Thanks for this info, it is big different between the two VOA's of the same Oil Treatment. Since I will use only 1/3 bottle per oil change, the cost will be less than $2 above the cost of oil and filter. Even if it does not help, the most I will lost is $2 each oil change, assume that it does not hurt the engine.

 

Nothing like more calcium in your oil.

 

First, I doubt the VOA published for the SynPower product. Who knows how it was collected? One wants to let the oil stream flow for a few seconds before taking the sample. If this was a bottom feeder sample, it would likely be highly skewed.

But more importantly - more is definitely not better. Moly that high is not needed, and can accumulate in pockkets and actually change tolerances in a finely machined engine. No regular oil has anywhere near that high a moly count, and it is that way for a reason.

I have never endorsed ANY additive other than MLEP, and that was for a very specific condition - where the owner wanted to change out the factory fill early for whatever reason, and wanted to add back something that closely tracks to the factory fill. I have never suggested or intended to use an additive beyond that specification.

Moly is not the King - note that LE-607 and their engine oils use none of it. The material in LE-607 is better in my opinion (I believe it is an aluminum magnesium silicate) and will not glom together as moly can.

Think of moly like a vitamin. Enough can be a benefit, too much can make you ill. I think the BITOG guys are moly crazy sometimes - they seem to have latched onto one parameter of additive technology and made it the Holy Grail of lubrication.

 

Thank You RoadRage for your inputs.
I use only 1/3 of SynPower Oil Treament bottle per oil change. If the VOA was correct, it will be about 100 ppm of Moly in the oil. If it was highly skewed, then it would be far less than 100 ppm of Moly. In both cases, there would be no more than 100 ppm of Moly in the oil, I hope that this amount would not hurt the engine.