Departed Terry Dyson used to talk about ARX 'liquid filter' but I never understood what he was getting at
2 bottle Auto-Rx test
- Thread starter BarkerMan
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Originally Posted By: Oilgal
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
How many miles ago did you put in the first, Oilgal?
About 400 miles or three weeks ago Gary. Why do you ask?
I'm just curious. I pondered some (putting on some Star Trek hat for a moment) "phase" difference in how a second bottle added on top of an "aged" bottle works out. Just one of those things like adding 10 day old milk to 5 day old milk ..I don't think you get 7.5 day old milk.
DOH!
Now I think I know what you mean Gary. I have been thinking more about this just today in fact. I don't want hijack this thread, and so I will talk about in my 'ARX anomaly?' thread.
Originally Posted By: Oilgal
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
How many miles ago did you put in the first, Oilgal?
About 400 miles or three weeks ago Gary. Why do you ask?
I'm just curious. I pondered some (putting on some Star Trek hat for a moment) "phase" difference in how a second bottle added on top of an "aged" bottle works out. Just one of those things like adding 10 day old milk to 5 day old milk ..I don't think you get 7.5 day old milk.
DOH!
The maintenance plan may well reduce oil burning too. I'm still working on this one. I want to look into the idea of a small dose maybe every 1k miles to control consumption. The problem with suggesting that is that no one really wants to be stuck adding a small dose every 1k miles for instance. For me I'd do it if it worked but for many it would be just too much to ask, it won't happen.
Back to the 3 bottle question we need Frank to pipe in. I hear that three bottles is just too much to be added. The idea is that more is not always better. Two is better but three is not.
Back to the 3 bottle question we need Frank to pipe in. I hear that three bottles is just too much to be added. The idea is that more is not always better. Two is better but three is not.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Originally Posted By: saaber1
Seems like your oil viscosity would be real high with 3 bottles added. Especially if you had a small sump.
One would think so, wouldn't they? I recall that Dan's 2 bottle experiment had UOA data that showed visc loss due to fuel dilution and/or shearing ..but it's hard to say in the presence of a fuel problem. Would it have been more (lower visc) without the Auto-Rx?
I've seen no out of whack viscosities with Auto-Rx in the large number of clean phase UOA ..but again, it would be hard to factor out all the variables. It's mostly been transparent in usage from every indication that I've seen.
We've seen that 2 bottles, in a 5 quart sump, is not intrusive ..but I'm sure that there's a limit.
Seems like your oil viscosity would be real high with 3 bottles added. Especially if you had a small sump.
One would think so, wouldn't they? I recall that Dan's 2 bottle experiment had UOA data that showed visc loss due to fuel dilution and/or shearing ..but it's hard to say in the presence of a fuel problem. Would it have been more (lower visc) without the Auto-Rx?
I've seen no out of whack viscosities with Auto-Rx in the large number of clean phase UOA ..but again, it would be hard to factor out all the variables. It's mostly been transparent in usage from every indication that I've seen.
We've seen that 2 bottles, in a 5 quart sump, is not intrusive ..but I'm sure that there's a limit.
I'd wished I wasn't into my first rinse phase in both my saturn and bimmer using the one bottle method. Both are closer to the 200K mile mark and will require a second application of ARX. But the wait time between OCI is killing me. This is the one time in my life I wish I had to drive more. 
I will dump another bottle into the Pontiac since I just started the clean phase.
I will dump another bottle into the Pontiac since I just started the clean phase.
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Originally Posted By: saaber1
Seems like your oil viscosity would be real high with 3 bottles added. Especially if you had a small sump.
One would think so, wouldn't they? I recall that Dan's 2 bottle experiment had UOA data that showed visc loss due to fuel dilution and/or shearing ..but it's hard to say in the presence of a fuel problem. Would it have been more (lower visc) without the Auto-Rx?
I've seen no out of whack viscosities with Auto-Rx in the large number of clean phase UOA ..but again, it would be hard to factor out all the variables. It's mostly been transparent in usage from every indication that I've seen.
We've seen that 2 bottles, in a 5 quart sump, is not intrusive ..but I'm sure that there's a limit.
What is the viscosity of Auto-RX?
For a 6qt sump f.e., I wonder would it be just like adding one quart of heavy weight oil to 5 quarts of lower weight oil (in terms of viscosity I mean)?
The rate published on the ARX MSDS sheet it is 2oz. ARX per 32 oz. of oil, or roughly 6% ARX. For a 6 qt sump, two bottles (24oz) would be around 12% (24oz/192oz). 3 bottles (36oz.) would be around 19% ARX.
So in terms of viscosity increase (if any), I guess it really depends on the viscosity of the ARX, viscosity of the oil used, and sump size (I'm purposely excluding all other factors here such as thickening due to removal of sludge, fuel dilution, etc. etc. just to keep it simple for the moment).
Originally Posted By: saaber1
Seems like your oil viscosity would be real high with 3 bottles added. Especially if you had a small sump.
One would think so, wouldn't they? I recall that Dan's 2 bottle experiment had UOA data that showed visc loss due to fuel dilution and/or shearing ..but it's hard to say in the presence of a fuel problem. Would it have been more (lower visc) without the Auto-Rx?
I've seen no out of whack viscosities with Auto-Rx in the large number of clean phase UOA ..but again, it would be hard to factor out all the variables. It's mostly been transparent in usage from every indication that I've seen.
We've seen that 2 bottles, in a 5 quart sump, is not intrusive ..but I'm sure that there's a limit.
What is the viscosity of Auto-RX?
For a 6qt sump f.e., I wonder would it be just like adding one quart of heavy weight oil to 5 quarts of lower weight oil (in terms of viscosity I mean)?
The rate published on the ARX MSDS sheet it is 2oz. ARX per 32 oz. of oil, or roughly 6% ARX. For a 6 qt sump, two bottles (24oz) would be around 12% (24oz/192oz). 3 bottles (36oz.) would be around 19% ARX.
So in terms of viscosity increase (if any), I guess it really depends on the viscosity of the ARX, viscosity of the oil used, and sump size (I'm purposely excluding all other factors here such as thickening due to removal of sludge, fuel dilution, etc. etc. just to keep it simple for the moment).
Last edited:
Actually it's Frank's chemist that said three bottles is too much. Maybe Frank can chime in.
Next test of Auto-Rx you ask. I wonder in a real oil burner what adding one ounce every 1k miles would do? I think the maintenance dose is way under rated. Could it be that one ounce every 1k miles for someone that would gladly put up with such a schedule reduce oil consumption or a long run? I get the feeling that their is more to using Auto-Rx than needs to be looked at.
Next test of Auto-Rx you ask. I wonder in a real oil burner what adding one ounce every 1k miles would do? I think the maintenance dose is way under rated. Could it be that one ounce every 1k miles for someone that would gladly put up with such a schedule reduce oil consumption or a long run? I get the feeling that their is more to using Auto-Rx than needs to be looked at.
Originally Posted By: Headnsouth
But the wait time between OCI is killing me. This is the one time in my life I wish I had to drive more.
LOL. I'm going through that right now with one of my daily cars. I still have 2000 to go for my 5000 OCI and I'm going nuts I wanna drain it so bad.
But the wait time between OCI is killing me. This is the one time in my life I wish I had to drive more.
LOL. I'm going through that right now with one of my daily cars. I still have 2000 to go for my 5000 OCI and I'm going nuts I wanna drain it so bad.
Originally Posted By: Dyoel182
Originally Posted By: Headnsouth
But the wait time between OCI is killing me. This is the one time in my life I wish I had to drive more.
LOL. I'm going through that right now with one of my daily cars. I still have 2000 to go for my 5000 OCI and I'm going nuts I wanna drain it so bad.
5K OCI? Please splain.
I poured a second bottle into my 98 Pontiac with 170K miles, which rarely gets driven.
I just started the clean phase, I'll keep you posted on my findings.
Originally Posted By: Headnsouth
But the wait time between OCI is killing me. This is the one time in my life I wish I had to drive more.
LOL. I'm going through that right now with one of my daily cars. I still have 2000 to go for my 5000 OCI and I'm going nuts I wanna drain it so bad.
5K OCI? Please splain.
I poured a second bottle into my 98 Pontiac with 170K miles, which rarely gets driven.
I just started the clean phase, I'll keep you posted on my findings.
I am still evaluating 2 bottles of Auto-Rx in a single application.
More Auto-Rx would be a waste of product. Please remeber we use oil to carry Auto-Rx throughout the engine lubrication suystem. What seems to never be discussed is that Auto-Rx comes with it,s own friction mofifiers, IMO why would anyone need to add anything to there engine oil other than maintenance dose of Auto-Rx after it has been cleaned, compression restored,better MPG and it will keep your car on the road and out of the shop.
More Auto-Rx would be a waste of product. Please remeber we use oil to carry Auto-Rx throughout the engine lubrication suystem. What seems to never be discussed is that Auto-Rx comes with it,s own friction mofifiers, IMO why would anyone need to add anything to there engine oil other than maintenance dose of Auto-Rx after it has been cleaned, compression restored,better MPG and it will keep your car on the road and out of the shop.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Originally Posted By: sprintman
Departed Terry Dyson used to talk about ARX 'liquid filter' but I never understood what he was getting at
Apparently there's a chelating effect ..or para chelating effect that occurs. He used other terms ..but that's how I integrated the action he was describing.
Departed Terry Dyson used to talk about ARX 'liquid filter' but I never understood what he was getting at
Apparently there's a chelating effect ..or para chelating effect that occurs. He used other terms ..but that's how I integrated the action he was describing.
Thanks to Gary from the home of the 'Pennsylvania Posse' you lucky lucky fella!
I see some really positive results from those that are running the double dose(2 bottles) in a host oil for 1000 to 1500 miles followed by rinsing. I am going to call this the impatient mode of application. IMO you can clean more by running the two bottles separately with the rinse in between. The rinse in between allows the first cleaning application to be maximized. Now the second cleaning bottle can go at the next layer of contamination unimpeeded. Running a single bottle treatment the ARX concentration is approximately 7.5 % of the sump capacity. Running a double dose the percentage is approximately 15%. Thank [censored] that all of ARX's components are lubraceous. ARX is pretty well match to 5 and 10W motor oils. But remember that ARX is not indexed like the host oil. With two bottles loaded into the crankcase, low temperature viscocity of the mix is going to be high. And at full operating temperature its going to make the overall lower than spec for the oil to some degree. Cold weather pour point and pumpability may well be an issue with dino oil in the northern parts of the country, with 2 bottles loaded.
I don't even want to talk about three bottles. ARX is not a fully formulated oil product. At this dose you are looking at running 25% ARX. Please.
If you are an impatient user, or have a real need for fast results run the two bottles. For example if you recently failed a smog or emission test and you need to pass it in under 30 days, to keep your car on the road, go for it.
For me I think that I'll just stick to the single bottle doseage every 25 K.
I don't even want to talk about three bottles. ARX is not a fully formulated oil product. At this dose you are looking at running 25% ARX. Please.
If you are an impatient user, or have a real need for fast results run the two bottles. For example if you recently failed a smog or emission test and you need to pass it in under 30 days, to keep your car on the road, go for it.
For me I think that I'll just stick to the single bottle doseage every 25 K.
I agree with Rick. His post should be read as many times as it takes so it is fully understood.
Originally Posted By: Dyoel182
Originally Posted By: Rick20
For me I think that I'll just stick to the single bottle doseage every 25 K.
Is that with or without the maintenance dose?
A single bottle dose is run for 2500 miles then an OCI. After your satisfied ARX has done its job and you have less than 100k miles on your vehicle. You can then do the maintence dose.
Originally Posted By: Rick20
For me I think that I'll just stick to the single bottle doseage every 25 K.
Is that with or without the maintenance dose?
A single bottle dose is run for 2500 miles then an OCI. After your satisfied ARX has done its job and you have less than 100k miles on your vehicle. You can then do the maintence dose.
If you don,t do the maintenace dose your not getting full benefits of Auto-Rx
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Quote:
I am going to call this the impatient mode of application.
Surely so. There may be some situations where you're going to need to remedy the situation in a shorter time span. These can vary from consumer preference to the severity of the situation to be corrected. The difficulty I see for Frank is articulating for the customer WHEN such action would be appropriate ..or rather inappropriate.
Quote:
But remember that ARX is not indexed like the host oil. With two bottles loaded into the crankcase, low temperature viscocity of the mix is going to be high. And at full operating temperature its going to make the overall lower than spec for the oil to some degree. Cold weather pour point and pumpability may well be an issue with dino oil in the northern parts of the country, with 2 bottles loaded.
This part may be true, but I would offer that our engines are well buffered for insult that may arise from viscosity variances to a great extent. Most 5w-30 of the vintage of an advanced sludge engine would probably have sheared to 20 weights in service (some may still shear in some engines) and there are plenty of people who use heavier oils in colder climates and their engines don't evidence issues that are in excess of the other operational variables present. Not to discount your concerns/cautions, but one must, just like in any medical practice using modalities of treatment that have side effects, weigh the benefits against the potential risks. The condition that is being corrected has the engine at risk too (potentially). As much as we've gravitated toward thinner oils, you've got to realize that, in all but the most severe climates, heavier oils were acceptable year round if you recall some of the older owners manual recommendations. My own 4.0 in an older evolution spec'd 20w-50 down to (IIRC) 32F and never spec'd 5w-20. Yet the same engine survives fine on 5w-20 or 15w-40 in a climate that spans from single digits to 95F on either. Although not preferred, nor recommended, I would think that most engines are just as tolerant and that the side effects are more in terms of fuel economy. Just look at OZ and see how they're just now losing their grip on the 20w-70 oil and you can actually buy 5w-20 if you look hard enough.
Again, I think that articulating the sensible use is the hardest part of the two bottle treatment. We've got decent UOA data on the 100C effects of two bottles ..but I haven't seen much in terms of, for example, taking a 5w-30 dino and seeing how the VI is skewed with 2oz. added to it.
I am going to call this the impatient mode of application.
Surely so. There may be some situations where you're going to need to remedy the situation in a shorter time span. These can vary from consumer preference to the severity of the situation to be corrected. The difficulty I see for Frank is articulating for the customer WHEN such action would be appropriate ..or rather inappropriate.
Quote:
But remember that ARX is not indexed like the host oil. With two bottles loaded into the crankcase, low temperature viscocity of the mix is going to be high. And at full operating temperature its going to make the overall lower than spec for the oil to some degree. Cold weather pour point and pumpability may well be an issue with dino oil in the northern parts of the country, with 2 bottles loaded.
This part may be true, but I would offer that our engines are well buffered for insult that may arise from viscosity variances to a great extent. Most 5w-30 of the vintage of an advanced sludge engine would probably have sheared to 20 weights in service (some may still shear in some engines) and there are plenty of people who use heavier oils in colder climates and their engines don't evidence issues that are in excess of the other operational variables present. Not to discount your concerns/cautions, but one must, just like in any medical practice using modalities of treatment that have side effects, weigh the benefits against the potential risks. The condition that is being corrected has the engine at risk too (potentially). As much as we've gravitated toward thinner oils, you've got to realize that, in all but the most severe climates, heavier oils were acceptable year round if you recall some of the older owners manual recommendations. My own 4.0 in an older evolution spec'd 20w-50 down to (IIRC) 32F and never spec'd 5w-20. Yet the same engine survives fine on 5w-20 or 15w-40 in a climate that spans from single digits to 95F on either. Although not preferred, nor recommended, I would think that most engines are just as tolerant and that the side effects are more in terms of fuel economy. Just look at OZ and see how they're just now losing their grip on the 20w-70 oil and you can actually buy 5w-20 if you look hard enough.
Again, I think that articulating the sensible use is the hardest part of the two bottle treatment. We've got decent UOA data on the 100C effects of two bottles ..but I haven't seen much in terms of, for example, taking a 5w-30 dino and seeing how the VI is skewed with 2oz. added to it.
Originally Posted By: Headnsouth
5K OCI? Please splain.
Sorry I didnt see this earlier. Not much to explain really. I'm running a 2oz maintenance dose in my car right now for 5000ish miles (it will be a little less since I'm gonna drain when my odo zeros out at 240,000 for easier changes every 5k after that).
5K OCI? Please splain.
Sorry I didnt see this earlier. Not much to explain really. I'm running a 2oz maintenance dose in my car right now for 5000ish miles (it will be a little less since I'm gonna drain when my odo zeros out at 240,000 for easier changes every 5k after that).
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
