Recent Topics
So What Oil Filter Is Everyone Using ?
by crazyoildude
09/19/14 02:30 AM
ACEA ratings
by slidetaker
09/19/14 01:55 AM
Crazy long drain interval
by dan87951
09/19/14 12:55 AM
When did the price of brass go up so high?
by Merkava_4
09/19/14 12:12 AM
MICRO GREEN OIL FILTER
by David1
09/18/14 11:21 PM
Scotland votes in referendum on independence!
by antiqueshell
09/18/14 09:53 PM
Wix 51334XP vs 51344 more media vs better media
by tommygunn
09/18/14 09:43 PM
Alignment Issue, Pulling to the Side
by Nick1994
09/18/14 09:26 PM
Need Opinion On Medical Alert Device Mom Can Wear?
by crazyoildude
09/18/14 09:12 PM
School safety
by CourierDriver
09/18/14 08:49 PM
Strange new noise
by buck91
09/18/14 08:23 PM
Switching Internet service providers??
by ClutchDisc
09/18/14 08:07 PM
Newest Members
FabSpecialists, Sanddog, 87Diesel, genericnj, Quickvr4
51341 Registered Users
Who's Online
22 registered (Char Baby, DaHen, 19jacobob93, ChiaroBlue, Bryankkkk, 97f150, 3 invisible), 532 Guests and 204 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
51341 Members
64 Forums
219451 Topics
3463281 Posts

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

Page 3 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 ... 9 10 >
Topic Options
#3383156 - 05/28/14 02:33 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: fireman1073]
demarpaint Offline


Registered: 07/03/05
Posts: 21083
Loc: NY
Mystic-Even if someone was to pay for the testing, it would take minutes for many of us to nitpick the testing methods and results. Bottom line, if you feel a product has some benefit that you might be in need of, try it. If you don't have the time or desire to get into a slug fest keep your observations and opinions to yourself.
_________________________
GOD Bless our Troops


Top
#3383159 - 05/28/14 02:36 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: fireman1073]
kschachn Offline


Registered: 12/26/05
Posts: 2558
Loc: Upper Midwest
One of the problems with any kind of additive is the relatively small effect they are claiming. For example, if the Archoil oil additive claims to reduce friction, you have to factor in that the coefficient of friction in motor oil is already extremely low. Even if you reduce it by 75% it is still going to be a small amount that is very hard to measure in an operating engine. It's kind of like the difference between buying two lottery tickets instead of just one. The marginal improvement is not a whole lot.

So you get additive companies making claims that for the most part are great sounding claims but nearly impossible to prove. If motor oil was some horrible substance that could barely keep an engine alive, and the additive claimed to improve it by 90%, well great, you could easily see that kind of a difference. But modern oils are already pretty good and any "improvement" whatever it might be is going to be tough to see. Whenever somebody claims a "%improvement", make sure you know what the base numbers are. It would be more meaningful if the additive company posted actual numbers.
_________________________
1994 BMW 530i, 189K
1996 Honda Accord, 203K
1999 Toyota Sienna, 304K
2000 Toyota ECHO, 224K

Top
#3383164 - 05/28/14 02:39 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: Clevy]
kschachn Offline


Registered: 12/26/05
Posts: 2558
Loc: Upper Midwest
So what is that, about a 10% improvement?

Originally Posted By: Clevy
I tested mos2,running a new to me vehicle on my commute which is flat and 30+ miles each way. I established a baseline after 3000+ miles,tracking every tank of fuel,then added mos2 and again tracked consumption for a total of 10000 miles all told.
I used cruise control,bought fuel from the same station and pump every time,so the only actual variable that was uncontrolled was wind speed.
And even then my observations weren't good enough.
All I wanted to to was to test the stuff objectively and see if there were any changes in fuel consumption that could be considered more than just tank to tank variation.
I also wanted to see if my observations in my other vehicles were more than just in my head.
And I proved it to myself that the stuff worked. I gained iirc 3-4mpg consistently,on the highway.
City mileage wasn't noticeable one way or the other however on the highway the increase was significant enough that 1 tank of fuel savings more than covered the cost of the additive,which I call good return on investment.
Now if all my miles were city driven I'm confident there would be little to no fuel economy improvement because of how traffic works,constant stops and starts but when on the highway there was a significant,repeatable improvement.
_________________________
1994 BMW 530i, 189K
1996 Honda Accord, 203K
1999 Toyota Sienna, 304K
2000 Toyota ECHO, 224K

Top
#3383171 - 05/28/14 02:46 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: kschachn]
Mystic Offline


Registered: 03/05/03
Posts: 7435
Loc: Colorado
Nobody has to use any oil supplement, although a new car dealership might try to sell you oil supplements. If a person does not believe in oil supplements, they don't have to use any-period. I do get tired of the people who are promoting some product here and they put down every product and claim their product works. Their product is the grand exception.

Kreen is sold by Kano Labs. I have heard of Kano Labs. I assume they are a reputable company. I have also heard of Turtle Wax (MMO) and Lubegard. I have heard of the company that makes LM moly. I am more likely to buy a product from a company I have heard of before.

Right now I am using very few supplements of any kind. I still use Techron, which was developed by Chevron, an oil company I have heard of.

I do think guys should be allowed at the Oil Additives Section here to discuss varous oil supplements. That is what this section is for.

Top
#3383193 - 05/28/14 03:16 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: fireman1073]
HTSS_TR Offline


Registered: 04/17/06
Posts: 12901
Loc: Irvine, CA
I agree with Mystic.

I tried various additives from only reputable companies such as Lubegard, Liqui Moly(Lubro Moly), Chevron ... Most of them worked as expected. Especially, the cost of those additives are relatively cheap such that if it didn't work it didn't hurt the pocket much.
_________________________
'94 LS400
'00 E430
'04 S2000
"Consumerism has accustomed us to waste. But throwing food away is like stealing it from the poor and hungry" Pop Francis

Top
#3383203 - 05/28/14 03:22 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: kschachn]
Clevy Offline


Registered: 11/11/10
Posts: 7207
Loc: Saskatoon canada
Originally Posted By: kschachn
So what is that, about a 10% improvement?

Originally Posted By: Clevy
I tested mos2,running a new to me vehicle on my commute which is flat and 30+ miles each way. I established a baseline after 3000+ miles,tracking every tank of fuel,then added mos2 and again tracked consumption for a total of 10000 miles all told.
I used cruise control,bought fuel from the same station and pump every time,so the only actual variable that was uncontrolled was wind speed.
And even then my observations weren't good enough.
All I wanted to to was to test the stuff objectively and see if there were any changes in fuel consumption that could be considered more than just tank to tank variation.
I also wanted to see if my observations in my other vehicles were more than just in my head.
And I proved it to myself that the stuff worked. I gained iirc 3-4mpg consistently,on the highway.
City mileage wasn't noticeable one way or the other however on the highway the increase was significant enough that 1 tank of fuel savings more than covered the cost of the additive,which I call good return on investment.
Now if all my miles were city driven I'm confident there would be little to no fuel economy improvement because of how traffic works,constant stops and starts but when on the highway there was a significant,repeatable improvement.


Well the charger baselined at 25ish on the highway,so 3-4 mpg is probably closer to 5% isn't it,or has the sun cooked my brain today.

I don't blame anyone for their skepticism,the whole additive market is pretty much snake oil in pretty containers,but the few that do work as advertised are worth mentioning.
Now I've noticed significant gains only in v-8 engines. Smaller engines don't seem to benefit as much on the fuel consumption end although from the posts I've read some guys do mention a free'er spinning engine,less shake etc,but for me,in the small engines I've used it in fuel consumption wasn't affected enough for me to make note of.
_________________________
2006 Charger RT
Miles x 2 per oil filter

Top
#3383236 - 05/28/14 03:47 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: Clevy]
kschachn Offline


Registered: 12/26/05
Posts: 2558
Loc: Upper Midwest
Ah well I didn't see what car you used it in. I was thinking it was something with higher mileage.

OK so maybe my 530i with the V-8 is a good candidate. My daughter drives it back and forth to school (250 miles each way). Sounds like a fit.

Originally Posted By: Clevy
Well the charger baselined at 25ish on the highway,so 3-4 mpg is probably closer to 5% isn't it,or has the sun cooked my brain today.

I don't blame anyone for their skepticism,the whole additive market is pretty much snake oil in pretty containers,but the few that do work as advertised are worth mentioning.
Now I've noticed significant gains only in v-8 engines. Smaller engines don't seem to benefit as much on the fuel consumption end although from the posts I've read some guys do mention a free'er spinning engine,less shake etc,but for me,in the small engines I've used it in fuel consumption wasn't affected enough for me to make note of.
_________________________
1994 BMW 530i, 189K
1996 Honda Accord, 203K
1999 Toyota Sienna, 304K
2000 Toyota ECHO, 224K

Top
#3383273 - 05/28/14 04:49 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: fireman1073]
Sam2000 Offline


Registered: 03/25/14
Posts: 400
Loc: Nevada
It amuses me that every few weeks we see the same posters NOT talking about the additive that started the thread but instead pontificating on how discussions on additives SHOULD take place. Which companies make good additives, how we should interpret results, what anecdotes are valid and which are not.

Having to wade through these posts every time is suffocating this sub forum.

Top
#3383329 - 05/28/14 05:54 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: fireman1073]
fdcg27 Offline


Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 9255
Loc: OH
19.1 mpg to 19.3 mpg is no more than fillup variation.
Consider this:
The difference between the two is only .15 gallons over a three hundred mile run, or about a beer can and a half. You can easily put in another couple of tenths on a full tank with patience if you'd like, so we can say that archoil did nothing for the fuel economy of your Trib.
Incidentally, 19 mpg is not bad for this heavy AWD vehicle with its thirsty, but very nice flat six.
_________________________
12 Accord LX 22K HGMO 0W-20
09 Forester 64K PU 5W-30
02 Accord 127K G-Oil 5W-30
01 Focus ZX3 98K Synpower 10W-30
95 BMW 318iC 146K Defy 10W-40

Top
#3383340 - 05/28/14 06:04 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: Sam2000]
kschachn Offline


Registered: 12/26/05
Posts: 2558
Loc: Upper Midwest
No doubt. Just like how every few weeks we see the same kind of anecdotal posts about the effectiveness some additive, such as a "hand to the manifold test" or an observed approximate 1% increase in fuel economy. Then when that, as the only offered evidence of effectiveness is discussed, some people decry how the additive itself isn't being discussed. Generally the next comment is a dismissal of any input by those who haven't actually used the product.

Frustrating, isn't it?

Originally Posted By: Sam2000
It amuses me that every few weeks we see the same posters NOT talking about the additive that started the thread but instead pontificating on how discussions on additives SHOULD take place. Which companies make good additives, how we should interpret results, what anecdotes are valid and which are not.

Having to wade through these posts every time is suffocating this sub forum.
_________________________
1994 BMW 530i, 189K
1996 Honda Accord, 203K
1999 Toyota Sienna, 304K
2000 Toyota ECHO, 224K

Top
#3383356 - 05/28/14 06:18 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: fireman1073]
Sam2000 Offline


Registered: 03/25/14
Posts: 400
Loc: Nevada
If someone starts a thread about their use of a particular additive and someone challenges their conclusions about that additive, then that's fine.

But to constantly read posts about how additive discussions should take place and what certain people's additive philosophy is are getting very old.

You'd think they either have a goal to increase their post count or there is some other issue going on with them.

I think I will put certain people on Ignore.

Top
#3383388 - 05/28/14 06:42 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: Sam2000]
Trajan Offline


Registered: 07/16/05
Posts: 3314
Loc: SE PA
Originally Posted By: Sam2000
If someone starts a thread about their use of a particular additive and someone challenges their conclusions about that additive, then that's fine.

But to constantly read posts about how additive discussions should take place and what certain people's additive philosophy is are getting very old.

You'd think they either have a goal to increase their post count or there is some other issue going on with them.

I think I will put certain people on Ignore.


Like people who claim "I don't blame anyone for their skepticism," and their postings complain about said skepticism?

Testimonial hype. Companies love it because they don't have to take responsibility for it.

People love it because they can point to it and avoid any responsibility for knowing exactly what it does. (My dad's uncle's half sister on his mothers side used Brand X in her Locomobile and it didn't kill it. So I'll use it....)


Edited by Trajan (05/28/14 06:47 PM)
_________________________

Lack of harm does not mean proof of benefit.

Top
#3383455 - 05/28/14 07:31 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: fireman1073]
Sam2000 Offline


Registered: 03/25/14
Posts: 400
Loc: Nevada
Trajan, you make 2 good points there.

Firstly, we have some here who talk out of both sides of their face. Unfortunately, many of these people have a high post count and we see their posts way too often. Fortunately, we do have an ignore feature. And what's funny is that these posters don't seem to realize that if they post a lot but offer up inconsistent viewpoints, their credibility will disappear quicker and with more readers due to the increased frequency that their high postings on the same topic are read.

Secondly, most vehicle damage occurs over time, whether it is a poor design or repair, incorrect fluid, or unapproved additive. Thus is why the threshold for qualifying as a CPO vehicle is quite high.

So additive manufacturers rarely have any blame traced back to them. Just like the mechanic who once used the incorrect coolant or transmission fluid will likely get away with it.

Top
#3383548 - 05/28/14 09:29 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: Trajan]
Mystic Offline


Registered: 03/05/03
Posts: 7435
Loc: Colorado
Here's an observation of mine, its always the same old players and one that can't seem to keep the same user name looking to take pokes to rile up people. Oil additives are always going to have anecdotal evidence, no one is going to spend the money to lab test them. Maybe that should be a sticky in the additive section and see if it helps cut down on these types of threads.

Furthermore, as far as I know there is no limit to how many posts a person can make here. In over eleven years I have a little over 7000 posts and replies in posts. That is something like 1.7 posts a day. I don't think that is excessive. Some people have more. Some people less. If the owner of this website and the moderators tell me I am posting too much then I will worry about it. I am not going to worry about it if somebody else who is not a moderator here keeps worrying about how many times I post and reply in posts.

Top
#3383572 - 05/28/14 09:57 PM Re: tried archoil [Re: Mystic]
demarpaint Offline


Registered: 07/03/05
Posts: 21083
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: Mystic
Here's an observation of mine, its always the same old players and one that can't seem to keep the same user name looking to take pokes to rile up people. Oil additives are always going to have anecdotal evidence, no one is going to spend the money to lab test them. Maybe that should be a sticky in the additive section and see if it helps cut down on these types of threads.

Furthermore, as far as I know there is no limit to how many posts a person can make here. In over eleven years I have a little over 7000 posts and replies in posts. That is something like 1.7 posts a day. I don't think that is excessive. Some people have more. Some people less. If the owner of this website and the moderators tell me I am posting too much then I will worry about it. I am not going to worry about it if somebody else who is not a moderator here keeps worrying about how many times I post and reply in posts.


LOL

Nice catch buddy! Time to tweak the ignore list again.
_________________________
GOD Bless our Troops


Top
Page 3 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 ... 9 10 >