Recent Topics
Motorcraft SAE 75w90 Premium 4x4 Front Axle Lubric
by FordSUVTruck
09/02/14 06:00 AM
1997 Shell Product Data Book - XHVI Lubes
by Shannow
09/02/14 03:58 AM
Kohler engine likes to burn oil as much as gas.
by cwatkin
09/01/14 11:19 PM
Front wheel bearing issue
by JHZR2
09/01/14 11:13 PM
Preferences
by 01_celica_gt
09/01/14 10:49 PM
91 Civic Hatch 3dr Si coolant hose
by Gito
09/01/14 10:19 PM
Who rev matches their downshifts?
by Klutch9
09/01/14 09:41 PM
'08 BMW 328xi, BMW 5W30, 10.5k OCI, 57k vehicle
by grumpyoldman
09/01/14 09:35 PM
1 yr, 3 yr, 5yr or since inception?
by bustednutz
09/01/14 08:45 PM
2009 Mustang 4.0 Tremec fluid
by Skeet6
09/01/14 08:35 PM
where to order slip on rocker panels
by eljefino
09/01/14 07:56 PM
Accords MPG on recent trip...
by gregk24
09/01/14 07:27 PM
Newest Members
SparkSVT, grumpyoldman, jbl_91762, PapasGuy, fanie
51170 Registered Users
Who's Online
51 registered (BISCUT, Bob5150, Archtop_Picker, Best F100, 1foxracing, aimatdeer, 2 invisible), 863 Guests and 211 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
51170 Members
64 Forums
218659 Topics
3447915 Posts

Max Online: 2862 @ 07/07/14 03:10 PM
Donate to BITOG

Page 4 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >
Topic Options
#3285690 - 02/17/14 09:17 PM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: jonny-b]
edhackett Offline


Registered: 06/09/03
Posts: 1527
Loc: Sequim, WA
Yes, let's get back to discussing AR6200.

What do you think of the fact that Archoil is flat out lying concerning the testing done on AR6200?

Ed
_________________________
Never attribute to engineers that into which politicians, lawyers, accountants, and marketeers have poked their fingers.

Top
#3285849 - 02/18/14 02:46 AM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: edhackett]
Clevy Offline


Registered: 11/11/10
Posts: 7102
Loc: Saskatoon canada
Originally Posted By: edhackett
Yes, let's get back to discussing AR6200.

What do you think of the fact that Archoil is flat out lying concerning the testing done on AR6200?

Ed



I certainly find the entire thing interesting.
I'll stick with liqui-moly. I know their stuff works and every product they make performs as advertised.
_________________________
2006 Charger RT
Miles x 2 per oil filter

Top
#3285950 - 02/18/14 07:39 AM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: edhackett]
simple_simon Offline


Registered: 01/26/11
Posts: 103
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
Originally Posted By: edhackett
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


Good info here. Not so good for Archoil though.

Top
#3286119 - 02/18/14 11:31 AM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: edhackett]
panthermike Offline


Registered: 04/01/08
Posts: 3161
Loc: Phoenix, AZ
Originally Posted By: edhackett
Yes, let's get back to discussing AR6200.

What do you think of the fact that Archoil is flat out lying concerning the testing done on AR6200?

Ed


I'm currently using this product with good results so far in the '77 F250. But I am interested in this CMB testing as well, I've emailed Archoil about it, we'll see what they say.
_________________________
'10 Mazda 6; QSUD 5w20 + Ceratec/MC Filter 30K mi
'12 Civic; PP 0w20 + LG Biotech/Fram Ultra 28K mi
'77 F250 "Ol Yeller"; Delvac/RL Mix +AR9100


Top
#3286851 - 02/19/14 01:07 AM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: jonny-b]
edhackett Offline


Registered: 06/09/03
Posts: 1527
Loc: Sequim, WA
I couldn't believe Archoil could really be that blatant in misrepresenting their testing. I did some more research into what they may have done.

They actually did use a method appropriate to what they were testing; method AS2077-1982, carbon mass balance. Abbreviating carbon mass balance as CMB is improper, as CMB is the proper name of the receptor model. They need to refer to the test by its full method name to eliminate confusion. Any search of EPA CMB will bring up only references to the receptor model.

Ed
_________________________
Never attribute to engineers that into which politicians, lawyers, accountants, and marketeers have poked their fingers.

Top
#3286905 - 02/19/14 06:01 AM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: edhackett]
simple_simon Offline


Registered: 01/26/11
Posts: 103
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
Originally Posted By: edhackett
I couldn't believe Archoil could really be that blatant in misrepresenting their testing. I did some more research into what they may have done.

They actually did use a method appropriate to what they were testing; method AS2077-1982, carbon mass balance. Abbreviating carbon mass balance as CMB is improper, as CMB is the proper name of the receptor model. They need to refer to the test by its full method name to eliminate confusion. Any search of EPA CMB will bring up only references to the receptor model.

Ed


This is correct as per: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:v5TUGGFLdIUJ:www.archoil.com/stage/assets/File/CARBON%2520MASS%2520BALANCE%2520TEST.pdf


Edited by simple_simon (02/19/14 06:02 AM)

Top
#3286907 - 02/19/14 06:15 AM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: edhackett]
demarpaint Offline


Registered: 07/03/05
Posts: 20988
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: edhackett
I couldn't believe Archoil could really be that blatant in misrepresenting their testing. I did some more research into what they may have done.

They actually did use a method appropriate to what they were testing; method AS2077-1982, carbon mass balance. Abbreviating carbon mass balance as CMB is improper, as CMB is the proper name of the receptor model. They need to refer to the test by its full method name to eliminate confusion. Any search of EPA CMB will bring up only references to the receptor model.

Ed


Based on that could the results they claim be within the boundaries of reality?
_________________________
GOD Bless our Troops!


Top
#3287094 - 02/19/14 10:50 AM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: jonny-b]
panthermike Offline


Registered: 04/01/08
Posts: 3161
Loc: Phoenix, AZ
Archoil sent me a 38 page pdf on their testing, can I link it somehow here?
_________________________
'10 Mazda 6; QSUD 5w20 + Ceratec/MC Filter 30K mi
'12 Civic; PP 0w20 + LG Biotech/Fram Ultra 28K mi
'77 F250 "Ol Yeller"; Delvac/RL Mix +AR9100


Top
#3288340 - 02/20/14 12:12 PM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: jonny-b]
Tron1 Offline


Registered: 04/29/10
Posts: 31
Loc: SACRAMENTO, CA USA
Thanks for that bit of research Ed, good work! That makes me feel more confident in the product. Let's continue the discussions.
_________________________
1965 Shelby Superformance Cobra - Honda S2000 - Toyota Venza V6 - Ford Crown Vic Police Inteceptor (for sale)

Top
#3288439 - 02/20/14 01:23 PM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: jonny-b]
a2gtinut Offline


Registered: 01/27/08
Posts: 11
Loc: Earth
I am on first tank of BP gas with AR6200. Second car should get it this weekend.

Top
#3288465 - 02/20/14 01:41 PM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: jonny-b]
jonny-b Offline


Registered: 01/06/06
Posts: 1071
Loc: Norway
Hi, a2gtinut.
Did you follow the instruction and use 1 to 5000 the first tank?
Translated to 10 ml for 50 liters(13 US gallons).

After that, only 5 ml for 50 liters, are needed(1 to 10 000).

What car brands is it?

Top
#3291757 - 02/23/14 02:05 PM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: jonny-b]
panthermike Offline


Registered: 04/01/08
Posts: 3161
Loc: Phoenix, AZ
Been a few weeks now in the F250. One observation so far is that cold starts are much improved. The truck often sits 5+ days without starting and usually I need to start it 2-3 times to keep it running. Since the addition of the Archoil, the truck has started on the first try every time. Not sure how it works, but it's been nice.

In the next couple of weeks, I will be putting Archoil's claims of reduced emissions to the test. The tuning on the truck is the same as last year, the only difference will be using Archoil in the fuel and the oil(only in the fuel at the moment). Last year it passed by 1ppm on the idle Hydrocarbon, so we'll see!
_________________________
'10 Mazda 6; QSUD 5w20 + Ceratec/MC Filter 30K mi
'12 Civic; PP 0w20 + LG Biotech/Fram Ultra 28K mi
'77 F250 "Ol Yeller"; Delvac/RL Mix +AR9100


Top
#3291861 - 02/23/14 03:19 PM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: jonny-b]
jonny-b Offline


Registered: 01/06/06
Posts: 1071
Loc: Norway
Hi, panthermike!

It is great that you haven't made any changes since the last emission testing.

It will be great to see the numbers.

I guess there will be many more, accurate readings, when people start using it.
I guess that maybe in 2 or 3 years, even those who haven't tried it, but still say it doesn't work, will be using it.

Top
#3291929 - 02/23/14 04:04 PM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: jonny-b]
boxcartommie22 Offline


Registered: 01/03/03
Posts: 2979
Loc: moutain country
jonny-b,thanks for your wisdom and listening on here, its amazing how some people on here trash peoples info. and experiences..
_________________________
2001 Lincoln Conti,RL,K&N,SS Filter,Lubegard,Archoil
2007 Grand Marquis,RL,K&N,SS Filter,Lubegard,Archoil
2010 Raptor,RL,SS Filter,Lubegard,Archoil

Top
#3291959 - 02/23/14 04:33 PM Re: Archoil AR6200 [Re: boxcartommie22]
simple_simon Offline


Registered: 01/26/11
Posts: 103
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
Originally Posted By: boxcartommie22
jonny-b,thanks for your wisdom and listening on here, its amazing how some people on here trash peoples info. and experiences..


Like how an oil additive magically changes the temperature of the thermostat installed in the cooling system? With that kind of "proof", Archoil has a LONG way to go to prove themselves to the intelligent members of BITOG.

I will say that AR9100 has gotten very positive reviews from the PowerStroke diesel crowd as the oil is used to operate the fuel injectors in those engines. Of course, Kreen has been shown to do the same thing for a lot less money.

Top
Page 4 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >