# Archoil : Wow!



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

Yesterday, i did my 50k oil change (I change oil every 10k km since im hard with my car) and i tried a new product after seeing this video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3ir3bg0ESU&feature=kp

Normaly im not fan of additives, they are often crap that doesnt do anything, but since Jay Leno made a video on it (Mr.Leno is an hardcore car fan and a collector and he normaly doesnt talk about crap on his show) i decided to try the product.

Result : Wow.

You guys must have noticed that the 1.4L engine, when ur outside the car, is noisy and you can ear the Valves and Lifters. After i put this in, right away the decibels when down by a good margin and today i used my remote start and when i came beside the car i wasnt sure if it was running or not!

They call it a Friction modifier, personaly i took the AR9200, since im hard with my car and do Track days with it.

Im sure this is good for Fuel economy and performance, just by the reduction in noise level, its evident that their is less friction happening in the Engine.

Only time will tell if this product realy make a difference in the long run, but for now, im very satisfied with it.


----------



## iTz SADISTIK (Apr 6, 2014)

I have to say I'm impressed. I'll give it a shot unless someone has a scientifically proven reason why this is a bad idea. (would probably help convince me it's bad if you have a chemistry degree)


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

If the product does what they claim, this will be in all my vehicules from now on.


----------



## iTz SADISTIK (Apr 6, 2014)

I'm going to purchase this AR9100 Nanoborate Friction Modifier | Archoil and give it a shot. AMSOIL oil is on the way. For records purposes I purchased the 0W30 Full Synthetic so we'll see how they work out together.

I also sent an email to the company about becoming a rep to try to get everyone discounts on their products if I like how they work. I'll let you know.


----------



## Dragonsys (May 27, 2013)

I have not used this before, but I have read about it. I'm interested in seeing how it affects everything.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

iTz SADISTIK said:


> I have to say I'm impressed. I'll give it a shot unless someone has a scientifically proven reason why this is a bad idea. (would probably help convince me it's bad if you have a chemistry degree)


Let's start with a critical discussion, which any technically inclined person should begin with. 

How about a scientifically proven reason why it is a good idea, and a scientifically proven demonstration that the oil you currently use does not have those friction modifiers. 

For example, AMSOIL Signature Series is a tad more expensive than most oils out there, but does have friction modifiers. Adding more would be implying that you are more intelligent than the team of engineers that developed that oil, and that you know better that you should be using more than they had planned to put in there from the start. What makes you the expert to determine how much of this additive you should add, and to which oil? I've been studying to eventually become an STLE Certified Lubrication Specialist, and one of the things I've learned is that oil formulations are extremely complex. For example, you have Mobil 1 and Mobil 1 EP. The EP is a longer drain interval version of Mobil 1. EP has more anti-oxidants and detergents than Mobil 1 to allow for those longer drain intervals. However, the end result is an increase in volatility and thermo-oxidation. 

When you add additives to your oil, do you know what the end result is? Are you modifying the thermo-oxidation properties of your oil? How about the volatility? Shear stability? Viscosity stability under temperature extremes? Are you inhibiting the function of other anti-wear and extreme pressure additives? Are you adding friction modifier to an oil that already has friction modifiers? Do you know if your oil even has friction modifiers? Will adding additives to your oil void that oil's warranty or mileage guarantee? Do you know what's in your oil at all?



Now, for a technical discussion.

Moving through the video, the representative mentions that they are adding Boron, which I have noted on countless occasions in this forum is an anti-wear additive. That can also be interpreted as an anti-friction additive, since friction produces wear. 
March 2013 - Test Results for AP

AMSOIL's OE oil has more than any other oil on that list. 

AMSOIL's SS oil also has boron, and a substantial 236ppm of it. 
Petroleum Quality Institute of America

Why do I keep mentioning AMSOIL? Because both of you have preferred accounts to buy it at wholesale cost, and you'll be voiding the oil's warranty by adding a friction modifier that is already there. In fact, given the low cost of AMSOIL OE and the cost of buying a friction modifying product, I cannot help but wonder why you would buy an oil that doesn't have it just to add it later, when you could, for the same price or less, buy an oil that was engineered to have it in specific quantities. 

It is because of products like this that I became an AMSOIL dealer, and why I've spent so much time writing informative threads and post to teach people more about lubrication. It is my firm belief that you should not be adding anything to your oil. If you don't believe your oil is doing its job, you should be using a better oil. Adding a "one size fits all" dose of an additive designed for all oils is hardly scientific. 

Oh, and for the record, the tick you hear is the injectors, not the valvetrain. The valvetrain is all hydraulic with zero-tolerance roller cams. There is no valvetrain tick _*to *_eliminate.


----------



## iTz SADISTIK (Apr 6, 2014)

No car oil is designed for one particular engine either so I'd be interested to see the results of a mixture of AMSOIL and Archoil


Sent from iFail Mobile


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Oh, and a few more notes. The fuel stabilizer product they introduced is like AMSOIL Quickshot. The rust inhibitor additive they presented at 6:30 is an additive that already exists in AMSOIL z-rod and motorcycle oils.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

iTz SADISTIK said:


> No car oil is designed for one particular engine either so I'd be interested to see the results of a mixture of AMSOIL and Archoil
> 
> 
> Sent from iFail Mobile


Engines are designed around the lubricants, not vice versa. 

The results of a mixture of AMSOIL and Archoil would be counter-productive for the reasons I mentioned in my post above. The additive is already there in a no-compromise formulation. If AMSOIL believed adding more than 236ppm of Boron to their SS oil, they would have added more than 236ppm. I strongly recommend against additives to any AMSOIL products.


----------



## iTz SADISTIK (Apr 6, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Oh, and a few more notes. The fuel stabilizer product they introduced is like AMSOIL Quickshot. The rust inhibitor additive they presented at 6:30 is an additive that already exists in AMSOIL z-rod and motorcycle oils.


Clearly they weren't designing their product for that line  AMSOIL AHEAD OF THE GAME


Sent from iFail Mobile


----------



## iTz SADISTIK (Apr 6, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Engines are designed around the lubricants, not vice versa.
> 
> The results of a mixture of AMSOIL and Archoil would be counter-productive for the reasons I mentioned in my post above. The additive is already there in a no-compromise formulation. If AMSOIL believed adding more than 236ppm of Boron to their SS oil, they would have added more than 236ppm. I strongly recommend against additives to any AMSOIL products.


Yes they are but then why have so many different grades of oil? Make money of course. So the engine designers had to of accounted for the different types of oils in their designs. It could just well be that these two companies have the same tech but AMSOIL sells their oil with it already combined.


Sent from iFail Mobile


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

iTz SADISTIK said:


> Clearly they weren't designing their product for that line  AMSOIL AHEAD OF THE GAME
> 
> 
> Sent from iFail Mobile


AMSOIL has been selling and designing synthetic motor oils since the 1970s, and their top of the line oils have always taken a no expenses spared approach, as demonstrated in the virgin oil analysis performed by PQI America. The fuel stabilizer is just another product they recently developed in response to the problems ethanol causes in our fuel. However, the application AMSOIL targets is smaller engines, since we tend to leave those sitting in our garage full of fuel over the winter.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

iTz SADISTIK said:


> Yes they are but then why have so many different grades of oil? Make money of course. So the engine designers had to of accounted for the different types of oils in their designs. It could just well be that these two companies have the same tech but AMSOIL sells their oil with it already combined.
> 
> 
> Sent from iFail Mobile


Different grades of oil are designed for different requirements. To explain this, you have to separate the winter viscosity and operating viscosity. A 5W-30 means the oil is a 5-weight at cold temperatures, and a 30-weight at operating (100C). The winter grade is entirely irrelevant once the oil has heated up. If we lived in the arctic, we'd want a 0W-30, since we would reach far colder temperatures. However, the addition of pour point depressants and viscosity index modifiers results in a substantial increase in volatility. Conversely, if we move up to a 10W-30 and we live in the desert, we will have little or no pour point depressants, and thus we have less dilution of the base stock and a much lower volatility.

As for the operating viscosity, that depends entirely on the application. Lately, the push has been to thinner oils, and it is rumored that the next gen Cruze engines will be running on a 20-weight oil. The reason for this is that we no longer need incredibly high film strength with regard to severe pressure protection, and the shift of OEMs to use higher concentrations of synthetic formulations has allowed them to thin the oil for fuel economy purposes. A 5W-20 will have a lower inherent friction, being a much thinner base stock, and will promote better fuel economy. A 16-weight oil has already been developed and will be finding its way in new vehicles made by Toyota and Honda, again for fuel economy purposes. 

If we move up, we find applications that require a 40-weight oil such as diesel truck engines, which require the added film strength for high pressure fuel pumps, camshaft loads, and viscosity thinning from fuel dilution. I don't think we need to get into 50-weight oils here for the purpose of this discussion. 

The engineers of Archoil didn't account for the many different kinds of oils, because had they done so, they would have added a disclaimer telling you not to add their boron to a product that already contains substantial quantities of boron. As you will note, not all synthetics contain Boron, but many do. In fact, many conventional oils also contain Boron. 

CONSOLIDATED DATA ON 5W-20s EXAM

Oil additives are a very lucrative market. The additives are very cheap to produce, and they usually come with a high price tag and tell very tall tales.


----------



## iTz SADISTIK (Apr 6, 2014)

Mind shooting your POC at AMSOIL a request for comment. Doesn't have to be specifically about Archoil (unless you want to) but can you ask them what happens when you up the PPM for Boron. Does it increase any of the factors you mentioned? Seems like we don't have a straight answer on whether it will or not. I would agree it probably does change a few aspects but I'm curious as to which ones specifically for this element.

Reading through an oil analysis Q&A they mentioned that mixed lubricants, additive breakdown (which this is not supposed to as quickly), and incorrectly lubricating (as you mentioned 1.2 ounces per quart generalized) can result in poor viscosity.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

iTz SADISTIK said:


> Mind shooting your POC at AMSOIL a request for comment. Doesn't have to be specifically about Archoil (unless you want to) but can you ask them what happens when you up the PPM for Boron. Does it increase any of the factors you mentioned? Seems like we don't have a straight answer on whether it will or not. I would agree it probably does change a few aspects but I'm curious as to which ones specifically for this element.
> 
> Reading through an oil analysis Q&A they mentioned that mixed lubricants, additive breakdown (which this is not supposed to as quickly), and incorrectly lubricating (as you mentioned 1.2 ounces per quart generalized) can result in poor viscosity.


I can tell you off the bat what AMSOIL's tech department will tell me, no need to ask them myself. They will tell me that they do not recommend adding any additives to their oil. Given that they have been doing this as a company and R&D facility for over 40 years and all you are doing (no offense) is speculating, I would take their word for it if you will be using their product. You are likely to hear the same from Exxon-Mobil and Shell. 

With additives, there exists a law of diminishing returns. Beyond that is the fact that the public is completely ignorant of the functions of oil additives and oil formulation. There are companies out there that sell ZDDP additives and demonstrate their improvements with extreme pressure testing like the one armed bandit, shell's 4-ball wear test, or any variety of scar tests available to them. Not only are those tests irrelevant to modern motors, but even if they were relevant, one would have to answer the question of why Manufacturer A decided not to add more than they did. In this particular case, why did AMSOIL add 250ppm of Boron to their OE oil, and not 300, or 200? It is a dangerous speculation to make that the additive formulations are dependent entirely on cost, and that goes for all aspects of engineering for which speculations are made. As you can tell from my posts in this thread, oil formulations are a complex balancing act. 

My speculation based on STLE studies is that increasing the concentration of Boron will not have a notable improvement in friction reduction. If it was worth their time to add 10% more Boron given a 25,000 mile guarantee, they would probably have done it. 

The other question to ask is what exactly is in Archoil's product. Since they aren't giving you raw boron, but rather boron inside a liquid carrier, what is that carrier made of, and how will that carrier affect the oil you're adding it to? Viscosity of course is also a critical aspect of lubrication. How viscosity responds to contaminants, how viscosity responds to temperature changes, and how viscosity responds to shear loads. It only takes 3.5% fuel dilution to take an oil from a 30 weight to a 20 weight viscosity. Want my advice? Spend your money elsewhere, like on new brake and clutch fluid.


----------



## iTz SADISTIK (Apr 6, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Want my advice? Spend your money elsewhere, like on new brake and clutch fluid.


Already ahead of you 

I was assuming AMSOIL knows what they're doing. You get what you pay for but I just can't understand why Jay Leno would promote a company given that it's a youtube video. You could say he makes money off of it (maybe) but let's assume he doesn't given the platform it was presented on. Why would he cover an additive, knowing he's a car enthusiast nut, if he doesn't see a downside to it? My only thought would be he is making money. But that is disappointing because he is so knowledgeable you would think he'd explain the reasons why he thinks or doesn't think it's a good idea. :S


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

iTz SADISTIK said:


> Already ahead of you
> 
> I was assuming AMSOIL knows what they're doing. You get what you pay for but I just can't understand why Jay Leno would promote a company given that it's a youtube video. You could say he makes money off of it (maybe) but let's assume he doesn't given the platform it was presented on. Why would he cover an additive, knowing he's a car enthusiast nut, if he doesn't see a downside to it? My only thought would be he is making money. But that is disappointing because he is so knowledgeable you would think he'd explain the reasons why he thinks or doesn't think it's a good idea. :S


Jay Leno is an automotive enthusiast. If I wanted to buy the most fun compact sports car, I'd ask him and he'd tell me which one was the most fun. He is not an engineer or a lubrication specialist. We all know money isn't his issue, but I have zero doubt that he was doing this, at minimum, as a favor for someone. You don't voluntarily call in a product rep to promote their product on your weekly show. In fact, he blatantly stated during the show that he had no clue about the chemical formulations of oils and basically referred to it like you would a foreign language. Had he been knowledgeable in that area, he would have asked the representative, "but don't other oils already come with boron, and if they do, how does your product affect those oils?" He didn't ask that question because he assumed off the bat that oils were not previously formulated with Boron. 

Furthermore, he was discussing an oil and additive used in one of his very old vehicles, a steam car, which, if you know anything about from a lubrication standpoint, require unconventional lubrication. Those old steam engines require detergent-free oils, and many don't have any additives at all as they are basically using straight SAE 30 base stocks. There is some merit to the product in that specific application, and his mechanic was correct in using it, but I can guarantee you they weren't using an assembly lube in that engine that already had Boron. 

Not everyone who is smart is a specialist or expert in a specific field. My old roommate from college has a PHD in mechanical and aerospace engineering and develops robotic prosthetics. I consider him to be a very intelligent and very smart person. Heck, the two of us started a company together in college. He could probably make my head spin with a discussion regarding fluid dynamics, but that doesn't mean he is an expert in chemical engineering and would understand the function of magnesium and calcium sulfonates in automotive engine oils. Jay Leno is a smart guy and a true automotive enthusiast, but does that mean he knows everything about maintaining the nuances of vintage Lamborghini? No, he takes it to his Lamborghini mechanic, like his Ferrari mechanic, and so forth. The same applies to lubrication. He leaves those details to the mechanics doing the work on his vehicles.


----------



## cruze01 (Mar 25, 2011)

I remember years back when Dura-Lube lube came out. I let them shine a bunch of sunshine up my butt about that product and bought it hook line and sinker. I used it in my 98 Suzuki Esteem and changed my oil religiously every 3k for 9 years. At around 50k the engine started to make funny noises, at 60k it started using oil that increased over time. I saw no benefit to using the stuff! I agree with X, the oil companies take great care to engineer their product and everything you need is already in there. Not to mention that your owners manual tells you "not to use additives".


----------



## iTz SADISTIK (Apr 6, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Jay Leno is an automotive enthusiast. If I wanted to buy the most fun compact sports car, I'd ask him and he'd tell me which one was the most fun. He is not an engineer or a lubrication specialist. We all know money isn't his issue, but I have zero doubt that he was doing this, at minimum, as a favor for someone. You don't voluntarily call in a product rep to promote their product on your weekly show. In fact, he blatantly stated during the show that he had no clue about the chemical formulations of oils and basically referred to it like you would a foreign language. Had he been knowledgeable in that area, he would have asked the representative, "but don't other oils already come with boron, and if they do, how does your product affect those oils?" He didn't ask that question because he assumed off the bat that oils were not previously formulated with Boron.
> 
> Furthermore, he was discussing an oil and additive used in one of his very old vehicles, a steam car, which, if you know anything about from a lubrication standpoint, require unconventional lubrication. Those old steam engines require detergent-free oils, and many don't have any additives at all as they are basically using straight SAE 30 base stocks. There is some merit to the product in that specific application, and his mechanic was correct in using it, but I can guarantee you they weren't using an assembly lube in that engine that already had Boron.
> 
> Not everyone who is smart is a specialist or expert in a specific field. My old roommate from college has a PHD in mechanical and aerospace engineering and develops robotic prosthetics. I consider him to be a very intelligent and very smart person. Heck, the two of us started a company together in college. He could probably make my head spin with a discussion regarding fluid dynamics, but that doesn't mean he is an expert in chemical engineering and would understand the function of magnesium and calcium sulfonates in automotive engine oils. Jay Leno is a smart guy and a true automotive enthusiast, but does that mean he knows everything about maintaining the nuances of vintage Lamborghini? No, he takes it to his Lamborghini mechanic, like his Ferrari mechanic, and so forth. The same applies to lubrication. He leaves those details to the mechanics doing the work on his vehicles.


True point.

For shits and giggles I'm still going to follow up with this Archoil company and pose the question to them "why add a boron based additive to an oil with contains 200+ppm boron already." We'll see what kind of a response we get. Wonder if it will be the standard "the more you have the better!"


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Engines are designed around the lubricants, not vice versa.
> 
> The results of a mixture of AMSOIL and Archoil would be counter-productive for the reasons I mentioned in my post above. The additive is already there in a no-compromise formulation. If AMSOIL believed adding more than 236ppm of Boron to their SS oil, they would have added more than 236ppm. I strongly recommend against additives to any AMSOIL products.


I use Amsoil in my Autobox and im very satisfied, but in the engine, i still use the normal Dexos oil that GM use, thats why i tryed Archoil in the engine.

Its to make my oil change at a GM dealership, use their crappy Dexos oil, make them happy and after put Archoil in it to counter the crappyness.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Poje said:


> I use Amsoil in my Autobox and im very satisfied, but in the engine, i still use the normal Dexos oil that GM use, thats why i tryed Archoil in the engine.
> 
> Its to make my oil change at a GM dealership, use their crappy Dexos oil, make them happy and after put Archoil in it to counter the crappyness.


Have you seen the oil analysis of the dexos1 oil? 218ppm of boron. Yes, the dexos1 oil already has high levels of boron. 

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## iTz SADISTIK (Apr 6, 2014)

^ interesting. Still one facet of the additive composition and oil. Not sure boron alone will cause issues but the other parts might...


Sent from iFail Mobile


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Have you seen the oil analysis of the dexos1 oil? 218ppm of boron. Yes, the dexos1 oil already has high levels of boron.
> 
> Sent from AutoGuide.com App


I used the AR9200 that isnt Boron based :

High performance engines and drive trains undergo extreme requirements beyond what 
traditional, even racing lubricants provide with added Zinc. If using an additional additive to a 
fluid system then it is important for the ingredients to be disclosed. AR9200-HPG is composed 
of organically grown Tungsten Disulfide (WS2) which is proprietary processed to 70nm, then 
blended into a pure PAO base Durasyn 166 for extreme temperatures and stability. The results 
of adding AR9200-HPG to a fluid system is the high extreme pressure ranging from 300,000 to 
400,000 PSI while reducing the coefficient of friction (COF) to 0.03, near frictionless surface and 
next to the AR9300-HPG is the lowest COF in Tribology. ARCHOIL WS2 is NOT chemically 
processed from China and far superior in performance.


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

Next year, im gonna try the AR9300. :grin:


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Poje said:


> Next year, im gonna try the AR9300. :grin:


I strongly recommend an oil analysis. 

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## iTz SADISTIK (Apr 6, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I strongly recommend an oil analysis.
> 
> Sent from AutoGuide.com App


Does saying "it looks black or golden" count as an analysis? 


Sent from iFail Mobile


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Poje said:


> I used the AR9200 that isnt Boron based :
> 
> High performance engines and drive trains undergo extreme requirements beyond what
> traditional, even racing lubricants provide with added Zinc. If using an additional additive to a
> ...


Did a bit more research on this since I hadn't heard of it before. Now I know why. Tungsten Disulfide is very dense and it settles. That is why it is used only in racing applications. How badly it will settle at the bottom of your crank case depends on how soluble the base stocks and additives of your oil are. Again, that's something a lubrication engineer would be able to test and develop.

The other thing you've changed now is that you'e added more base stocks. Instead of running a group 2/3 base stock blend, you are now running a group 2/3/4 base stock blend. PAO molecules are very small compared to group 3 molecules.


----------



## hificruzer226 (Mar 27, 2013)

So changing to these weird brands because some celebrity endorses it probably because of a paycheck? Odd its funny to me that people are so quick to become experts on oil based pop material instead of analitical breakdowns of chemical make up of said product. Not only is it important to pick a quality as it seems this forum loves to negotiate over but has anyone thought to considered said effects on available filters and flow rate changes as well as filtration screen size?

Carroll Shelby heavily endorsed Zmax ....do you think that was in any vehicle he drove? Really?


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

Oil formulators spend countless hours theorizing, calculating, mixing, analyzing and testing oils. The additive packages they come up with are a balanced blend with all ingredients present in ratios that work well together. Adding something to an oil may have a positive effect, no effect at all, or a negative effect, and that effect will likely be different for every oil since they're all blended differently to begin with.

Cost is absolutely a factor when it comes to consumer products, but assuming that you (or someone selling an additive) can guess their way to a better product is not a very sure bet.

I've read lots of studies where lubrication Engineers experiment with things to get results, and quite often the results are different than what was expected. As XR pointed out, most additives have a positive effect until some concentration level is reached and then little benefit is seen after that point. After that point you are typically replacing base oil with additives for no reason, and often those additives are more volatile than the base oil which can hurt its NOACK and oxidation properties.

As they say, to each their own. As my mother always said, "There's a sucker born every minute, and two more to take him!"


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I strongly recommend an oil analysis.
> 
> Sent from AutoGuide.com App


Ya, next year, i'll do one.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Poje said:


> Ya, next year, i'll do one.


Do you drive that little? I was suggesting more on the lines of, while you're using this additive, right before you drain it.


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Do you drive that little? I was suggesting more on the lines of, while you're using this additive, right before you drain it.


Yes, im trying something new : Im gonna do a full year of driving b4 changing my oils, thats 25k kms. (about 16k miles)


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Poje said:


> Yes, im trying something new : Im gonna do a full year of driving b4 changing my oils, thats 25k kms. (about 16k miles)


You're going to go 16k miles on the dexos1 blend oil?

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

opblood:


----------



## fred20 (Apr 26, 2014)

But that motor honey is soo thick when you pour it, dude, it's just gotta be good. Lol


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> You're going to go 16k miles on the dexos1 blend oil?
> 
> Sent from AutoGuide.com App


Yes, its Mobil 1 oil + Archoil AR9200.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Poje said:


> Yes, its Mobil 1 oil + Archoil AR9200.


As they say, "your funeral." 

I have yet to see a UOA of Mobil 1 in our engines that shows that oil is capable of going more than 9,000 miles, let alone 16,000 miles. In fact, the oil analysis I've seen show that you really shouldn't go more than 8,000 miles on it unless you have oil analysis done, yet here you are attempting to go double and you'll only analyze it after you're done. The TBN just isn't high enough, and the mostly group 3 base stock will oxidize and sludge as the antioxidants will be depleted. Furthermore, you're trying to do this on an oil that has a significant concentration of Mg-based detergents, which have been proven to be less effective at neutralizing acidity, which corrodes soft metals (re: bearings, including the ones on the turbo). 

I cannot tell you just how bad of an idea this is. Chances are, you will go 16k miles, get the oil analysis taken, and won't post it because of how bad it looks and end up having to run a flush through your engine. For the purposes of any oil discussion, any kind of driving with this engine falls under a "severe service" drain interval. This engine is pretty hard on oil when it comes to synthetic lubricants due to the heat generated by the turbo and piston cooling jets. It's an entirely different story when you do it with a Group 4/5 blended oil that has a TBN of 12.6 with exclusively Ca-based detergents than when you do it with a mostly group 3 oil that has a TBN of 9.7 with ~40% Mg-based detergents. What makes you think Mobil 1 will hold up to 16k miles of abuse? 

I'd advise looking at some used oil analysis. Ultimately, it's your funeral, but I figured it might benefit you to be warned that Mobil 1 is not at all suitable to go those drain intervals.


----------



## hificruzer226 (Mar 27, 2013)

Poje said:


> Yes, its Mobil 1 oil + Archoil AR9200.


IMO this is not a good idea however, your motor might not blow (as in spin a bearing) but it will effect the life expectancy of your engine. If you are willing to throw another motor in it around 100000 miles than go for it. Mobil 1 is a totally different formula than 7 years ago. I was a die hard mobil 1 fan ....not anymore.


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

My goal is to do a full year, but in reality, if the oil warning comes down to 0%, i'll probably change it. 

Im always the guy that do more oil changes then anyone else, (did my 1st oil change at 3k miles and all the following one until this one at 6k intervals) but when i got informed on Archoil and oils in general, the majority of research done said that you could go way more then 6k miles on modern syntetic oils, thats why im trying this.

And Xtreme, im the 1st guy who installed and tryed on this forum the ZZP brake kit and told there was problems, so if i see any problems with what im doing/using, i'll post it here for sure. I have no personal gain in Archoil succeding, just that from my experiences with the product, it made a difference right away.


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

Poje said:


> My goal is to do a full year, but in reality, if the oil warning comes down to 0%, i'll probably change it.


As long as you are willing to analyze a few oil samples along the way to make sure you're OK, I don't see a problem at least trying it.

If you wanted to be accurate in gauging the success of your experiment you should consider a Virgin Oil Analysis to let you know what the oil is like when you start out (TBN, viscosity, etc.), especially because you're blending in an additive. Then a Used Oil Analysis at 5k miles would give you an idea of how things are holding up and give you an idea how to proceed with further UOAs until you eventually change the oil.

To do UOAs without draining all your oil you can buy a sampling kit that allows you to extract oil through the dipstick hole.

Either way, let us know how things turn out.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Poje said:


> My goal is to do a full year, but in reality, if the oil warning comes down to 0%, i'll probably change it.
> 
> Im always the guy that do more oil changes then anyone else, (did my 1st oil change at 3k miles and all the following one until this one at 6k intervals) but when i got informed on Archoil and oils in general, the majority of research done said that you could go way more then 6k miles on modern syntetic oils, thats why im trying this.
> 
> And Xtreme, im the 1st guy who installed and tryed on this forum the ZZP brake kit and told there was problems, so if i see any problems with what im doing/using, i'll post it here for sure. I have no personal gain in Archoil succeding, just that from my experiences with the product, it made a difference right away.


This is an entirely different situation compared to the ZZP brake it. Unlike the ZZP brake it, the testing has already been done this time. Here are a few things that are working against you:

1. Mg-based detergents, which make up about 40% of Mobil 1, are less effective at neutralizing acidity. They are used in diesel oils because the byproducts of the combustion of diesel fuel does not introduce anywhere near as much acidity into the oil as gasoline fuel does. This is one reason why our CTD members can go 15k miles on an oil with a MUCH lower TBN. When I say that the Mg-based detergents are less effective at neutralizing acidity, I mean the TAN (total acidity number) ends up being higher than a comparable oil with exclusively Ca-based detergents. There are only two 5W-30 synthetic gasoline engine oils on the market that use Mg-based detergents, and those are Mobil 1 and Castrol Edge. Everyone else uses exclusively Ca. The reason why I mention this first is because you are planning to go a long time on this oil, where acidity is guaranteed to ramp up as the detergents deplete. Acidity corrodes soft metals like scroll and sleeve bearings. 

2. The oil life monitor was recalibrated in 2013, which had people changing the oil 2000-3500 miles sooner than they would on the 2011-2012 Cruzes. GM made this specification change in acknowledgement that their dexos1 oil was not suitable for a 10k mile drain interval. Bear in mind that you are relying on an inaccurate OLM. 

3. Modern synthetics are inferior to synthetics made in the early and mid 2000s, and in fact have a lower usable life. Unlike PAO synthetics, which are made from very small molecules that were a byproduct of the production of wax, and Ester synthetics, which are a byproduct of alcohol and acid, modern hydrocracked group 3 synthetics are not a byproduct, but a heavy filtration of group 2 conventional oils. As a result, they suffer from higher volatility, reduced oxidation resistance, and a host of other deficiencies that must then be made up with additives (which increases volatility further). If you had wanted to go 15k miles on AMSOIL Signature Series, nobody here would have even blinked. It is guaranteed for a 15k mile severe service interval, the TBN is far higher with Ca-based detergents, lots of Moly, lots of Boron, a very low volatility, and definitely not a group 3 oil. That's kind of what Mobil 1 used to be, when they gained their reputation. You are attempting to go 15k miles on an oil that I don't even consider to be a true synthetic.

4. This engine is particularly hard on oil due to the turbo that is both water and oil cooled (note: it is not exclusively water cooled) and the piston cooling jets. The conditions present for this oil force all oils to be run under a "severe service" drain interval.

If you wanted to do some testing, I would recommend you get the oil analyzed periodically throughout the oil's life. Start your first analysis at 8,000 miles. That is the point at which most Mobil 1 users have acknowledge it should be changed out. If you are still comfortable with using it after seeing those results, get another analysis done at 10k miles or 12k miles, depending on how good (or bad) that report looks. Keep in mind that your filter won't last more than 10k miles (and even that much is questionable), and should be replaced. 



Blue Angel said:


> As long as you are willing to analyze a few oil samples along the way to make sure you're OK, I don't see a problem at least trying it.
> 
> If you wanted to be accurate in gauging the success of your experiment you should consider a Virgin Oil Analysis to let you know what the oil is like when you start out (TBN, viscosity, etc.), especially because you're blending in an additive. Then a Used Oil Analysis at 5k miles would give you an idea of how things are holding up and give you an idea how to proceed with further UOAs until you eventually change the oil.
> 
> ...


One thing Mobil 1 fanboys love to rave about is the TBN retention compared to other oils. This brings me back to my previous point on Mg-based detergents. Their rate of TBN decay is far slower than Ca-based detergents, which gives a false sense of protection as the oil's acidity will also be higher. For this test to be accurate, he would need to test and accurately interpret TAN as well as oxidation.


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

XtremeRevolution said:


> For this test to be accurate, he would need to test and accurately interpret TAN as well as oxidation.


Good point.


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

Interesting observation on Mobil1 0W-20 oil. My car just flagged service at 15% OL remaining, so I went and picked up a 5 qt. jug of the above to do the oil/filter change. I noticed that the new jug is quite a bit different than the one I have left from Oct. of last year. The front and rear labels have considerably different contents and the new verbiage is much less "glowing" in it's claims for the oil. The old label is pre-Dexos rated and the new jug has .1 of qt. less oil in it (same price). 

I'm not concerned about this oil as I'm changing following the Maintenance Minder computations (about 6,400 miles) while the car is under warranty. This engine is really old school (NA, SOCH, no DI) so I have no issues with this oil. After all, the engine in my 11 year old P5 with over 90K miles on it still uses no oil during a 10,000 mile OCI. It's also an old school motor, and it still delivers the same mileage as when it was a year old. Would I use it in the 1.4L turbo Cruze motor, not likely.


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> One thing Mobil 1 fanboys love to rave about is the TBN retention compared to other oils. This brings me back to my previous point on Mg-based detergents. Their rate of TBN decay is far slower than Ca-based detergents, which gives a false sense of protection as the oil's acidity will also be higher. For this test to be accurate, he would need to test and accurately interpret TAN as well as oxidation.


Im not a fan of Mobil 1, infact, it was the first time i used it : 5000 km = Royal purple - 10000 km = Dealership - 20000 km = Jiffylube - 30000 km = Royal purple - 40000 km = Dealership - 50000 km = Mobil 1

Its more a question of if i have time to go to dealership or not, lol...

Since im hard with my car, i thought that doing my oil changes at 10k km was a good idea and it was easy to remember. 

With what u guys have said, i think im gonna forget my plan to try to do a full year and stick with my previous intervals of 10k km ! (All those oil sampling and tests are not my style, lol, i rather just beleive what u guys said)


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

Yep, im more and more satisfied with Archoil, once a year ftw!


----------



## iTz SADISTIK (Apr 6, 2014)

Poje said:


> Yep, im more and more satisfied with Archoil, once a year ftw!


Are you drunk? Because I am 


Sent from iFail Mobile


----------



## fred20 (Apr 26, 2014)

If oil additives are so magical then why can't you just put 100% or they just say 20% so your motor runs on majority of what it's supposed to and doesn't grenade with all bs in it. It's like watering something down accept this water is more than the base.


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

fred20 said:


> If oil additives are so magical then why can't you just put 100% or they just say 20% so your motor runs on majority of what it's supposed to and doesn't grenade with all bs in it. It's like watering something down accept this water is more than the base.


Thats like the most random statement i ever read, lol.

2 reasons why some additives like Ws2 are not in basic lubriquant :

1. Price.

2. Why would a major manufacturer of cars want its powertrain to last forever w/o any repairs ? Money.


I worked 5 years in the Automobile industry and what i saw is this : Dealerships and compagnies do WAY more money with services and repairs then with sales of cars.


----------



## fred20 (Apr 26, 2014)

It's not random, additives are "the topic". What does a company like amsoil, for example, have to do with a dealer wanting more repair work? Right, nothing. Put 100% magical archoil in your car then and save a tow company to your contacts


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Poje said:


> Thats like the most random statement i ever read, lol.
> 
> 2 reasons why some additives like Ws2 are not in basic lubriquant :
> 
> ...


There are a few flaws in your logic. First of all, AMSOIL doesn't care about price with their high end oils, but this product doesn't exist in any of them. My initial research show that it is not very soluble because it has a very high density. Simply put, left alone for enough time, it will eventually settle. 

Second, most of us buy our oil from 3rd party manufacturers, yourself included, so it doesn't matter what GM in this case wants. 

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## Poje (Aug 2, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> There are a few flaws in your logic. First of all, AMSOIL doesn't care about price with their high end oils, but this product doesn't exist in any of them. My initial research show that it is not very soluble because it has a very high density. Simply put, left alone for enough time, it will eventually settle.
> 
> Second, most of us buy our oil from 3rd party manufacturers, yourself included, so it doesn't matter what GM in this case wants.
> 
> Sent from AutoGuide.com App


I wasnt talkin about Amsoil, but what GM or Honda or any other car manufacturer wants : Pay the least possible and have the maximum return in profit.

Thats pure capitalist logic.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Poje said:


> I wasnt talkin about Amsoil, but what GM or Honda or any other car manufacturer wants : Pay the least possible and have the maximum return in profit.
> 
> Thats pure capitalist logic.


In the context of this thread, most of us don't use the OE fluids. That said, I do agree with you. 



Poje said:


> lol, u know nothing Jon Snow...
> 
> AR9200 is the most slippery thing i ever saw in my life, its like Mercury, the oposite of being thick.
> 
> They make high quality products, im sure of it.


Just keep in mind that lubricity is not the only purpose of engine oil. 

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

Laughing now. Remember the STP ads where the screwdriver dipped in it would slide from between the pinched thumb and forefinger? 

And who could forget Motor Honey!


----------



## fred20 (Apr 26, 2014)

Jim Frye said:


> Laughing now. Remember the STP ads where the screwdriver dipped in it would slide from between the pinched thumb and forefinger?
> 
> And who could forget Motor Honey!


They still sell motor honey, lol! Sucker born every minute, PT Barnum


----------



## fred20 (Apr 26, 2014)

As seen on TV from the makers of dura lube, yes they're out of jail, mercury in a bottle, works in any motor, slickest stuff in the universe. 19.95 , but wait.....


----------

