[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference terri::cars_uk

Title:Cars in the UK
Notice:Please read new conference charter 1.70
Moderator:COMICS::SHELLEYELD
Created:Sun Mar 06 1994
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2584
Total number of notes:63384

585.0. "SLICK 50..." by DRONGO::MATTHEWS (I wear my RAY-BANs, driving in my car...) Mon May 08 1989 15:30

    Has anyone had any experience (good or bad) with SLICK 50 ???
    
    I was thinking about putting some in the gearbox of the MGB but
    am a bit concerned about the overdrive. The oil for the gearbox
    is 20/50, so I would have to use the SLICK 50 product for engines
    rather then the gearbox one...
    
    Mark
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
585.6the science of micro-tribology, as told to me by a salesmanCRATE::RUTTERI am IBOS 2 !!!Tue Oct 22 1991 20:0588
    At a motor club meeting the other night, we had a demonstration of
    a really effective oil additive.  I cannot remember the actual name
    of it, something about monomolecular micromu, available from a UK
    industrial supplier.  The stuff was patented by some guy in the US
    quite recently and works by bonding to the material surface under
    temperature.  Due to the chemical action involved, it is only a
    single particle surface and does not reduce clearances in any way.
    
    The demo was quite impressive, using an electric motor with a torque
    wrench showing force exerted on a metal surface pressing against a
    drum (being turned by the motor).  The current required to spin the
    motor was shown on an ammeter.
    
    First stage was to show the point of failure of bearings using a
    standard motor oil (Castrol GTX was used).  With a pressure of
    25 lb/ft on the torque wrench, the bearing started making bad noises
    and the current draw went up appreciably.
    
    When the additive was put into the oil and the test repeated, the
    bearing was run at a pressure of 75 lb/ft and only just started
    to show signs of failure.  The bearing was examined after each of
    the tests, first time it was extremely hot to the touch and had a
    large groove worn into the surface.  The next time, it was only just
    warm and had a very minor scuff mark.  The same bearing was used,
    simply reversed for the second test.
    
    The action of this oil additive is not really in question, it
    definitely decreases friction between metal components.  It also
    works even when the oil is removed, since it is bonded to the
    metal surface, as another demonstration was to show.  Since it
    forms this bond, it doesn't need replacing after an oil change.
    
    It was explained that due to the way in which the chemical bonding
    action works, this product will actually 'work its way' through any
    surface crap to bond the metal underneath.  Due to this fact, it was
    recommended not to put it into an engine that is already quite old,
    nor to one which has had Slick 50 added.  Reason being that the new
    product will cause the crap to become detached from the metal.
    With old carbon deposits, this will be bad.  With Slick, we were told
    that it would probably result in the oilways becoming blocked asap.
    
    The guy selling this stuff seemed genuine and did not like Slick at all,
    seemingly because he knew more about it - not just because it is in
    competition with his product.  He said that it generates a thick
    surface layer on engine components, which is not good for its longevity.
    Since he said that his product should not be put into old engines, he
    agreed that may be a good place for Slick, since it would reduce worn
    clearances.  He did confirm that it does have good friction-reducing
    properties, but nowhere near as effective as his own product.
    
    The UK company which distributes this additive do so only in largish
    quantities, intended for use in industrial applications.  As a result,
    they do not sell specifically to the motor market.  His solution was
    for the club to buy the larger quantity and sell it on to members at
    the pro-rata cost (or higher if the club wanted to make some profit
    out of the deal).
    
    He did make mention of a competitor which has a similar product, called
    PPX I think.  This is supposedly streets ahead of Slick and he does not
    claim it causes any problems.  He claims that his own product is even
    better and to back this up he pointed out that it MUST NOT be added to
    gearboxes which use synchromesh cones, nor in automatic transmissions,
    since the friction would be reduced so that they would no longer work
    as intended.  The PPX product was actually recommended for use in gearboxes
    as well as engines, so it appears that maybe his product is better.
    
    He did also point out that it is possible to use his additive in grease.
    This would be of use wherever the lubrication is in an area which may
    generate heat, such as wheel bearings, u.joints, what have you.
    
    On adding this product to an engine, you can expect less noise and
    better mpg.  In some cases, idle speed may increase due to lower
    frictional drag to be overcome.  If it is added to an older engine,
    you could expect it to be quieter and more efficient, but it is
    likely to cause the engine to burn more oil since it will lead to
    the carbon being worked out from the piston ring seatings.
    
    Since this is from a UK source, there is no point in me finding the
    actual name of this additive, but if you see something advertising
    similar claims (other than PTFE-based products such as Slick), then
    you would to well to look into it.  I'm going to get some and use it
    in one or two of my vehicles...
    
    J.R.
    
    PS  Price worked out about �12 per person, with minimum order being
        for enough to do 8 engines.  I haven't followed this up yet, but
        I have the business card of the guy who did the demo.
585.7PERKY::RUTTERRut The NutWed Apr 15 1992 18:2749
    I sent off for information on the product I mentioned in previous reply.
    
    In the gumph I have now received is a chart listing comparative
    figures for wear on a steel bearing using their test device.
    
    Figures are as follows :-
    
    Applied Torque	|54 Nm (40lbft)|108 Nm (80lbft)	162 Nm (120lbft)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Lubricant		|  Wear scar   |    Wear scar	|  Wear scar   |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Duckhams Hypergrade | 9.50 / 4.20  |  11.50 / 5.50  |    - / -     |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    EP-90		| 7.50 / 3.20  |  10.50 / 4.80  |    - / -     |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    REDEX PENTA 5	| 7.00 / 3.00  |   9.00 / 4.00  |    - / -     |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    SLICK 50		| 9.00 / 4.00  |  11.00 / 5.40  |    - / -     |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    (*) MICRO-mu-1	| 1.50 / 0.80  |   2.00 / 1.00  | 2.20 / 1.00  |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.T.P.		| 10.0 / 4.20  |      - / -     |    - / -     |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    CASTROL GTX		| 9.30 / 4.00  |  10.00 / 4.30  |    - / -     |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    GTX + MICRO-mu 5:1	| 1.50 / 0.80  |   2.00 / 0.90  | 2.40 / 1.00  |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    GTX + MICRO-mu 20:1	| 1.50 / 0.80  |   2.00 / 0.90  | 2.40 / 1.00  |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Wear scar (on test bearing) indicated as length/width in mm.
    
    Note that although this product (*) is an oil additive (or engine
    treatment, whatever) it appears effective when used on it's own.
    Slick does not do well in this chart BUT is not listed as an
    additive with an oil of any sort, where I would expect it to fare
    much better.
    
    I do find the differences between some of the oils to be of interest...
    
    
    Anyhow, these are test figures as supplied to me.  They do bear out the
    claim that this product *does* reduce friction, but that's all.
    
    Also supplied is a graph showing power/torque figures for a 2-litre
    Ford Pinto engine with before and after results.  An increase of
    aproximately 20% is shown in this graph.
    
    J.R.