I went and read the patent and it's pretty straightforward. Their main contribution is not the tungsten disulfide, but rather the fine grit-blasting process used to get the WS2 to stick to the surface.
I have no data to refute their claims, but they don't have much data to support their claims, and that brings my skepticism. if it's that good, you'd think they'd have real data showing spool times and whatnot. But I went through the web page thoroughly and there just ain't much data. The only good stuff I found was on the I-R hydrodynamic milling spindle, and even that was pretty thin.
You see the same thing from cryotreaters and coatings people. Lots of marketing hype, little data.
The inventor has degrees in finance and marketing, so it's not surprising that what you read is, uh, marketing, more than anything. He says he got "an education you can't find in books," and that just makes me wince.
Just like the cryo nuts, IF they can come up with real tests and real data, then it would be a lot more believable.
So, I say, try at your own risk. It might work, might not. As a metallurgist, I'm on the fence.
Attention: TDR Forum Junkies 
