Fuel and Oil Additives

Mr_Shiftright

Well, no, I wouldn't take it personally.

I don't even know what your position is individually. If some "Person A" insisted that an additive will cure severe engine problems, I am extremely skeptical and would caution people about that.

Marvel Mystery Oil is an upper cylinder lubricant, there is nothing "mysterious" about it. The use of UCL is perfectly logical and good as a preventative measure. I'm not sure modern engine technology really needs UCL anymore, as valve guide and seal technology is so much better than when Mystery Oil first came out, as is lifter technology. But it might do some good for older engines.

It really depends on what problem you are trying to address "out of a can" as to whether or not you are "wasting your money" on additives.

If someone tried to put laundry detergent into MY engine, I'd knock it out of his hand, you can be sure!

chispas

"If someone tried to put laundry detergent into MY engine, I'd knock it out of his hand, you can be sure!"

The man was talking about the 1920's....

This is almost 100 years later....

___________________________________________

By the way, PLEASE CANCEL my posting priviledges.

Thanks

shipo

You've been threatening to quit posting, indirectly at least, for a couple of days now. Please, don't let us stop you. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

Mr_Shiftright

Anyone use Redline products? I've used "water-wetter" in my Alfa (good), diesel injection cleaner in my 300D (never had a problem like many old diesel owners do), and their differential gear oil in the LS in my BMW, which also seemed to help it along.

armtdm

You have a great deal. For a while I was using Analysts inc for $9 but that went away and now Blackstone Labs charges $18 without a TBN

As to RedLine Water Wetter, don't expect any differnece with this product if you run a 50-50 coolant. This product is for racing and the label even says it works best in 100% water, any mixing with a coolant renders it almost useless in reducing the temp. I have tried it and IMO it is useless for the ave. driver!

Mr_Shiftright

You mean "useless" because you mixed it with coolant or "useless" because it didn't work after you instlaled it as directed?

gregoryc1

Reasons, (a rational), to CONSIDER using an "upper cylinder / fuel lubricant / cleaner as part of an "on-going" preventive maintenance program, when using unleaded gasoline as an automotive fuel!
     The modern automobile is a balanced system. On one side you have the "engine management system", (computer / electronics & sensors), and on the other side, you have the basic engine mechanical systems, (cooling / fuel / & electrical), and the internal engine components.
     Fuel injectors are electromechanical devices, that are "high tech" in design and construction. They have moving parts. DEPOSITS can form on the tip of a fuel injector, and these deposits can prevent the proper fuel delivery. Deposits can alter the "spray pattern" of the injector.
     As a result of these deposits forming over time, driveability problems can occur such as: -----a rough idle, ----a loss of power, ----and / or poor fuel economy. These problems DO NOT happen over night, but rather, they grow slowly until the symptoms surface in the form of driveability issues. The loss of performance can be VERY small and hardly noticeable at first to the driver.
    The deposits form on the fuel injectors for the following reasons: ----1.) Heat affects some components of the unleaded gasoline, and these components bake on the injector, ----2.) Start and stop operation contributes to the issue, ----3.) The design of the injector can cause the deposits to collect on the tip, ----4.) The "quality of the fuel" can contribute to the creation of these deposits, ----5.) A lack of an "on-going fuel system preventive maintenance program" can keep the build - up process on-going!
     On the engine / mechanical side of the issue, the engine's valves must be properly timed. This means that they must operate in a "smooth fashion", (as designed by the manufacturer).
     The engine's valves must operate without LAG, and they must seat tightly. An engine's valve train that has too much clearance, will open late and close early. This means that the engine cannot breath properly.
     The clearance between the valve stem and the valve guide must be correct, and if the engine is to run properly over many miles, this clearance must be maintanied.
     When a valve guide wears, "GUM" and / or "CARBON" deposits on the valve stem can cause valves to stick partly open. On occasion, valves will stick in the guide, when the engine is cold, and will work free as the engine warms up to normal operating tenperature. A carbon build up on the valves will cause the cylinder to run "lean" because the "carbon" is acting like a "sponge"!
    Valve burning is most often caused by "poor valve face seating", as a direct result of a valve guide / stem problem. A worn valve guide prevents normal valve seating, and can cause the valve to break
    A little extra lubricant delivered in the fuel system can help to prevent these problems, by lubricating the fuel system components, the valve stems & guides, valve seats and the upper cylinder / ring area. Years ago, this was accomplished by lead.
    The modern lead free gasolines are prone to the formation of "CARBON" as part of the combustion process. If this carbon gets behind the compression rings, it can lock the rings in the lands / grooves of the piston, which will freeze the ring movement, and casue cylinder / compression problems and oil burning issues. With a lubricant / cleaner in the fuel this carbon from the fuel cannot stick to the upper cylinder components.
    You see this problem in marine engines VERY early in their life, because they work VERY hard. There is a fuel that is sold at some marinas called ValveTec. This contains an upper cylinder lubricant.-----Greg

badgerfan

owned by gregoryc1 must be very touchy.

As for my fuel injected Tauri and Caravan, they have never seen an ounce of MM or other fuel treatment and never have I had an injector, valve or piston ring problem. Had the first Taurus for 98K before selling it(still was running fine). Am on the second and at 37K has seen no additives. Current Caravan is at about 73K and no additives to date.

Most of these additives do nothing but part a fool from his money.

gregoryc1

gregoryc1

You are missing the point of my posting. I am only using my Honda vehicles as an example. I like to read about and experiment with engines. I grew up with a wrench in my hand, and I have been associated with the automotive repair business all my life. When other young people were playing ball in elementary school I worked on engines, carbs and ignition systems. My goal is to keep the engine tolerances as close to new settings for the longest possible miles. If a lubrication additive can do this, then I have succeeded.

Mr_Shiftright

No harm done using an upper cylinder lubricant. I don't think marine engine analogies apply too well though gregory because marine engine generally run colder than car engines and at more constant rpms.

sequoiasoon

My '94 Explorer started to "ping" at light throttle and just cruising on the highway. Regular maintenance always done 3k oil changes, air filter 1/ year, only "name brand" gas, spark plugs, wires, etc 30k. Fill tank every time and write down gallons, miles etc. Had to start using 91 octane and even then would ping intermittently. Service shop did a decarbonize using BG products including a before and after borescope (the mini camera that takes pictures of insides of anything) First was an intake cleaner, followed by the fuel rail hook up deal, and then a can of BG 44k cleaner in the tank. No more ping even on 87 octane. finished full tank of gas then shop did the "after" borescope. Big difference on carbon build up from before (a lot) to (almost none) after.

Snake oil? maybe, but a very clean powerful snake.

After results on Explorer I did just the 44k in the tank on my Corolla (120k). One tank later, mileage up 2-3 mpg and a VERY noticeable increase in power (car now sees 5,000 rpm a lot in 1st 2nd and 3rd gear). I now use 1 can every 6 months. Results? 180k on Corolla gets 30-32 mpg in rush hour traffic which is the same as when it was new in '93 (yes I have the written down, fill up every time, mileage and gallons, oil changes every 3k records) (Thanks Dad for making me AR about this!) Family and friends have the same results from the 44k after I recommended it. Where do I buy it? From my Toyota dealer! Seems Toyota, Lexus, Infiniti dealers in my area use it for their $189 Fuel injector cleaning service. I asked some people that had it done at dealer and they gave same feedback on positive results. So, if these dealers who service some extremely reliable and high $ cars use it with no warranty concerns and get great results, that works for me.

gregoryc1

Most marine engines with Raw Water Cooling run at 175 Degs.. The Fresh Water Cooling Units run at 190 to 195. The problem on a boat is not the temperature of the cooling system, but rather the "heat soak" of the engine after the engine has been shut down, after a long run. The ambient temperature around the engine within the engine compartment, depending on the design of the hull of the boat and the ventilation system, on a "hot day" can run very high, ----(higher than the engine)----(some people estimate between 200 to 500 Degs.). The engine is constantly ingesting this hot air, which contributes to the heat of the combustion chamber temperature. ( IMPORTANT NOTE: ---One of the biggest problems on inboard and I/O engines is "vapor lock" in the fuel delivery line. ---With EFI engines, and fuel return lines this has been eliminated, but the older boats with carbs. and no fuel return line had a "big problem" with heat and fuel!)
    The accumulation of carbon deposits on the pistons, valves and the combustion chamber causes poor heat transfer from the combustion chamber to the cooling system, therfore, the engine within the combustion chamber, could be a lot hotter than the gauge is reading on the control panel.
    Carbon accumulation also artificially increases the compression ratio, and causes a lean mixture, because the carbon deposits act like a "sponge" absorbing the fuel charge coming into the cylinder. Lean mixtures burn hotter!
    Both of these conditions will cause "knock"
CAUSES OF DETONATION:
    Excessively advanced ignition
    Engine overheating
    Gasoline too low in octane
CAUSES OF PREIGNITION:
    Incandescent deposits in the combustion chamber
    A faulty cooling system
    A spark plug that is too hot
    Poor engine lubrication
    Crossfiring

    As you can see, HEAT and CARBON DEPSOITS are closely related in terms of engine operation, damage and longevity.

armtdm

My issue with the BG promoters is that they market this as a cure all for everything. Local radio show is sponsored by BG, all they do is promote the product.

Many many fuel additives that work as well for lower cost. Amsoil PI, Shaeffer Oil Neutra, Redline Fuel Additive etc. The world does not revolve around BG as they would make you believe.

gregoryc1

You are correct. There are many fuel additives that will do a "great job" as an upper cylinder lubricant, and a "Carbon Control" substance. Some are very expensive, and some a very reasonable. Years ago, I did use BG products, and I found them to be very high is quality, but somewhat expensive. The bottom line to this whole issue is that there is a "carbon problem" with the fuel that is on the market today. Years ago, carbon was a by-product of the lubricating oil that was leaking past the rings, and down the valve guides. Today, engines are assembled with tighter tolerances, so the oil is no longer an issue, but the fuel is no longer the same formulation. Many land based vehicle owners, don't see the development of this problem early in the vehicle's life, because the engine in a land based vehicle, does not work as hard and accumulate wear,(early in its life), as engines on the water. For every 100 operating hours on the water, it is equal to 10,000 miles on land. At "planing speeds", the 100 operating hours would be the same as a "land based engine" climbing a hill for 10,000 miles. Carbon deposits in any engine, when mixed with the lubricating oil can be very abrasive over time. This is another reason to change the engine oil and filter frequently, and control the formation of carbon in the cylinders. You will hear and read many opinions on the oil change subject. Once the oil filter is saturated with dirt, it will no longer perform it designed function. It will simply "bypass" the oil, and the engine's oil pump will simply circulate dirty oil. Have you ever wondered why oil pumps go bad? Think of this. They are sitting at the bottom of the engine in a crankcase full of oil, and they wear out from use. The problem is that they are sitting in dirty oil, because of a lack of preventive maintenance, (frequent oil and filter changes). Carbon from the fuel can "lock the rings" on the pistons allowing "blow by" to enter the crankcase, which then gets into the oil. The PVC system can only remove a limited amount of "blow by". To keep engines healthy, carbon in the combustion chamber needs to be controlled.

Mr_Shiftright

sequoiasoon -- you are talking about a complete decarbonizing system incorporating injection right tnto the fuel rail, etc. This is a long stretch from the $3.49 "magic formulas" that people are buying off the shelf. There's snake oil and there's science. I don't think you are going to pour something from a can into your gas tank and decarbonize your engine like you did by the method you described.

gregoryc1--- very interesting stuff, thank you for posting that.

When you said "preignition" and "detonation", isn't this basically the same thing. Did you mean "post-ignition" that is, "running on"?

Or did you mean "detonation" in the sense of a very raggedy flame front (poor octane) and "preignition" as an actual premature firing of the combustion charge.

But I understand "detonation" as a premature and destructive combustion in the cylinder.

RE: Marine engines. Seems to me such a heat-soak would also dilute the intake charge quite a bit.

sequoiasoon

You are totally correct. I had the total decarb deal done at the shop on the Explorer and it did correct my pinging problem (as well as give me back some power and fuel effiency). I did not do this on the Corolla. All I did was add the BG 44K to about a 1/2 tank. The Corolla was not suffering from any issues at the time. It had always had a steady diet of oil changes 3k max, Chevron Techron 3-4 times a year and regular tune ups (air filter 1/year, plugs 20k, wires-cap-rotor 45k) I never noticed any change with the Techron. I figured it was because the engine was clean and it was just maintaining it that way. I was happy using it as part of PM.

Using just the 44K by itself, correct, will never work as good as the complete cleaning. On my car (Corolla) the noticeable power and mileage increase showed that it did something to clean it better than the Techron. I'm satisfied with getting 30+ mpg consistently and now use the 44K 2-3 times a year. Some day I might go for the complete cleaning just to see if it helps any.

I've never tried the $3.49 outlaw brand, I would never expect it to work as well as the complete deal. Many people will try anything (except normal PM) and pray that it works (some of us know better). I'll keep my cars going with the 44K until I either see some documented proof comparisons that the others are better (or at worst one of my friends convinces me to try something else). This probably won't happen as I have to remind them to change oil and check tire pressure on a regular basis.

JTO

I have a jeep with over 200k miles on it (4.2l 2bbl). It runs well, but I have to go through NJ's smog check soon. I use Chevrons techtron additive every 3000 miles or so, but will this effect the readings if I go with it in the gas... good or bad?

Mr_Shiftright

You might want to invest in a new O2 sensor for that Jeep if you haven't had one in a long time; also you can buy an additive to help you pass emissions which does, occasionally seem to help. Last of all, don't go into the test unless your car has just come off a really hard long run and is good and hot.

JTO

Any ideas on a good one to add for that emmisions test? I stopped by the local Pepboys, but didn't see much.

swschrad

for instance, the old used-car-salesman friends like STP oil treatment, or Casite Motor Honey, or any other of the high-ZDDF "golden goo" items. IMHO not car owners' friends, but salesmens' friends, these chemicals.

Mr_Shiftright

There's a product called I think "Smog Test" and like most products of this type (helping you to pass the Smog Test) it contains mostly isopropyl alcohol, which carries some extra oxygen. So it's not voodoo, there is some science in it. But of course it can only do so much for you.

gregoryc1

This past Saturday, I was at a major marina on the Jersey shore, picking up some parts for a boat, and sitting on the counter was a product for the control of "Carbon" in the upper cylinder area for both 2 and 4 cycle engines called "Carbon Guard"! It sold for: ---$23.00 a quart. YES, ---$23.00 a quart. I guess "carbon" is an issue in hard working marine engines! ----Greg

badgerfan

Mor than likely it is a high profit item for the marina. Snake oil comes in many different bottles many times with very high prices.

Mr_Shiftright

The best definition of a skeptic that I've heard is "someone who wants his facts to be right".

swschrad

harvest it yourself

bowke28

i have a 2003 Focus SE sedan, 7000 miles. on my way home last night, the gas guage read empty, although i had just filled up that morning. as i looked at it wondering what happened, the engine light came on.

i took it in to service last night, and they called me this afternoon saying its done.

turns out that superamerica fuel has been ruining fuel pumps in fords, chryslers, chevys, hondas, toyotas, etc...pretty much everything. there is a news article about how AAA has has triple the fuel calls over the last week, with people reading 1/2 tank but running out.

anyway, they replaced the fuel pump (in under 24 hours, by the way), and all seems fine. they said it might happen again, since i still have the gas in it, but that superamerica will be reimbursing FoMoCo when all is said and done, so they dont mind doing it again.

please let me know if you have issues like this, so we can organize our efforts.

i have a feeling that superamerica is "watering down" their gas...kind of like ballparks do with beer.

tblazed

tblazed

I recently put a bottle of "RxP Emissions Reducer" in my 1988 Chevy S-10 with 4.3 V6 due for emissions inspection. The results of the test were less than satisfying:

"Low Speed Emission Results" Hydrocarbons HC from a pre-"RxP"= 53 ppm (at 97195 miles) to the current WITH "RxP" = 197 ppm at 98114 miles. It almost failed with "RxP"! (Legal limit in Texas is 213 PPM) These before and after tests were done on my '88 S-10 on the same analyzer and the same operator-inspector.

I put in the bottle of "RxP" and filled the tank with Shell 87, drove it on a 70 mile freeway loop, and drove that tank 200 miles before I took it down for the current emission test.

Am now awaiting a response to their "100% guaranteed satisfaction" as stated on the bottle. (No reply so far, after two emails) "RxP" might work in some cases but sure didn't improve things for me.

bowke28

the same ingrediants are added to ALL gasoline in metro louisville, KY for about the last 15 years.

swschrad

all information concerning additives tends to be anecdotal, with no head-to-head testing done on identical fleets of cars under identical conditions, with engine tear-downs before and after, etc etc

sounds like you nailed one of those snakes, though.

I personally have a soft spot in my heart for the thought of "Cobra"-brand oil additive, and "Rattler"-brand gas additive, but not enough energy to trademark 'em, and too high morals to market 'em might even smile at the thought of "Python"-brand gear lube additive, guaranteed to bind and choke your diffs

tblazed

Just got a reply back from the RxP sales department. Just send in the proof of purchase for a refund. So to be fair they do give a refund ( I will know that for sure upon receipt of the check.)

However, I would think they would have been at least a little interested in my documented test results and why their product seemed to produce such an increase in HC. Even the emissions inspector was a little surprized the HC went up so dramatically. He has seen it work in some other vehicles.

dustyk

Swschrad,

Your post provoked some laughter from me. I'd trademark those names now, just in case. Hey, 'ya never know!

There are some chemicals that do have a place in the modern automobile engine. Many of the solvents used for fuel system maintenance are a far cry from snake oil. Combustion chamber conditioners and fuel injector cleaners being primary useful products. There seems to be a fuel injector cleaner made by every company remotely connected to the automotive industry. I don't know which ones work more effectively and I don't think anyone has done any comparison testing.

Oil additives are another story. I'm sure there are individual engines with low levels of symptoms that could benefit from the product. But in the vast number of cases even if the product rendered some level of benefit I'm sure that the cost of continued use would outweigh the cost of the repair in the first place. Nothing that I'm aware of will close the tolerances of worn or cracked piston rings, valve guides, or main bearings. I know of no product that will make a valve guide seal soft after it becomes brittle.

I worked in a radiator repair shop part-time one summer for need (or want) of a little extra cash. There was a product called "Barr's Leak" that was very popular several decades ago. It worked sometimes. The problem was that in a crusted cooling system it also closed up those little tubes in the heater core. Good for business, though.

And as I type these words a product that I thought was long since gone from the market, much less my memory, was something called "Marvel Mystery Oil." But just a little while ago I noticed a can of it on a shelf in some auto parts store. I was awe struck. I couldn't believe they still made that stuff. I don't remember what it was suppose to do or how it was used, but it's an awfully pretty can sitting in a person's garage somewhere. Very nostalgic.

Regards,
Dusty

tntitan

I believe their is quite a bit of evidence and testimonial at bobistheoilguy that AutoRX can and does soften seals that have become brittle.

Two other products that many on that site (some of the biggest and most knowledgable oil nuts on the planet) believe in are Lube Control and Fuel Power. All of these products have been tested and used over the long term and have almost ZERO long term negative comments or problems.

I am a moron and have tried all three of these products recently. I can personally attest to an increase of mileage in my Accord from 26.4 MPG to 28.3 MPG at this time but it appears to be continuing to improve.

badgerfan

If Gregoryc1 sees your post, he will fill you in on the wonders of Marvel Mystery Oil. He believes in it so much, I think he might even be putting it on his salads.

He claims it does wonders for lubricating injectors. I have never had an injector problem and have never used this stuff.

The name alone conjures up visions of snake oil.

swschrad

and in measured, lab-determined quantities are of great use. I have hysterical laughter at all thoughts of "mechanic in a can" formulations, for as we all know, the mechanic in the can is reading the sports page and having a cigar, not working on the engine whether or not the "hourly rate" meter is running

marvel mystery oil is still around, it's basically a light oil solvent that can even be used as a penetrating oil if you run a little short of your regular stuff. 50s and 60s era engines used to collect a lot of goop from the highly-paraffined oils of the time, and this sort of slop would erode it a little and stop some clatter and clanking. you might want to use some if you suspect carbon is binding rings, or believe in solvent flushes periodically when you change oil. but it won't replace the socket wrench set any time soon. IIRC the graphics on the can are a little "cleaned up" from the highly curliqueued design used when I was growing up, so they can print the cans cheaper.

gregoryc1

My engines love MM Oil in the fuel!---- "I love the smell of MM oil in the morning, -----It smells like victory"!-------- I use it in the fuel 2 and 4 cycle engines, both land and marine based. GREAT product! ----Give it a try! ( 4 ounces to each 10 gallons of fuel).

shipo

After an ill-advised encounter between me and a Copperhead (ill-advised for both me and the it, I am at least alive to tell the story) in WV a couple of years back I had to opportunity of riding in the back of an (MM?) oil burner powered ambulance to the (not so) local hospital. In-between my intermittent waves of nausea (from both the venom and the fumes of the burned oil) I found myself asking what sane individual would willingly put oil in their fuel tank. About then Junior (my paramedic, Junior by the way is his real given name, all 6' 7" and 270 lbs. of him) decided to try and take blood from me for the twentieth time as we were bumping along the dirt road up the mountain. Right then and there I decided that all fluids that owed their origins from somewhere within the bowels of a snake can well remain there. :-/

Best Regards,
Shipo

bowke28

marathon-ashland have taken responsibility for the rash of failing fuel pumps here in louisville. someone authorized more ethanol in the mixture, and was fired.

swschrad

and good for ashland for stepping up and admitting it.

gregoryc1

How much MM oil did the driver put into the tank of fuel???? The proper mixture is 4 ounces of MM oil to each 10 gallons of fuel. In a twenty gallon tank that would be 8 ounces of MM oil. What did the person do, dump a quart of oil,(32 ounces),in the fuel tank? If this is the case, the fault is with the driver, not the product!

shipo

I guess my feeble attempt at a humorous way of communicating my opinions on snake oil (aka. MMO and others) missed the mark by quite a wide margin. :-/ The "Oil-Burner" in question was in fact a Diesel Ambulance, and as such, the entire fuel tank was filled with an oily substance.

As for my personal opinion; anybody who actually buys snake oil is wasting their money. Period. To take it one step further, if they actually put that stuff in their cars they are running the risk of wasting even more money by causing early failures of engine and/or fuel system components which are already properly taken care of by modern engine oil and modern fuel.

Said another way, if I was looking to buy a used car from someone who proudly proclaimed that they used any byproduct of snake as part of their normal maintenance regimen, I would not walk away, I'd run, as fast as I could.

Best Regards,
Shipo

gregoryc1

Thank you for your most informative posting! Do you have any research to back up your opinion on this subject? Have you used any of these products in a vehicle? I have used this product in all my vehicles and I have never had a problem. I guess that makes me a "winner" on this issue!

shipo

I have used this product in all my vehicles and I have never had a problem. I guess that makes me a "winner" on this issue!

Hmmm, I guess that's a matter of conjecture. I've never used any of them, ever. The only fuel system failure I've ever had on any of my 18 cars (and well over a million miles of driving) was on my 1966 Plymouth Valiant with the bullet proof 225 Slant Six (I suspect that it was literally bullet proof as there was probably enough iron in the engine alone to build a Datsun B-210 or two of that era). Of course you need to factor in the conditions of the car when I bought it. It was 11 years old and had been sitting in a farm field for over two years without being touched. The person I bought if from said his mechanic told him that the engine was about to "blow", and so he parked it.

All I needed to do was to change the grime in the crankcase, put a battery in it, pump up a couple of tires and drive it away. Two weeks later the engine died just as I was pulling into my parking space. It turned out that a bunch of gas tank sludge had passed through the all but dissolved fuel filter and clogged the carburetor. I flushed the gas tank, rebuilt the carb, changed the filter, and drove it for two more years. The car had 106K miles on it when I bought it for $200, and 70K miles later, I sold it to a good friend for that same $200.

So, since I've never used Extract of Snake of any kind, in either the crankcase or the fuel system, and since I've never had any troubles, I guess that make me the "winner" since I'm out of pocket a total of $0.00. Yes, no?

Regarding research, no I don't have any at hand. That said; I rubbed elbows with enough of the Mercedes-Benz engineers when I worked for MB-USA both in New Jersey and in Stuttgart, and asked enough questions to know that the folks who do have said research believe stuff like MMO is Snake Oil and can actually be detrimental to the vehicle. Furthermore, I have the manuals of my last six cars (from four different manufacturers, only one of which was DC), and each of them explicitly states that no additives of any kind should ever be used in either the fuel system or the crankcase.

Then again, many folks don't believe that the engineers who design these things know what they are doing, hence in an era of 15K mile oil change intervals, they are still performing the same 3K (or less) oil changes that their grandfather used to use. Yeah, I know that's silly, never the less, folks still do it. Go figure. I guess that folks really WANT to believe that by doing things over and above what the manufacturer recommends, they are going to extend the life of their vehicle. I sort of liken that type of attitude to Religion, either you believe, or you're a heathen damned to regular early automotive mortality.

Best Regards,
Shipo (a damned heathen)

swschrad

old televangelist joke, if you didn't get it, you watch them too much.

LOL shipo, I'm of the old and cranky engineers' school. that is, both "shut up and do what I tell you, boy, it's good for you" and "change that oil early or you can scrape it outta there yourself, ya fool" are my auto-religion mantras.

no snake-(oil)-handling done here, and I change my fluids regularly and on the severe-use schedule, because winters are cold, summers are hot, and walking 10 miles to town with past heart issues is not my first choice of alternatives if the flivver conks out.

now, give me a light canoe and a nice day, and I'll take on 120 rods of portage, no questions asked. but that's fun, not work the two are different

Mr_Shiftright

The question to ask about "snake oil" if that's what you want to call it...let's say "additives".... is not whether they do any harm but whether scientific testing can demonstrate that they do any good.

That often requires expensive testing but that's what I usually need to convince me of any benefit.

gregoryc1

How about a difference in performance as measured by the sound of the engine, general operating characteristics, and the feel of the engine,(as observed by the operator of the vehicle), while accelerating and the overall smoothness of the engine. MM oil was used in the military aircraft fuel in WW2. Many drugs people take today work on some individuals, and don't work on others. Does that make them "snake oil"?

shipo

"How about a difference in performance as measured by the sound of the engine, general operating characteristics, and the feel of the engine,(as observed by the operator of the vehicle), while accelerating and the overall smoothness of the engine."

I have been hearing for years things like, "I just did (fill in your favorite placebo here), and suddenly my engine got smoother, and started returning 10 more miles per gallon and knocked 3 seconds of of my 0-60 time." Ummm, yeah right. In every case, including the bilge I've heard from MMO devotees, I classify such statements as "Wishful Thinking". Sorry dude, I'm not buying.

Regarding WWII and MMO being used in aircraft fuel. Ummm, where did you hear that? It just so happens that I'm a student of such engines, and in all of the hundreds of hours of research that I've done, I've never come across any evidence to support your statement. Furthermore, any analogy that you might want to draw between a WWII aircraft engine and a modern automobile engine is essentially irrelevant. Why? During the war, in an effort to improve aircraft power and range, the U.S. led the world in the development of high octane aircraft fuel, and fuels with ratings high as 130 were widely distributed into every theater that the U.S. and our allies fought in. Said fuel, the development of which was spearheaded by none other than Dr. Jimmy Doolittle (Doctorate in Aeronautical Science) and the NACA (forerunner of NASA), was a witches brew of many toxic elements, including lots of lead. This stuff was not the easiest on fuel systems, however, since the average life expectancy of a combat engine was only something like 50 hours, who cared?

If you were to put WWII vintage fuel and lubricating oil in a modern engine, it would probably quit running in a few thousand miles and would require significant remedial work to bring back to a running condition. In the end, even if it does turn out that MMO was used somewhere in a few aircraft during WWII, how does that relate to using it now in a modern car engine? IMHO, it was snake oil back then and it is snake oil now.

Best Regards,
Shipo

snarks

Engines are very uniform across the same make/model. The variables are not too differing from one to the other. With human being there are infinite variables between them and complex processes going on making a drug work or not work with them.

Your analogy is weak.

dustyk

Even after Maj. Jimmy Doolittle took his squadron of medium U.S. Army Air Corps bombers off of the Navy's aircraft carrier, the U.S.S. Hornet (or "Shangra-la" for those really, really old enough to remember!), U.S. production gasolines were far different than those in use today.

The chemical structure of gasoline has changed considerably since WWII. Even through the 1960s alkyl lead compounds were being used to increase octane, something that isn't found in today's fuels, and higher amounts of alcohol. Even iodine was a common component to reduce knock into the 1950s.

In the '40s the typical initial boiling point (IBP) and final boiling point (FBP) were between 30C and 220C at atmosphere. Today's oxygenated or reformulated gasolines have a much narrower boiling range, with the IBP increasing and the BP decreasing as the balance between saturated and unsaturated hydrocarbons has shifted dramatically in modern gasoline blends.

To say that the pump gas you buy today is different from what was available in 1945 would be a significant understatement.

Avaiation fuels are different and I believe still leaded. Excessive bromine is harmful to avaiation engines (especially older types) and use halogenated lead scavengers (ethylene dichoride?) and organoleads in the blend.

Whether Marvel Mystery Oil was ever used in any kind of military aircraft engine as a fuel additive is not known me. This product has been around for a long time, I believe going back to post-WWI era. My father had a can of it for years in the garage but I never knew what it was used for. Later, I worked in a garage that had a can of it on one of the shelves, but I never saw anyone ever use it.

Since the formulation is still a "mystery" it would be difficult to predict any positive chemical results in modern engines.

Now, what do Jimmy Doolittle & Billy Mitchell have in common? Maj. Doolittle flew a B-25 medium bomber off of the U.S.S. Hornet, a plane named after Billy Mitchell (B-25 Mitchell Bomber).

Regards,
Dusty