Debating the Lucas Saga

Status
Not open for further replies.
Von,

I don't have a good answer to any of your questions. However, I am now at the point that I want to see data for any position. If lucas et al. wants my business, they will have to show me some data. Likewise, I know that I cannot say that most additives are harmful. So, I also cannot make negative claims against the additive companies. I don't have that data either.

I am most cautious about products that use an emotional appeal to sell. I really don't care care how many people "feel" that a product is good or bad. I am very interested in what people "think" about a product.

GreaseMonkey,
I have seen Lucas, STP, and CD-2 used in many engines, including fairly high RPM engines. I have never seen an aeration issue. On the other hand, I have seen both Lucas and STP make some fairly thick paste when used in manual transmissions. As a kid, I saw the same aeration issue with STP used in bicycle wheel bearings (I don't know why even an eight-year-old would think that STP would stay in the bearing - make an sticky mess on the floor where you park).
 
quote:

Aren't we tired of talking about the same old thing? There is plenty of new ground to be covered, but we keep talking about the same old stuff.

That's a very liberal usage of the term "we" for someone who just shows up to beat the drum for Lucas products.

Yes, I remember your 6.0L UOA report, seemed rather like you were trying to "bait" someone into providing you with more Lucas information.
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=002823;p=1

And your comment from a few weeks later in this thread:
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=012184;p=1#000001

What's with the constant references to anti-Lucas sentiment?

Now, if you are a life-long Valvoline user/fanatic, I could see why you may feel abused & neglected...
smile.gif
 
Von, I admit, I've always been curious about Lucas since Bob's experiments. But you've also got to admit that there are a lot of variables between your two UOA's, just like one or two other folks mentioned.

According to the MSDS's, the synth stuff is tons thinner than the HD version. If it's thin, what's the point? I'd like to see a VOA myself. It's gotta have some additives otherwise....
 
Obviously he is a moron! He can read the white papers on the product and see that it is chiefly bright stock. If he is not going to do a UOA to see if it is makeing any difference good or bad just write him off! He obviously has his mind made up even though he has even less evidence then what you have presented him with. The fact that his other 5 vechiles have not self destructed due to Lucas use is all the proof he needs. I doubt that anything will change his mind.

I have found that trying to educate anyone is usualy a waste of time. I try to educate myself and then share my ideas with others of like quriosity(sp). People with closed minds are too frustrateing to deal with. This is one reason I like bitog! Even though we often see strong differences of opions on this site I never feel like I am talking to someone that is closed minded!!!
 
Post Preview
Blue99, the reason I popped up and then disappeared was because I realized that there are serious agenda's among the professionals on this site, and I didn't want any part of it.
I don't even check this forum very often anymore because of the lack of honest discourse.
I DON'T POST STUFF I DON'T KNOW ABOUT.
When I saw the Lucas Synthetic at AutoZone (I hadn't heard of it), I remembered the Bob test of the original (which I wasn't willing to use in my truck - too thick) and said h$ll, I'll be the guinea pig for this and post it on the forum. The posts are getting boring and this will be great (how innocent). So I used it, ran the UOA with Blackstone, paid Terry for his advice, posted it on the forum, and......nothing. I was p$ssed, because I realized that the forum I thought was all about honesty and knowledge based on experiments where no data was available, and UOA's when available, was really a bunch of guys like me who don't know crap$$, and a bunch of experts pimping for their companies.
You CANNOT badmouth a product based on an experiment, and then not take a look at a valid UOA. That's dishonest. (I know Bob can't anymore.) I don't give a rat's a$$ about Lucas or their products. I already told you I don't use them because the original is too thick, and the synthetic is too expensive. But I thought we were giving everyone a fair shake here. The ONLY reason I talk about Lucas is because it is the only one I have run a test on.
pat.gif

As far as the "liberal usage of the term "we"", maybe the rest of you guys are excited to hear another thick/vs/thin thread, or another UOA on a 97 Carolla that shows yet again low wear. I'm bored with it all. Let's try some addatives, witches brew, new oils, new viscosities, anything, and pony up $20 for a test. I did it, and what do I get? "Funny you only post about Lucas." Well get out there and pay for something and test it yourself. It would be a breath of fresh air.
Von
 
Blue99- you're just making Von's point for him. Von has a good point with the response to his UOA, and yet you ignore that and all of his questions. He's not beating the drum for Lucas, just wondering aloud why it is not discussed as objectively as other products. And he has a good point. You do not.
 
if anything Von is more openminded than most on this board. There are two many bashing themes and not enough unbiased data evaluation.
 
Boy, Von, you sure have a chip on your shoulder. The world didn't stand up and salute you for your single UOA--what a rude world!

All your UOA showed is that your truck is generating fewer wear particles at 65K than at 27K. We don't know how much of that is due to break-in of your engine. We don't know how much of that is due to a change in vehicle use. We don't know if your UOA might have been better or worse without the Lucas.

If you really want to "prove" how well Lucas works, run it for thee UOAs to establish a baseline of performance, then don't run it for three UOAs to see if there's a change, then run it again for three UOAs to see if there's a change.

Yeah, that's a real pain to do, but it's the closest thing you could do with just your vehicle to show whether Lucas has an effect or not.

Until then, I'll stick with my Auto-Rx and LC20--both of which have many UOAs and before/after photos showing their effectiveness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top