Nano Lubrication ??? Bull Crap or not ? - Jay Leno's Garage

[manatee2000@gmail.com]

OK guy's I am horrible I buy into all the snake oil out their but this one has really gotten my attention. I first noticed it watching Nano Lubrication - Jay Leno's Garage on YouTube. Since then I have purchased AR9200 originally I was getting it for a my jeep engine and transmission. Since then I realized that I need to do an oil, transmission, rear drive fluid changes in my 08 1200 GSA with 50 K original miles.

The Question what harm can I do by adding this stuff to the Oil, Transmission and Rear Drive of the only thing that has ever worked really well in my life the BMW? Thanks Matt

 

[Omega Man]

OK guy's I am horrible I buy into all the snake oil out their but this one has really gotten my attention. I first noticed it watching Nano Lubrication - Jay Leno's Garage on YouTube. Since then I have purchased AR9200 originally I was getting it for a my jeep engine and transmission. Since then I realized that I need to do an oil, transmission, rear drive fluid changes in my 08 1200 GSA with 50 K original miles.

The Question what harm can I do by adding this stuff to the Oil, Transmission and Rear Drive of the only thing that has ever worked really well in my life the BMW? Thanks Matt

First of all, Welcome to the forum!
On the other, I'm not sure about the Nano Lube products-not up on them- but that doesn't mean I wouldn't try it. There are lots of opinions and criticisms about "additives" in general but if it helps- why not. I have had enough good luck with Lucas products and so far 1 Amsoil product that I can make recommendations on/for them.
Gary

 

[195848]

Very interesting thank you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3ir3bg0ESU

 

[20774]

I found this discussion on Bob Is The Oil Guy forum:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3120146/Archoil_products#Post3120146

 

[8ninety8]

If there are compounds and such that are so spiffy, so much more slippery, moly, boron, etc., why don't manufacturers use them in our oils? So that we buy more oil, and change it more often?

 

[dbrick]

I found this discussion on Bob Is The Oil Guy forum:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3120146/Archoil_products#Post3120146

Welcome to the intenet: another discussion from posters whose training, knowledge, and experience is unknown, and which ultimately circles back to the Jay Leno's Garage mention.

I'll pass.

 

[pglaves]

Is this stuff like Slick 50? Or are the chunks smaller?

 

[akbeemer]

OK guy's I am horrible I buy into all the snake oil out their but this one has really gotten my attention. I first noticed it watching Nano Lubrication - Jay Leno's Garage on YouTube. Since then I have purchased AR9200 originally I was getting it for a my jeep engine and transmission. Since then I realized that I need to do an oil, transmission, rear drive fluid changes in my 08 1200 GSA with 50 K original miles.

The Question what harm can I do by adding this stuff to the Oil, Transmission and Rear Drive of the only thing that has ever worked really well in my life the BMW? Thanks Matt

Guess if you do not know for sure, then avoid it for the time being. You don't say what kind of BMW you ride, but if you have a wet clutch then I certainly would not use it in the engine/transmission.

Also, welcome to the forum. Please take some time to fillout your profile and it is also helpful if you put some info in your sidnature lines. Some list their bikes there.

 

[na1g]

Is anybody having lubrication failures in their engines, transmissions or rear drives? With regular, scheduled changes these things pretty much go forever on synthetic or semi-synthetic lubricants. So why fool around with snake oil? Want to be a beta tester? If so, please report back in 50,000 miles and tell us how it's going.

pete

 

[20774]

Is anybody having lubrication failures in their engines, transmissions or rear drives?

While not proof, I have a friend who lost metal on the faces of his lifters on his R60/2 when he used an oil whose level of ZDDP dropped without his knowledge. So, I would say the possibility is there.

I'm too conservative to stray too far from the standard "feeding trough"!

 

[pglaves]

Is anybody having lubrication failures in their engines, transmissions or rear drives? With regular, scheduled changes these things pretty much go forever on synthetic or semi-synthetic lubricants.
pete

I always react when I read this because we all know about many lubrication failures. When an Airhead needs a top end overhaul at 80,000 miles that is a lubrication failure. When the cam followers on an R1100RS are badly worn at 200,000 miles that is a lubrication failure. When wet bearings in a transmission fail that is a lubrication failure. Virtually any metal against metal wear of a lubricated surface is a lubrication failure.

Lubricants can always get better. Whether this stuff is better time will tell. But even the best oils changed regularly are leaving us with worn engines, so it does need to be improved.

 

[racer7]

I may have a somewhat different perspective than Paul

Machines have a finite lifespan for many reasons. Not just wear of oil lubed parts but also corrosion of frame bits and electrical connections, oxidation and failure of wiring insulation and conductors, wear and tear on all manner of parts that move in use or simply from vibration, UV damage to plastics, ability to repair or source new electronic modules. etc etc..

So what is that life? Well, no doubt it varies but lets say its 25-35 years for the sake of discussion. (Meaning that after that period there is some significant amount of restoration needed to a variety of parts, not that the machine has disintegrated to dust)

So how long do those oil-lubed parts need to last? Well, for 25-35 years that's maybe 100,000 to 350,000 miles to cover pretty much all riders, except the hardcore longer distance folks. (See mileage contest results and note how many entrants even there are well below 10K and the others no doubt represent the more hard core distance types.) Remember its been said the average Harley goes only 1500 miles per year X 35 would equal less than 70K miles.

Modern oils are generally capable of protecting the current BMW motors for 150-200K or more as evidenced by their owners at rallies.
And how many folks ever want to keep a machine 25-35 years in full normal use anyway given that technology advances and bikes get better?

My conclusion then is that additives are chasing exponentially diminishing gains and anything realized is probably beneficial to only a very small minority of owners- the folks who rack up huge miles every year and also want to keep their bikes 25 years or more.

I own 4 bikes and ride a total of 5 all year. There is no chance I can wear them out mechanically though they are garaged to protect them from environmental damage. I'm not one who would benefit.

Then there is the point that what some would call a lube failure I would call a design failure. Sliding parts are far more sensitive to lube issues than rollers, for example. So one could as easily argue that valve train issues on airheads are design related rather than lube related. In the airhead era, neither buyers nor designers expected machines to go 25-35 years of constant use. Even today, most of us would probably say 20 years of constant use covers most. (Though I've got one favorite, heavily modded cage in routine use at 23 years)

Lubes can and do get continually better, which is great. But in general, if proper chosen and changed, they're already "good enough".

 

[Rinty]

A hotrodder guy I know calls those additives "mouse milk."

 

[manatee2000@gmail.com]

I may have a somewhat different perspective than Paul

Machines have a finite lifespan for many reasons. Not just wear of oil lubed parts but also corrosion of frame bits and electrical connections, oxidation and failure of wiring insulation and conductors, wear and tear on all manner of parts that move in use or simply from vibration, UV damage to plastics, ability to repair or source new electronic modules. etc etc..

So what is that life? Well, no doubt it varies but lets say its 25-35 years for the sake of discussion. (Meaning that after that period there is some significant amount of restoration needed to a variety of parts, not that the machine has disintegrated to dust)

So how long do those oil-lubed parts need to last? Well, for 25-35 years that's maybe 100,000 to 350,000 miles to cover pretty much all riders, except the hardcore longer distance folks. (See mileage contest results and note how many entrants even there are well below 10K and the others no doubt represent the more hard core distance types.) Remember its been said the average Harley goes only 1500 miles per year X 35 would equal less than 70K miles.

Modern oils are generally capable of protecting the current BMW motors for 150-200K or more as evidenced by their owners at rallies.
And how many folks ever want to keep a machine 25-35 years in full normal use anyway given that technology advances and bikes get better?

My conclusion then is that additives are chasing exponentially diminishing gains and anything realized is probably beneficial to only a very small minority of owners- the folks who rack up huge miles every year and also want to keep their bikes 25 years or more.

I own 4 bikes and ride a total of 5 all year. There is no chance I can wear them out mechanically though they are garaged to protect them from environmental damage. I'm not one who would benefit.

Then there is the point that what some would call a lube failure I would call a design failure. Sliding parts are far more sensitive to lube issues than rollers, for example. So one could as easily argue that valve train issues on airheads are design related rather than lube related. In the airhead era, neither buyers nor designers expected machines to go 25-35 years of constant use. Even today, most of us would probably say 20 years of constant use covers most. (Though I've got one favorite, heavily modded cage in routine use at 23 years)

Lubes can and do get continually better, which is great. But in general, if proper chosen and changed, they're already "good enough".

By Far the best response I have had to the post.

Matt

 

[pglaves]

I may have a somewhat different perspective than Paul

Machines have a finite lifespan for many reasons.

<very large snip>

I agree almost entirely. Virtually any "in-specification" lubricant will allow our motorcycles to have a long and useful life. And, I certainly don't know much about Calcium Borate as a lubricant.

Even with almost complete agreement I still react when folks seem to think oil related failures don't happen. I personally don't think Airheads ought to need rings at 80K to 100K miles, and better lubrication would delay and prolong that wear. And there are other examples of less than ideal life spans of lubricated parts.

Part of my automatic reaction is based on the fact that the "show me an oil related failure" challenge is usually coupled with an assertion that some out of spec oil is good enough. Or that very extended change intervals are OK. Not true this time, but it is so very often the case.