Synlube

quote:

Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Yep like I said we produce electricty not bombs...If you google it at least read it...The DOE sites at Savannah River are not commercial reactor's.

BWR's or PWR's are not using heavy water...They produce ELECTRICTY Miro

Your busted.........and now you're backpeddling!! You shoot your mouth off like a loose cannon without thinking, and also you are making false accusations about everything including my identity!

You're mouth is disconnected from your brain!!

ok...Whatever you say Miro...You don't understand I realize that.

Noria the time has come after exposing synlube as a fraud for selling used motor oil as new to close this thread and ban Miro and his other name Captain Kirk.

Please leave the thread open to read though as a warning for all to stay away from this unethical company

If I read right most of reactor use light water, I do believe he work in a nuclear reator why? Simple he have nothing to gain in the process, nothing to prove, nothing to sell all he said is I have full time job….and here go Miro attacking him because he said I have a job wtf .

You are the dishonest one, you become an expert on every domain when it’s needed, someone discredits your computer skill suddenly one of your personalities becomes an engineer. When question about your data, a tribiologyst . If we ask a location suddenly you need credential and security clearance.

You where a wanabee race driver, then a salesman, learns your place! Your scam is been exposed, here like it has been on the other forum you went, face the reality!

quote:

It’s a jeep thing you wouldn’t understand.

quote:

If I read right most of reactor use light water

Got ya thinking.........didn't I...

It was't until I smoked out dawg about the heavy water that he changed from the mention of demineralized water and then moved to damage control mode, because as usual,he spoke without thinking first.......like some other guys here on this board! Heavy water is used very much so in the industry if you would ever read the links that are pasted on this thread like the above link would you know that.

Another loose cannon on the thread I see!! Look at all your remarks so far if you doubt that!!

Most of the time I can never figure out what the heck your posts even say in the first place... and the last one is no exception!!



By the way.......we are now off topic......again!!!

Did you forget that I have this lube in the engines in all of my cars and more.

Explain to me how the engines keep on running perfect over the very long term if the lube is as you say.........not worthy??

By the way...Miro is on the west coast and I am on the East coast. My engines are waiting for any of you characters to see the living proof running flawlessly. Care to take a look at over 91,000 dollars in inventory running with synlube at present when bought new!! Running as good or better than new!!!! Lawn mower included.....make that $91,450. AT least I put my money where my mouth is!!!

Don't knock it until you try it!!!! Otherwise why are you still here????? I have close to a hundred grand at stake and I am not worried the least bit...just the opposite......I am satisfied totally 100%..........what's your exuse and what are you worried about or all excited about anyway??????? Your not using the lube and you only look for every excuse in the book not to. If your not happy here..........leave!!!!

Yes Miro you welcome thank you!

quote:

Originally posted by Miro Kefurt:

And any post from anyone taht is affraid to reveal their name, location e-mail, are sure questionable.

Nice to know you feel that way about kirk/inhaliburton.

Ok then Miro.

Verifiable, direct to the reports links for the ftp/aaa tests you claim to pass.

You claim it, you back it up. No synlube shuffle or Texas two step.

We want to click on the link and read it. No searching for it. no kirk like cries of google it.

Failing that, maybe we'll take the scanned in reports that you should have in your records.

Maybe, given your track record.

In case you forgot, Amsoil is API certified. Something aynlube can't claim. They also have regional warehouses and a HQ we can actually find on a map.

No mail drops or shady claims of operating in a place closed to the general public.

And, just so you know, I do not use Amsoil.

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Kirk:

quote:

Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
They don't use heavy water...We are not building atomic bombs in world war 2.

It' called demineralized water

http://www.global-greenhouse-w...y-water-reactor.html


Just like I figured..............you're clueless about your own Job... Unless of course you sweep the floors over the reactor where you say you work..........that would explain a great deal!! If you don't know what you are talking about............shut up.........or risk making a fool of yourself........too late!!!!!

http://webcache.googleusercont...&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Guess you missed this part: "The first of the five heavy water reactors came online in 1953, and the last was placed in cold shutdown in 1996"

And you didn't pay any attention to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_water_reactor

And this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_water_reactor

Look down the page. What do you see? "The BWR uses demineralized water (light water)"

quote:

Originally posted by Trajan:

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Kirk:

quote:

Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
They don't use heavy water...We are not building atomic bombs in world war 2.

It' called demineralized water

Just wanted to see if You actually sleep trajen.!!!!

Well it's official........you don't sleep ...you just spend every waking hour and every sleeping hour attacking synlube. That's 24/7 !!!!

WOW,YOU REALLY DO HAVE ISSUES MAN!!!

You must be off your meds again. You see......unlike you I take weekends off from this forum and only post on weekdays at night at that! What are you after exactly anyway!!

http://www.global-greenhouse-w...y-water-reactor.html


Just like I figured..............you're clueless about your own Job... Unless of course you sweep the floors over the reactor where you say you work..........that would explain a great deal!! If you don't know what you are talking about............shut up.........or risk making a fool of yourself........too late!!!!!

http://webcache.googleusercont...&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Guess you missed this part: "The first of the five heavy water reactors came online in 1953, and the last was placed in cold shutdown in 1996"

And you didn't pay any attention to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_water_reactor

And this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_water_reactor

Look down the page. What do you see? "The BWR uses demineralized water (light water)"

quote:

Originally posted by Trajan:

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Kirk:

quote:

Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
They don't use heavy water...We are not building atomic bombs in world war 2.

It' called demineralized water

Wow......now you're defending Nuke..........shouldn't a guy who goes by the name of "nuke" be discussing nuclear info and defending himself!

How many hours of reading did you spend chasing me once again! You must be a shell shill..or some other big oil shill.....no doubt.


http://www.global-greenhouse-w...y-water-reactor.html


Just like I figured..............you're clueless about your own Job... Unless of course you sweep the floors over the reactor where you say you work..........that would explain a great deal!! If you don't know what you are talking about............shut up.........or risk making a fool of yourself........too late!!!!!

http://webcache.googleusercont...&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Guess you missed this part: "The first of the five heavy water reactors came online in 1953, and the last was placed in cold shutdown in 1996"

And you didn't pay any attention to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_water_reactor

And this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_water_reactor

Look down the page. What do you see? "The BWR uses demineralized water (light water)"

quote:

Originally posted by Trajan:

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Kirk:

quote:

Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
They don't use heavy water...We are not building atomic bombs in world war 2.

It' called demineralized water

http://www.global-greenhouse-w...y-water-reactor.html


Just like I figured..............you're clueless about your own Job... Unless of course you sweep the floors over the reactor where you say you work..........that would explain a great deal!! If you don't know what you are talking about............shut up.........or risk making a fool of yourself........too late!!!!!

http://webcache.googleusercont...&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Guess you missed this part: "The first of the five heavy water reactors came online in 1953, and the last was placed in cold shutdown in 1996"

And you didn't pay any attention to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_water_reactor

And this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_water_reactor

Look down the page. What do you see? "The BWR uses demineralized water (light water)"

Is nuke/trajen/snakedoctor Canadian or US? Makes a difference!!

Or will you trajen.....answer for nuke once again.......because you are.......nucleardawg!!! It's like shootin fish in a barrel!!!! The only thing being exposed is all of your identities trajen!!!

Now back on topic if you don't mind!!


http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.g...e/nucene/ligwat.html

If anyone thinks VOA/UOA is so reliable..........read this confirmation.

This just confirms what has already been stated about lab results vs the real world engine results.

Labs have many errors and issues with oil sample test results


http://neptune.spacebears.com/...stories/labtest.html

Here is virgin oil from a famous brand engine oil with some water in it according to the lab results. Those lab results will drive ya cazy!!! It's driving these guys bonkers!!

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...wflat&Number=1606542

Margins of error below....yes errors!!!



http://neptune.spacebears.com/...stories/margins.html


Another one with an erroneous fuel reading nuke was sqawking about with synlube....it happens because of sloppy lab work!


http://webcache.googleusercont...&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

The plot thickens yet again with those pesky oil anlaysis results.



<a href="http://www.machinerylubricatio...297/oil-analysis-bus%5B/url%5D" target="_blank">http://www.machinerylubricatio...l-analysis-bus</a>

and yet again....


http://www.machinerylubricatio...l-analysis-standards

Even bob had his take on uoa...


ast-articles-of-the-month%26Itemid%3D78+used+oil+analysis+is+unreliable&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" target="_blank">http://webcache.googleusercont...&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

This takes it a little further and mentions in the article about getting very different results with the same sample of oil and playing with math. I wonder what this test would cost?

http://www.wearcheckusa.com/li...e/techdoc/WZA002.htm


MORE PROOF OF FLAWED LAB WORK.

http://www.hazardouswaste.utah...Adobe/fall08drip.pdf

THIS READ WILL GIVE YOU A MIGRAIN...........BUT MORE PROOF OF VARYING READINGS!!!

http://www.gastopsusa.com/know...thod_Application.pdf

These are from Noria regarding oil sampling. Very good reads!!

http://www.machinerylubricatio...0/oil-sampling-lists

http://www.machinerylubricatio...oil-analysis-program

http://www.machinerylubricatio...l-analysis-standards

http://media.noria.com/pdf/poa/poa200507.pdf

This one talks lubes in aviation...same basic concept though. Errors once again an issue!

http://www.gaalert.com/Problem___Opportunity.html


This last oil analysis article really sums it up very accurate in it's title!

http://www.mt-online.com/compo...ng.html?directory=90

Gentleman......assuming you have read all those links above regarding the accuracy and reliability of the various oil analysis services and techniques.............it's like I have been saying all along..........it's all about real world in the field results.

In my case........my engines never have any issues whatsoever using the lube-4-life.

Kirk/Miro you flunked a UOA VOA, the smoke and mirror retaliation, classic! It isn't working though. Sorry the Mods find this thread entertaining and want to keep it open. More people will view it, be linked to it, and see you for the fraud con artist you are. Keep digging, you'll never get out of this hole. Shutting this thread gave you a chance to stop digging, which BTW is the only way out of a hole. Maybe the Mods are right in keeping it open, it will further trash the product, and keep the public from getting scammed.

AD

quote:

Originally posted by ADFD1:
Kirk/Miro you flunked a UOA VOA, the smoke and mirror retaliation, classic! It isn't working though. Sorry the Mods find this thread entertaining and want to keep it open. More people will view it, be linked to it, and see you for the fraud con artist you are. Keep digging, you'll never get out of this hole. Shutting this thread gave you a chance to stop digging, which BTW is the only way out of a hole. Maybe the Mods are right in keeping it open, it will further trash the product, and keep the public from getting scammed.

AD

Bottom line......why are all my engines running flawless. You have yet to answer that. I have even offered to show anyone my cars,and other equipment. No one accepts the offer.

I have a almost a ten year track record using the lube,with over 60,000 and six years on one car........and perfect engine. All you guys focus on is VOA/UOA. I just proved with above links they are flawed.

My engines are not flawed.......they run perfect and you refuse to accept that.

By the way,I live in New Jersey, not NV where Miro lives. So stop by any time if you care to and see for yourself.

quote:

Originally posted by Houckster:
Just an update:
Ford Ranger FX4, 4.0L V-6 w/5-spd manual
Synlube installed: 27-Jan-2004
Miles: 45,449.7
Avg MPG: 19.774, mostly light city/suburban driving (EPA 15/19)
Other SynLube products: gear oil, power steering fluid, brake fluid, coolant

I have had excellent service from these products. No problems at all.

I use a CM filter and about 2 years ago, I removed it to check for any sign of oil deterioration. There was none. I reinstalled the filter but I replaced the media so that I could show anyone interested.

The engine feels consistantly strong, spark plugs look clean, no deposits on the tailpipe, cold starts, even after extended down time, are effortless. Oil consumption during this time is about 4-6 ounces.

I will take my six years of actual experience over any other standard.

For all the naysayers.......what about Houckster and his very positive experience just like my very positive results. Six years/45,000 miles and running for Houckster.

My engines have run flawless too, and are clean as well. One has over 190,000 miles and according to Miro engines don't last that long. The family has driven a Ford to over 300,000 miles and I have a buddy with a SB Chevy with over 375,000 miles on it, he posts on Bitog. Go figure, American Iron, not even a Yugo!

BTW I live in WA, Jersey is out of the question, sorry. Maybe I can visit Miro in his hidden bunker. I'm in the Military so I'm sure getting onto the site won't be a problem.

I knew as soon as a VOA UOA report came out you'd attack it. I wonder how you would have responded if the report was good, guess we'll never know.

AD