Archoil AR6200

Status
Not open for further replies.
OK. Great to see that you have finally tried AR6200, kschachn!

What is your impression after the first 1000 miles?
 
Last edited:
Can you see for yourself how stupid it looks like, when somebody who doesn't have first-hand knowledge about AR6200, cycles into this tread.

Having tried it, is actually the criteria for saying something under this tread.

You still doesn't understand it, or...?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Did you look that up? The "EPA CMB" is a Chemical Mass Balance model, not even a test as such. It is a computer model. And it is used to predict air pollution.

Unless there is another "EPA CMB test" then this doesn't appear to even relate to what they claim.

Originally Posted By: jonny-b
"AR6200 Fuel Modification Complex was developed to address the shortcomings in carbon based fuels. AR6200 utilizes the principle of catalysis and at the same time is a demulsifier, increases available combustion BTU by lowering the burn rate, controls bacteria growth, a polymerization retardant and more. Tested in the field for MPG using the EPA CMB test averaging an 8% improvement, the most accurate EPA test for MPG. Can be used in any carbon fuel type including bunker and will maintain storage fuel integrity. One pint treats 1280 gallons".

It looks like they know it because of the testing.


Late to this thread, but good catch, kschachn.

CMB is a source-receptor model used to do source apportionment of regional air pollutants. It was developed by the Principal Investigators at the Desert Research Institute's Environmental Anyalysis Facility. This is where I spent the last 17 years of my career at DRI. A large part of my work there was analyzing source and ambient samples and putting the results into final form for input into CMB.

I can tell you without a doubt that Archoil did not use CMB to determine a fuel milage increase of an additive.

CMB is used to "back out" the sources of pollution in an area. Source profiles are generated by sampling major point sources in the area of interest; refinery stack emissions, cooking(Burger King is a big polluter), power plants, chemical factories, etc. These samples are comprehensively analyzed to create a chemical signature of each point source. Non-point source emission source profiles are added to the data; gasoline powered vehicles, light, medium, and heavy duty diesel, OPE, BBQ, etc. Ambient samples are taken around the region, neighborhood, or even a specific point such as an elementary school. CMB backs out the contribution of each source profile entered to the specific ambient sample of interest.

CMB

Ed
 
You don't need to have tried a product to comment on it. Especially when there are plenty of very knowledgeable people here...
 
found this online
http://www.archoil.nl/pdf/msds/SDS%20AR6200%20NL%28EN%29.pdf

Composition/information on ingredients
3.1 Mixtures
Chemical Name
Concentration CAS Number EC Number R/H Phrases* Symbols
1-decene, homopolymer, hydrogenated 1-5% 68037-01-4 500-183-1 H304
R65
GHS08
Xn
Distillates (petroleum) hydrotreated light 70-80% 64742-47-8 265-149-8 H304
R65
GHS08
Xn
Solvent naphtha (petroleum) heavy aromatic 10-20% 64742-94-5 265-198-5 H304
R65
GHS08
Xn
Ethylenediamine
H312, H314,
H317, H334
R10, R21/22,
R34, R42/43
GHS02, GHS05,
GHS07, GHS08
Xn, C
Hexahydro-1,3,5-triethyl-s-triazine
H314, H317,
H318, H330,
H400, H410
R22, R24,
R26, R34,
R43, R41,
R50-53
GHS05, GHS06,
GHS09
T+, C, N

70-80% light petroleum distillate and 10-20% naptha
not too special
 
Last edited:
What you found there, spasm3, is actually quite useful.

However, when I started this tread, I was thinking more of a tread where actual users of this product could say something.
Good or bad.

If someone with great technical know-how, tribologists and others have something they want to share, it would be great if they did it in another tread, where they can tell everyone what they know about this product, what they feel about this product, etc, etc, etc,......

But, interestingly enough, people who claim this or that about a product they haven't tried, must have quite a desperate need to say something about a product they should not care about.

Unless it is an effort to look smart, or trying to talk down a bothersome competition.

Or, it could be a natural talent of being rude.
Who knows?
 
What is it about the MSDS you find useful?

Originally Posted By: jonny-b
What you found there, spasm3, is actually quite useful.
 
Wow. You're not going to scare me away by demanding that I not address you again, LOL.

You were the one who said the post was useful, in fact you said it was "quite useful". I wondered what it was that you found useful about the data that was posted.

I don't think that I have once been demeaning or rude here, yet you continue to be that way. And I have made up my mind? Absolutely not. But it certainly appears you have, at least to the extent that you do not want to know if the product is of any value or not.
 
kschachn, I found it was interesting that it is biodegradable and does no harm if it leaks into water.

I really don't understand your speculation in if I don't want to know if the product is of any value or not?

How can you ask such a strange question, when you know that I am using it (AR6200)?

I already know that it is useful.

But, in which, and how many ways, I will come back to when I have driven 2000 kilometers with both my personal cars.

As I have said before.

The advantage of using 20 Bucks in product and testing it personally, is that you can see/feel/measure what differences that occur.

How far you want to go with it, depends on if you have your own private lab.

However, if several persons that have actually USED it, tell what they experience, it is an indication that it does something.

Good or bad.

I have to repeat once again, that this tread was meant for those who have actually tried the product.

Those who like speculations, can start their own tread.

Of course, for a person who want to sabotage this tread, it is very easy to do what kschachn have done with success, so far.
 
Last edited:
Well, first off please explain to me how asking you questions about posts YOU have made to this thread is somehow "sabotaging" it. You posted the data, I only asked about what YOU posted.

And second, why would I or anyone spend $20 on a product and test it, when the company is making apparently unsubstantiated and dubious claims?

Why would you?
 
I believe you are on thin ice here, kschacn.

What you consider dubious claims, may look different, to others.

I am very glad I decided to try it, after a couple of months sitting on the fence.

It looks like most people that have tried it, are impressed.

You are ruining this tread because of stupid questions, that you know (since I told I will not report until after I have driven 2000 km)I will not answer, yet.

People get tired when they read meaningless hypothesis and speculations about a product.
From a person who haven't even seen the product in real life.

That's the difference from belief to knowledge.

We all know what kind of damage belief and religion can do, and what you appear to do is quite similar.

You have only changed out the religion with your hate against additives.

Why can't you be quiet for a while, so that people who have actually tried this, can report their findings?

If you feel an itching desire to write something, start your own tread.
 
I am on the fence re: the fuel system additive... and I am aware that others use it and claim it works..... I would like to keep the criticisms non-personal and focused on the product. I appreciate the points of view of both jonny-b and kschachn re: Archoil...but as far as I am concerned the personal differences miss the point of a good, objective, discussion.
 
Jonny-b got what he deserved. As he said himself, he sure ain't no diplomat. I agree.

How it works around here is we share stories and anecdotal experiences, but once in a while some 'proof' is requested. When that happens you can be a jerk and tell the guy to buzz off like Jonny-b did or you could consider responding in a civil tone.

I occasionally use additives, and I cannot always provide iron clad proof of their effectiveness. But in an open forum it may be unreasonable to expect everyone to simply do as you tell them! Not likely at all when done brusquely...
 
Yeah, at first you think you are having a rational discussion but then realize it isn't rational, and will go nowhere.

jonny-b you win. The specs and claims that Archoil publishes about AR6200 are all sound, as is their testing methodology. I didn't realize my questions were stupid and that I shouldn't be questioning their published data that you yourself posted. I didn't know that taking what they said without questioning it was, as you say, "the difference from belief to knowledge".

Above all I did not realize my questions were "meaningless hypothesis and speculations about a product". You see, I thought that described the product's claims instead. I also didn't know that "testing it personally, is that you can see/feel/measure what differences that occur" was what was important. I thought what was important was the integrity of the claims the manufacturer made for the product, backed by at least a shred of substantiated test data.

When you're right, you're right.
 
"Just wonder if anyone here has tried AR6200, over more than 1000 miles?

If you haven't, don't bother to write anything, since it won't be of any value".


This is the excact wordings that starts this tread.

Can it be said much clearer?

Which part of it didn't you understand, kschacn?[color:#FF0000][/color]
 
Last edited:
I rule in favor of jonny-b. It really sucks when a thread specifically makes a request and others feel they are too smart to comply.

I feel your pain jonny-b. It happens all the time on this site and is the worst part of this site now days. Sticking to a topic is impossible. Keep fighting the good fight. Hopefully some people who have tried it will chime in soon.

I'd like to try archoil products if I can find them for a reasonable price and would love to read the experiences of others.
 
I agree with badtlc about this site!! however, it is till a great site to learn from. archoil is awesome and a sleeper that has come to life.
 
Last edited:
^^^Yes, and some wonder WHY I sometimes feel the need to 'pre-emptively strike' in threads I start on here!
lol.gif
 
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
^^^Yes, and some wonder WHY I sometimes feel the need to 'pre-emptively strike' in threads I start on here!
lol.gif



But seriously, think about it and you can't possibly think it's not going to fire someone up when you tell them to shut up and go away because you don't appreciate their comments?

It's a public forum. Expect dissent, people who want to censor the comments in threads are thinking very unreasonably. It's going to happen...
 
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
^^^Yes, and some wonder WHY I sometimes feel the need to 'pre-emptively strike' in threads I start on here!
lol.gif



But seriously, think about it and you can't possibly think it's not going to fire someone up when you tell them to shut up and go away because you don't appreciate their comments?

It's a public forum. Expect dissent, people who want to censor the comments in threads are thinking very unreasonably. It's going to happen...


This is true. However when you spell it all out, and are very specific in who should answer, meaning only people who used the product in this case, it can be frustrating. I've seen it in other threads where very specific questions were asked, and people twist things around just to reply ignoring the question and how it was asked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top