B

Bob Axsom

Well Known Member
In doing a fast scan back through my copy of Kent Paser's book "Speed With Economy" I was struck by something on page 132. Here are a few lines to set the mood. I read the book as I was building our plane as part of my effort to build for speed. I tried to build it "slick" with every fillet and fairing done to the best of my ability, biggest engine for the design, best constant speed prop (at the time). With extensives internal baffel modifications I have been able to coax out around 5 kts over my 170+kt baseline speed.

Ok today I read this paragraph on "Engine Aditives" (p.132) from this respected book, author and engineer that sounds like it came directly from a carnival snake oil salesman. To cut the story short - He added the Microlon that he won at Oshkosh and (quote) and says:

"The results of the test flight to determine the effects of the Microlon was a genuine surprise. My Mustang-II showed an additional 6 MPH of top speed! I can't verify all of the claims made by Microlon, and other teflon additives but I do believe my test data."

He has a fixed pitch prop so all I can see that would enable such a speed gain is higher RPM due to lower friction. In a constant speed prop installation the lower internal friction would result in higher prop pitch for the same RPM.

I checked it through Google and the company is still around and they have a product for racing. To say that I am dubious is putting it mildly. Has anyone else tested Microlon in their engine? If so, what is the engine/prop combination? What were the test results? What is the long term operational experience?

Bob Axsom
 
From the Skeptic's Dictionary

The basic ingredient is the same in most of these additives: 50 weight engine oil with standard additives. The magic ingredient in Slick 50, Liquid Ring, Matrix, QM1 and T-Plus from K-Mart is Polytetrafluoroethylene. Don't try to pronounce it: call it PTFE. But don't call it Teflon, which is what it is, because that is a registered trademark. Dupont, who invented Teflon, claims that "Teflon is not useful as an ingredient in oil additives or oils used for internal combustion engines." But what do they know? They haven't seen the secret studies done by Petrolon (Slick 50).

PTFE is a solid which is added to engine oil and coats the moving parts of the engine.

However, such solids seem even more inclined to coat non-moving parts, like oil passages and filters. After all, if it can build up under the pressures and friction exerted on a cylinder wall, then it stands to reason it should build up even better in places with low pressures and virtually no friction.

This conclusion seems to be borne out by tests on oil additives containing PTFE conducted by the NASA Lewis Research Center, which said in their report, "In the types of bearing surface contact we have looked at, we have seen no benefit. In some cases we have seen detrimental effect. The solids in the oil tend to accumulate at inlets and act as a dam, which simply blocks the oil from entering. Instead of helping, it is actually depriving parts of lubricant".

In defense of Slick 50, tests done on a Chevy 6 cylinder engine by the University of Utah Engineering Experiment Station found that after treatment with the PTFE additive the test engine's friction was reduced by 13.1 percent, the output horsepower increased from 5.3 percent to 8.1 percent, and fuel economy improved as well. Unfortunately, the same tests concluded that "There was a pressure drop across the oil filter resulting from possible clogging of small passageways." Oil analysis showed that iron contamination doubled after the treatment, indicating that engine wear increased.

John Clark
RV8 N18U
KSBA
 
Microlon

In the mid-80's I was actively involved in racing RC airplanes. The engines were hand built custom fit units. Any edge to be gained was explored. We tried Microlon and experienced 2-300 rpm increase. This isn't much when you are turning 18,000 RPM but it is a little gain.

One of my racing buddies got a quantity of Microlon for a good price and we used it. I don't think I would have spent the money otherwise.

I don't think it would create any real advantages for our airplane engines.
 
BSIAB

There is a great thread on the Avsig forum about oil and additives. Search BSIAB (BS In A Bottle)

John Clark
RV8 N18U
KSBA
 
Compromise

There's and old story about closing one eye to avoid total blindness while risking a look at something tempting. Maybe a one shot treatment just before the AirVenture Cup Race would yield some speed without plugging the lubrication ports. If my MTBO went down to 1900 hours but I picked up 6 MPH it would do it without a second thought. Not a good idea probably but the God of Speed demands sacrifices.

Bob Axsom
 
Ah....I'm beginning to understand why Bob liked "The World's Fastest Indian" so much... :D :rolleyes:

Paul
 
PTFE Additives in Oil

Microlon and its other names is a crude slurry of PTFE particles in oil. It is not in true suspension and it won't coat your moving parts as claimed and certainly will not last beyond the oil change. It is or was FAA approved because all that means is that it did not hurt the test engine. In a given engine it it possible to see gains from it. I have talked to folks who have said similar things to what is reported above. It is, as far as I know, the same thing as Slick50, the slickest thing about which is the marketing.

I cannot say the improvements did not happen. I will say, though, two things about Microlon's improvements in performance. 1. Do the math - what kind of HP gains would it take to produce the claimed improvement? I'm sceptical. If the BSFC were correct to begin with, would it still be believable after the claimed improvements? 2. An engine with certain characteristics, among them some severe internal friction problems, will possibly gain from the PTFE getting into the oil. There have been other additives with similar potential - Moly particles for instance, which are better than PTFE in high pressure testing.

Because it is a crude slurry and not a true suspension, it can and IMHO will clog something it should not. Use at your own risk.

For automobiles, there is a better way: TufOIl ( www.tufoil.com ) it has published testing and patents. It is a true suspension and does not settle out even afer years of sitting on the shelf.

Disclaimer - I tried selling TufOil to the transportation market in the late 80's. I have no connection with them now.

I have millions of miles of expeience with TufOil in cars and trucks and can recommend it. However, with airplanes it's a little different. TufOil is not formulated to be ashless and is not FAA certified. For that reason, even the inventor/manufacturer does not use it in his Bonanza. I did try it in a Moni with a KFM 2-stroke engine and the results were spectacular in climb. Since the 2-stroke is RPM inflexible, there was no noticeable change in cruise. I once helped a Pitts driver try it in his Lyc and he reported that his vertical performance was noticeably improved and his temperatures were lower. He tried it after watching my before and after tests in my Moni. Everyone at the airport that day had a similar reaction to watching the difference in my climbout.

I have a bottle of Micron for 2-strokes at home. All the PTFE is settled into a glob at the bottom and it will not re-disperse when I shake it. The reason for this is what makes TufOil different than all the others. PTFE is attracted to itself. Special, patented treatments are needed to keep it in suspension. One of these is particle size. TufOil particles are sized to easily pass through any normal filter. Microlon is not. Another is chemistry. TufOil is a true suspension and under magnification the beginnings of Brownian movement of the particles can be observed.

My advice to everyone is to be honest with yourself, analytical and safety aware. Use it at your own risk. I would not put Microlon in my lawnmower, let alone my airplane. We are all experimenters; do it if you choose to.
 
I order Microlon for a test

There was a more recent thread on this but I couldn't find it in a brief search. In that thread I said I would buy it, test it and report my results. I ordered the Microlon from Aircraft Spruce for $119.95 and the shipping cost for Fedex Ground was $13.61. I use Aeroshell 15W-50 which aready contains additives. When I changed C/S props recently I saw evidence of buildup on the walls of the cavity in the crankshaft behind the prop before ordering the Microlon so there may be some conflict in the application but a promise to test is a promise to test. I received the order today (1-15-10). The product comes in a "kit" which consists of two cans and an instruction sheet. The large can is 32 oz. and it is labeled "CL-100 Engine Treatment." The small can is 4 oz. and it is labeled "CL-100 Fuel System Treatment." The situation here at home is such that it will be a while before I can run the test (probably in February) but I will give it the best checkout I can. Images of product and instructions below. Logistices of a fair test should not be a problem since I have to run the engine before the installation and after so the configuration will be the same. I currently have three wing configurations and I am working on another. The best (fastest) one is not installed but it will be before the test is run. The best speed I have established so far is 184.4 kts but I am working on two new mods that have not been tested and the new blended airfoil prop that has not been tested in the fastest configuration. In the current configuration the prop did produce the 3 kt gain expected. Since I have a Hartzell C/S prop, I expect the prop speed to remain the same but the pitch to increase and any improvement will be measured in aircraft top speed. If the manufacturer's claims are applicable to my airplane I should see something on the order of 192 kts. We will see.

Bob Axsom

legmicrolon016.jpg

Microloninst.jpg
 
Last edited:
Suspension

A local pilot here has had great results, more power and lower temps. BUT he followed the instructions exactly and apparently is very important because the particles are not in suspension. Namely, you must SHAKE WELL and apply to a hot engine then fly immediately at high cruise power (not circuits). I think his memorable flight was over an hour where the temps came down during the flight and RPM increased.

His report has made me curious. I too wonder about the material stopping in the filter and blocking oil galleries but his results were impressive

Bevan
 
I wouldn't put that stuff in my lawnmower, let alone an aircraft engine. It will build up in small passages such as your lifter bodies and rocker arm passages which will starve critical areas of oil. I've got a few quart bottles that an engine builder gave me because he didn't want anything to do with it.
 
Everything has an upside

rocketbob said:
I wouldn't put that stuff in my lawnmower, let alone an aircraft engine. It will build up in small passages such as your lifter bodies and rocker arm passages which will starve critical areas of oil. I've got a few quart bottles that an engine builder gave me because he didn't want anything to do with it.
Click to expand...

Well if it goes bad I have an excuse for a high performance overhaul or higher power replacement - racers can't be complacent.

Bob Axsom
 
F-150

My personal experience with PTFE involves using FRAM PTFE oil filters. A dose of PTFE was in the filter and it claimed to treat your engine when the oil picked it up, passing thru the filter.

The 5.4L engine on the F-150 needeed a teardown at 130k miles and the inside of the engine was most enlightening. Every small oil passage way was packed with PTFE "crud". It was caked up everywhere.

Microlon may be a different type of product, I don't know.
 
PTFE Crud

RV8RIVETER said:
My personal experience with PTFE involves using FRAM PTFE oil filters. A dose of PTFE was in the filter and it claimed to treat your engine when the oil picked it up, passing thru the filter.

The 5.4L engine on the F-150 needeed a teardown at 130k miles and the inside of the engine was most enlightening. Every small oil passage way was packed with PTFE "crud". It was caked up everywhere.

Microlon may be a different type of product, I don't know.
Click to expand...

Even though Microlon did pass the FAA certification, it is, indeed, the same kind of stuff as plugged those passages. There is only one PTFE product that can keep the stuff in suspension and not in the oil filter and that is TUFOIL. See my post above. Even DuPont had to write a letter to the president of TUFOIL stating that their statements about Teflon in oil did not apply to his technology. I've seen the letter. Can Microlon help a given engine? Maybe. Should you use it? Maybe not!
 
hevansrv7a said:
Even though Microlon did pass the FAA certification, it is, indeed, the same kind of stuff as plugged those passages. There is only one PTFE product that can keep the stuff in suspension and not in the oil filter and that is TUFOIL. See my post above. Even DuPont had to write a letter to the president of TUFOIL stating that their statements about Teflon in oil did not apply to his technology. I've seen the letter. Can Microlon help a given engine? Maybe. Should you use it? Maybe not!
Click to expand...

If you actually read up on the Microlon product you'll find out that there is NO PTFE (Teflon) in the product and will not create any buildup. By the way, the way they got it approved by the FAA is by running an airplanes engine 11% above redline with no problems.
 
Bob,

If you find information that it could damage your engine I don't think anyone will try to hold you to your word regarding the test. This information in this thread is concerning and I'd be afraid to put it in my engine unless I was ready to tear it down.
 
PTFE or no PTFE?

FirearmSystems.net said:
If you actually read up on the Microlon product you'll find out that there is NO PTFE (Teflon) in the product and will not create any buildup. By the way, the way they got it approved by the FAA is by running an airplanes engine 11% above redline with no problems.
Click to expand...

Petrolon, Slick-50 and Microlon, it is commonly believed, share the same origins. This link explains in detail. If Microlon does not contain PTFE then many authors including the linked one, are in error. One can Google many other internet articles to the same effect. Can I prove it has PTFE in it? No. Is it widely "known" that it does? Yes.

Microlon, on their site, claims that the product coats your engine internals so that you don't need to repeat with each oil change but that the coating is impervious to the chemicals and temps in the engine. Does that really seem reasonable to you?

Another source says:
"Among those oil additives containing PTFE are: Slick 50, Liquid Ring, Lubrilon, Microlon, Matrix, Petrolon (same company as Slick 50), QMI, and T-Plus (K-Mart) with many others not listed. While some of these products may contain other additives in addition to PTFE, all seem to rely on the PTFE as their primary active ingredient and all, without exception, do not list what other ingredients they may contain. By far the most damning testimonial against these products originally came from the DuPont Chemical Corporation, inventor of PTFE and holder of the patents and trademarks for Teflon. In a statement DuPont's Fluoropolymers Division Product Specialist, J.F. Imbalzano said, "Teflon is not useful as an ingredient in oil additives or oils used for internal combustion engines."

PTFE in oil additives is a suspended solid and it has other qualities besides being a friction reducer: It expands radically when exposed to heat. This can result in a clogged oil filter and decreased oil pressure throughout an engine.


This conclusion seems to be borne out by tests on oil additives containing PTFE conducted by the NASA Lewis Research Center, which said in their report, "In the types of bearing surface contact we have looked at, we have seen no benefit. In some cases we have seen detrimental effect. The solids in the oil tend to accumulate at inlets and act as a dam, which simply blocks the oil from entering. Instead of helping, it is actually depriving parts of lubricant."
Reports from tests conducted by researchers at the University of Utah Engineering Experiment Station involving Petrolon additive with PTF state, "There was a pressure drop across the oil filter resulting from possible clogging of small passageways." In addition, oil analysis showed that iron contamination doubled after using the treatment, indicating that engine wear didn't go down -- it appeared to shoot up.
"
 
FirearmSystems.net said:
If you actually read up on the Microlon product you'll find out that there is NO PTFE (Teflon) in the product and will not create any buildup. By the way, the way they got it approved by the FAA is by running an airplanes engine 11% above redline with no problems.
Click to expand...

OK now I'm curious, where exactly can you read this? Not on the Microlon site. However they do post the FAA Acceptance letter, which basically says nothing bad happened when they tested the stuff:

http://www.microlon.com/PDF/FAAAcceptance1979.pdf
 
Instructions say to shake the can before use. That tells me it's full of particles. IMO, don't even think about putting this stuff in your engine. Might be fine on a gun or other item, but don't use it in an engine with a circulating oil system.

Any additive that uses a suspension of "particles" - PTFE, PFA, TFE, etc., etc. - *is* setting you up for premature engine failure.

No substitute for clean oil, filter and maybe an antiwear or EP additive (e.g., Lycoming additive LW 16702) if necessary.

And the World's Fastest Indian is a great movie!
 
MICROLON

I HAVE BEEN USING THIS PRODUCT FOR OVER 30yrs. IT WILL REDUCE FRICTION IN MOST ENGINES, GEAR BOXES, ECT. MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN VERY GOOD IN REDUCING WEAR, TEMPS AND OIL CONSUMPTION. I HAVE USED IT IN ENGINES FROM LARGE DIESELS, CONT., LYC., TO LAWN MOWERS.
THIS PRODUCT DOES NOT CONTAIN OIL. ALL PARTICALS ARE LESS THAN 5 MICRONS IN SIZE. YES IT SETTLES AFTER TIME ON THE SHELF BUT MIXES EASILY WITH AGITATION. YOU MAY CALL ME AT DenMac Aero 936-443-3562 THX. DENNIS
 
oil additives in general...

If they really are the holy grail, why doesn't auto/aircraftmaker X or Y put it in all their engines and gearboxes after break-in, thereby getting 15% more power and mileage than everybody else?

not a conspiracy theory, just a question.

my reading found comments that questioned how it alters the ability of dinosaur oils to scavenge etc........pretty important running leaded fuels eh?

It appears most additives are used & endorsed by racers/performance enthusiasts, with the knowledge that they are willing to trade ANYthing for power - speed-cooling etc.
 
I'm Ready to add but timing is difficult

I am ready to add the two Microlon products (one in the engine oil and one in the fuel) but the installation procedure requires a large block of time and I want to perform a good comparative test so I'm having to delay. All of my testing to date has been at 6,000 ft density altitude and I want to conduct my immediately before and after speed runs there as well. The weather has been such that I can't get up to that altitude VFR and I am entered in the Texoma 100 cross country air race this coming Saturday (weather may prevent that as well). My plan is to run a speed test and bring the engine up to operating temperature as required before adding the Microlon. Then land, refuel, add the microlon products, restart, fly for 2 hours and finally, conduct the "after" speed test. If it is clear that I can't get that all in in one undisturbed sequence before the race I will leave it out until a later date. It looks like Friday is the only shot left for now.

Bob Axsom
 
Bob, It'll be nice to get a "before" race and "after" race as part of your comparison testing as well...give you a chance to see how the engine and airplane performs over the full course of each race. Conditions may be slightly different, but you'll know in your gut...especially if there is a marked difference. I know you know all this as the consummate racing pro, but I am very intersted in the results you get. Happy testing and racing!

Cheers,
Bob
 
Last edited:
Tested on 4-27-10, Results?

I have been wanting to get this test conducted for a long time and today was the day. There were clouds at my "standard" test altitude but at least I could put enough hours together to get it done. I first made a flight to get the engine up to operating temperature per the manufacturer's instructions and record the before Microlon speed. I had to run the test at 7,500 ft pressure altitude with outside air temperature 5C. The speed was 182.6 KTAS. I landed refueled and added the Microlon Engine Treatment and the Microlon Fuel Treatment after shaking each of them for a full minute. Both are light blue tinted clear liquid. I started up and flew with no delay. The manufacturer says to fly for two full hours after installing the Microlon products before stopping. I flew from Fayetteville, Arkansas to Flippin, to Hot Springs, to Pine Bluff, and to Little Rock before returning to Fayetteville. I completed the two hour operating requirement after leaving Little Rock and after crossing the Arkansas River by Russellville I ran two speed tests. The first was at my standard 6,000 ft density altitude and the second was at 7,500 ft pressure altitude at 5C temperature. The first test speed after Microlon treatment was 182.1 KTAS and the second was 181.8 KTAS. At this point there is no evidence of an improvement in speed as a result of the Microlon treatment to my RV-6A with its Lycoming O-360-A1A.

Bob Axsom
 
Thanks Bob!

Thanks for taking the time and expense to do a proper, unbiased, test.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
49clipper

Bob,
I almost hate to admit it, but I tried that in an old pickup I had in the eighty's (with 150,000 miles). I did like they said (trying to prove them wrong) and got the engine up to normal temps, then checked the compression and checked the rpm with my test tack. I then added the microlon while watching the tack and it did exactely what they claimed. I watched it rise 300 rpm just pouring it in to the running engine (choke was off and nothing else could have influenced it). Then I drove it the recommended time, removed the plugs again and while hot, rechecked the compression and it had actually increased quite a bit (its been thirty years, so I don't remember the numbers). I have not used it since, I will not recommend it, but, I cannot say it does not work due to my "somewhat" scientific test.
Jim
 
Theory

Before I flew airplanes for money, I spent 15 years in the auto repair business. I have watched a number of "magic potions" come and go. I have an unscientific theory on the results that Jim and others have mentioned. In the case of high mileage engines, stuck piston rings are common. There are several chemical cures for this, including one produced by General Motors called "Top Engine Cleaner." Having no idea what the chemical make up of Microlon really is, I would not be surprised if there was a chemical penetrant of some sort with the ability to free up rings. That would produce the "magic" that they claim. The idle speed increase can be caused by the solvents in the product burning off after being ingested through the PCV system. Again, many years ago, there was a company marketing an elixir that would penetrate and free up all sorts of things in high mileage engines. Again, lots of claims but some results. A customer had a Ford V8 in a boat that had a stuck hydraulic lifter. I poured a can of the stuff down the pushrod hole of the offending lifter and it did free up. As I suspected from the smell the "magic" product was powdered graphite in lacquer thinner. The problem is that aircraft engines are generally much healthier than a 200K automotive engine that has spent its life running at 20% power.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
ASE Certified Master Automobile Technician :rolleyes: (But so long ago that it doesn't count)
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
Maybe nothing but ...

During the West Texas 100 race at Plainview, Texas on Saturday (6-5-10). I saw 2740 rpm for the first time ever and I have run MANY wide open throttle, max RPM, leaned for speed tests. The RPM is usually 2720 and occassionally 2730 - never higher. I filled the tanks to the brim immediately before and after the race and saw a burn rate of 13.74 gph. When I ran a test for this parameter before the 2008 AVC race to give me a number to determine if I could make it with the stock tanks with a VFR reserve and the minimum ground speed I would have to maintain. The burn rate in that test was 14.5 gph. May not mean anything but they are interesting before and after Microlon observations.

Bob Axsom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.