Skip to main content

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

I will not resort to ad hominem arguments any more - but the debate over your company's product 'Lube4Life' is based upon the misconception that you are on this board as a mere user of the products which you are hawking. I will not engage in a debate with someone who is here for the express purpose of getting attention for his personally owned company - remember, I still have copies of all of our correspondance. I know what you are and who you are. I dare you to refute my comments here! Are you not one Miro Kifurt, owner of the company - Lube4Life A.K.A. "Synlube"? ANSWER?
A.J. Amatuzio made use of used P-A-O Synthetic Jet oil from his Air Force F-86 to conduct his first 'cold start' experiments in his personal vehilce in the frigid starting conditions in Minnesota, my home state in 1968-69. From there he went on to start the AMZOIL company. Pennzoil got twisted about his use of the 'Z' in the name so he changes it to an 'S'. His pioneering work, in the field of synthetic engine oils, led recently to Wal-Mart coming to him [Read the artilce in the months LUBES'N'GREASES article] .... with a check for $40,000,000 to put his products in their stores. He turned them down for obvious reasons. "An now you know the rest of the story."
Synlube no one is questioning amsoils capabilities I know it intimately, I've been using it longer than you've been" Power Up Lubricants Representative for 14 years! "

However lets step back a little bit and rethink, when amsoil was touting it's 1yr 25k drain how many individuals embraced such a concept way too radical, how many were in disbelief of it's capabilities. Even mobil1 jump on the bandwagon and couldn't substantiate their claims and withdrew it's statement. Yet Amsoil persevered.

Nonetheless it took a long while for people to get use to the concept of not draining the oil past 3k or even 2k. Many naysayers and critics hurled a number or attacks against amsoil for propagating such a radical idea. For that matter much of the disbelief regarding synthetic oil was predicated on opinionated bias, without substantiation and so people were convinced because the local mechanic and Johns great grand dad said no way, what's wrong with you, we've been doing this for years and you can't convince me, and now you couple that with the car manufacturer discouraging such a proposterous notion of extended oil drains, despite oil analysis proving otherwise.

Point is people have been conditioned and indoctrinated to believe without questioning, don't fix it if it isn't broke, despite the increase in technology yes even within the oil industry. Addtionally those who tried amsoil did so without oil analysis sort of a leap of faith, and many have become to this day strong proponents of synthetics, again despite the fact that most did not even seek testing data to prove to themselves Amsoil was viable, maybe they were ignorant, not aware such data existed or how to obtain it, yet they based there decision on the marketing put before them or because a certain friend uses it, and so reasoned he had no problems it must be good.
A goodly portion being ancedotal.

I believe we've again encounter a much similar situation that Amsoil faced, and look how it stood against the giants within the oil industry, it had some very humble beginings.

So we need bear in mind that it's quite possible or probable that a lubrication company such as SYNLUBE may be in it's humble stages as well trying to go against the tide promoting a radical concept as no oil changes for 150k or 15yrs, just as amsoil did with it's 1yr 25k drain regiment.

And the question arise could it be that such technology does exist could it be that SYNLUBE might have something here that others may have missed or chosen not to explore, the possiblity is worth exploring rather than tear down, open mindednes is key to knowledge.
Last edited by gsleve
Well I must concede, gsleve has finally posted a wonderful counterpoint to the nay sayers of Synlube, myself included. I have only been using synthetics for 15 years, and only started extended drain intervals (mind you only 10-15,000 miles as well) in the last 10 of those years.

I've used just about everything out there, always looking for bigger and better. Hell, I even started the vegetable oil topic for some input, and that met with resistance and nay sayers, because not so long ago, mention the term vegetable oil and most people think of castor oil, which would most definitely NOT work in most of today's automobiles very well. But alas, I did some homework, read the web pages of information on the product, called up the company, talked for a while, and decided to give their product a go. I currently use it in three vehicles, and it seems to doing just fine.
Sorry, hit the wrong button...

To continue, I guess that we might be going about condemning Synlube's product this way based on cost, or that we have been programmed to believe that a product that could possibly last that long, without changing, couldn't possibly be true or work.

I have learned the very hard way to listen to the more experienced than I in most lubrication matters, so that is why I kind of stay skeptical toward Synlube. Everything points to that it won't work, but if it didn't cost a mortgage payment to outfit a vehicle with all of their fluids, I would give it a try for myself. That's why I wanted cold, hard facts and figures first.

I guess that I'm just old fashioned that way.
DAD2LEIA: OK, you make a good point but let's also consider that there aren't very many "experts" on SynLube. Using solid lubricants is relatively new to most people, even those who have been using and studying lubricants for years have little experience with colloids. Consequently, you really can't depend too heavily on others in order to make a determination.

In the end, you simply have to be willing to take a chance just as you did with the product you're using now. Do the homework, read their website and ask yourself the question: Why WOULDN'T it work?
glseve, I guess there are just not enough people out there to generate enough interst in getting a uoa. I though this forum was a place you could trade info and ideas without going to a web site. That way you could get info based on analysis and experience vs a sales promotion. I have never said that I though Synlube was anything good or bad, just that it was a mystry. And since there is not much info maybe it's just a product that will just go away, somewhere. Look at these 9 pages of interest, and still no rabbit.
Bakerman I don't believe that those who are using it are aware that such a debate exist about the product. My point was to net out the sales promotion and enlist those on the website to obtain a UOA and see if there vehicles are running optimally.

However I believe that some of these people will not get that granular regarding information about there vehicles, we on this forum are for a lack of a better word "oil fanatics" looking for the best so we can extend the life of our vehicles and lower the total cost of ownership. Getting the most bang for the buck.

What I find of interest that some users of synlube have allowed for there email contacts to be posted which lends itself for nicely for exhanging information and insight if we continue to be the skeptics that we are about this product, then by all means lets leverage this resource to our advantage in the light of information gathering and make inquires of them.

Isn't this the process we use in everyday life we inquire research inquire more seek knowledge and then test whether such claims are true.
If this thread goes on long enough, will we see a uoa or voa on this stuff. Testimonals are hard to figure out. Analysis and numbers are more useful, expecially if this oil is different than everything else in the world. It's like the caveman that says that with his secret weapon that no one else has, he can rule the world, and holds up a rock.

Sift through the maze of non-scientific stuff and arrive at the lowest common denominator and you will see why AMSOIL is a highly respected company with an impecable record of satisfaction amongts it's customers!

Impeccable record of satisfaction huh ? Razz

Well myself and some other people might just disagree with you on that . Smile

Carry on though , never mind me . Smile
Originally posted by Houckster:
About 15.3K.

Re Terry, I know that his word would have more value here but as I pointed out, I want to have Synlube's results first and then if that's good then I send another sample to Terry.

Why don't you send one to each, Synlube and Terry at the same time. Let us know the results of both.
Asking a manufacturer if they think their product is good is not of much use. Since Terry does not own any stock in Synlube his evalutation would carry more weight. He should do his work without any knowledge of what the Synlube lab says.

You may not realize it, but one of the things that attracted me to Miro is his willingness to be truthful. He is a no-nonsense guy who would tell me if something is wrong and advise what would be needed to fix it. He also genuinely loves getting feedback from the field. My belief is that the results I get back will come very close to what Mr. Dyson reports who, as I understand it, already has some experience with SynLube. BTW, it is important to know about SynLube before analyzing it as it because it has components in its additive package that would lead to misinterpretation otherwise.

SynLube Oil Analysis

Mazda1 wrote:
Why don't you send one to each, Synlube and Terry at the same time. Let us know the results of both.
As I wrote above, there is no point sending a sample to Dyson UNLESS SynLube gives the oil a thumbs up. Though most here won't accept a good report from SynLube I think most would accept a bad one and in such a case spending $40 or so to get a second bad report would be pointless.
BRUCE381: Thank you for an entirely worthless post. Go take your meds.

From Barkerman:
That's too bad. I thought we were going to see a uoa. If there's a chance that this stuff in nothing special you sure don't want to expose it to a uoa. It's better to just do some more advertising.
Why don't you read my posts? You will see a UOA!
On basis Amsoil boast a 100k OCI and Synlube reduce OCI depending on use, perhaps not barmy.

Synlube may also take same view as Ford does with thin oils!

Synlube may have as interseting basestock as GC.

Solids are being used by Elf.

Synlube now have added 0W40 to range.

Intrigued to see UOA.

Perhaps non Synlube users are being conned into short OCIs as wear may be highest after oil change!
From Barkerman:

That's too bad. I thought we were going to see a uoa. If there's a chance that this stuff in nothing special you sure don't want to expose it to a uoa. It's better to just do some more advertising.

Why don't you read my posts? You will see a UOA!


You have not commited to sending a sample to a third party, you said maybe. This thread has been running since July and there has not been anything of substance. There is an interest in this Synlube stuff. People would like to believe that somthing like Synlube could exist, but I guess it's not to be.
I honestly think you haven't read the my posts closely enough. You're missing my point.

The point of the UOAs is to see if the product gives a good result. Isn't that right? Sending the first sample to SynLube gives them a chance to establish their validity. If they supply a UOA with a good result, then a sample will be sent to Dyson for further comfirmation. I drew two samples of the oil for testing at the same time. Much has been made that SynLube will hype their product rather than report accurately. This gives us a chance to see if that claim is true.

Now, just what is the point of sending a sample to Dyson if SynLube reports that the oil is NOT holding up? It is only if SynLube sends back a positive UOA that it makes any sense to submit a sample to Dyson.

Doesn't this make sense?
It makes perfect sense to me. I wouldn't waste a second $40. US sending another sample to some guru unless the first sample comes back with good results. We should start a pool on how many pages this thread will go, or how many years it will go. I'm going to start things off with a guess of 68 pages and the year 2007.
Paul in Haliburton.
The point of the UOAs is to see if the product gives a good result. Isn't that right?

Sending the first sample to SynLube gives them a chance to establish their validity.

Establish Validity??? What are you smoking An ICP spectro of wear metals will be Established by using certifed standards to callibrate the test equipment. There is NO validity to establish DUH. 10 ppm lead is 10 ppm lead.
If ICP machine is correctly calibrated any lab will give within a few percent same answer.

So basicly if your oil sample sucks then you will not want to advertise that so you will not send out to an INDEPENDENT lab that we all can trust right?
BRUCE381: If you will take the time to go back over the posts, you will see that your comments simply miss the point. The question that has been raised is whether SynLube would report accurate results, not whether the a proper test method would. Thus my comments. You can't expect to read the last two or three posts and know what's going on here.

INHALIBURTON: Yes, this is a long-winded thread and I fully expect the controversy to continue even if BOTH SynLube AND Dyson give good reports.
I think Houckster is missing something. A lot of us would like to know what's up because the idea of a better oil is very seductive. The problem is that there have been too many snake oil products in the past, enough to say that almost all past wonder products have been rip-offs. Every now and then a better product shows up. Some of these products are the better deal, but suffer because they promised more than they delivered, even though what they delivered was enough to justify the label new and better. This thread has 10 pages, now, and that's proof that people whant to know. This company, Synlube, may be the real deal, but it's really difficult to seperate the facts from the hype. There is an additonal problem with Synlube. The jump to this stuff is expensive. So we have a group of geeks with a few that would make the jump if they could just get a handle on what's really going on.
Barkerman, that's the point that I've been trying to make as well. I certainly wouldn't mind the cost of this product, if the claims were backed up by some real user data. I guess now we just have to be patient and wait for Houckster to post his results of the UOA and go from there.

Other than that I guess this stuff is all academic, right?
Miro Kefurt is my name and I am the President of SynLube, Inc. our e-mail is, our web is and our phone is 800-SYN-LUBE.

I am not Houckster although I know who he is as he is one of our ling time customers.

I any one had any direct questions please send them direct to me at the e-mail address.

Sorry I do not have time to live on message boards as we have a real business to take care of and already get 100 to 150 e-mail a day.

What is more "disturbing" that on this "noria" board the names like synlube, mirox and so on are ALREADY TAKEN, but we have never registered to this web before, so if anoyne ever posted anything as "synlube" it was not our compnay nor me personally, no MATTER WHAT THEY HAVE CLAIMED !!!

This is the FIRST time I have registered, and since our trade names are already "taken" I have used my name Miro Kefurt for sign-in lon in.

My basic question to all of you who are not even familiar or have ever used SynLube, what gives you any authotiry to even discuss it !?

Use if FIRST and then talk about it !

Colloidal super lubricants since 1969 !
WOW ten pages of arguments but not a single person but one that has ever used our product !

Real people in the real world, and not Aristotelian pure though experimenters, are our real live customers, and there are e-mail links to them on our web

1.) SynLube eliminates oil changes for the "useful life" of motor vehicles - see EPA and CARB on what "useful life" is.

2.) Real people do not really care about TBN, particle counts, or any such results, they care it their car RUNS, and if it RUNS BETTER, and if it gets MORE POWER and uses LESS FUEL.

All those results are real as well as engine life in 300,000 to 500,000 mile range on now 20 years vehicles whose "useful life" and "certified useful life" for example was ONLY 5 years or 50,000 miles !! (Are you old enough to remember 1984 and cars like BERTONE who used SynLube as OEM fill ?)

No person on this planet ever comes to a mechanic and says I am worried about TBN, can you give me a $20 oil analysis, so I can figure out if I need your $19.95 oil change that is today only on $9.95 special !!!

Get out to real world - and if you posses a decent car - that is not a past it's "useful life" then just may be SynLube is what you need !!!

Miro Kefurt
SynLube, Inc.
Link copied to your clipboard.