quote:

Who can argue with that. You should go now. You'll be late for kindergarten.

inHaliburton I think the issue with trajen is that he hates to admit when is proven wrong. I've done it more than once and he can't deal with it.

I am willing to bet he doesn't even have a car,let alone a Beamer!! He posts 24/7...so we know he at least doesn't drive.

My posts have hours and days of gaps because I also have a life....and a job!!! Just look at his posts on this site and the other. Does he even sleep???

quote:

I know someone who sludged up his engine using this stuff. And all I get is grief.

Trajen..........You have just fabricated another lie after making some 30 post and now another lie just shows up this late in the game. You're busted again! You failed to prove the last lie regarding the beamer z car........so your strategy is to fabricate another lie????

You fail proving other brand of oil sludge engine as well ,Idn't dat fulish bye

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Kirk:

quote:

I know someone who sludged up his engine using this stuff. And all I get is grief.

Trajen..........You have just fabricated another lie after making some 30 post and now another lie just shows up this late in the game. You're busted again! You failed to prove the last lie regarding the beamer z car........so your strategy is to fabricate another lie????

And what lie was that? I said I know someone who sludged up his engine using this swill. Same guy I mentioned before.

You are of course at liberty to prove me wrong.
You will fail of course, but take your shot.

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Kirk:

quote:

Who can argue with that. You should go now. You'll be late for kindergarten.

inHaliburton I think the issue with trajen is that he hates to admit when is proven wrong. I've done it more than once and he can't deal with it.

I am willing to bet he doesn't even have a car,let alone a Beamer!! He posts 24/7...so we know he at least doesn't drive.

My posts have hours and days of gaps because I also have a life....and a job!!! Just look at his posts on this site and the other. Does he even sleep???

How typical. Can't answer the questions, so more of the preschool attacks.

On the synlube site are claims of passing tests. FTP and AAA. And yet, no mention anywhere on the web but at a suspect site.

Where are the tests? Post the links that go right to them so that we may all read the results.

quote:

Lets see, his msds have not changed since 1982, well osha did not require msds to be kept till 1986. So is the rest of that tirade in question as well.

Apparently you can not even accept the facts presented in your own research, namely:

****

"
It is safe to assume, from all the information I can gather, that by the middle of the nineteenth century, manufacturers where supplying their customers with some sort of data sheet, either along with their product or on demand. Therefore, the parameters of the MSDS, Sections 1, 3, an 9, had been dealt with by this time. The earliest example of an MSDS that I have ever seen is one by Valentine and Company of 1906. I came across this example while doing a research paper for NIOSH in 1980."
***** by Samuel Aaron Kaplan ***

So once again we were actually AHEAD of the OHSA requirements by years, but MDSD were supplied by SynLube Comapany since 1969.

They were called "Handling Instructions and Precautions" as the term MSDS was not used in Canada at that time.

Most tests are on Chevy & FOrd but yes one is on Nissan, because oils that passed the Chevy test ruined engines in Europe and Japan (Diesels) so Nissan sponsored the inclusion of thest on their engine, which also is not manufactured since it was "saved" by Renault.
But they could not get API to accept a Diesel (small truck) engine since no such vehicle are sold in USA, so NISSAN compromised with EFI Gasoline fueled engine - a totally different engine family than the one which had in the field failures in Japan and Europe with then current API oils.

My point is "what is the point" to do artificial tests on obsolete engines from 1990's on oils that are to be used in 2011 designs ?

The general answer is: "We can not afford to run tests on $11,000 engines installed in $30,000 cars", so (my comment) we use $2,000 engines that are no longer manufactured and teh cars they used to be in are long gone.

Yet the same OIL COMPANY will blow $120,000 in a minute to tell you how well their oil fight sludge during a "Golf Game". BS They can afford to run tests on LS 3 and GM will even sell them at a discount for 1/2 the "Suggested Racer Price".

But no THEY (BIG OIL) FEAR to test anything they have on 2010 Camaro or Corvette engine - they know it would fail !!! (One reason they use Mobil 1 as OEM fill, no petroleum oil will make the engine last !)

Using OBSOLETE ENgines for "certification" in 2010 = Just GREAT !!! (Logic)

A logic totally worthy of Trajan/snakedoctor to prove this point that "good" (read it = obsolete ) engines do NOT have any sludge problems, and they are right they do not, they also put out 1/2 the HP than modern engines that hold one less quart of oil do.

The entire automotive industry is based on sales and the 3 to 4 year cycle (anything still in production after 5 years is "dated, no good, obsolete, out of fashion" Just read AUTOWEEK, CAR & DRIVER, AUTOMOBILE and see what they say about car that is more than few years old and still in production !!!)

Yet the lubricant "Industry" is using 1996 GM and 1960's CRL, and 1993 4.6-liter Ford and 1994 Nissan KA 24E 2.4-liter.

Just go to your friendly NISSAN Dealer and tell them you want to buy NEW 1994 engine to run and 100 hour OIL TEST, and you will promptly return it to them for a re-biult as it will we "worn" by then with a "passing" oil that ONLY casued 90 micrometers of wear.

And OH Yes:

DO NOT FORGET to take the engine appart FIRST and measure it:

The twelve cam lobes are each measured at 7 locations, using a surface
profilometer for the measurement of maximum depth of wear.The wear
on all 7 positions of each lobe are added, then all twelve lobes are averaged
for the wear result.This result is the primary evaluation for the test.

The NEW ENGINE service tollerance for the said engine is +/- .25 mm or 500 micro meters - so the engine will be in the OEM specs EVEN with a FAILING OIL.

In my opinion that is really "stupid" - a test that teh worst of lubes (except API SA) will pass with not much of a problem.

Where are the verifiable, trustworty, third party links to those tests you claim you passed?

Why did you claim that Shell/Pennzoil/QS do not have API certs when, unlike your stuff, they clearly do?

quote:

Why did you claim that Shell/Pennzoil/QS do not have API certs when, unlike your stuff, they clearly do?

GO to "Turkey Hill" and buy PENZOIL EXCELLENT - no really go ahead and try, after all it is just around your corner where you live, and if they do not have it the SHELL Station on the other side of the street will !

ANd do not forget to ask them about QUAKER STATE PROGRESS, well what is the problem ?

May be SHELL HELIX ULTRA should be availble at the MINIMUM after all it is a SHELL Gas Station and they sell ALL SHELL Brands !!!

Go AHEAD, make my day !!! (well night in your case).

WARRANTY CLAIMS

It is totally true that BIG OIL has no Warranty Reserve, not even SHELL to cover their "Warranty" on the otehr hand Auto Industry always had deep pockets, and any accountant or lawyer that is smart enough to figure that one out, will go after that reserve, no matter what or who is at "fault"

This just out:

***

These figures once again include annual totals for General Motors, thanks to a surprise fin]ling the company made with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission yesterday. The company, now owned by the U.S. Treasury Department and others, remains the largest warranty provider based in the U.S., paying out a reported $4.1 billion for claims in 2009.

As an illustration of how drastically the problems of the U.S. auto industry manifested themselves in warranty financing, consider that GM had $9.6 billion in its warranty reserve at the end of 2007. At the end of last year, that balance was down to $7.0 billion. In 2007, Ford paid out $4 billion in claims. Last year it paid out $2.5 billion. Some of that cost reduction comes thanks to better quality, but much of it comes from fewer sales.

****

In summary various industries paid out 25.2 billion total in claims in 2009 - BIG OIL is not even on the list !!!

It is bunched up in "Other" which is just 0.25 %

Auto Industry is 37% of that TOTAL !!!

I luv Nissan engine, rb25det, rb26det....vr38dett, Chevrolet are amazing to, the ls9 engine is just plain amazing. Engine have never been so reliable, we live in an era where the engine will outperform the rest of the vehicle. My only concern will be from the new generation of mechanics, tend to always use the computer to fix problems instead of listening the engine.

The problem will come from stealership and the user, not the oil or the engine in the vehicle, as long the vehicle hold until the warranty is over no issued right? Customer is to blame to…people have no time, want everything now, drop the key at the dealer, take them at the end of the day job done.

When you are fueling up how much people open their hood check the fluid level, take a peek at their tire pressure, check is they see any leek on the engine…close to none all they do is filling up the windshield washer.

Why would you blame the oil company then? Their product did work as expected, even did better then expected if you take the user in consideration.

Remember back in the days, the mechanic will take your vehicle for a test drive with you, then show you the broken part, tell you before hand the price and the alternative ,you knew the job will be done right. Remember the weekends; you will see people doing their own oil change each 2 or 3 month, cleaning and waxing their car almost each week, pulling out the spark plug to read them. People where taking better care of their stuff plain simple, still compare to all the vehicle today these vehicle needed way more maintenance.

If you where to take a vehicle from today and give it to someone from the 60s….you can be sure this vehicle would go over 300k without any major problem and would be kept for year and in good shape .

quote:

vitual_mage

I totally agree with you except that in my opinion and experinece I have seen the PEAK of reliability in mid 1980's.

EFI did away with Carburettor, EI with the points and condenser and spark plug changes.

Due to the horrific failures in 1970's due to early untested smog reduction experiments (smog pump, catalysts that melted things, etc.) the metalurgy was beafed up to way above what was the MINIMUM needed for "durability".

Then for 26 years every manufacturer went back to the supplier and DEMANDED that the parts be made "cheper" ! And can be assembled "faster" and never mind access or serviceablity after initial assembly...

I have even seen Memo from Chrysler to BOSCH demanding price reduction and the justification was "quote" "THERE IS NO REASON FOR A FUEL INJECTOR TO LAST LONGER THAN 100,000 miles"

TODAY it is a Lap top computer (and sometimes as many as 70 embeded controllers) that run everything electronically.

Just take your 10 year old Lap top to a computer store for repair - and they laugh you out (or kick you out) if you do not buy a new one on the spot.

Same will be true with 2010 car in 2020 - it may look great, be mechanically perfect, but it will not run because this or that chip that failed was discontinued form production 7 years back and being proprietary is not available at any cost, period !

FORD already does not have electronic parts for some LINCOLNS that are only 5 years old ~!!

(Like controller that runs the cooling fan on radiator which is prone to failure = engine overheat = time for new LINCOLN)

The PENNZOIL 500,000 mile Warranty is absolutely no risk to SHELL, the cars just will not run that long no matter what, and it will not be the oil that will kill them either -
- but the electronics will.

The fan controler is an easy fix.....always been always will.

http://www.dccontrol.com/fancontrol.htm

Miro i dont care about Memo from Chrysler or laptop era.....i just want to know did you have any document like you said...your product pass the test? and Can we laugh too in this forum..? same with those computer repair store when you give us 1990 test to this 2010?....I see in this forum ...you like to talk about around-around in the sky if we ask about this document, so can you provide us your copy of document?
thanks,
enoch

Still waiting on facts. My dad owns a 20+ YO Ford, never had problems getting parts, any part, in fact the engine in it has been discontinued several years ago.

Fuel Injectors made to last only 100,000 miles? Tell that to my 3.0L engine approaching 200,000 miles and running strong on dino oil and P1 filters.

Just wondering who does a customer see, and where do they go/call if they have an engine failure using Synlube? Do they run to open desert space in NV hoping to get beamed to the Synlube suite on the Enterprise?

The way I see it the Synlube warranty is no risk to Synlube either, just try and locate them.

AD

Dear AD,
who said Fuel injector made to last only 100,000 miles? its Miro again?yes......hmm how about my car and my friends car in our club(have 30 cars with XU10J2 engine, Magneti Marreli MP8.0 ECU, waste-spark ignition systems) this KM in the dasboard have a 250,000 to 350,000 KM and still use the same injector/same ECU with 5000KM fuel injector cleaner like redline S1 or another brand put in the gasoline or ultrasonic. some use dino oil some use semi synth oil.
So Miro...can you give us your document?
enoch

quote:

I have even seen Memo from Chrysler to BOSCH demanding price reduction and the justification was "quote" "THERE IS NO REASON FOR A FUEL INJECTOR TO LAST LONGER THAN 100,000 miles"

My Uncle has a 318 in a Dodge Ram used for hauling a boat, with close to 175,000 miles. I sent him a link to this discussion he was rolling on the floor he said in an email. His Ram PU runs like a clock. He can't believe this thread survived 57 pages, and not one fact with any proof about Synlube was posted, just a lot of BS from 1 shill with a few names as he put it.

AD

Ah, to be the smartest man in the world, and your only claim to fame is running a scam.

Well, in his mind only.

Typical scam artist Miro is. Can't answer questions. Can't back his claims.

Can't even expalin why Shell/Pennzoil/QS has API certs in spite of the fact he claims they don't.

Must be really upset his juice couldn't even get them.

Miro/kirk talks alot, yet says little.

Can he produce this "memo" that says FIs only last 100,000 miles? I'm guessing.....no.

And, as kirk spouts when caught in a situation he can't handle, FIs are not the topic.

So, miro, explain what fuel injectors, or laptops, etc has to do with synlube?

The fact of the matter is that if you had passed such tests, we would of seen the documents long ago.

But you and the rest of the brain dead trust have done everything except produce them.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Trajan,

Ask SHELL to produce any TEST documents and published on line, if you succeed then I will in 15 minutes publish everything on line too.

Till then all those tests and the results are proprietary information that is considered "trade-secret" and we are also bound by signed legal agreement with Mobil and AAA and FORD not to disclose anything to anyone in detail without a PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION, from them that NAMES the recipient of the information.

SO you have to DISCLOSE your NAME, ADDRESS, etc, FIRST and then on your behalf we can ask for such permission.

The Agreement terms standard in the industry I have published more than once and so far no one can understand the simple legal language.

LIKE WRITTEN PERMISSION IN ADVANCE OF DISCLOSURE.

(Personally I doubt that anyone who can not understand the difference between Houston and Tokyo, can!)

We do not make the Laws or Rules, we just have to follow them.

Send e-mail To South West Technical Institute and demand they disclose to you any OIL TEST they have done recently and see what they will tell you.

DO the same with ExxonMobil, AMSOIL, SHELL, BP.

And none of that "Independent Lab" did this or that - NAME THE LAB, Reference the TEST NUMBER, provide the DATE.

That is also what is considered a legal proof by FTC - the data itself is "proprietary" always was, and always will be - and if you are NOT a Judge in FTC case, or work for the referenced company the test data is none of your business !

So where is the MINIMUM that is needed to provide a legal proof as per FTC for AMSOIL, SHELL, EXXONMOBIL, BP,?

I want to see it "FIRST"

Ours is ALREADY on your web !!!

Just read it !!!


Project Description: SynLube Lubricants Long Term Test

AAA Project Identification Number: 81

Project Number: 2002-0317-1

Project Begin Date: 2/26/2002

Project Finish Date: 7/6/2007

And for CARB reference

Certification:

I certify under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, That I performed the inspection in accordance with all bureau requirements, and that the information listed on this vehicle inspection report is true and correct.

Technician Name: Robert Shirvanyan Technician Number: EA149136 Station Number: RM208755 Smog Certificate Number: NI353286 Date: 04/24/2009


You have all the data and if you hire a Lawyer you can through a Judge ask for "discovery" but you have to show a Legal Cause, to get one !!!

The best defence ever for someone running a scam.

(1) It is illegal for us to produce the test.

(2) Out facility is on a secret government base and no one can get in to see it.

What fairy tales will we hear next???