Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Fuel and Oil Additives

1363739414244

Comments

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America I70 & I75 Posts: 21,381
    From what I can tell from the eBay ads and comment pages on performance car-oriented forums, there are two versions. One for the tank and one for putting in with a direct pump device that replaces the fuel line to flow directly to the injectors. Some people are using the pump chemical into their tank.

    >I double-dosed it with a near empty fuel tank

    That should clean out anything that was ever going to come out! Putting cleaners into an almost empty tank before filling with the requisite volume of gasoline for the container size probably helps pickup/dissolve some things floating in the fuel or on the intake sock for the fuel pump which sometimes gets clogged and causes problems (on some H-bodies from GM at least).

    I saw BG being sold as low as $11 on eBay. At that price I would like to try it for one of my biannual cleanings. At $25 per container, I'd be better off just using only Shell, Mobile, Marathon, etc., instead of the grocery chain fuels (Kroger, which are the above-named fuels delivered in blind tankers with the standard additives).

    2015 Cruze 2LT, 2014 Malibu 2LT, 2008 Cobalt 2LT

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 57,815
    Diesel tanks are very rank by nature but the Benz has a very large fuel filter, and mine also had a water trap.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

    Share Your Vehicle Reviews Here

  • bassprobasspro Posts: 34
    Thanks for the input. I have done some research and part of what you had written was one of the reasons for the different vis and add pac. The time spent at high to max RPM in boating environments is one reason for the new classification.
    Also there is a different test that is needed to pass the new classification,in short it is for salt water moisture exposure that most automotive engines are not exposed to.
    Red line and RP did not have a oil with the NMMA FC-W classification and other than the simi syn.of quicksilver, Amsoil had the only fully syn. on the market. I had looked at a obscure company that had a claimed syn. oil that I could not get any info MSDS or spec's
    When I changed the oil filter I drained some oil until clean and ended up replacing 2QT. I will change over to the fully syn at 10 hrs. I do not want to run wide open throttle without Fully syn oil. I have gone from a 15w40 to the AMSOIL 10w40 for a little easier flow, cold.
    I have since 05, done the switch to syn. oil on three motors (non outboard) with no problems.
    Most piston rings are pre seated these days with a lapping process and piston bores are finished at 125 or better (still cross-hatched) unlike the good old days. The rest of the engine parts are different animals as far as break-in is concerned.
    Anyway, thanks again for your input and my motor is running good so far.
  • bassprobasspro Posts: 34
    Thanks Shipo, As far as I could find you are right. So the only other brand I could find with specs or MSDS etc,, with the NMMA-FC certification, was AMSOIL. I got it and will use it until or if I can find another easier to acquire product.
    I do not know, nor can I say that the AMSOIL is better than the Quicksilver at this point, because I have not looked at their spec sheets if the Quicksilver oil even has one I can access. I hope to do that soon. Basspro
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    What I find interesting regarding the Amsoil 10W-40 4-Stroke Marine oil is that it is the only oil that I've ever seen from Amsoil that is actually certified to a specific standard. Said another way, I find it curious that Amsoil has decided to certify this particular oil and yet do the soft shoe / song and dance routine when it comes to the specs that their other oils "meet". Case in point, they claim that their European spec oils are engineered to meet various manufacturer specifications, but they steadfastly refuse to submit those oils for certification testing.

    I've always felt that Amsoil operates with shady business ethics (the language regarding the application of their European oils is a prime example), and have (and will continue to) always avoid their products.

    Best regards,
    Shipo
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 19,653
    It seems every few years another "miracle" additive hits the market.

    There are usually sold "Amway" style and they always seem to go away quickly as people find our they do nothing.

    Replace worn out metal? Impossible.

    I have seen certain additives get rid of carbon that has caused a loss in compression. Rislone seems to do a good job at this.

    I've watched old times squirt water down carburators to accomplish the same thing.

    This is very risky but believe me, it works!
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 57,815
    I think what those additives or techniques do is mostly get rid of carbon and thus lower the compression from an artificially high level caused by the carbon (less volume in the cylinder due to carbon buildup). So you get rid of "pinging" and also "post-ignition" or engine run-on after shutting down.

    I suppose that excessive carbon could cause compression rings to stick although I've never actually seen this happen on a modern engine using modern fuels.

    The worst thing I've seen happen to modern engines is sludge, and this is best prevented by frequent oil changes or use of synthetic oils.

    Once your engine is severely 'sludged up" there is certainly nothing in a can that's going to clean it all out. You have to take it apart. Engine flushes can barely touch it, it's so tenacious in there.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

    Share Your Vehicle Reviews Here

  • bassprobasspro Posts: 34
    Hi Shipo, I do understand what you are saying and I too have never bought AMSOIL in the past because I have had alternatives in the automotive world.
    That being said I appreciate you info and if you happen to see or hear of a fully syn oil that meets the NMMA FC-W certification,I would be glad to look into it.
    I just went to the different out board motor sites,and goggled marine oil a few different ways and then went to E-Bay and Yahoo to shop around. I found one other brand I had never heard of and goggled it a got a marine center up on the East coast. I assumed they wear pouring up their own concoction and got out of there.
    I will write RP and Redline along with Lucas to see what they have in the pipeline and I will switch when something full syn. comes out.
    At ten hrs. I will also install an oil bypass system and start oil analysis at 50 and 100 hrs. etc... to get proper oil change intervals no matter what full syn oil I use.
    I do appreciate your incite, and hope if you see spec sheets on other full syn. products for marine service,that you or anyone else who reads this site would forward it to me.
    I am like most here and want the least wear, most dependability I can get from any motor I use. Oil is one of the main components and I plan to keep the boat for twenty plus years,if I live that long. Basspro
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    I found this list of certified NMMA FC-W oils:
    http://www.nmma.org/certification/programs/oils/registeredoil.asp?y=FC-W2008

    The list contains many oils, some of which may be synthetic, some are most likely not. The only oil brand that I'm really familiar with is Motul, and I have a great appreciation for their products (which as I understand it, are primarily Group IV synthetics). That said, I'm not sure of Motul is available in North America.

    Best regards,
    Shipo
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 19,653
    Have you ever taken apart a sludged up engine? What a MESS!

    When I was a kid working in a gas station we had a local Japanese gardner who never had time to bring his truck in for an oil change..." Too busy"!

    But every time he needed gas, it seemed we would have to add a quart of oil. At least once a week, along with the oil, he would have us add a can of STP.

    Oh, and he insisted we use one of the "Penn" oils that used to gum up engines.

    It was an old Chevy with a 235 six and one day it finally died.

    I got the job of getting his old engine ready for a local Machine Shop to overhaul.

    I had to beat the valve cover off with a hammer and you can't believe what was underneath it!
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    I've opened up way too many engines that used STP and Pennsylvania Grade Crude (i.e. Quaker State, Pennzoil, and Wolf's Head), and each and every time I did, that "patented" smell would nearly make me puke. The flip side is opening up an engine run on something like Valvoline or Havoline (for the conventionals) or pretty much any synthetic, and you usually find a nice clean engine and just that good old fashioned grease smell. :)

    Just before I stopped wrenching for a living, one guy brought me an engine that had been abused with STP and Quaker State and I asked him to take it to someone else.

    Best regards,
    Shipo
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 57,815
    When I was working on cars at a friend's shop, I also refused to deal with an engine that was doped with STP. I told them to have it all dunked chemically before I touched it...or I told them I'd just open the engine and shake all the parts into the trash can and start from scratch.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

    Share Your Vehicle Reviews Here

  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 19,653
    Valvoline used to yield the same results as the Penn brands.

    Havoline was the best! You take apart a 100,000 miles engine and with a shop rag, wipe out the oil pan!

    STP was the WORST stuff yet there was a time it was quite popular.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    Interesting, back in the 1970s when I was wrenching I never once saw a sludged Valvoline motor (errr, at least one that had oil that had been changed at reasonable intervals). I agree though, back then the Havoline was the best of the mineral oils. :)

    Best regards,
    Shipo
  • bassprobasspro Posts: 34
    Hi all, I just read a article in "Lubes and Greases" where RP got their respective slick words in the ringer. They(RP) have agreed to back off on how great the oil is. I have been using the stuff for years and all my oil analysis say my engines like it too.
    I have always found it interesting that oil company's cannot help slicking it up in their ads and I guess we ask for it, by increasing their sales when they do it.
    I assume that BP filed the law suit because PR must be getting thir sales up enough to have an impact on some of the other big guys.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,798
    One oil engineer I've talked to says RP's pretty decent, as did a Rally group here in Portland.

    But I'm not using synthetics. Stuff I use helps oil resist high temperatures and slows Oxidation; company's light on testimonials and heavy on what appears to be solid engineering data (as chem tech, I did some of the high temperature tests they describe).
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,798
    These folks introduced in 2/09 a zinc-replacement oil additive called ZINC.

    It claims it's a polymer product that reduces engine friction, but does not add zinc or phosphorus to the oil (the latter 2 can apparently poison cat converters).

    Comments?

    FYI, their other products had a look and "viscosity feel" similar to STP.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    Why on Earth would someone consider using a product such as this when engines will already outlast the rest of the vehicle with just regular maintenance?
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 57,815
    A question I ask myself frequently. It's really the *rest* of your car, not the engine, that needs help getting to old age.

    I guess the reason is that no one has invented an expensive front suspension & brake additive? How about a pill that extends the life of your electric windows?

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

    Share Your Vehicle Reviews Here

  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,798
    The only product I would (and do) use is one that helps prevent oil breakdown/coking at high temperatures (my motor has a turbo).
    That product received actual testing, not glorified worthless "testimonials".

    For sure, the FTC tested many additives and found them worthless.

    http://www.hotrod.com/pitstop/hrdp_0702_pitstop_zinc_oil_additive/index.html

    describes how zinc protects engines.
    This has nothing to do with hy-per lube's additive, btw, because hy-per lube Zinc has no zinc. ;)

    http://skepdic.com/slick50.html

    explains what's in many of the additives, and how ineffective it is.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    What you're missing in all of this is that Zinc is poisonous to your catalytic converter and that new oils are formulated to provide the same protection without zinc. Said another way, there's no way I'd use this product in my engines.

    As for a product that prevents oil breakdown / coking at high temperatures, to say that I'm skeptical is a gross understatement. From my perspective after owning a number of turbocharged engines, use the manufacturer recommended oil with no additives (I suspect that your Owner's Manual recommends against additives) and you should be good to go.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,798
    repeating part of my previous post:

    It claims it's a polymer product that reduces engine friction, but does not add zinc or phosphorus to the oil (the latter 2 can apparently poison cat converters).


    My comment did say zinc and phosphorus can poison cat converters, and that the additive does not have zinc.
    Whether that additive is of any real use, I cannot say. They offer some rudimentary test data, but nowhere as thorough as that presented by the stuff I actually use.

    And yes, I agree that following manufacturer recommendations is very important.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    "Whether that additive is of any real use, I cannot say. They offer some rudimentary test data, but nowhere as thorough as that presented by the stuff I actually use.

    And yes, I agree that following manufacturer recommendations is very important."


    If you agree with following the manufacturer recommendations they why do you use an additive? :confuse:
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,798
    ...because a number of conversations with the engineer who developed the product (his other products work well and are used by the US Military, etc), and reviewing the extensive engineering presentations, suggested his product was well tested and does what it claims (improve oil's resistance to oxidation/heat, helped reduce engine friction, helped protect seals).

    As synthetic's not recommended for my engine, and would be very expensive to use on the recommended schedule, the additive seemed the best cost effective "extra insurance" for turbo bearing failure.

    Here's a posting of the engineer on the superclub.org forum (and note: the engineer said the product, though originally designed for aircraft engines, offers similar benefits for auto engines) :

    I was very pleased by the tone of the article (Light Plane Maintenance) and I feel he got it right with the corrosion prevention aspect. This was by far the top priority followed by deposit control, wear protection and seal conditioning.

    Ed
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    I have a number of problems with the things you just wrote...

    A conversation with an engineer is in no way a proof that his product does anything even remotely resembling the claims for said product, regardless of whether we're talking about aircraft engines (which I am more than a bit familiar with as well) or for cars.

    Synthetic oil NOT being recommended for your engine? I'm not buying that either. Just because a manufacturer allows you to run conventional oil in your turbocharged engine (dumb move in my opinion) in no way means that synthetic oil isn't recommended for use.

    Regarding working __fine__ in automotive engines, ummm, you do realize that oil for IC aircraft engines needs to fulfil a very different set of criteria than does an oil for a modern automobile engine, not the least of which is to hold tetraethyl lead (TEL) in suspension. Even if this stuff does work (something I highly doubt) in aircraft engines, I'm even more doubtful that it will work properly in an automobile engine, turbocharged or otherwise.

    Edit:

    Is this the stuff you're talking about? http://www.aslcamguard.com/

    If so, then it seems highly improbable that it has any of the properties that you've ascribed to it.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,798
    http://www.avweb.com/news/maint/oil_myths_debunked_197096-1.html

    explains the chemists' rational for the product. That info is presented at the Camguard site in various ways.

    Yes, aircraft engines are different - I knew that when researching the product.
    But:
    The chemist told me several times that despite differences between aircraft and automotive oils (both of which he has formulated - he was a petroleum research chemist for Exxon), his product is beneficial for the reasons explained on the Camguard website, for both forms of engines, and especially turbos.

    However, your comment inspired me to recheck the Subaru info I'd received.
    I was partially incorrect :blush: (advice I got from my dealer, who is a top tier Subaru service center, warned me of possible seal leakage if switching to synthetic - that info clouded the info Subaru had sent me).

    This was Subaru's actual response.
    Synthetic engine oils can be used in our engines if the user follows the engine oil recommendations prescribed in the Owner's Manual. Subaru has not tested the compatibility of all synthetic oils with engine seals, but the petroleum industry does adhere to standards for the refining process which meet Subaru requirements. Subaru does not guarantee the performance of any brand of any engine oil.

    They added this for good measure (the CAPS are theirs, not mine :blush: ):
    Engine Oil Guidelines: - only use engine oil that meets or exceeds the API classification designated in the Owner's Manual for the vehicle - only use engine oil that meets the VISCOSITY requirements for the ambient temperatures under which the vehicle will be operated as outlined in the Owner's Manual - THE ENGINE OIL MUST BE CHANGED AT THE INTERVALS SPECIFIED IN THE WARRANTY AND MAINTENANCE BOOKLET FOR THE VEHICLE. SOME SYNTHETIC OIL REFINERS RECOMMEND EXTENDED OIL CHANGE INTERVALS. SUBARU DOES NOT RECOMMEND ANY DEVIATION FROM THE SPECIFIED INTERVALS IN THE OWNER'S MANUAL.

    And BTW, nowhere in Subaru literature or service info does it say that Synthetic oil should be used with a turbo.

    My apologies for attempting to explain this additive's background.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 57,815
    I think the biggest "problem" if you will about all this is that it seems to be the answer to a question no one is asking, or rather the solution to a problem no one is having. Modern turbos rarely fail or coke up anymore. All that was worked out a decade ago. If you opened up a turbo rebuilding shop these days you'd starve, unless you did modification/speed work.

    This sounds analogous to when you had to buy lead additive to protect valves in engines using unleaded gas. Nowadays you don't have to do that anymore, due to advances in valve metallurgy.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

    Share Your Vehicle Reviews Here

  • roland3roland3 Posts: 431
    ... I agree about the modern turbos. I don't know that zinc (or derivatives) ever helped shaft problems. The main problem, as far as I know, was the removal of the zinc compound for sensor or cat problems. This was a big problem for flat tappet cams; especially in racing; and extremely so in the NASCAR big boys that still are required to run flat tappet cams. This led to a bonanza for Brad Penn and even Joe Gibbs and others started selling huge amounts of racing, zinc laden oil. There were of course many other attempts to add zinc all the way to home brew and even some guys adding heavy gear oil to get the precious boundary layer back.
    ..
    ... It appears that most all the majors (oil giants) in the last six months have some new additive that is a replacement for or a safe (for the tailpipe) compound of the zinc. Some of this is quite expensive, some might not be so well advertised. And I have not seen any mention of turbo shafts. These partial truths and myths usually get blown out of proportion, and all it seems to take is a little true publicity to start the snow-ball down hill. Now, with all that, I think the best turbo shaft protection, is a quality full synthetic, because of it's higher heat capabilities. My stuff is years old, original, and way out of warranty.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,798
    The problem's synthetics vary widely in corrosion protection and resistance to heat. Some are contaminated very quickly and will happily circulate hydrochloric and nitric acid through the engine for their change interval.

    Very few oil additives make any claims of neutralizing acids, preventing corrosion/sludge, or adding heat resistance. They focus on wear and performance.

    Granted, aircraft engines pollute their oil much faster than auto engines, because of blowby and higher temperature differentials. But it happens with cars too.

    There have been TSB's regarding Subaru turbos getting cooked because banjo bolt filters get plugged. Subaru also does not cover the turbo with extended warranty. Hence the interest in the best oil protection possible.

    As for Camguard, its engineer / maker will be posting an auto version website very soon. He told me it will offer explanations why current version works for autos, and how new version is improved.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 57,815
    Sounds like Camguard is for engines that sit a long time without use, such as aircraft and marine. Seems like a waste of money for a modern car in daily use. $25 a PINT!!!

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

    Share Your Vehicle Reviews Here

Sign In or Register to comment.