WPC Metal Treatment/Reduced Friction
 

When it comes to improving fuel economy, my overall goal has been to increase the efficiency of an engine. Recently, I came across a process known as WPC engine treatment which in summary, is micro-shot peening. Much like conventional shot peening, it makes the metal part stronger, while adding micro-dimples that act as oil reserves to the piece. This inherently makes the part slicker, whereby reducing friction.

My question to everyone is this; would increased friction add to fuel economy?

WPC - Metal Surface Treatment

http://ep.yimg.com/ty/cdn/twincamtec...011pricing.jpg

friction on the cylinder walls maybe. anywhere else i can't imagine. crank, cam ride on bearings. parasitic loss from oil slosh can't be fixed either.

So what you're saying is that for the biggest bang for my buck would be to have the cylinder walls treated. That's interesting because the engine building instructor at the local tech college once told me that fuel economy can be improved by the cylinders.

What would you say about having the treatment applied to the pistons, wrist pins, and piston skirts as well?

those areas are not touching anything except wrist pins, in a VERY SMALL area... the only friction would be parasitic, such as splash.
i was hoping someone else would join in. your title sounded like unicorn material and i had to read it first to understand what you meant.

My little Fiat engine has 'plasma coated' cylinder walls using 'formula one' technology. With the aim of reducing internal friction, quite a few OEM's are doing it :D

That's interesting to hear because I investigated that option a few years ago. The problem was that each search on plasma coating seemed to lead me back to ceramic coating. Would you be willing to elaborate what exactly it was that you had done or even the process if possible? I've trying to determine if there's a distinction between the two.

Simple answer: yes.

This is a focus on modern engine design in order to improve efficiency. Mazda's claim for the Skyactiv-D engine is that they reduced friction by 30%

Mazda Engines - Skyactiv-G Gasoline Engines | Mazda Canada

The Skyactiv 2.0L uses 15% less fuel than the old 2.0L Mazda engine. Partially due to friction, but it is also direct injected, higher compression, and has improved VVT. So, who knows how much is due to friction. Also, I'm sure significant design changes were made to reduce friction rather than just a surface finish.

So, can it help? Yes. Is this particular process worth doing for improving fuel economy and an existing engine? Very unlikely, unless it is cheap and you are rebuilding the engine anyways. And the prices you posted don't look cheap to me...

The intent is at some point to rebuild; but for now, I'm exploring potential options.

GM is claiming "diamond'ized" cylinder wall coating increases FE in current engines, but you couldn't tell it by our Cruze numbers.

Reduced friction, improved fuel efficiency, cheap and simple to do?
 

XcelPlus showed a similar reduction in friction (~30%):
Refer FAA testing

Fuel efficiency improvements will vary from car to car e.g.
Le Tourneau Uni testing +36%

If you want to experiment XcelPlus is a simple and cheap way of coating the moving parts in an engine.

:-)

The greatest amount of friction in an engine occurs between the piston and bore (40~50%)

If you're looking for a simple way to reduce friction try coating with XcelPlus. The Combustion Chamber Treatment (aka 2-Stroke) is easy to apply, extremely durable and low friction.

:-)

I'm not going to link all the research on Boric Acid basically reconditioning old worn engines here.
It was 'invented' by Argon National Labs if you want to look up all the research.

Basically:
It does NOT do anything to to 'mod' the oil. It just forms an emulsion that is carried around to all the bearing surfaces and pistons, rings and cylinders etc where it reacts with the metal/s to form an extremely slippery ~0.5 micron layer.
So in a bearing or piston you 'lose' 2 microns of wear.
( Crazy slippery! Like 70X more slippery than steel-oil-steel IIRC)

The bottom layer is a ceramic with 85% the hardness of diamond, with the subsequent layers are akin to a deck of micro sized playing cards easily sliding over each other.

You want around 20% by weight of the oil of Boric oxide/acid. (As Boric Oxide absorbs moisture out the air turning it into acid they are basically the same thing.
NB: Boric Acid/Oxide NOT!!! Boracic etc which is another chemical all-together..!!

You want to add this powder to around std coffee mug of boiling water.
Pre heat the cup with boiling water; pour that water out and then add more boiling water before stirring in the powder:
The hotter the water; the more of the Boric will dissolve in it, but you wont get it all dissolved and that's fine as long as you get most of the undissolved powder into the oil.

Add that to the engine after making sure the oil level is at or just below full and the engine is hot, then run the engine immediately.

After around 10 minutes you will notice/feel the difference and be amazed by the 'better than newness' and economy etc of the engine.
It will also swing over on the starter much faster/easier.

Leave it in for a day or so of use, during which time it will get in under any sludge, loosening it, then change the oil and filter.
You can add a tiny bit of said mixture to the new oil if you like but basically the engine is good for around 100 000 km before needing another treatment.

NB!!!
That VWs have a very fine sieve on the oil pump pickup and are thus blocked by the loosened sludge..!
I haven't had an issue with any other make of vehicle.

NB that most gearboxes rely on the friction of the syncro rings to get your gears spinning at the same speed to avoid grating while changing, so be careful there.
Similarly; limited slip differentials become way less limited if you treat them. Great for std diffs and mpg and all, but...

NB That you DO NOT want to add this stuff to any engine that is not thoroughly run in.
I'd say at least 30 000 km on the clock with some spirited driving in the mix.

WPC treatment sounds promising for improving engine longevity and efficiency by reducing friction, but increasing friction itself would not help fuel economy. If anything, reducing internal friction should result in a small but measurable fuel economy gain. Have you seen any real-world tests showing MPG improvements after WPC treatment?

' increased friction '
 

1) Kinematic viscosity of the oil dictates 'fuel economy.'
2) The engine designer chooses the lowest possible viscosity, of which the friction-modifer ( FM ) package can satisfy film strengths tough enough to prevent 'high-point' ( asperity contact ) during the highest demands within boundary lubrication regions of operation.
3) Since 1986 ( Ford Motor Company ) engine designers have gone towards roller-tappet camshafts which have no 'sliding friction' boundary lubrication requirement.
4) They've also gone to thinner, lower tension piston rings, and piston-ring metallurgical changes and selective coatings to reduce parasitic friction in the piston-ring / cylinder wall interface, which also reduce the degree of 'boundary lubrication region' for the engine.
5) Since 1993, engine designers have also adopted ' chemically accelerated vibratory finishing' ( superfinishing ) of the engines machined surfaces which have removed the asperities boundary lubrication fought to prevent contact with, while producing the 'micro-textured isotropic surface' which facilitates holding the lubricant 'plating' onto the metal surfaces.
6) So, in effect, automotive engines basically already possess all the technologies that the 'WPC Metal Treatment' is offering.
7) Today, motor oils are down to SAE 0W-8, made for 'Hybrid' engines, which have the highest brake thermal efficiencies ( BTE ) known, lowest brake specific fuel consumption ( BSFC ), and highest mpgs.
8) WPC's 'product' might have had relevance thirty-two ( 32 ) years ago. I'd look elsewhere for mpg improvement.

Unless your driving a 32-year-old car. With flat tappets.