And no, I'm not "misinformed", I just don't believe that load of crap until a major company signs on to endorse it. It's my money, so I'll decide when I'm informed or misinformed, by the way.
swschard can defend himself, but I rely heavily on him for information, and I'm an automotive engineer - he has info that boggles my mind. He's not "misinformed" either, I don't think.
Being a consumer, and a court-appointed automotive expert, I have plenty of contact with people who come to me for advice - I have no reason to believe this hogwash and definitely have no reason to recommend the product.
application instructions (new oil filter, add auto-rx, drive x miles, varying from 750-2000 miles dependent on engine and fuel type, do an oil change and filter replacement) and language of "liquifying deposits" and using the existing oil as a carrier of this heavier product indicate this is meant to be a detergent product.
under benefits, auto-rx claims to renew seals and reduces wear. generally, "renew seals" products are a light petroleum that irritates and expands rubber, as a solvent for that rubber would.
MSDS info (and this section is regulated by OSHA guidelines in federal law) says the product is a modified additive, using "Fatty Acid Esters CAS #68440-09-5", which comes up under shelldubai.com as part of the product "Ensis RX", a solvent-based rust preventative. the specific ingredient name of CAS "68440-09-5" is... drumroll please... oxidized wax. well, I suppose allowing wax to leak through a seal will slow the flow a bit, until it warms up past the listed temp of 410 degrees Centigrade, at which time the seal is no longer rejuvenated.
in other words, add some 1960's paraffined motor oil to your crankcase and wonders occur. same stuff in an oil carrier.
somehow I'm even less thrilled about the idea of adding this stuff than I was before I did a couple minutes of research on the web. the only other google hits on the CAS # were to auto-rx, but MSDS CAS numbers are registered with the government to uniquely identify products for hazmat and OSHA purposes.
classic ad-in-the-catalog fare from the old days of JC Whitney.
//edit// just occurred to me why I thought to chase the CAS number immediately... another common fatty-acid ester is soap.
My animosity stems from the fact that I enjoy Edmunds for automotive type discussion, not to be sold the latest "miracle cure" that rivals the junk that Pep Boys peddles.
I guess our guy failed to realize that people with some level of education might actually research this beeswax he's calling "oil additive".
but it's not relevant to a modern high-temperature, high-compression engine on first glance. they used to love high-paraffin base stocks for motor oil, bragged it up on the front of the can, "Paraffin Motor Oil." Vaseline and heavy oilstock that won't drop out of bearings are commonly used in engine rebuilding so you don't run on dry bearing surfaces the first time you fire it up... and so you don't score the death out of those new bearings turning the crank over by hand installing things.
but at a redline of 5000 or 7000 out of the driveway on a cold morning, around one corner and onto the Interstate ramp... no, I don't think so, not for this ol' boy. give me the modern SAE-rated oil that matches the engine maker's standards.
now I know where the deposits went, though... stuck to a dead-end passage someplace in the engine block, hung up on a little wax slime. someday they'll be back.
I need a lot of convincing to decide that cleaning my wax buffing cloths in solvent, and pouring that in my $5000 engine, is going to make it outlast me.
There are a ton of people that swear by RX. Interesting comments from the previous posters. Anyway, a ton of people do swear by it some I have faith in. I tried the Schaeffers Neutra as an oil additive cleaner and (IMO) it did do the job as adverstised. However, after all is said and done one should never use an additive (per RX spec sheet it is a modified engine oil additive)of any kind (coolant, oil etc) unless it is a last resort. If it ain't broke don't fix it (use additives only as a last resort) and too many people are searching for the perfect additive and oil when in the long run it really doesn't make a hill of beans difference in how long you keep a car. The body or transmission or the nickle and dime syndrome usually will get you before the engine dies from normal maintenance!
I've ever used was radiator "stop leak" on a 150,000-mile beater, that I was replacing the radiator on anyway; and "smoke be gone" oil treatment to get a vehicle through smog. I changed the oil immediately afterwards.
I'd never even consider using additives on a vehicle with normal miles and performance.
You guys seem to get a kick out of bashing Auto-RX. All I read here are a few scientific buzzwords and a hastily drawn conclusion. Why do you think the folks over at Bob's Oil board are raving about it? That place is full of chemists, engineers, tribologists and other scientific folks. They looked at the chemistry and examined the real-world feedback and concluded that the product was for real. It even has a patent confirming all of its claims. Give credit where credit is due.
but I don't come here to be sold something - that's as cheesy as telemarketers calling me during supper.
You can analyze and twist words all you want - I work in the legal system and I see dramatic issues swept under the rug and tiny problems made into life-threatening incidents - save the chastising - if I wanted to read advertising, I'd buy a newspaper and go to the classified section.
These biochemists have nothing to do with my opinion and the long-standing fact (and consensus from most in the automotive service industry) that putting anything other than clean oil in your engine is pretty stupid.
it's no secret, chase slashdot.org sometime, that there are a ton of ill-advised patent applications being granted because the patent examiners are overloaded. for instance, the one-click purchase patent by Amazon, which is plain old using a browser cookie as a database key... old hat 8 years before they wrote it up and submitted it. there are lots of software patents that are granted because there are no programmers current in the state of the art at the patent office.
I had a grandfather who got a patent on the safety pin... the fiftieth iteration of the safety pin... because his clasp had a different design... in the early 1900s. so this has been around a long time. I could patent water, if only I submitted a design patent application on the appearance of the back label of its bottle, when looked at from the front, and patented the design and its parts as a whole.
the only thing that is guaranteed to not slip through the cracks is any permutation on perpetual motion, because if they get any training at all, they get the laws of thermodynamics.
BTW, if you want to make extra money quick... it's methylene blue, a dye with mild antibacterial properties and in all the pharmacopeias. dazzle up some old early Latinate name for it and submit your papers today.
whatever you want and call it a miracle cure, and put it on the shelf at Pep Boys or Autozone, it'll sell like hotcakes to the guys with overused beaters who never took the time to maintain their rides and are too cheap to buy another car.
subject to repeatability when tested by independent scientists and peer review according to the scientific method. you will need to make clear what your idea of a control experiment is, why that is relevant, and show results that are more significant than the rounding errors. don't need no more "voodoo science" in my life.
claims that rely on word of mouth only and "If I tell you, I have to kill you" types of arguments flat out belong with "hey, I got a hemi now, too."
put it on the line and show me the pink slip. over and over again, lots of labs, from a standardized published experiment, and I will believe in the standardized results against a valid control.
this is not a diatribe against product X or reporter Y, it's fed-up'ness with pseudologic and anti-research allegedly supporting unproven claims that conflict with the expectations of the materials used in a product. computers are benchmarked with a standard test suite, and horsepower is measured multiple times on known dynamometers, before specs are published on items from Xeons to Neons. it is not unfair to expect this month's miracle to prove it up, I don't think, before I consider it.
treatment plan I heard about. I'm not a smoker, never have been, but both my parents chain smoked since long before I was born. One claim in this commercial was a lady saying "I've smoked for 24 years - I quit in just three days with (XYZ product)".
There is NO freakin' way.
The problem is that as long as we have gullible morons who run out and buy diet pills by the truckload because they're convinced they can still have their pizza and beer, not exercise, and still lose 3 pants sizes in a week; people who'll buy 6 gallons of STP Gas Treatment to make up for 150,000 miles of neglect; and my total favorite, the ability to wax your car with a spray bottle, we'll have these goofy products and wild claims.
have a heart attack today, and be on your back for 7 days in the hospital!
worked for me, it can work for you, too! call 1-800-555-1212 today, do it now! all insurance accepted! 800-555-1212, ask for mercy! get scared NOW! 800-555-1212!!!
It kills me that every time I've taken the PT into the dealer, they want to do an oil change and try to sell me on their BG Engine Flush for an extra $29.95.
It's got 5,000 miles, for goodness sakes. I can't believe dealers are hooked up with this, except for having plausible deniability when the chunks that were broken loose from an older motor start causing trouble.
I guess, though, the cars that it won't hurt, don't need it and the cars that do need something like that don't end up at a dealer for oil changes.....I'm still against the oil flush thing, because it's like the hair in the sink drain after you shave - where do all those shavings and junk go if they don't come out with the old oil? Back through your motor!!
everybody's department has to generate another 12 percent, whatever this quarter's impossible profit number is, or the heads roll. one of these machines costs less than a real butch job by a tech, so they can get 'em in on a promise, I suspect. but if you depend on rain-X and BG flushes and transaxle fluid changes to make 12 percent more money each month for three months, you are living under a different color sky than I see.
I had grey in my transfer case last month, so I had 'em change the fluid. it's documented. any more, and they get to put one in on extended warranty. that kind of logic I can live with.
my making their boat payments just because ol' Bill down the road with his 75 Mark didn't come in this month, I don't buy into that logic at all.
Although I concur with your comments as quoted next " subject to repeatability when tested by independent scientists and peer review according to the scientific method. you will need to make clear what your idea of a control experiment is, why that is relevant, and show results that are more significant than the rounding errors. don't need no more "voodoo science" in my life."
Problem is, I guarantee that the oil you now have in your engines does not have the scrutiny that you just stated was required of additives. Did you look at all the data and lab reports before placing that Wal MArt oil in your engine (not that you use that brand) or that Fram filter. Probably not. As we know, the API doughnut is pretty worthless if you relied on that as a symbol of quality. Did you investigate the API certification process to assure that your oil was really top notch, and actually ask for the API results of their test on that oil before using it? probably not.
Look, I tried RX and (and I love to bash it as well as the next guy) it did not work for me and I just wish the developer would be honest and say that it doesn't work in every applicatiuon, which he will not do, however, IMO it is different then the snake oils sold over the counter etc. I agree, don't use it unless a last resort. It sure would be nice to have real world tests on real world cars on oils and filters. Will we ever get it, no, too costly and too much time to perform.
I have no problem bashing RX,however to my knowledge there are no horror stories of engines failing due to teflon particles (wax in RX's case) plugging up the oil screen etc. At least I have not seen any. It does not always work but it does not cause damage either. Again, like all additives, only a last resort and should not be used all the time or often IMHO!
What joe1000 calls moderate knowledge may be more than that in zeuslewis's mind, and I quote (from other posts): "benefiting from the finest automotive minds of our times"..."doing endless research"..."enthusiast" etc etc.
However, zeuslewis does provide useful information from time to time, although usually in a needlessly abrasive manner. I will take good information over poor manners any day, and while I would have used more polite terms than his postings here ( I have been told this difference is cultural), I would basically agree with what he has said here. Auto-Rx seems to be yet another variation of snake oil.
Not sure how well it works, but many of the guys over at Bob's seem convinced that there are some worthwhile qualities; and those dudes really do get "over-my-head" technical.
I believe it's safe to say that there's "crud" build up in most engines, and the debate is whether an effective cleaning agent has been created to safely dissolve and remove these deposits. Rx may be that product, but I've not seen any definitive proof to support or deride their claims.
All I know is that my last car (96 Altima) had 170K miles on it when I sold it, and I always used GTX (differing viscosities from 5w30 to 15w50)with ODI's of 3K to 8K, and the engine NEVER gave me any problems. Wait, had a small oil leak, one drop per day on the garage floor. And it survived without any sort of flushes.
With the increase in technology, both in my new car engine and current oil formulation, why would I need a flush today, when my old car did so well without it?
Snake oil? I wouldn't be so extreme. Unproven? In my mind, most certainly.
Heading over to Bob's to do a little more reading......
I again apologize if I was abrasive towards you in the past - it was clearly a misunderstanding on my part.
joe1000 - no, a Jiffy Lube tech couldn't qualify to testify in court as an automotive expert. You really shouldn't spout off about something you know nothing about.
I get totally run through the ringer on qualification, even after 83 court apprearances and involvement in over 2,300 cases. With modesty, my qualifications don't always "blow away" the judge, because they're there to be skeptical.
Anyone without quite a few years of experience in both mechanical fields and appraisals would never step foot inside a court room, unless he was charged with something.
zueslewis: Thank you, and no hard feelings. I enjoy your posts, just not being your target!
chinee: I will accept that to call it snake oil would be extreme, but why go after something unproven when there is no need?
I would say that a good oil filter and regular 3k changes on conventional oil or 5K on synthetic would suffice to prevent any lubrication related problems for just about anybody.
If one accepts this, there should be no scientific reason to spend yet more money on oil flushes, slick 50, or NASA-approved super-duper been-to-the-moon oil, unless one wishes to do so as an exercise of free will, which also includes the right to be stupid or wise by a definition of one's choosing.
with the initiation of the AutoRX subject was that it was just like a full-blown advertisement. Here on Edmunds, we're pretty safe from the advertising barrage we get hit with in computer pop-ups, radio ads and telemarketer calls.
I have someone jump in and claim that this product was the new cure-all for our automotive ills was annoying, at the least.
Being directly involved, chest-deep in many areas of the car business at once, including the legal side, I get over-loaded with junk from manufacturers claiming that I should forget everything else on the market, throwing away all that was said before, because THEIR product is the "chosen one", the revolutionary new fix to my car's problems.
It disheartens me because I know there'll be thousands of people who take a quick glance at a magazine or internet ad about this stuff and file off like lemmings to Pep Boys to buy a case.
As a consumer advocate, I see that as a real shame.
with their warranties. warranty isn't free. they test to the API standards which they helped set. that is repeatable and peer-reviewed... AFAIK, API publications aren't in my local library, but not all the physics journals are, either. warranty ain't free, in case you haven't priced an extended warranty, and licenseable specs with extensive testing to the tune of millions of dollars a year and peer review make API the closest thing to a recommendation you can define.
"satisfaction or money refunded" is not anywhere near the same thing. it doesn't replace my $5000 engine, just the $38 for the OffalSlop (tm) I bought.
it's hard to bring order to a camp meeting. I prefer to set examples with my 167,000, 142,000, 120,000 miles-then-traded-tight engines on frequent changes of oil and filter with recommended maintenance than to participate in unrefereed non-controlled experiments.
freedom of religion, folks, enjoy yours. I do enjoy mine.
"these two clowns have convinced me that moderate knowledge is an arrogant thing!
I've never seen two individuals stand up on a soapbox more than zeuslewis and swschrad!"
I've always been told, by my dad, now 89, that "you've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything".
If people want to follow the herd of lemmings out to waste $10-50 a bottle on unproven stuff to pour into their engine, they should have at it. I'm just not one to follow the herd.
When Ford, Honda, Toyota, etc (any of the majors) stands up and says "AutoRX is good stuff, we recommend using it", then I'll be first in line at Pep Boys.
...I am proud to be counted alongside the two "clowns" as far as opinions expressed in this forum are concerned regarding Auto-Rx and other snake oils. We may have differences in other fora, but certainly not here.
Isn't freedom a wonderful thing!
Thus, I and everybody else has the the right to differ, and spend one's own money any way deemed fit, including peeing it down the drain or into the engine as a miraculous cure for shoddy maintenance or malfunction or just ripe old age wear and tear.
Just don't try to mislead people, that is all I request.
I'm going to have to do a couple of deletions in the thread here but not too much.
post 52 will be deleting for soliciting a product and product website which is a clear violation of the user agreement and post 75 will be deleted for the "clown" remark, which crosses the line from argument to personal attack, also a clear violation.
Please continue your discussion but remember that no solicitation of AutoRx will be permitted by anyone with a financial interest in this product.
And please continue to follow the "rules of engagement" which, by and large, you have all done quite well in a "hot" spot.
I guess I mentioned to you all some time ago that in my younger days, when dinosaurs ruled the earth, my friends had a wrecking yard and we would drain all the oil out of various engines, lay a cinder block on the gas pedals, and run for the hills (ah, the follies of youth).
But I do remember that even old 50s and 60s engines would run WOT with no oil for up to 11 minutes before seizing. They did make some very bad noises prior to that, however. Still it does sort of show what even the smallest amounts of oil in the sloppiest of engines can accomplish.
Given that modern engines routinely run up to 175K with just the most basic of care, one does have to wonder what some people are after with "improvements" to the oil.
My two cents is that there may indeed be some valid circumstances for an oil flush, but personally I cannot see why this should be a part of routine maintenance that is done on a regular basis.
down and rebuild an engine, then yes, I'd use a flush. The damage to bearings and things wouldn't matter, because I would be replacing the bearings.
Same for all the gunk that would block the oil pump screen - it wouldn't matter, because I was tearing it down.
On an engine that you're keeping "as is", not pulling the pan, etc, I can't see it - it's like putting mud and oil in with a load of wash and expecting your clothes to come out clean.
I, too, did the brick on the gas pedal, but it was a "practical joke". The popular guy from school didn't think it was very funny.
on automotive matters from someone who doesn't know the difference between a "patent" and a "patient", not to mention the misunderstanding of the patent system and not being able to spell.
Patenting an idea is easy. Period.
In my position, I am asked for advice at least 50 times a day. My endorsement of a product means that I'm putting my word on the product to ensure people that it works.
The parafin used in AutoRX WILL slow down oil leaks because it is WAX!! Wax is not something I want in my engine and is not something I'd recommend to folks.
"There are a couple of you that must really like yourself's and think you know it all about everything from diet pills to stop smoking products, what do you work for GoodHousing Keeping or what, you seem to even be knocking STP. The king would not appreciate that."
Richard Petty, while he deserves mucho respect, is simply a paid endorser for a product belonging to a company that sponsored his race team for years. His nearly life-long contract requires his kind, positive words. I can bet a stack on hunnerts that he doesn't pour that crap into the tank of his personal ride.
My response to those goofy diet pill and smoking ads was just that - a response. I think they're really stupid to pawn these products and the folks who buy these products are pretty gullible.
By the way, my job title is "consumer fraud investigator", so I take these issues with a little more zeal and "consumer protectiveness" than most folks.
and if there is prior art, you can patent improvements on a process. design patents are a dime a dozen. all you have to do is keep pushing the paper and keep the lawyers fed, it takes a year to two years with no prior art. a diligent and thorough pre-search of the files (public patent files are pretty outdated as well) and explainations on why prior claims don't apply should speed up the application.
it's a free country, buy anything you want. nobody has put mechanic in a can yet, other than at breaks (ha, ha). claims to the contrary need to prove it by research to get me interested.
...spout the same kind of gushing testimonials I see on TV, and clearly have an ulterior motive in misleading anybody who is gullible enough to believe them, whether it is diet pills or snake oil or kitchen knives.
It is a pity that they try from time to time to use a useful forum as Edmunds to peddle their trash.
Let's take a few examples from a recent post:
"I can not believe what I have been reading the last 2 days on the board."
What part of the vocabulary did you not understand?
"I am a user of Auto-rx and you guys don't have a clue as to what you are talking about. "
Yes, we do. Auto-RX is yet another variation on snake oil.
"You checked out the MDS's and did you see that they got a patient on the product."
I second zeus's comments on this. There is a clear difference between patient and patent. Also it is MSDS, not MDS's. MSDS= Material Safety Data Sheet.
"I don't know if you realize it or not (swschrad and a couple of you others) but it is not that easy to get a patient. I have a nephew that works for the patient office he said they have to go through alot of testing and research before they give them a number, we are talking month and years of research."
Well, I have patented tomographic reconstruction algorithms in image data analysis, so I have some idea about patents, perhaps better than your nephew. I do not want to boast of my academic qualifications but they include three graduate degrees including medicine, a Master's and a PhD from internationally renowed institutions. And I know something about cars too, more than quite a few people, but less than true masters, hence my ongoing efforts at learning here at Edmunds.
"You guys must get a life, if you have never used the product you have no right to say anything. "
I have a very good life thank you, as I am sure zeuslewis and swshcrad do too. I thought freedom of expression is a very american virtue. And further, you don't have to try out a potion claiming to be the elixir of eternal youth for humans, or car engines to know that it will not work. If you have to try out everything yourself, well then you will also never learn from knowledge of other. To paraphrase Newton, if we see further than others, it is because we stand on the shoulders of giants who have gone before us.
"I have used the product and it has done just what the web site stated."
Well good for you. May be it would have stopped anyway by the accumulation of gunk. Maybe it was leaking due to an overfill, and stopped when the level dropped. Have you established a cause and effect relationship, and if so, how?
"I had a seal leak and you know what it leaks no more."
Hallelujah!!!
"I ahve friends that use it have never had a problem with the product."
Well, guess what: if they had not used the product, they wouldn't have had a problem either. And they would have a few more dollars in their pockets.
"When I changed my oil, the only change to the oil was that it was a lot blacker for the next few oil changes and the oil did not break down."
How did you establish the fact that the oil did not break down? And that this additional stability was due to the miraculous AutoRx? And that this additional stability of oil would lead to a tangible benefit such as increased service life or better fuel economy or something else?
"There are a couple of you that must really like yourself's and think you know it all about everything from diet pills to stop smoking products, what do you work for GoodHousing Keeping or what, you seem to even be knocking STP."
No, we just are able to think clearly and logically, and have a sound understanding of what we are talking about.
"The king would not appreciate that."
So? Even the bloody Emperor himself has to make sense as far as I am concerned.
"come on guys get a grip and come down off your soap box"
...may be you would be better off with an intravenous drip of Auto-Rx to keep everything lubricated and sludge free for the next three year or 36 thousand miles, whichever comes first. After all, the next door neighbour of my nephew's second girlfriend gave it to his dog via an enema right after an ice cream truck ran over him, and that puppy is still going strong. Therefore this stuff works!
(No seriously, please take care of your health above all.)
I have no patients (pun intended) and don't ever plan on getting any.
Now, as for patents, you would be surprised at the junk they will give patents for. If you have the money and can show it is original, they will issue a patent. The product DOES NOT have to actually work, just be original.
Additives, no matter what they are, are just that. There is no substitute for regular maintenance. I've made my comments on engine flushes and my experience with having to clean up the messes some of them make. Any parafin base additive, in my opinion, is not something I would ever put in my vehicles.
No one here actually uses "oil flush" do they? I've lost track, what with all the sputter and fumes... My unsolicited opinion is that a good putty knife is the best engine cleaning tool in the roller cabinet. (:o]
a steel putty knife? oh, scratch my guides! plastic rules anyplace tolerances count, and a hammered-out chunk of flexible copper pipe as a scraper where they do.
"No one here actually uses "oil flush" do they? " I don't know about here, but:
... that I have seen all kinds of potions and flushes being used is in the parking lot of my local Walmart.
People will buy the latest flush, stopleak or whatever, and walk out to their car, usually a beater that has seen better days, or a clearly malfunctioning car (such as smoking, drips of oil or coolant, or horrible sounds), dump it into the appropriate orifice, throw the container underneath the car and drive merrily away, secure in the knowledge that they have taken good care of their car, avoiding those "sharks" known as properly trained and equipped mechanics who might fix their car properly.
By the time one can make a case for using a flush, usually the engine is so far gone that it can be tried only as a last desperate sort of measure.
If one starts off on the right foot, and performs regular oil and filter changes, there is probably never any benefit in using a flush during the useful life of any modern automotive engine.
No, wait, using these flushes does benefit somebody else's pockets, and thus the overall economy I guess.
To the host: Points well made and taken on board.
To zeuslewis: Thank you, and I look forward to continue to learn from you, while avoiding any fireworks! I am making a conscious effort to make my language more "american" and thus less misunderstood. I will appreciate any feedback.
To 0patience: Nice website you have there buddy. You are a good man, and I mean this in the best possible way. I hope you will let bygones be bygones.
It's hard to tell on the internet who people are and why they do things, but your posts seem to add confusion where none existed before. The last thing this fine board needs is yet another Auto-RX "expert". Your posts above in which you assemble prior threads will surely provide inaccurate information overload for someone just wanting a simple straightforward answer.
who was advertising on Edmunds?? Before you criticize us on our posting formats, read the users agreement.
The three primary oponents to your theory are scshwrad (engineer), vcheng (multiple masters plus a PhD) and me (masters on automotive engineer plus 2 bachelors degrees, 23 years of racing cars, automotive expert for a lawfirm).
We're not some country bumpkins with a piece of straw sticking out of our mouth, taking our automotive and engineering knowledge from episodes of "The Dukes of Hazzard".
Comments
And no, I'm not "misinformed", I just don't believe that load of crap until a major company signs on to endorse it. It's my money, so I'll decide when I'm informed or misinformed, by the way.
swschard can defend himself, but I rely heavily on him for information, and I'm an automotive engineer - he has info that boggles my mind. He's not "misinformed" either, I don't think.
Being a consumer, and a court-appointed automotive expert, I have plenty of contact with people who come to me for advice - I have no reason to believe this hogwash and definitely have no reason to recommend the product.
under benefits, auto-rx claims to renew seals and reduces wear. generally, "renew seals" products are a light petroleum that irritates and expands rubber, as a solvent for that rubber would.
MSDS info (and this section is regulated by OSHA guidelines in federal law) says the product is a modified additive, using "Fatty Acid Esters CAS #68440-09-5", which comes up under shelldubai.com as part of the product "Ensis RX", a solvent-based rust preventative. the specific ingredient name of CAS "68440-09-5" is... drumroll please... oxidized wax. well, I suppose allowing wax to leak through a seal will slow the flow a bit, until it warms up past the listed temp of 410 degrees Centigrade, at which time the seal is no longer rejuvenated.
in other words, add some 1960's paraffined motor oil to your crankcase and wonders occur. same stuff in an oil carrier.
references...
http://www.shelldubai.com/industrial/msds/ensis-rx.pdf
http://www.auto-rx.com/pages/msds.html
http://www.auto-rx.com/pages/applications.htm
http://www.auto-rx.com/
somehow I'm even less thrilled about the idea of adding this stuff than I was before I did a couple minutes of research on the web. the only other google hits on the CAS # were to auto-rx, but MSDS CAS numbers are registered with the government to uniquely identify products for hazmat and OSHA purposes.
classic ad-in-the-catalog fare from the old days of JC Whitney.
//edit// just occurred to me why I thought to chase the CAS number immediately... another common fatty-acid ester is soap.
I guess our guy failed to realize that people with some level of education might actually research this beeswax he's calling "oil additive".
but at a redline of 5000 or 7000 out of the driveway on a cold morning, around one corner and onto the Interstate ramp... no, I don't think so, not for this ol' boy. give me the modern SAE-rated oil that matches the engine maker's standards.
now I know where the deposits went, though... stuck to a dead-end passage someplace in the engine block, hung up on a little wax slime. someday they'll be back.
haven't seen it yet on this one.
I'd never even consider using additives on a vehicle with normal miles and performance.
You can analyze and twist words all you want - I work in the legal system and I see dramatic issues swept under the rug and tiny problems made into life-threatening incidents - save the chastising - if I wanted to read advertising, I'd buy a newspaper and go to the classified section.
These biochemists have nothing to do with my opinion and the long-standing fact (and consensus from most in the automotive service industry) that putting anything other than clean oil in your engine is pretty stupid.
I had a grandfather who got a patent on the safety pin... the fiftieth iteration of the safety pin... because his clasp had a different design... in the early 1900s. so this has been around a long time. I could patent water, if only I submitted a design patent application on the appearance of the back label of its bottle, when looked at from the front, and patented the design and its parts as a whole.
the only thing that is guaranteed to not slip through the cracks is any permutation on perpetual motion, because if they get any training at all, they get the laws of thermodynamics.
BTW, if you want to make extra money quick... it's methylene blue, a dye with mild antibacterial properties and in all the pharmacopeias. dazzle up some old early Latinate name for it and submit your papers today.
claims that rely on word of mouth only and "If I tell you, I have to kill you" types of arguments flat out belong with "hey, I got a hemi now, too."
put it on the line and show me the pink slip. over and over again, lots of labs, from a standardized published experiment, and I will believe in the standardized results against a valid control.
this is not a diatribe against product X or reporter Y, it's fed-up'ness with pseudologic and anti-research allegedly supporting unproven claims that conflict with the expectations of the materials used in a product. computers are benchmarked with a standard test suite, and horsepower is measured multiple times on known dynamometers, before specs are published on items from Xeons to Neons. it is not unfair to expect this month's miracle to prove it up, I don't think, before I consider it.
There is NO freakin' way.
The problem is that as long as we have gullible morons who run out and buy diet pills by the truckload because they're convinced they can still have their pizza and beer, not exercise, and still lose 3 pants sizes in a week; people who'll buy 6 gallons of STP Gas Treatment to make up for 150,000 miles of neglect; and my total favorite, the ability to wax your car with a spray bottle, we'll have these goofy products and wild claims.
Why? Because they make their manufacturers money.
have a heart attack today, and be on your back for 7 days in the hospital!
worked for me, it can work for you, too! call 1-800-555-1212 today, do it now! all insurance accepted! 800-555-1212, ask for mercy! get scared NOW! 800-555-1212!!!
It kills me that every time I've taken the PT into the dealer, they want to do an oil change and try to sell me on their BG Engine Flush for an extra $29.95.
It's got 5,000 miles, for goodness sakes. I can't believe dealers are hooked up with this, except for having plausible deniability when the chunks that were broken loose from an older motor start causing trouble.
I guess, though, the cars that it won't hurt, don't need it and the cars that do need something like that don't end up at a dealer for oil changes.....I'm still against the oil flush thing, because it's like the hair in the sink drain after you shave - where do all those shavings and junk go if they don't come out with the old oil? Back through your motor!!
I had grey in my transfer case last month, so I had 'em change the fluid. it's documented. any more, and they get to put one in on extended warranty. that kind of logic I can live with.
my making their boat payments just because ol' Bill down the road with his 75 Mark didn't come in this month, I don't buy into that logic at all.
I never relied on some of the garbage the other guys did, simply because I couldn't sell what I didn't believe in.
Show me in the owner's manual, ANY owner's manual, that you need to do a BG engine flush.
" subject to repeatability when tested by independent scientists and peer review according to the scientific method. you will need to make clear what your idea of a control experiment is, why that is relevant, and show results that are more significant than the rounding errors. don't need no more "voodoo science" in my life."
Problem is, I guarantee that the oil you now have in your engines does not have the scrutiny that you just stated was required of additives. Did you look at all the data and lab reports before placing that Wal MArt oil in your engine (not that you use that brand) or that Fram filter. Probably not. As we know, the API doughnut is pretty worthless if you relied on that as a symbol of quality. Did you investigate the API certification process to assure that your oil was really top notch, and actually ask for the API results of their test on that oil before using it? probably not.
Look, I tried RX and (and I love to bash it as well as the next guy) it did not work for me and I just wish the developer would be honest and say that it doesn't work in every applicatiuon, which he will not do, however, IMO it is different then the snake oils sold over the counter etc. I agree, don't use it unless a last resort. It sure would be nice to have real world tests on real world cars on oils and filters. Will we ever get it, no, too costly and too much time to perform.
I have no problem bashing RX,however to my knowledge there are no horror stories of engines failing due to teflon particles (wax in RX's case) plugging up the oil screen etc. At least I have not seen any. It does not always work but it does not cause damage either. Again, like all additives, only a last resort and should not be used all the time or often IMHO!
However, zeuslewis does provide useful information from time to time, although usually in a needlessly abrasive manner. I will take good information over poor manners any day, and while I would have used more polite terms than his postings here ( I have been told this difference is cultural), I would basically agree with what he has said here. Auto-Rx seems to be yet another variation of snake oil.
I believe it's safe to say that there's "crud" build up in most engines, and the debate is whether an effective cleaning agent has been created to safely dissolve and remove these deposits. Rx may be that product, but I've not seen any definitive proof to support or deride their claims.
All I know is that my last car (96 Altima) had 170K miles on it when I sold it, and I always used GTX (differing viscosities from 5w30 to 15w50)with ODI's of 3K to 8K, and the engine NEVER gave me any problems. Wait, had a small oil leak, one drop per day on the garage floor. And it survived without any sort of flushes.
With the increase in technology, both in my new car engine and current oil formulation, why would I need a flush today, when my old car did so well without it?
Snake oil? I wouldn't be so extreme. Unproven? In my mind, most certainly.
Heading over to Bob's to do a little more reading......
joe1000 - no, a Jiffy Lube tech couldn't qualify to testify in court as an automotive expert. You really shouldn't spout off about something you know nothing about.
I get totally run through the ringer on qualification, even after 83 court apprearances and involvement in over 2,300 cases. With modesty, my qualifications don't always "blow away" the judge, because they're there to be skeptical.
Anyone without quite a few years of experience in both mechanical fields and appraisals would never step foot inside a court room, unless he was charged with something.
chinee: I will accept that to call it snake oil would be extreme, but why go after something unproven when there is no need?
I would say that a good oil filter and regular 3k changes on conventional oil or 5K on synthetic would suffice to prevent any lubrication related problems for just about anybody.
If one accepts this, there should be no scientific reason to spend yet more money on oil flushes, slick 50, or NASA-approved super-duper been-to-the-moon oil, unless one wishes to do so as an exercise of free will, which also includes the right to be stupid or wise by a definition of one's choosing.
I have someone jump in and claim that this product was the new cure-all for our automotive ills was annoying, at the least.
Being directly involved, chest-deep in many areas of the car business at once, including the legal side, I get over-loaded with junk from manufacturers claiming that I should forget everything else on the market, throwing away all that was said before, because THEIR product is the "chosen one", the revolutionary new fix to my car's problems.
It disheartens me because I know there'll be thousands of people who take a quick glance at a magazine or internet ad about this stuff and file off like lemmings to Pep Boys to buy a case.
As a consumer advocate, I see that as a real shame.
"satisfaction or money refunded" is not anywhere near the same thing. it doesn't replace my $5000 engine, just the $38 for the OffalSlop (tm) I bought.
it's hard to bring order to a camp meeting. I prefer to set examples with my 167,000, 142,000, 120,000 miles-then-traded-tight engines on frequent changes of oil and filter with recommended maintenance than to participate in unrefereed non-controlled experiments.
freedom of religion, folks, enjoy yours. I do enjoy mine.
"these two clowns have convinced me that moderate knowledge is an arrogant thing!
I've never seen two individuals stand up on a soapbox more than zeuslewis and swschrad!"
I've always been told, by my dad, now 89, that "you've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything".
If people want to follow the herd of lemmings out to waste $10-50 a bottle on unproven stuff to pour into their engine, they should have at it. I'm just not one to follow the herd.
When Ford, Honda, Toyota, etc (any of the majors) stands up and says "AutoRX is good stuff, we recommend using it", then I'll be first in line at Pep Boys.
Isn't freedom a wonderful thing!
Thus, I and everybody else has the the right to differ, and spend one's own money any way deemed fit, including peeing it down the drain or into the engine as a miraculous cure for shoddy maintenance or malfunction or just ripe old age wear and tear.
Just don't try to mislead people, that is all I request.
post 52 will be deleting for soliciting a product and product website which is a clear violation of the user agreement and post 75 will be deleted for the "clown" remark, which crosses the line from argument to personal attack, also a clear violation.
Please continue your discussion but remember that no solicitation of AutoRx will be permitted by anyone with a financial interest in this product.
And please continue to follow the "rules of engagement" which, by and large, you have all done quite well in a "hot" spot.
thank you
Shifty the Host
PS: Quote from Smokey Yunick for your comments:
"What could be slipperier than oil"?
But I do remember that even old 50s and 60s engines would run WOT with no oil for up to 11 minutes before seizing. They did make some very bad noises prior to that, however. Still it does sort of show what even the smallest amounts of oil in the sloppiest of engines can accomplish.
Given that modern engines routinely run up to 175K with just the most basic of care, one does have to wonder what some people are after with "improvements" to the oil.
My two cents is that there may indeed be some valid circumstances for an oil flush, but personally I cannot see why this should be a part of routine maintenance that is done on a regular basis.
Same for all the gunk that would block the oil pump screen - it wouldn't matter, because I was tearing it down.
On an engine that you're keeping "as is", not pulling the pan, etc, I can't see it - it's like putting mud and oil in with a load of wash and expecting your clothes to come out clean.
I, too, did the brick on the gas pedal, but it was a "practical joke". The popular guy from school didn't think it was very funny.
Patenting an idea is easy. Period.
In my position, I am asked for advice at least 50 times a day. My endorsement of a product means that I'm putting my word on the product to ensure people that it works.
The parafin used in AutoRX WILL slow down oil leaks because it is WAX!! Wax is not something I want in my engine and is not something I'd recommend to folks.
"There are a couple of you that must really like yourself's and think you know it all about everything from diet pills to stop smoking products, what do you work for GoodHousing Keeping or what, you seem to even be knocking STP. The king would not appreciate that."
Richard Petty, while he deserves mucho respect, is simply a paid endorser for a product belonging to a company that sponsored his race team for years. His nearly life-long contract requires his kind, positive words. I can bet a stack on hunnerts that he doesn't pour that crap into the tank of his personal ride.
My response to those goofy diet pill and smoking ads was just that - a response. I think they're really stupid to pawn these products and the folks who buy these products are pretty gullible.
By the way, my job title is "consumer fraud investigator", so I take these issues with a little more zeal and "consumer protectiveness" than most folks.
it's a free country, buy anything you want. nobody has put mechanic in a can yet, other than at breaks (ha, ha). claims to the contrary need to prove it by research to get me interested.
It is a pity that they try from time to time to use a useful forum as Edmunds to peddle their trash.
Let's take a few examples from a recent post:
"I can not believe what I have been reading the last 2 days on the board."
What part of the vocabulary did you not understand?
"I am a user of Auto-rx and you guys don't have a clue as to what you are talking about. "
Yes, we do. Auto-RX is yet another variation on snake oil.
"You checked out the MDS's and did you see that they got a patient on the product."
I second zeus's comments on this. There is a clear difference between patient and patent. Also it is MSDS, not MDS's. MSDS= Material Safety Data Sheet.
"I don't know if you realize it or not (swschrad and a couple of you others) but it is not that easy to get a patient. I have a nephew that works for the patient office he said they have to go through alot of testing and research before they give them a number, we are talking month and years of research."
Well, I have patented tomographic reconstruction algorithms in image data analysis, so I have some idea about patents, perhaps better than your nephew. I do not want to boast of my academic qualifications but they include three graduate degrees including medicine, a Master's and a PhD from internationally renowed institutions. And I know something about cars too, more than quite a few people, but less than true masters, hence my ongoing efforts at learning here at Edmunds.
"You guys must get a life, if you have never used the product you have no right to say anything. "
I have a very good life thank you, as I am sure zeuslewis and swshcrad do too. I thought freedom of expression is a very american virtue. And further, you don't have to try out a potion claiming to be the elixir of eternal youth for humans, or car engines to know that it will not work. If you have to try out everything yourself, well then you will also never learn from knowledge of other. To paraphrase Newton, if we see further than others, it is because we stand on the shoulders of giants who have gone before us.
"I have used the product and it has done just what the web site stated."
Well good for you. May be it would have stopped anyway by the accumulation of gunk. Maybe it was leaking due to an overfill, and stopped when the level dropped. Have you established a cause and effect relationship, and if so, how?
"I had a seal leak and you know what it leaks no more."
Hallelujah!!!
"I ahve friends that use it have never had a problem with the product."
Well, guess what: if they had not used the product, they wouldn't have had a problem either. And they would have a few more dollars in their pockets.
"When I changed my oil, the only change to the oil was that it was a lot blacker for the next few oil changes and the oil did not break down."
How did you establish the fact that the oil did not break down? And that this additional stability was due to the miraculous AutoRx? And that this additional stability of oil would lead to a tangible benefit such as increased service life or better fuel economy or something else?
"There are a couple of you that must really like yourself's and think you know it all about everything from diet pills to stop smoking products, what do you work for GoodHousing Keeping or what, you seem to even be knocking STP."
No, we just are able to think clearly and logically, and have a sound understanding of what we are talking about.
"The king would not appreciate that."
So? Even the bloody Emperor himself has to make sense as far as I am concerned.
"come on guys get a grip and come down off your soap box"
Just as soon as you stop peddling this rubbish.
Well, I rest my case.
(yes, I did get 'em cleaned out)
(No seriously, please take care of your health above all.)
Now, as for patents, you would be surprised at the junk they will give patents for. If you have the money and can show it is original, they will issue a patent. The product DOES NOT have to actually work, just be original.
Additives, no matter what they are, are just that. There is no substitute for regular maintenance.
I've made my comments on engine flushes and my experience with having to clean up the messes some of them make. Any parafin base additive, in my opinion, is not something I would ever put in my vehicles.
Anyway, I would like to second 0patience's comments as being absolutely correct.
Hey, maybe lard balls would work better in an engine!
Again, I apologize for hacking on you earlier.
This whole oil flush notion is turning into the most entertaining and informative topic in all of Edmunds - for me, at least.
Please don't argue with anyone posting personal attacks...just ignore them and let me erase them.
thanks,
Mrshiftright the Host
My unsolicited opinion is that a good putty knife is the best engine cleaning tool in the roller cabinet. (:o]
I don't know about here, but:
... that I have seen all kinds of potions and flushes being used is in the parking lot of my local Walmart.
People will buy the latest flush, stopleak or whatever, and walk out to their car, usually a beater that has seen better days, or a clearly malfunctioning car (such as smoking, drips of oil or coolant, or horrible sounds), dump it into the appropriate orifice, throw the container underneath the car and drive merrily away, secure in the knowledge that they have taken good care of their car, avoiding those "sharks" known as properly trained and equipped mechanics who might fix their car properly.
By the time one can make a case for using a flush, usually the engine is so far gone that it can be tried only as a last desperate sort of measure.
If one starts off on the right foot, and performs regular oil and filter changes, there is probably never any benefit in using a flush during the useful life of any modern automotive engine.
No, wait, using these flushes does benefit somebody else's pockets, and thus the overall economy I guess.
To the host: Points well made and taken on board.
To zeuslewis: Thank you, and I look forward to continue to learn from you, while avoiding any fireworks! I am making a conscious effort to make my language more "american" and thus less misunderstood. I will appreciate any feedback.
To 0patience: Nice website you have there buddy. You are a good man, and I mean this in the best possible way. I hope you will let bygones be bygones.
The three primary oponents to your theory are scshwrad (engineer), vcheng (multiple masters plus a PhD) and me (masters on automotive engineer plus 2 bachelors degrees, 23 years of racing cars, automotive expert for a lawfirm).
We're not some country bumpkins with a piece of straw sticking out of our mouth, taking our automotive and engineering knowledge from episodes of "The Dukes of Hazzard".