3 ARX cycles, didn't do much, bummer..

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: badtlc

I have 4 actual success stories all on my own.


I am glad auto-rx worked for you.

Quote:
It is amazing to read through the archives on this very site and see all the success stories where people even provided numbers, measurements, pictures, etc. confirming their success.


The problem here is that these numbers cannot be verified, and I am having a very hard time with anything I have read about auto-rx since I did read THE PAID POSTERS FOR AUTO-RX THREAD.

Quote:
Too bad the flamers on here don't take the time to go back and read those, too.


Maybe members who here are considering auto-rx or any other oil additive should read the old threads and then they can make up there own minds.
 
I, too, wonder what the OP's further results were with his vehicle...he has not posted since February of last year, and took a two year hiatus from '07 to '09, but he left this interesting post several years after beginning this thread:

Originally Posted By: mdocod
If "sludge removal" in a sensitive turbo application is something you are after, I would have the following words:

A bottle of ARX tossed in with a dino or Group III for about 2-3K miles followed up by a couple oil changes in the 2K range, again, with regular dino (get a group III synthetic if you are uncomfortable), will have more cleaning power than the PP claims by a long shot. After cleaning is complete, use German Castrol 0w30 and enjoy that engine for another hundred thousand miles without worry on reasonable OCIs. For the sake of comfort, you might repeat ARX treatments once and awhile on those shorter OCIs with dino/III.


Obviously he continues to believe in ARX.
 
Re: '98 328 first ARX 149k Nothing?! [Re: Steelhead]
mdocod Offline


Registered: 07/06/05
Posts: 581
Loc: Colorado, US
The effects of ARX in various engines seems to vary.. I haven't exactly pinpointed it as of yet... But I'm going to list a few of my *hunches* on the subject.

1. Engines that work the oil hard, and have hotspots, and are prone to sludge problems, seem to respond to ARX with the most dramatic obvious results.
2. Engines that work hard in general, and see higher temperatures (thus thinner hotter oil) seem to respond to ARX with more dramatic results with less treatments and or shorter treatment times.
3. Engines that are very "easy" on oil, and do not work hard at all, and don't thin out oil much with heat, tend to be more lax about responding to ARX treatments.

Heat and exposure time are critical factors. Frank and I have had some discussion on this subject. In some engines extended ARX applications are required to get the results, because the engine just doesn't work ARX hard enough to do it's job.

If you are coming up with clean filters after 1500 mile clean and 2000 mile rinse and you want to do another treatment, bump up the clean phase to ~2250-2750 miles and run the rinse as a 2500-3000 mile OCI. Run the #@$%! out of it during the treatment time and try to get the oil temps up, consider blocking off some of the radiator to force it to run a little hot. (just don't go overheating it, try to get the needle to move above the thermostats "position" a little bit once and awhile).
_________________________
trying to think of a better sig line...

I really like this post, run the car really hard and break every traffic law and put yourself at risk as well as other drivers on the road, and you have to block off your radiator to get your car to run hotter,that is if you think auto-rx is not working for you.

This post is from the OP of this thread, we have all seen the pics, I am glad that I am using an oil additive that cleans my engine and I do not have to break every traffic law as well as putting other lives at risk.

I am also glad that I do not have to risk overheating my engine to get my oil additive to work.

If the OP still believes in auto-rx, then that is fine, I will continue using another oil additive.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: chucky2
ok?


chucky2, if you are happy with auto-rx, then that is great, but I do feel that whatever oil additive members use they should be able to hear the good and the bad. JMO
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: PontiacFan
Originally Posted By: chucky2
ok?


chucky2, if you are happy with auto-rx, then that is great, but I do feel that whatever oil additive members use they should be able to hear the good and the bad. JMO


That's fine, I have no problem with that. But I hope you've done the due diligence on this Kreen stuff you're talking up to ensure it's safe for your engine like Auto-RX has proved out to be.

Has there been any UOA confirmation of Kreen in an engine that has a steady UOA history, to ensure it's not causing undue wear on the engine as it Kreen's?

Until people have such engines (with steady number UOA's), do a Kreen (and only Kreen, nothing else to potentially skew), send in that UOA(s), and those UOA's come back OK, this Kreen is an Unknown.

It being able to clean is great, but if it cleans at the expense of accellerated wear, then that should be known.

Chuck
 
IMHO a UOA would be totally useless.
First because if the engine has a large amount of deposits that are being removed any particulate matter contained in them could also show up in the UOA.
Second and engine can literally be coming to pieces and the UOA wont show it because of the size of the particles.

I don't believe the engine should have a steady diat of Kreen but Kano has been making and selling this product a lot longer than ARX has been in business and has a long history to gather data from.
If engines were being damaged then i am sure that after a few blown up engines and suits they would change their recommendation to fuel only as Berrymans Chemtool did.
In this case i believe you have to trust the manufacturer to be selling what they claim and the use they intended it for.I think given Kano labs stellar reputation they are a trustworthy company.

One could claim ARX shows good UOA,s but from my personal experience with that product its no surprise as it didn't clean or dissolve anything that may show up in a UOA anyway.
 
Last edited:
I don't trust any company that's making a buck off me, because, they're in business to make money (off me), not necessairily to pull their own product if they know it may cause issues. They'll do a cost/benefit, and whatever it comes up with, that's likely the direction they'll go.

And I disagree about the UOA's. If someone has a UOA history that shows 1 PPM of lead where in say 3k mi. run intervals, they do this Kreen and take a UOA after 3k mi. and lead is at 89 PPM, that ain't [censored] Kreen is cleaning out of the engine, that's soft metal wear.

I'm not saying Kreen will do that, what I'm saying is, it sounds like no one has an engine with a solid static numbers UOA history, and has done a controlled Kreen program on it, and taken UOA's. Until that happens, it can be the best sludge/varnish remover in the world, it doesn't mean it's not causing undue wear.

Chuck
 
Quote:
don't trust any company that's making a buck off me,


Your kidding right?I guess you trust no company because as far as know every company is in business to make a profit.
UOA is not going to tell you much except maybe fuel dilution or coolant.If there is sludge in the engine then it contains a lot of wear particles since the sludge began to form.
When you liquefy it its all going to be in the oil,maybe a few years worth of wear particles.

There was a Grand national engine that had good UOA's and blew up anyway pretty dramatically.The guy posted pics of the engine and the "good" UOA of the oil that was in there when the engine let go.
Personally i am sceptical of UOA's ability to predict wear trends.
 
Originally Posted By: chucky2
I don't trust any company that's making a buck off me, because, they're in business to make money


As opposed to all of those companies that are in business to NOT make money?
 
Originally Posted By: Trav
Quote:
don't trust any company that's making a buck off me,


Your kidding right?I guess you trust no company because as far as know every company is in business to make a profit.


You're exactly right.

Quote:
UOA is not going to tell you much except maybe fuel dilution or coolant.If there is sludge in the engine then it contains a lot of wear particles since the sludge began to form.
When you liquefy it its all going to be in the oil,maybe a few years worth of wear particles.


This was not seen with UOA example of Auto-RX 'back in the day' (when this board was young and Auto-RX was just getting started. Someone could take a spotless engine with a solid UOA history and run Kreen, just to prove a "healthy" engine and Kreen are OK. Point is, no ones done a Kreen UOA and compared to the same engine with recent steady UOA history. Until that's done, or at least until a few Kreen UOA's are done that show low wear metal results, it's an Unknown in that dept. Period.

Quote:
There was a Grand national engine that had good UOA's and blew up anyway pretty dramatically.The guy posted pics of the engine and the "good" UOA of the oil that was in there when the engine let go.
Personally i am sceptical of UOA's ability to predict wear trends.


That really means nothing in respect to UOA and that example. That example in reality has almost nothing to do with UOA, unless the teardown was done and it showed the cause of destruction was from a wearing part where UOA would have caught that.

Chuck
 
Originally Posted By: Samilcar
Originally Posted By: chucky2
I don't trust any company that's making a buck off me, because, they're in business to make money


As opposed to all of those companies that are in business to NOT make money?


And now you understand why I have no inherant trust of any company.

Chuck
 
Originally Posted By: chucky2
Originally Posted By: Samilcar
Originally Posted By: chucky2
I don't trust any company that's making a buck off me, because, they're in business to make money


As opposed to all of those companies that are in business to NOT make money?


And now you understand why I have no inherant trust of any company.

Chuck


Who is taking the most money off you in a treatment, Arx or Kreen?
(I ask this not actually knowing how much Kreen costs)
 
Originally Posted By: expat
Originally Posted By: chucky2
Originally Posted By: Samilcar
Originally Posted By: chucky2
I don't trust any company that's making a buck off me, because, they're in business to make money


As opposed to all of those companies that are in business to NOT make money?


And now you understand why I have no inherant trust of any company.

Chuck


Who is taking the most money off you in a treatment, Arx or Kreen?
(I ask this not actually knowing how much Kreen costs)


Kreen cost about $13/qt plus shipping. I just got mine yesterday. They also give you a free aerosol product of your choice to try. If you are not happy with Kreen they'll give you your money back. Seems like a good deal to me. I bought it to add to gas to see if I can completely eliminate an occasional intermittent stumbling problem I have with my E-150.
 
Quote:
This was not seen with UOA example of Auto-RX 'back in the day'


Okay but doesnt ARX claim to work slowly?
Why do you keep bringing ARX into this? I bought ARX and used it on many engines with miserable results,not just 2 or 3 engines but many hundreds of dollars worth of the product and not much was removed so i can see why there was no increase in wear metals in a UOA.


Quote:
That example in reality has almost nothing to do with UOA, unless the teardown was done and it showed the cause of destruction was from a wearing part where UOA would have caught that.


IIRC that was done exactly as you suggest!
But let me ask you this even if wear metals were slightly elevated for 1000 miles what real difference would it make in the life of the engine? we are talking PPM here not chunks of lead or iron being dumped into the oil.
This is BITOG where even a great oil like Mobil 1 is suspected by some to cause high iron numbers possibly contributing to premature engine failure.
IMO you are attempting to use scare tactics to discredit a product you haven't used and promote a very expensive product that has had its abilities brought into question more than a few times.

I have nothing against UOA's but they have to be interpreted properly and anything used in the oil or fuel can skew the results.Even brand new engines show elevated wear particles breaking in.All i can say is that in the engines i have used Kreen in they have collectively accumulated tens of thousand of miles without any oil related failures whatsoever.
 
Originally Posted By: Trav
IMO you are attempting to use scare tactics to discredit a product you haven't used and promote a very expensive product that has had its abilities brought into question more than a few times.


+1
 
Don't misunderstand me the UOA on an engine that is running the same oil without additives in the oil that clean,thicken,or add metals to the mix in an attempt to correct a engine on its last legs may very well provide some valuable information.
As soon as you add anything into the oil or fuel IMO the door is open for skewed results.

My question is simple how can anyone tell the age of the wear particles being released into the oil? Are they recent in this OCI or are they from deposits that had accumulated prior too and are are now being released by some cleaner that is in the oil?

IMHO its about trusting the maker of the product.
After all we do this every single day when we buy fuel,food,drinks you name it.we are trusting the manufacturer of the product that it will not damage the engine or poison us.
As far as Kreen goes Kano labs recommend it for use in the oil and the fuel and have been doing so for years.
They are known for high quality products and have a spotless reputation i have no reason to mistrust them or believe that they are selling a product for decades that will grenade my engine.
 
Originally Posted By: Trav
As far as Kreen goes Kano labs recommend it for use in the oil and the fuel and have been doing so for years.
They are known for high quality products and have a spotless reputation i have no reason to mistrust them or believe that they are selling a product for decades that will grenade my engine.


I believe Kano labs has been around since 1939, that is alot longer than auto-rx has been around, I believe the auto-rx company is about 10 years old and I wonder if they have any data that shows if Kreen or any other oil additive is bad for our engines.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
Chemtool B12 in Oil
Replies
13
Views
2K
nicholas
Vapor Lock
Formulated by the Mad Scientist
Replies
17
Views
2K
Vapor Lock
P
2021 Ford Mustang GT500, Mobile 1 Supercar 5w50, 6hrs track time plus some street miles.
Replies
11
Views
596
Indyxc
OVERKILL
Ontario nuclear update - January 30th, 2024 - Pickering refurb announced
Replies
6
Views
213
Danno
M
The importance of Safety glasses...
2
Replies
20
Views
941
ripcord
Back
Top