AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Q a o-% I have been told that reprocessed used oil is

30th March 1973, Page 56
30th March 1973
Page 56
Page 56, 30th March 1973 — Q a o-% I have been told that reprocessed used oil is
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

as good as, "#' not better than, new oil. What is your opinion?

ANearly all types of engine lubricant

are treated with additives to provide improved detergency and other properties. A lubricant suffers from additive depletion with use and after the harmful deposits in the oil have been removed by appropriate filtering procedures in preparation for re-use it should also be reprocessed to restore the additive levels to those of a new oil.

If this is done expertly the oil should be as good as new, but restoring additive levels is a highly complex business requiring the expertise of an oil technologist. So, unless you are satisfied that such expertise is applied to the reprocessed oil that you have (presumably) considered using, you would be well advised to employ new oil.

The kind of additives with which an oil is treated depends on the type of service for which it is intended. For example, a turbocharged engine may require an oil with a higher detergency level than a normally-aspirated counterpart. And there are special additives for combating oxidation, the scuffing of pistons and valve gear, the formation of cold sludge and so on.

It has been claimed that a properly reprocessed engine oil is better than a new oil, possibly because repeat impact loading has a favourable effect on the molecular structure. At one time reprocessed oils were being marketed in America at a price that was higher than the cost of new oil. But nothing has been heard of this practice for some years.

Tags


comments powered by Disqus