I did try it on one of my previous cars and did notice a slight difference in how smooth the engine ran.

 

I was more amazed that I couldn't stop the rotating bearing. I put that much pressure on the bar, I nearly bust his table.

Good point Andy.

 

1. Most manufacturers don't even use fully synthetic oils, let alone any additives in a new engine because of the "bedding" in period. An engine with this type of additive in it would not allow the engine to break in properly and the rings to seat properly etc. (hence why synthetic is only added after a few thousand miles).

 

2. They would have to spend thousands, if not millions in testing the product!

 

3. They are content with the quality of oil they are using anyway + they have probably set up a special deal with the oil company.

 

4. Make a very little difference to the cost to who??? The manufacturers will lose out due to lack of rebuild parts!....Oh, by the way customer you need for fork out another £xx every oild change blah blah blah.

 

There is an old saying about corporate policy. Cost is foremost - do the mostest for the leastest. Why go over board when what you have already does the job. If they didn't they would go broke through competition.

 

Thats why there are thousands of companies providing uprated components for about every field imaginable including performance car parts, not excluding oil related "upgrades".

 

Also, increased the power output of your car = more protection?

I've got several Shell guys working on a reply to this. ;)

 

Will post info when available.:cool:

For now my take on this (with limited experience and some guess work) is that that test is posssibly not analogous or comparable with engine conditions. The extra force required to stop the bearing is POSSIBLY more than would be experienced in the engine.

 

As stated before, friction modifiers (which is what MOA is I think) competes with anti-wear aditives, so extra friction reduction may result in excessive wear - something which the demo described would not show. There may also be deposits as a result of high concentrations of this additive. There are many factors which need to be addresses when formulating an oil. Looking at one factor in isolation is only one part of the bigger picture.

 

Oil companies continue to use mineral and semi-synthetics for good reasons - because older engines run better on them, because they were designed for them. Fully synthetics can be too thin for older engines. I know costs are kept down on factory-fill oils for big car manufacturers, but this is on the insistence of the OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturers).

 

Maybe there is something in what you say about "oils could be made better" - but I very much doubt that it's a big conspiracy as you say, wrt. engine parts business and oil revenue. There is a lot of skill in designing oils to pass a suite of ever more stringent tests, and lots of pressure to extend ODIs (Oil drain intervals) and increase fuel economy. IF this was easy to do, I'm sure Shell would be doing it, as lots of money is spent making it better, or giving a better price-to-performance ratio.

Thats a very good point. I totally agree that oils are produced to suit the market as oposed to provide the "best" protection hence the continued use of semi-sythetics, but there is a cost issue too. Mineral and Semi synthetic oils are cheaper to produce.

 

I'm not claiming to be an expert on this. But what I do know is that many people are using BG products with great success and with no adverse side effects that I can find. That speaks for itself I guess.

 

Plus...I have used MOA in my engine and it IS noticably smoother with less top end noice. Im no physics or chemistry guru but I know that energy is wasted on noise and if there is noise there is surely going to be a degree of wear, no matter how small. I stand to be corrected.

 

You need to check the BG website. I recently pulled off my valve cover and sump to find it absolutely spotless so there were no signs of deposits etc. That could of been as a result of the engine flush though.

 

Andy

Another point...

 

I'm not classing it as a "big conspiracy". Its standard business economics. Of course companies are continuing to improve their products but they are not going to use gold if silver is sufficient.

The sound of an engine has a lot to do with the viscosity of the oil, not simply the condition of the engine or how well it's running.

 

Shell has a range of oils of differing costs. This is to satisfy the market. Shell Helix Ultra, which is I think the best they CAN make, is put into Ferrari road cars - would Ferrari skimp on the quality of oil to be used in the engines they love ?

 

I have bought various pieces of expensive hi-fi. Some companies cater for only high-end equipment, and they make the best they can - this is due to market forces. If a company makes a brilliant piece of kit, which is better than anything that's gone before, it will get rave reviews and lots of sales. Now you could say that they are just making their product a little better than the best of the best, but I am fairly certain this is not the case, as very small companies are often run by lovers of great hi-fi and would love to make something which was hard to equal, hence they make the best they can.

 

Now oils are a different kind of market, but I would have thought the same principled applied. Top-tier oil is an expression of the highest quality of oil that Shell can produce. If they just 'tweaked' it a little, a competitor could then make a much better oil and embarrass Shell's oil. So oils which are NOT top-tier ARE undoubtedly the result of primarily economics, just as a Ford is not made as well as a Mercedes.

 

I'm still open-minded about this. It's very interesting and I want to get to the bottom of it.

 

Cheers,

Dave.

I agree with you to a point but...

 

I disagree that Shell or the engine oil industry have reached a peak on quality. I doubt the best oil that can ever be produced is being produced.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if an oil company could come up with an "ultimate" engine oil, but it could cost so much to research and manufacture that it would be priced too high, like £100's per gallon to make any profit. As it stands there is no market for that quality.

 

Its not just the viscosity of the oil - I have tried may viscosities and brands and there's been no noticable difference in noise or drivability.

 

From the BG Website

 

"BG Advanced Formula MOA prevents oxidation and thickening of engine oil under even the most severe stop-and-go, high temperature driving conditions. It fortifies high quality engine oil to provide superior long-lasting engine protection and help maintain optimum engine performance. BG Advanced Formula MOA keeps ring lands, hydraulic lifters and other engine components clean to help extend engine life and reduce costs of operation.

 

The Thin Film Oxidation Uptake Test (TFOUT), ASTM Test Method D4742, proved BG Advanced Formula MOA's remarkable resistance to oxidation by more than 200% longer than six major brands of SJ quality oil.

 

At the conclusion of the API Sequence IIIF Engine Test a major brand, high-quality reference oil barely passed the 80-hour test with a viscosity increase of 255 percent. At 80 hours, another brand of oil fortified with BG Advanced Formula MOA had a viscosity increase of only 57 percent. At the conclusion of the double-length, 160-hour test, it was still well within the viscosity limits with an increase of only 123 percent."

 

Andy

i too have seen the said demo with the bearing and the leaver, infact me and my mate have both swung on it at the motorshow a few years back, i think the product was called something like xp2000 or something, i whacked some in my previous car, and it ran for ages( well till i got shut of it) with no probs, also a few years earlier i had also whacked i n some slick 50, and again i have nothing bad to report about that either..

Originally posted by Anders UK

...Im no physics or chemistry guru but I know that energy is wasted on noise and if there is noise there is surely going to be a degree of wear, no matter how small. I stand to be corrected...

 

GOOD!!! LOL

 

Noise isn't the only way of wasting energy - there is also HEAT.

 

If the oil does leave a coating on the surfaces, the two faces then have the same molecular surface. Two objects with the same surface will have higher friction - try two sheets of glass together, then try glass against something else. See where I'm coming from? I'm NOT saying this IS the case BUT its another point to consider. Also, I can't see how a bar against a bearing represents the internals of an engine???

 

This is an excellent thread - wish there were more like it. If this stuff really interests you then try the http://www.eng-tips.com forum - there are some incredible ideas floating around in some of those threads. For example check out this new engine design http://www.revetec.com - I can't believe how clever this engine really is! You even can change the power/torque curves simply by changing the rotor shape...

 

CheerZ,

 

Andy

"Noise isn't the only way of wasting energy - there is also HEAT" you know what I mean't LOL. I can change fuses!

 

"Also, I can't see how a bar against a bearing represents the internals of an engine???"

 

Sure, but it demonstrates the lubrication and protection ability of the product, using metal against metal surfaces as an example. Surely, this reduces friction?

 

Thats an interesting site. Revetec.com

 

Is it me or is everyone on this thread called Andy? LOL

LOL. Yes but friction isn't the only consideration. There are so many different forces occuring inside an engine, that friction alone isn't the deciding factor. How well does the oil cope under temperature etc etc

 

Andy

im pretty sure the oil companies can do a LOT better. One of my dads mates works in truck/bus transmissions. Anyway not so long back they had a sample of a new engine (i forget who it was made by), but anyway this engine had oil which lasted a lifetime, actually impossible to change the oil in it. They reckoned this would last perfectly for the average lifetime of a truck engine which i guess is quite some miles.. Was also told it will not be released in the forseable future as it would kill the oil market dead. I can;t prove it works to you, but there's no reason i can see for him to lie about it...

The test they give ??? how can this be comparable ???? U r oil runs in bearings which it is forced into, there is an awful lot of forces insode the engine, not saying that it dosent work , just seems like a simple test to an advanced prob.

 

The stuff could foam r anything under pressure (Yamaha R7's) did this becasuse of to great oil pressure level .......

 

The stuff could work fine under noral limits ... but when u start pushing ........ What does it do when it meets a cookin turbo ????

 

Don't trust the stuff until, it is proven i.e. in the engine direct from factory

Originally posted by Clarkey

...One of my dads mates works in truck/bus transmissions....

 

He must be small then :D

LOL!!!! :D

Cor this is really exciting, can I use this instead of baby oil?

You use baby oil in your engine??? :eek: Surely you know you should use sunflour oil??? FFS some people :rolleyes:

 

CheerZ,

 

Andy :D

I used Olive Oil once, Popeye got really mad. :D

FFS Andy, everyone knows olive oil is healthier....Your engine though....

:D But olive oil tastes like p1ss! My engine told me :D I wonder if margarine would be any good - that sticks to EVERYTHING :D

On a more serious note. "don't trust the stuff until its proven"

 

This is what BG have to say about MOA tested in a REAL engine...

 

 

"BG Advanced Formula MOA prevents oxidation and thickening of engine oil under even the most severe stop-and-go, high temperature driving conditions. It fortifies high quality engine oil to provide superior long-lasting engine protection and help maintain optimum engine performance. BG Advanced Formula MOA keeps ring lands, hydraulic lifters and other engine components clean to help extend engine life and reduce costs of operation.

 

The Thin Film Oxidation Uptake Test (TFOUT), ASTM Test Method D4742, proved BG Advanced Formula MOA's remarkable resistance to oxidation by more than 200% longer than six major brands of SJ quality oil.

 

At the conclusion of the API Sequence IIIF Engine Test a major brand, high-quality reference oil barely passed the 80-hour test with a viscosity increase of 255 percent. At 80 hours, another brand of oil fortified with BG Advanced Formula MOA had a viscosity increase of only 57 percent. At the conclusion of the double-length, 160-hour test, it was still well within the viscosity limits with an increase of only 123 percent. This product is a part of the BG TDC® program."

 

BG also manufacture and supply FS oil, their MOA additive is already incorporated into the oil.

 

Andy

Andy, mate, tanstaafl

 

What is an "API Sequence IIIF Engine Test"? Who sets the standard? Do I know what it means? (nope)

 

If you start to see a piece of marketing (advert, brochure, website) which uses a lot of TLAs and exclamation marks! and non-attributable quasi-engineering bollocks (sorry - should have said NAQEB), put your cynicism into high gear.

 

I don't work for the petroleum industry and question their motives most of the time. But there has beem so much complete a*se talked about the engine that ran on water, the everlasting light bulb and so on it's just a shame that people still get conned.

 

If it hasn't been tested by the SAE or BSI or RAC or AA or SMMT or any other reputable recognised body, then it's probably bollocks.

 

If there is something which promises the earth for being better oil or better petrol and isn't already on the market from the companies which are putting billions into R&D just to get a minor competitive edge over the competition - then it's probably bollocks.

 

Do I believe a small company can out R&D (say) Shell? Nope.

 

I'd be happy to stand corrected - but need to see evidence from an expert, independent body.

 

Oh god - an £0.02-worth has gone on far too long. Sorry - Gio

Alright Gio, calm down....

 

"quasi-engineering bollocks"

 

I referred to it because there are those who wanted to take it a higher level. Before you start reacting irrationally about it try using your intiative and do a search on Google. API is an APPROVED standard by an APPROVED INDEPENDENT body with the API Sequence IIIF Engine Test being one of the tests.

 

Quite frankly I don't give A F*&$ about BG's claimes but to some its important. I am solely interested in the fact that word of their products are spreading and for the GOOD reasons. I've yet to read a report contray to that. In adition to that their products have worked for me and others.

 

Small company - I say again, check out the website, then come back to me and tell me they are small. They have huge finanical backing.

 

Sorry, but thats just my £0.02

 

PS. No offence is intended