You fail proving other brand of oil sludge engine as well ,Idn't dat fulish bye
Read our primer articles on High Mileage Oil, Synthetic Oil and Kinematic Viscosity
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?
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 !!!
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 .
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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 !!!
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???
(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???
quote:Project Number: 2002-0317-1
Miro, I hit the link above and nothing came up, can you print it out for us to see here.
quote:The fan controler is an easy fix.....always been always will.
http://www.dccontrol.com/fancontrol.htm
Thanks for the link, I will send it to who ever has such I can not get OEM controller from OEM Dealer syndrome.
Most people that own LINCOLNS (check their average age) to not play with their own cars, and if their FORD-LINCOLN-MERCURY Dealer tells them it can not be fixed they take their word for it from them.
There even was Long Article about this in Los Angeles Times - they even called FORD Direct and talked with the "Parts VP for NA" and he told them there is no obligation for FORD to keep any parts available once the vehicle is past the OEM Warrnty - and they quoted him.
THere are geeks that can fix their Lap top sometimes, or even re-wire Hybrid Batteries, but the majority of the populus can not do it, just as 60% of vehicle owners in USA are NOT CAPABLE to change their own oil, and 45% never opened their hood - real life real facts (Research from JD POWER).
There is legal requirement to ahve 300 page owner manual, but almost no one ever reads one (98.3%) the most common look at owner manual documented by FORD is to find out how to adjust the CLOCK when the time changes (Spring Fall).
Yet you can get $10,000 fine from NHTSA is you leave out one page about "advanced air bag" or the fact that childrent have to sit in the back seat....
The CHRYSLER Memo did not say the injectors last 100,000 miles, it specifically stated and I again for the 3rd time repeat:
THERE IS NO REASON FOR FUEL INJECTORS TO LAST MORE THAN 100,000 miles
and it was part of DEMAND to reduce the per unit cost by BOSCH - back in 2003
I did nto say I had it, I say I saw it and I can testify to it in Congresional Hearing if you institute it.
BOSCH has it at their Michigan Headquarters and they showed it to me with pride, to demonstrate how good their stuff is !!!
And I do know I have some BERTONE X1/9 with 200,000+ miles form 1980's with OEM BOSCH EFI and no problems.
But the system BOSCH made in 1980 is not available at any price today - we wanted it in 2003 and I was told it was too expensive (about $495 pre car) - SO NO ONE WAS BUIYNG IT and they quit making it in 1994 since it did not have OBD.
The average cost of EFI on today's vehicle is $175 - that is the ENTIRE EFI system - then go to your dealer and try to buy just one injector, or fuel pump, etc.
But it takes $163,000 to "calibrate" and MAP the $175 system.
The 1979 BOSCH EFI was self calibrating and if you installed it on any engine with 2, 4 or 6 cylinders from 600 cc to 2.5 L - in 4 minutes after initial ON, it fugured out the proper calibration, itself, and without any CPU !!!
30 years later and such "advanced" technology is not manufactured !!! - it was too much for volume OEM.
And you's think any OEM woudl spend $500 to permanently lube any vehicle if they will not invest it into EFI ?
So it indeed has to do with SynLube - long term reliability and long term durability is NOT a desirable feature for volume OEM on any vehicle.
It on other hand is for BREMACH it uses SynLube as OEM fill for all vehicles to be sold in USA.
But in 2009 they made 309 vehicles world wide -
www.bremach.it
So for very few like BERTONE, MORETTI in the past SynLube is the ONLY WAY TO GO !!!
quote:Miro, I hit the link above and nothing came up, can you print it out for us to see here.
It is not a link just the exact identification number for the test project issued by AAA Auto Research Lab.
quote:There even was Long Article about this in Los Angeles Times - they even called FORD Direct and talked with the "Parts VP for NA" and he told them there is no obligation for FORD to keep any parts available once the vehicle is past the OEM Warrnty - and they quoted him.
I was under the impression that all auto manufactures are supposed to keep parts for 10 years after the car is sold.
So a 2001 Chevrolet Monte Carlo would have parts that were available from the Dealer until 2011.
If Ford is not required to keep any parts past the 3 year 36,000 miles Warranty are you recommending that Ford Owner's should not even use Synlube.
Do you know of any other car manufactures that keep parts in there inventory for 10 years or more, the reason being is that since your oil is so GOOD, anyone using Synlube would expect there engines to last at least 25 years or 500,000 miles.
If these automakers are not going to hold onto parts or not be required to hold onto parts when the warranty is over then maybe we should all just use the cheapest oil and not even think of using Synlube, why should I use the best oil when I have to worry about not being able to get parts for my car.
Miro, you have given everyone here the perfect reason not to use Synlube unless you decide to go into the parts business and sell us our parts when the manufacture no longer carries it.
quote:Originally posted by Trojan/snakedoctor:
[QUOTE]
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.
Talk is cheap. You just proved that.
quote:Originally posted by Miro Kefurt:quote:Miro, I hit the link above and nothing came up, can you print it out for us to see here.
It is not a link just the exact identification number for the test project issued by AAA Auto Research Lab.
So produce the test. we want to read it. Of course, the only site said test comes up doing kirk's favorite line "Google it.", is a suspect synlube site.
Nothing from Ford or the AAA.
Oh, BTW, I've never had trouble getting OEM parts for the 64 Buick Le Sabre or the 68 Chevy Nova I had when they were both 20 years old.
quote:Originally posted by Trjan aka snakedoctor:quote:Originally posted by Miro Kefurt:quote:Miro, I hit the link above and nothing came up, can you print it out for us to see here.
It is not a link just the exact identification number for the test project issued by AAA Auto Research Lab.
So produce the test. we want to read it. Of course, the only site said test comes up doing kirk's favorite line "Google it.", is a suspect synlube site.
Nothing from Ford or the AAA.
You bozos can't tell a link from a non-link. No wonder you can't understand what Miro has been telling you for days, weeks, months, YEARS.
quote:Originally posted by inHaliburton:quote:Originally posted by Trjan aka snakedoctor:quote:Originally posted by Miro Kefurt:quote:Miro, I hit the link above and nothing came up, can you print it out for us to see here.
It is not a link just the exact identification number for the test project issued by AAA Auto Research Lab.
So produce the test. we want to read it. Of course, the only site said test comes up doing kirk's favorite line "Google it.", is a suspect synlube site.
Nothing from Ford or the AAA.
You bozos can't tell a link from a non-link. No wonder you can't understand what Miro has been telling you for days, weeks, months, YEARS.
inHaliburton....Look what trajen is talking about on the other thread with ADF1,cp30 etc.
MMO and auto-rx....and they all use those products admitting sludge issues/concerns.
All those naysayers are talking about and using products that are designed to remove sludge!!
Marvel mystery motor oil....auto-rx........all in an effort to address sludge. Why?? They are admitting that sludge is an issue on the other thread by using those products.
Wow....the truth finally comes out!!!
quote:Originally posted by ADFD1:
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
It was not stated the car stops running at 100k...give me a break.... It's already proven that after 100k the fuel spray pattern is out of spec and the injectors should be replaced because emissions are higher and or the cat is doing more work to clean up the exhaust.
It's all about emissions now days. The EPA wants all cars to have ultra low emissions and stay ultra low for as long as possible. However...after a 100k on a typical car emissions start going up!!
AT 200k....your car would be much higher than when it had 50k...even if the check engine light is not on..your cars emissions are higher. That was the whole point basically.
quote:Originally posted by ADFD1: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
I am glad to see on the other thread you admit your family uses products like marvel mystery oil and auto-rx.........to remove sludge.
So that is why that engine with only 175k is running so good as you say.........you have to over maintain them... and flush them of sludge on regular basis with mmo/auto-rx....
now I am rolling on the floor with laughter.
The whole point of this thread was that store bought oils have issues...and now you finally admit there are issues on the other thread titled MMO or auto-rx.
Finally the truth comes out....it's about time..... it took long enough!!!
So where are the docs for those tests synlube claims it passed.
quote:Tell that to my 3.0L engine approaching 200,000 miles and running strong on dino oil and P1 filters.
However...you admit on the thread titled MMO or auto rx..........you are using sludge removing products to accomplish 200k. Why??
The whole point of this thread was to show that dino oil and group III synthetic cause the very problems you are trying to address with the solvent based chlorine spiked MMO. Yes..MMO does have chlorine...did you know that?
Why are you using auto-rx in addition to mmo?
Did you see the valve picks on this forum showing that the auto rx did not clean up the massive sludge in that engine??
Why not use 100% PAO premium group IV synthetic oils in the first place and avoid those issues in the first place.
The P1 filter restricts oil by the way especially petroleum oil.
quote:
You bozos can't tell a link from a non-link. No wonder you can't understand what Miro has been telling you for days, weeks, months, YEARS.
quote:inHaliburton....Look what trajen is talking about on the other thread with ADF1,cp30 etc.
MMO and auto-rx....and they all use those products admitting sludge issues/concerns.
All those naysayers are talking about and using products that are designed to remove sludge!!
Marvel mystery motor oil....auto-rx........all in an effort to address sludge. Why?? They are admitting that sludge is an issue on the other thread by using those products.
Wow....the truth finally comes out!!!
Capt. Kirk: Nice work!
It's mighty quiet out there since you dropped that A bomb. They must be in a huddle trying to figure out a come-back. The native are restless...
InHaliburton I’ve noticed that you never let a thought interrupt the flow of your conversation,was that your conclusion, or simply the point in the conversation where you got tired of thinking?
quote:Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:inHaliburton....Look what trajen is talking about on the other thread with ADF1,cp30 etc.
MMO and auto-rx....and they all use those products admitting sludge issues/concerns.
All those naysayers are talking about and using products that are designed to remove sludge!!
Marvel mystery motor oil....auto-rx........all in an effort to address sludge. Why?? They are admitting that sludge is an issue on the other thread by using those products.
Wow....the truth finally comes out!!!
Yes, I just finished reading that thread. It does sound like conflicting info. Maybe they can explain why they use the stuff if they are satisfied with their motor oils.
Personally, I have not used any additives in the current car, 2005 Focus, 275 000 kms.
Sorry to ask, but memory is bad. What do you drive, engine, bought new or used, when started using Synlube, have you had the valve covers off, your thoughts on the product. In all these pages, I can't remember.
Thanks.
quote:Originally posted by Trajan:
So where are the docs for those tests synlube claims it passed.
Come on Trojan, stop with that stupid nonsense of yours. It's becoming very boring.
quote:Originally posted by vitual_mage:
InHaliburton I’ve noticed that you never let a thought interrupt the flow of your conversation,was that your conclusion, or simply the point in the conversation where you got tired of thinking?
No offense to you Vitual, but I do not understand. I know it's a Jeep thing with you, but could it be that you have received one to many bumps on the head from bouncing up and down in that tightly sprung Jeep? Salute!
quote:Originally posted by inHaliburton:quote:Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:inHaliburton....Look what trajen is talking about on the other thread with ADF1,cp30 etc.
MMO and auto-rx....and they all use those products admitting sludge issues/concerns.
All those naysayers are talking about and using products that are designed to remove sludge!!
Marvel mystery motor oil....auto-rx........all in an effort to address sludge. Why?? They are admitting that sludge is an issue on the other thread by using those products.
Wow....the truth finally comes out!!!
Yes, I just finished reading that thread. It does sound like conflicting info. Maybe they can explain why they use the stuff if they are satisfied with their motor oils.
Personally, I have not used any additives in the current car, 2005 Focus, 275 000 kms.
Sorry to ask, but memory is bad. What do you drive, engine, bought new or used, when started using Synlube, have you had the valve covers off, your thoughts on the product. In all these pages, I can't remember.
Thanks.
The cars that had it were used cars when I bought them.
1991- Cadillac Eldorado 4.9 V-8 140,000 used. Totaled head on at 169,000. Synlube had about 25,000 on it if memory servers. Engine was running very perfect,car was sports car fast....always passed emission. Valve train... like budman showed on his car....was seen with oil fill cap off and Looked very clean to me. Synlube cleaned that engine Up! Too bad for the accident. Loved that car!
1995 Pontiac 3.1 Gran prix. Used. Installed synlube at around 33,000 miles. Car ran perfect,clean engine(oil cap off). Always past NJ state Inspection. 23 Mpg average.
Filters cut open all were clean. Care saw amsoil for a while at first which cleaned the engine I'm sure. Intake manifold gasket leaked some coolant into the Synlube. Bars stop leak fixed that and a good drive dried out the oil.
At 76,000 last march car was traded in for new 2009 v6 mustang. Car ran perfect,engine still clean even though some coolant got into synlube...that was impressive!! Synlube drained out looking good and sent back for 100% credit,new oil I got free is now in the mustang.
2001.5 VW 1.8t bought used with 38,000 miles. Saw amsoil for a while to prove engine was good and help clean the engine. Installed synlube at 50,000. Car now has 68,000. Engine is perfect. Valvetrain through cap looks clean. Last filter cut open looked clean. Always passes state inspection....never any issues. Car run perfect!
1996 buick riviera. 3.8 series II engine 205 HP. Used again. Synlube at 114,000 miles.
Car was traded in at 178,000 with synlube still in car(forgot to drain/sales pressure)...transmission was acting up!(never synlubed the tranny). The engine ran perfect. Never any emission issues. Cut open filers...clean. Sylube had 64,000 miles on it. I did do several oil filter changes because car was very used...but good. Engine was running flawless when traded. I'm still ticked for not draining out the synlube for credit. oh well!
2008 Brand new Jeep Grand Cherokee Ltd.4.7 V8(303 Hp). Nice engine. Synlubed at 700 Miles in August of 2008. Jeep now has 14,500 on it. That Jeep is a runner Man. I will keep you posted on the jeep. So far,so Very Good.
I am going to follow with the JeeP and the Mustang the 50,000 drain interval and get 100% credit for new oil....hey why not...it's free from now on. I Plan on the maximum engine life schedule. Leaving it in for 150k is for "normal" life.
I can't see past the oil fill cap on the stang or the Jeep,my view is blocked...I'm not worried...I've seen what it can do!!
It's also in the 7Hp over head briggs lawn mower,Honda Snow Bower,etc.etc. lawn equipment! I am not going to ever drain out of the lawn mower just to see what it can do.
The last lawn mower saw 250 hours run time/ 7 years on engine with synlube and ran perfect always..no engine isssues ever...and the crappy yardman mowers wheels fell off twice,power drive kept braking....bought a new craftsmen two years ago,much better overall mower. The other yard-man mower I put out to the curb with only the engine still be being the best running perfect part.....mower was gone the next day.
So far,I have not ever had any engine issues ever using this product. The engine outlives the equipment. The real ultimate test is always the fleet users who use run with Synlube. I wonder who went the longest so far?
quote:Captain, you are wrong. bruce381 is a tribologist and a blender and has probably been doing it longer than Miro.
OK what company he works for and what BRAND is he blending ?
That should not be too much to ask for ???
Or is it ?
Where are the documents for the tests you claim to pass?
Well?
Well?
quote:I was under the impression that all auto manufactures are supposed to keep parts for 10 years after the car is sold.
Lot of people have that impression, not even sure where that tale came form !! (Was it BITOG)
Show me the NHTSA or EPA law that states so !
The only requirement in USA is to have parts that can support 9% of production of 26 vehicles (which eve is less) for the duration of the Emission Performance Warranty and have those parts available within 24 hours to the dealer.
That is CARB and EPA "regulation" but not a LAW.
Law however is that if there is 26 successive failures of any emission part the EPA has to be notified, if the MFG fails to do so, like Mercedes-Benz neglected to do for 10 years, they get fined for that, not for NOT HAVING the parts, but for NOT REPORTING the failures that cause Air Pollution (exhaust or gas tank evaporative) that is part of the Clean Air Act and sicn ethat was passed by congress and signed by respective presidents in office for the updates it is the ONLY LAW that requires any part to be available.
Part availability during Warranty Period is what MFG view as "obligation" to their customers, but they do not even have to do that.
PS: The duration of the Emission performance warranty is either 70 or 80% of the maximum certified useful life which today ranges from 100,000 to 150,000 miles
Except in California where since 2010 the certified life is 120,000 miles for the power train (or 150,000 if PZEV) and 150,000 for the evaporative.
Note the Evaporative is LONGER than the powertrain as in the CA opinion car can break down (not run) and be parked for several years with fuel in the tank, and they do not want parked junkers to pollute the air !!!
Kind a smart move, in my humble opinion.
Also explain this trend:
in 2009 MORE vehicles junked (about 14 million) than sold (about 10.4 million)
Average age of the vehicles on the road 9.2 years.
BUT most amazing the average age of the taken out of service vehicle is only 6.8 years, that means that more and more OLD vehicles remain in service - and much younger vehicles get taken out of service.
And that includes the 690,000 + clunkers that averaged 14 years (median 13 years) in age !!!
The most common MY traded-in was 1995, then 1997 and 1998
The oldest year applicable 1984, which you would expect to be the MOST as those vehicles if they even run have no resale value was only 0.27% - only 2005 MY was lower (0.04%).
So again really old cars that really would not be worth $4,500 to anyone were actually NOT traded-in that often !!!
So this trend indeed proves with 95% confidence level in statistics that NEW vehicles (more recent MY) do not last as long as the older vehicles still in service (older MY).
Again I rest my case and await the verdict by jury !
ON Longevity:
Vehicle Age
(Passenger Car)
Estimated
Survivability
(1977 to 2002 NVPP)
Estimated VMT
(2001 NHTS)
Weighted Yearly
Travel Miles
1 0.99 14,231 14,089
2 0.9831 13,961 13,725
3 0.9731 13,669 13,300
4 0.9593 13,357 12,813
5 0.9413 13,028 12,262
6 0.9188 12,683 11,652
7 0.8918 12,325 10,991
8 0.8604 11,956 10,287
9 0.8252 11,578 9,554
10 0.7866 11,193 8,804
11 0.717 10,804 7,746
12 0.6125 10,413 6,378
13 0.5094 10,022 5,105
14 0.4142 9,633 3,990
15 0.3308 9,249 3,060
16 0.2604 8,871 2,310
17 0.2028 8,502 1,724
18 0.1565 8,144 1,275
19 0.12 7,799 936
20 0.0916 7,469 684
21 0.0696 7,157 498
22 0.0527 6,866 362
23 0.0399 6,596 263
24 0.0301 6,350 191
25 0.0227 6,131 139
Estimated Passenger Car Lifetime VMT 152,137
Source: NHTSA, Vehicle Survivability and Travel Mileage Schedule, 2006
Notice that after 13 years you have 50/50 chance that your car will quit - even coin toss chance.
After 25 years so few cars are in service they do not bother to find/count them.
Vehicle Age
(Passenger Car)
Estimated
Survivability
(1977 to 2002 NVPP)
Estimated VMT
(2001 NHTS)
Weighted Yearly
Travel Miles
1 0.99 14,231 14,089
2 0.9831 13,961 13,725
3 0.9731 13,669 13,300
4 0.9593 13,357 12,813
5 0.9413 13,028 12,262
6 0.9188 12,683 11,652
7 0.8918 12,325 10,991
8 0.8604 11,956 10,287
9 0.8252 11,578 9,554
10 0.7866 11,193 8,804
11 0.717 10,804 7,746
12 0.6125 10,413 6,378
13 0.5094 10,022 5,105
14 0.4142 9,633 3,990
15 0.3308 9,249 3,060
16 0.2604 8,871 2,310
17 0.2028 8,502 1,724
18 0.1565 8,144 1,275
19 0.12 7,799 936
20 0.0916 7,469 684
21 0.0696 7,157 498
22 0.0527 6,866 362
23 0.0399 6,596 263
24 0.0301 6,350 191
25 0.0227 6,131 139
Estimated Passenger Car Lifetime VMT 152,137
Source: NHTSA, Vehicle Survivability and Travel Mileage Schedule, 2006
Notice that after 13 years you have 50/50 chance that your car will quit - even coin toss chance.
After 25 years so few cars are in service they do not bother to find/count them.