CRANKCASE oil additives from a professional's viewpoint. (don't use additives in your crankcase).

W0QNX

W0QNX

Blacksheep Tribal Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
3,397
Location
Pensacola, FL. USA
Bike
06/ST1300 19/R1250RT
2024 Miles
014428
This might be the ultimate oil (additive) thread. I've watched most of this guys YT videos and he has done a lot of design and research concerning oil and oil products. I've never fell for most of what I considered to be advertising sales pitches so I stick with my choices after review of the information and experiences I've had along the way.

For anyone who doesn't care to watch the video, he comments and shows lab results that additives ADDED INTO THE CRANKCASE of an engine are useless or in most cases damaging. He said if you need to add more of what the oil is made of, oil and additives, you probably are using the wrong oil to begin with.

The last part of the video shows a 3 oil blend some Corvette owner was making and using and the "bad things in the oil" numbers are real high compared to my analysis of my bike at 400,000 miles.

Please note, crankcase additives are not the same as what you might pour into the tank to clean fuel injectors. I have used those many times. Fuel additives don't migrate very much into the crankcase when used in normal amounts but I do think they clean the fuel injectors a bit. This video even covers that briefly. He states one thing, use nothing but Polyetheramine based cleaners.

My oil report quicklink: https://www.st-owners.com/forums/threads/400000-miles.185520/page-4#post-2478008

 
Not surprising to me at all.
When I worked at a GM dealership many moons ago we would regularly, which does not mean often by the way, receive service bulletins from GM informing us of GM's position that no additives should be added to the engine oil used in GM engines. This assumed of course that an oil meeting the GM recommended specification was being used and changed when it was supposed to be.

Lubrication is a complex chemistry. The service bulletins stated that in some cases additives alter that chemistry and interfere with the chemical interaction between the additives that are already in the oil. This can make the oil less effective at doing its job, not more effective. At that time GM did sell a couple of engine oil additives, but there were precious few of them and they were for treating specific conditions. They were not intended to be used on a continual basis.

I have never believed that a quality engine oil of the proper specification for where it is being used, or the engine that it is lubricating, benefits from supplemental additives.
 
Totally Agree. From my earlier experience of working at a service station I can say with a great deal of confidence that the can of STP i put in customers pieces of **** was a total waste of money. Good oil and regular filter changes is what's gonna keep them on the road.
 
Where I agree that 99% of oil additives don't do anything there are a couple of additives I have found that do in fact have value in some applications. I have found that Archoil 9100 works very well to remove carbon and clean up very dirty engines and also totally cure Ford Diesel fuel injector stiction issues on the hydraulic actuated injectors in some Ford Diesels. Nothing magic about it other that it is polyol ester based with nano-borate blended into it. This really works well with older flat tappet engines as well being that newer oils do not have as much zinc in them as before and the borate prevents wear in these older engines. The other additive that is well proven is made by Lubegard - LubeGard is very well known as an additive for automatic transmission ATF - they synthesized an additive that replicates the molecules that were in early ATF that was made from Sperm Whale Oil. When the whale oil was no longer available automatic transmissions began failing at an alarming rate as the newer ATF formulations were not nearly as good as the old whale oil for protection. They also make engine oil additives based on their Liquid Wax Ester technology which is made from Canola oil(rapeseed). This stuff adheres to metal and provides a very strong film. Again not some magic elixir but for some high stressed engines like the newer GM V8s that have the DFM lifter failure issues - this stuff cures the problems with lifter failures. It also cleans carbon from the piston rings and skirts very well.
The other thing these two additives have value for is in the newer GDI(gasoline direct injected) engines. These engines are very prone to intake valve carbon buildup as the direct injected engines have the fuel injectors, inject fuel directly into the combustion chamber and without the fuel passing over the intake valves, oil vapor and oil mist from the crankcase vent system(from the pcv valve) collects on the intake valves and this can plug up the intake tract. These additives decrease the oil volatility by about 30% as far as temperature goes so the oil produces far less vapor and mist and produces far less carbon on the valves.
 
Last edited:
OK, so I happen to own an 07 Camry with the 2.4liter. This design is notorious for burning oil, 07-09 being the worst, but still an issue through '12. Toyota tried thinner, low tension piston rings and the result was they get loaded up with sludge and cease doing their job. When I got the car at 66K, it was burning 1QT every 600miles. That isn't a typo. Documented oil changes every 6-8K, car was not abused. So how did I "fix" it? Well, one of the ways is to replace the pistons and rings. Obviously. However a small cadre of Toyota owners suggested I try this first: Multiple flushes with Berryman B12 or Seafoam infused crankcase oil, alternating. Drive 2-400miles on each change, repeat. So take a guess what happened? Anyone? Well, for the past 4 oil change intervals, the car now uses 1qt every 2500miles. Which is entirely acceptable oil usage. And this isn't just my experience. Numerous other owners with the same issue have been able to reverse the damage. So when I hear someone making a blanket statement that it "all bad", well, I have proof otherwise.
 
rwthomas1 said:
So when I hear someone making a blanket statement that it "all bad", well, I have proof otherwise.
Click to expand...
You are using an additive to deal with a specific known problem. That makes perfect sense, depending on the additive chosen of course. Using additives all of the time because they are providing a benefit to an engine that does not have a problem, as the marketing claims, is another story. An engine that is not suffering from any ailment does not need to be medicated.
 
I used to add a little automatic transmission oil into my 1983 Honda 650 Nighthawk, to loosen the sticky valves. And it worked.
 
Additives.....
I poured a bottle of STP into my 1973 Ford, 302 equipped every oil change. It lasted just over 80,000 miles. This was 'about' the same overhaul mileage for other 302's according to the shop I took it to. Never bothered with additives again.
Since that vehicle, 1972 VW Squareback...180,000 miles (bought used with very low miles). 1978 VW Bus....110,000 miles (persistent electrical issues, no mechanical). 1990 Chevy Lumina....194,000 miles (lots of non drivetrain issues). 2010 Hyundai Santa Fe....184,000 miles and climbing. In between were two Chevy's, two Dodges and two Fords that didn't crack 60,000 miles prior to engine issues. There's a pattern here, somewhere, and it doesn't seem to involve engine oil additives.
Just my experience.
 
74 Econoline 302 , mileage 240,000 needed timing Chain,no additives used. 91 5 litreT bird 380,000 kms needed a crank and bottom end bearing( driven like i stole it) top end still good, sold it at 460,000 km started rusting out though,wah. My advice spend the money the additives cost , on good quality oil and filter. When I can easily read the dip stick time to change the oil. Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom