Auto RX questions

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: badtlc
Gary Allen (RIP), who is VERY respected on here, has his documented test case on that link. I'm not what else can be added.


So does Dnewton3. There really isn't anything to be added.

Even Artem posted that it worked better than kreen. Only for the baseless accusations to start.

 

[badtlc]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Those test results are from the Auto-RX website. So now I want to see testing that can be verified by bobistheoilguy.com guys that we know are independent and unbiased. I want to see testing done by well known respected members here who have no relationship with Auto-RX and I want to see testing on more than one vehicle with sludged up engines. I want to see before and after photography and I want to see compression testing with quality recording compression testers and the results verified.


Gary Allan was a BITOG guy. You asked for them to give evidence. Now you don't like it because it comes from them? Don't ask it from them then.

Also the Taxi test and emissions test were also not done by AutoRX.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: Mystic
Personally I am tired of discussing Auto-RX just like demarpaint is. I am tired of going over the same old arguments bak and forth.

So Auto-RX promoters let me know when you have proof. Maybe in 2050?


Then one must wonder why you and he continues.


LOL

We wonder the same thing about you.

 

[Mystic]

Good grief! People, go to that link provided by badtlc. Now tell me, is there any information given to document that taxi cab fleet testing? Maybe I missed it. At least when Exxon/Mobil tests Mobil 1 in a taxi cab fleet they seem to give more information-like the name of the taxi cab company and other documentation. Maybe I missed it? Can we have a little bit more information?

 

[TrevorS]

Mystic

The standard of proof you are asking for seems inconsistent to me.

Firstly, engine performance issues would be in areas where you cannot take pictures without tear down. That is not a reasonable request. If you are therefore asking for pictures that are easy to take, then these are pictures of things that don't prove, one way or another, anything related to performance.

Secondly, you need measurable improvements such as mpg tracking or compression testing to verify if the parts that matter have been cleaned.

However, you seem to have put some strict conditions on compression testing but at the same time say personal testimony, which could be anything and need not be measured in any way, is acceptable.

So a personal testimony such as better acceleration, less noise, better mpg is acceptable without verification and third party witnesses. But a compression test specifically requires specific validation with a "quality" compression tester and independent witness. Do you have a list of compression testers and witnesses that one should use? Otherwise it seems that you could dismiss evidence provided in good faith as you see fit.

And when it comes to pictures, how do we establish that their timing is genuine and that indeed the said product was or was not used? If you provided pictures, someone else could claim that there was no independent witness who watched you and your car to make sure you didn't use a different additive or manually cleaned whatever it was you were taking pictures of. Or that the light and camera settings weren't manipulated or that photoshopping didn't take place.

It seems to me that you are being very selective and inconsistent in what evidence you are willing to accept. You are not the only one so please don't feel that I am picking on you.

 

[Mystic]

Okay, let me try to explain it to you. We have various products that are supposed to clean the insides of engines. Products such as Kreen, MMO, and Auto-RX Plus. Now, if those products are supposed to clean the insides of engines, presumably if we examined those engines before and after the cleaning, there should be some evidence of cleaning? Other things might take place, such as an improvement in compression. But a cleaning product should have some ability to remove sludge-correct? Otherwise, if a cleaning product does not have to be able to clean I want to get into that business.

One of the things I like to see in the Oil Additives Section are stories of people using various engine cleaning products and oil supplements. That is what the Oil Additives Section is for, I think. I have no problem with anybody posting their experiences with various products in the Oil Additives Section. What I do have a problem with is when people trying to promote some product attack people who try to talk about their experiences with certain products, Kreen and MMO in particular. These promoters demand 'scientific' proof that Kreen and MMO actually work but seem to be unwilling to supply 'scientific' proof that their own product works.

Nobody is going to be able to supply actual scientific proof that some product such as Kreen, MMO, Auto-RX or whatever actually works. It would cost too much to test these products in a real lab.

I think people should be allowed to talk about their experiences with engine cleaners and oil supplements here. I don't expect those people to supply 'scientific' proof that their product works.

But if people here attack other people who talk about their experiences with various products and then promote some product here then I want to see proof that their product works. Nobody should be attacked here because they told their story about trying MMO or Kreen or whatever and then the attackers say-'Oh, but our product X works!' If they are going to attack people here just because they told their story about trying a certain product and then they are going to try to PROMOTE THEIR OWN PRODUCT then I want to see some proof that their product is so great. I get tired of seeing people attacked here merely because they told a story about trying some product and then the attackers try to promote a product. Nobody should be attacked just because they told their story. But if people are trying to promote some product and attack people who tell their stories about trying some other product then I want to see proof their product works. I don't know how to explain this any better.

Since you are new here you can go check some previous postings yourself and find out what I am talking about.

 

[sprintman]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Personally I am tired of discussing Auto-RX just like demarpaint is. I am tired of going over the same old arguments bak and forth.

I am ready to talk about Auto-RX Plus and maybe give it a try once the Auto-RX promoters can provide proof that it works. If Auto-RX Plus is such a miracle product it should be easy for them to provide proof. And I mean proof-not just compression testing done by one guy with a compression tester of unknown quality and no independent verification. That is not proof.

So Auto-RX promoters let me know when you have proof. Maybe in 2050?


I've been testing it for 12 years and it's still the only think that consistently works TO MY SATISFACTION, and I'm anal. But I guess that doesn't count, as I don't follow the instructions like sheeple?

 

[Mystic]

There is an Auto-RX website. Frank, who owns Auto-RX, used to be a member here but is not a member now. If anybody here wants to learn more about Auto-RX perhaps they should visit the website for Auto-RX. I assume that all of the people who like to promote Auto-RX here are unofficial. So to get the official information about Auto-RX people should visit the website.

 

[sprintman]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
There is an Auto-RX website. Frank, who owns Auto-RX, used to be a member here but is not a member now. If anybody here wants to learn more about Auto-RX perhaps they should visit the website for Auto-RX. I assume that all of the people who like to promote Auto-RX here are unofficial. So to get the official information about Auto-RX people should visit the website.


You seem to miss the point. You ain't special, and nobody has to prove anything to you, or anybody else here. The only person that needs to prove anything to you, is you yourself. I spend 6 days a week in a mechanics workshop and trust nothing from nobody. I work out what works, and what doesn't myself. Try that and see how you go

 

[Trav]

+1 I also work in the business and have done for 40 years, i try everything myself and tried ARX in many engines. It was useless on anything i tried it in, it did nothing at all worth noting.


.

 

[Mystic]

I know a little about Trav and I will believe him and demarpaint before I believe some other people here. And yes sprintman, I am not special. But you seem to want to promote Auto-RX. Not too much Auto-RX is going to be sold to members here if they are insulted and told to believe what they are told. The customer is always right. Want me to buy your Auto-RX that you seem to promote all the time? Better treat the potential customer a little better. And as a customer I want proof the product works before I buy. I am not a pushover customer. I buy what I want to buy and what I think works. And if somebody promoting a product tells me 'You ain't special,' I don't buy the product. Because in the end the customer rules. No customer buying, no sales.

 

[sprintman]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
I know a little about Trav and I will believe him and demarpaint before I believe some other people here. And yes sprintman, I am not special. But you seem to want to promote Auto-RX. Not too much Auto-RX is going to be sold to members here if they are insulted and told to believe what they are told. The customer is always right. Want me to buy your Auto-RX that you seem to promote all the time? Better treat the potential customer a little better. And as a customer I want proof the product works before I buy. I am not a pushover customer. I buy what I want to buy and what I think works. And if somebody promoting a product tells me 'You ain't special,' I don't buy the product. Because in the end the customer rules. No customer buying, no sales.

I'm not promoting or selling anything and I wouldn't have you as a client. I'm particular who I deal with, and you don't meet my criteria. Sorry about that, but that's life!

 

[Sequoiasoon]

I don't know about the ARX+ but probably 9 years ago now I used the ARX on my Corolla that was burning 1qt/1k. I got linked here to BITOG through another forum to read about it. At that time it was the rage. I bought a couple bottles and did the whole clean rinse repeat thing which was a little involved but gave some quick OCI's. That car was mostly dino for it's life, I did use some M1 around then also.

After the ARX I was down to .33qt/1k miles. No change in mpg. Oil pan and head gasket started weeping but stopped after treatment was done all was dry again.

My take, it worked on that application. Would MMO, Kreen have done the same who knows probably and to late to try. I do use Kroil at home and it's great, I was interested in Kreen after reading about in many places. MMO easier to get and try.

I read ARTEMS thread and part of my take is the money back quarantee. He wasn't happy with Kreen, they refunded money no questions asked. ARX+ no such option anymore. MMO no clue.

That car saw at least 1/year Gunk Motorflush toss in qt idle 10 minutes and drain. Over the years it also got Slick 50, Duralube, Zmax, Militech, BG MOA. Best I saw at that time was Duralube with fresh oil and a highway trip with loaded car returning 41mpg. It also saw Regular Techron which IMO didn't do carp after trying BG44K afterward.

I can say that currently I have 1qt of MMO in my Sonata to try some extra cleaning for the last 1k of OCI before I put in Ceratec. Sonata is starting to use some oil between OCI's. With MMO I also changed my small M1-M104 filter and put a pure 1 on. MMO plus 1/2 qt PP brought me back to full. Sonata has been on M1, PP, PU for 109k and oil stays clean for a couple thousand miles after change then gets dark quick. What is larger than an M1-104 with same "specs"?

 

[MrQuackers]

Originally Posted By: sprintman
Originally Posted By: Mystic
I know a little about Trav and I will believe him and demarpaint before I believe some other people here. And yes sprintman, I am not special. But you seem to want to promote Auto-RX. Not too much Auto-RX is going to be sold to members here if they are insulted and told to believe what they are told. The customer is always right. Want me to buy your Auto-RX that you seem to promote all the time? Better treat the potential customer a little better. And as a customer I want proof the product works before I buy. I am not a pushover customer. I buy what I want to buy and what I think works. And if somebody promoting a product tells me 'You ain't special,' I don't buy the product. Because in the end the customer rules. No customer buying, no sales.

I'm not promoting or selling anything and I wouldn't have you as a client. I'm particular who I deal with, and you don't meet my criteria. Sorry about that, but that's life!


Well now, isn't that special?

MMO in the oil and TC-W3 in the tank works very well for me. Glad to hear your "snake oil" works to your satisfaction.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: TrevorS
Mystic

The standard of proof you are asking for seems inconsistent to me.

Firstly, engine performance issues would be in areas where you cannot take pictures without tear down. That is not a reasonable request. If you are therefore asking for pictures that are easy to take, then these are pictures of things that don't prove, one way or another, anything related to performance.

Secondly, you need measurable improvements such as mpg tracking or compression testing to verify if the parts that matter have been cleaned.

However, you seem to have put some strict conditions on compression testing but at the same time say personal testimony, which could be anything and need not be measured in any way, is acceptable.

So a personal testimony such as better acceleration, less noise, better mpg is acceptable without verification and third party witnesses. But a compression test specifically requires specific validation with a "quality" compression tester and independent witness. Do you have a list of compression testers and witnesses that one should use? Otherwise it seems that you could dismiss evidence provided in good faith as you see fit.

And when it comes to pictures, how do we establish that their timing is genuine and that indeed the said product was or was not used? If you provided pictures, someone else could claim that there was no independent witness who watched you and your car to make sure you didn't use a different additive or manually cleaned whatever it was you were taking pictures of. Or that the light and camera settings weren't manipulated or that photoshopping didn't take place.

It seems to me that you are being very selective and inconsistent in what evidence you are willing to accept. You are not the only one so please don't feel that I am picking on you.


Which previously expunged member are you. I certainly recognize this post as being written remarkably similar to a former member,who was banned.
I look forward to seeing more from you Trevor.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: Sequoiasoon
read ARTEMS thread and part of my take is the money back quarantee. He wasn't happy with Kreen, they refunded money no questions asked. ARX+ no such option anymore


Well thats the whole point right there isn't it. It is unrealistic to think any product can perform to everyones expectations all the time, its not happening.
When i doesn't you don't need to be in some sort of Mickey Mouse go round with the company, its owner or some flunky, you want your money back plain and simple.

Kano gave Artem his money back no questions asked, no harm no foul. True the product did not perform as he had hoped but neither did anything else, at least Kano made him whole without any drama.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: TrevorS
Mystic

The standard of proof you are asking for seems inconsistent to me.

Firstly, engine performance issues would be in areas where you cannot take pictures without tear down. That is not a reasonable request. If you are therefore asking for pictures that are easy to take, then these are pictures of things that don't prove, one way or another, anything related to performance.

Secondly, you need measurable improvements such as mpg tracking or compression testing to verify if the parts that matter have been cleaned.

However, you seem to have put some strict conditions on compression testing but at the same time say personal testimony, which could be anything and need not be measured in any way, is acceptable.

So a personal testimony such as better acceleration, less noise, better mpg is acceptable without verification and third party witnesses. But a compression test specifically requires specific validation with a "quality" compression tester and independent witness. Do you have a list of compression testers and witnesses that one should use? Otherwise it seems that you could dismiss evidence provided in good faith as you see fit.

And when it comes to pictures, how do we establish that their timing is genuine and that indeed the said product was or was not used? If you provided pictures, someone else could claim that there was no independent witness who watched you and your car to make sure you didn't use a different additive or manually cleaned whatever it was you were taking pictures of. Or that the light and camera settings weren't manipulated or that photoshopping didn't take place.

It seems to me that you are being very selective and inconsistent in what evidence you are willing to accept. You are not the only one so please don't feel that I am picking on you.


Which previously expunged member are you. I certainly recognize this post as being written remarkably similar to a former member,who was banned.
I look forward to seeing more from you Trevor.


He's back!

 

[TrevorS]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Okay, let me try to explain it to you. We have various products that are supposed to clean the insides of engines. Products such as Kreen, MMO, and Auto-RX Plus. Now, if those products are supposed to clean the insides of engines, presumably if we examined those engines before and after the cleaning, there should be some evidence of cleaning? Other things might take place, such as an improvement in compression. But a cleaning product should have some ability to remove sludge-correct? Otherwise, if a cleaning product does not have to be able to clean I want to get into that business.

One of the things I like to see in the Oil Additives Section are stories of people using various engine cleaning products and oil supplements. That is what the Oil Additives Section is for, I think. I have no problem with anybody posting their experiences with various products in the Oil Additives Section. What I do have a problem with is when people trying to promote some product attack people who try to talk about their experiences with certain products, Kreen and MMO in particular. These promoters demand 'scientific' proof that Kreen and MMO actually work but seem to be unwilling to supply 'scientific' proof that their own product works.

Nobody is going to be able to supply actual scientific proof that some product such as Kreen, MMO, Auto-RX or whatever actually works. It would cost too much to test these products in a real lab.

I think people should be allowed to talk about their experiences with engine cleaners and oil supplements here. I don't expect those people to supply 'scientific' proof that their product works.

But if people here attack other people who talk about their experiences with various products and then promote some product here then I want to see proof that their product works. Nobody should be attacked here because they told their story about trying MMO or Kreen or whatever and then the attackers say-'Oh, but our product X works!' If they are going to attack people here just because they told their story about trying a certain product and then they are going to try to PROMOTE THEIR OWN PRODUCT then I want to see some proof that their product is so great. I get tired of seeing people attacked here merely because they told a story about trying some product and then the attackers try to promote a product. Nobody should be attacked just because they told their story. But if people are trying to promote some product and attack people who tell their stories about trying some other product then I want to see proof their product works. I don't know how to explain this any better.

Since you are new here you can go check some previous postings yourself and find out what I am talking about.


Wow! That was a detailed response.

I'll pass on reading past posts on this topic. I'm not that interested in living in the past, especially if its all about people arguing.

It seems that there is some history behind this topic so I won't get involved except to say I think you and others may have differing success criteria for these products.

 

[Mystic]

Tom, is that you? Tell me its not so.

 

[Mystic]

And sprintman, you don't meet my criteria as a salesman. I used to use Auto-RX. I am 100% honest and I will give Auto-RX this-it did seem to stop a seal leak. But I have never seen any solid evidence that it really cleans engines. I stopped using Auto-RX a long time ago after a guy here said in a post he was receiving product under the table for promoting it. I don't know if that guy was telling the truth or not but that was it for me.

A professional sales person knows how to talk to customers sprintman. Your behavior is on display here. My behavior is on display. Everybody's behavior is on display. Everybody here can observe who is professional and who is not.