Skip to main content

Read our primer articles on High Mileage Oil, Synthetic Oil and Kinematic Viscosity

And yet.......... no synlube is spec'd by any car maker.

GM 6094M is not the the synthetic oil spec so if your owners manual says that then is came with mineral oil, not synthetic.

GM4718M is General Motors' High Performance engine oil specification. Oils which meet GM4718M tend to be made from synthetic base stocks, so it is often referred to as a "synthetic" specification.

However, not all oils, synthetic or otherwise, are capable of meeting the stringent requirements of GM4718M.
Last edited by trajan
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
And yet.......... no synlube is spec'd by any car maker.



Show me a lawsuit/FTC,ETC,that says not to use it.

Also,show me any-mfg, stipulating.....not-to-use synthetic oil,but to ONLY use MINERAL BASED OILS. SHOW ME THAT ONE!!!!


Never claimed there was a lawsuit that said one could not. What I said was/is the following:

No synlube is spec'd by any carmaker.
Last edited by trajan
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:

Never claimed there was a lawsuit that said one could not. What I said was/is the following:

No synlube is spec'd by any carmaker.



Nor is............ Motul,Amsoil,Royal Purple,Torco,lubro moly,Neo synthetic,Redline,etc,etc.

Yet,these are all very good lubricants....Much better than what the Avg motorist has installed in their engines....


AND YOUR POINT IS....TRAJAN....



OH LOOK,GM ENDORSES WALMART BRAND OIL,AND OTHER OILS BLENDED BY BIG-OIL COMPANIES.............POLITICS AGAIN!!!

http://www.gm.com/corporate/re...oved_engine_oils.pdf


TRAJAN..............KEEP DRINKING THE KOOL-AID........
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
And yet.......... no synlube is spec'd by any car maker.



Show me a lawsuit/FTC,ETC,that says not to use it.

Also,show me any-mfg, stipulating.....not-to-use synthetic oil,but to ONLY use MINERAL BASED OILS. SHOW ME THAT ONE!!!!


And show us that car you claim exists down the street with the engine that was ruined by running Synlube.

We have been waiting months for your proof.

Well?
And he calls us liars!

None of them here can get over the fact that you are successfully running Synlube in your vehicles. They love to mention that it costs $32. per bottle, cenveniently not mentioning that you return it and a new supply is sent to you prepaid and no charge in replacement every 50 000 miles! No other company in the World does that!
quote:
Originally posted by inHaliburton:
And he calls us liars!

None of them here can get over the fact that you are successfully running Synlube in your vehicles. They love to mention that it costs $32. per bottle, cenveniently not mentioning that you return it and a new supply is sent to you prepaid and no charge in replacement every 50 000 miles! No other company in the World does that!


--------------------------------------------

Thanks,inHaliburton.......these guys are old school. One even talks about what his 'Uncle recommends'. My uncles ask me,not the other way around.

I bet these guys are from the same stock that thought 100k platinum spark plugs were impossible,let alone 200k iridium plugs. How about 100k tires and brakes......must have sounded crazy at one time.

What I can't figure out is that none of them get the fact they could just install-drain-refill, just like the stuff they use now(every 5-8k),and send in for 100% credit..thus almost free oil in the long-run,if they are afraid of 50k OCI's.

My prediction for the future is that the automakers will install lifetime oil,and lifetime(over-sized-integrated oil filters) because of all the environmental issues.....give it a few more years! They already are doing it with fuel filters,it's part of the pump module.

The fuel filter-pump module system was only really an issue in the beginning if someone went to fill up at a 'mom-n-pop' gas station with sediment laden fuel. Now days people go 150k with those things,no problem.
Kirk my uncle is someone I respect, who is extremely knowledgeable, and in tune with facts. He's not some shill on a message board, who talks to himself. There are many respectable people here who know the product is a hoax.

When you log 275,000 + miles let us know. I read your threads you haven't come close yet.

I do commend you on your new tactic to shill your product thought, nice approach. Did you get those business issues resolved and establish a business location yet? Or is the business location and mailing address still classified?

AD
I saw lots of anecdotes; if there were data, I must have missed them, though not for lack of looking.

RobertC, I'll agree with you that the 'accuracy window' (what us old lab-rats call 'test precision') is generally pretty tight for bench tests (viscosity, TAN, TBN, ICP, etc.) But an engine test stand is a whole different animal. They are run with, well, engines. So you have to start with the much greater variability that comes with using a commercial engine as your 'instrument'. Then you have to multiply that variability by that of the bench test used to evaluate the end-of-test oil. The reason bench test variability is so tight is because they well-controlled, highly isolated simulations of mechanical phenomena. Engine tests tend to sprawl.

I base my opinions on 35 years in laboratories located in various corners of the lube business. These have included analytical testing, product development, release testing and field tech service. But in the absence of that, I'd take the advice of an uncle over a fast-talking sales guy who stands to make a (potentially excessive) profit on my decision.

The notion that buying a synthetic from a compounder-blender is somehow sticking it to 'Big Oil' is the second funniest thing I've heard today, right behind the Korean techno-pop singer doing to Japanese roach-spray commercial. Where to you think those compounder-blenders get their molecules (and often their formulations)? The PAOs are probably coming from ExxonMobil, or some other major with excess capacity. Mineral base oils also probably from ExxonMobil, maybe Shell? (Who has surplus these days?) Addiitves will come from Lubrizol, Ethyl (no mom & pop shops, those), Oronite (Chevron), Infineum (ExxonMobil - Shell), or a few other players that may look small until you figure out who owns them.
quote:
Originally


I base my opinions on 35 years in laboratories located in various corners of the lube business. These have included analytical testing, product development, release testing and field tech service. But in the absence of that, I'd take the advice of an uncle over a fast-talking sales guy who stands to make a (potentially excessive) profit on my decision.

The notion that buying a synthetic from a compounder-blender is somehow sticking it to 'Big Oil' is the second funniest thing I've heard today, right behind the Korean techno-pop singer doing to Japanese roach-spray commercial. Where to you think those compounder-blenders get their molecules (and often their formulations)? The PAOs are probably coming from ExxonMobil, or some other major with excess capacity. Mineral base oils also probably from ExxonMobil, maybe Shell? (Who has surplus these days?) Addiitves will come from Lubrizol, Ethyl (no mom & pop shops, those), Oronite (Chevron), Infineum (ExxonMobil - Shell), or a few other players that may look small until you figure out who owns them.


I'll also read through threads like this and take advise from someone like Mr. Dumont who obviously knows what he's talking about, then someone with a clear sales agenda.

AD
Lamont, I have the greatest respect for you and your ilk. Your knowledge is first-rate and few can question what you post. Similarly, I respect Capt. Kirk who is using a contraversial product. All he is doiing is giving us his personal experience with said product, and his opinions on sludge formation. I also agree with his vision of the future, which could have been yesteryear if it could have been more profitable for big oil than the usual 5- to 8-thousand kilometer oil change intervals we enjoy up here in the Great White North. When that era arrives, we can expect to pay much more for permanant oils to make up for the lack of OCIs on new vehicles. I can recall when cars were assembled without grease nipples and at the time I was positive that it would mean big problems for my car. Of course, I have yet to experience such a problem.
quote:
Originally posted by ADFD1:

I'll also read through threads like this and take advise from someone like Mr. Dumont who obviously knows what he's talking about, then someone with a clear sales agenda.

AD

I do not believe that Capt. Kirk has a sales agenda. He has no relationship with Synlube except as a customer. Like Kirk, I could care less whether anyone purchases Synlube or not.
quote:
Originally posted by inHaliburton:

I do not believe that Capt. Kirk has a sales agenda. He has no relationship with Synlube except as a customer. Like Kirk, I could care less whether anyone purchases Synlube or not.


Well then three of us agree on something! That is not caring who uses it. I don't care who uses it either. But you'll never find it in anything I own.
I will agree with that. If Kirk uses Syn-Lube and has good luck with it, hey, no problem. I prefer a good name brand oil that is API certified. I have a hard time buying products from a vehicle trunk (the old speaker scam comes to mind). I really would not have a hard time with S-L-4_life, if the website was not from 1996. Anyone with a little computer knowledge can make a decent site with DreamWeaver and cold fusion.

I prefer a quality oil that I can find on the shelf.

Dave
quote:
Originally posted by ADFD1:
quote:
Originally posted by inHaliburton:

I do not believe that Capt. Kirk has a sales agenda. He has no relationship with Synlube except as a customer. Like Kirk, I could care less whether anyone purchases Synlube or not.


Well then three of us agree on something! That is not caring who uses it. I don't care who uses it either. But you'll never find it in anything I own.


Fails to explain why he spent so much bandwidth defending the product and attacking any and all who question it though.

Or why he's afraid to use it despite such a defense.

Or why this kirk person spends so much time pushing it.
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
[QUOTE]
And verifiable, third party tests.


If your certified oils are so good, why do you find it necessary to use that black ARX gunk.

BTW, I used that stuff on my first Focus at about 200 000 km. Had to dig the stuff out of the bottle because it had gone solid just like sludge. Either my engine was pristine, or that stuff did not do as advertised because I noticed no difference whatsoever, except my bank account was somewhat lighter...

I still have 2 bottles. Anyone want them
Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×