New vid from Project Farm - MotorKote. I'm sold.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I just bought it to try it.. theres my connection?
Wanna call Motorkote and recommend me a job there?
Do me a favor please Mr suspicious..
for all the naysayers.. read me points again..

show me a shred of proof Motorkote doesnt do what it says
OR
any evidence Motorkote messed up someone's engine
OR
any evidence there IS chlorine in that product

waiting.. (yep .. sound of crickets)
 
Last edited:
well what is being claimed may be circumstantial

how about the explicit claims (by some) that it
1) contains chlorine
2) messes up peoples engines

well prove that it does any of the above two?

ok so if its accepted the naysayers claims of chlorine etc are moot then it goes back to square one..

which is that its an additive which claims to protect against friction
and 80%+ of those who used it seem to feel that it does what it claims
pretty good odds dont you think?
all those long running engines.. just a coincidence I suppose
 
Last edited:
I have no idea what its makeup is. Chlorinated compounds have been mentioned here many times, but I've never seen an analysis on the product nor had one done.

As for the product claims, circumstantial is being kind. There's another thing called confirmation bias. A lot of people who throw useless additives into their engines claim it does whatever it said. 80% of people can believe in all kinds of things, but that's not evidence. Now, has any testing been done to demonstrate friction modification by the product in an internal combustion engine?

As for long running engines, are we having engine failures that people need to rush to additives to save them? We've run many engines into the hundreds of thousands of miles using ordinary, conventional 10w-30 Quaker State over 6,000 mile intervals. What could we have possibly gained by an additive? By what you claim, the logic should be that Quaker State conventional used over double the OEM OCI will categorically make an engine outlast the rest of the car. Not one of them used Motorkote, so failure to use Motorkote also helps engines last longer.

There's nothing lacking in a fully formulated motor oil. And if there were, it almost certainly won't be found in the additive aisle.
 
I am not debating that the product claims are hard to prove without real experimentation of which I have not seen up to now .. maybe it exists somewhere I dont see it
I am simply saying the negative side or naysayers are saying the same thing in the opposite vector and also without any evidence as well.

Meanwhile so if both sides have no concrete evidence to prove their side's argument, you fall back on experiential data
Experiential data being only valid from those who actually experienced the product (ie.. USED it)
Right off then the naysayers's inputs need to be negated as theyve no experience with the product

From experiential testimony, it seems a preponderance of it is positive (over 80%).. alot of the rest is neutral rather than negative..
now if the product had chlorine in it, you'd expect to see over 20 years alot more negative feedback about engines corroded into malfunction.. not seen any
well so is it all in their head?
maybe who knows.. but it is positive

btw what wear-check.. send a link please

actually sorry I need to say that there have been some experimentation on usage of motorkote in abnormal trying conditions on youtube and its fairly phenomenal
although its not exactly scientific but phenomenally its a positive
any phenomenally negative experimentation results on youtube? not that I've seen..
 
Last edited:
Welcome to the Amsoil club.
lol.gif
There are even UOA's here showing excellent performance for what can be measured and it gets treated the same way as MotorKote.

If it works for you that's all that matters. There will always be that group that thinks otherwise and can never provide proof but will jump at the opportunity to cut up a product most of them have never used or claimed to have used and had some sort of bad results. Their loss.
 
Last edited:
I've just got my order in.. my bottle is coming this week
so I plan to blackstone a before-after and over several iterations to see what its doing to be sure
so I'm not exactly putting faith into it either I want to see results in terms of
whether I am getting any efficiency gains at all which should show in RPM, operational temperature, vibration
as far as the most important goal (for me) is engine life so I want to see a baseline blackstone and then look @ with motorkote in over time
but I have to say the fear mongering based on nothing but negative belief is wholly unscientific and keeps people from maybe getting a product which may benefit their engine investment
 
Originally Posted by insanecoder
Meanwhile so if both sides have no concrete evidence to prove their side's argument, you fall back on experiential data
Experieential data being only valid from those who actually experienced the product (ie.. USED it)
Right off then the naysayers's inputs need to be negated as theyve no experience with the product

Unfortunately, that's not even experimental data, but one data point. It's anecdotal. The average user doesn't have the credentials or time to properly evaluate the one data point. Even if he does, it's just that - one data point. I don't need to smoke to know that smoking is bad for me, even if it's no guarantee of cancer or lung disease.

Originally Posted by insanecoder
btw what wear-check.. send a link please

With respect to chlorine, additive skepticism works in reverse, too. Just because something is harmful doesn't mean it will kill your engine dead, or noticeably harm it over the time one has it. Nor will the evidence always be obvious, particularly if there are no tear downs. If catastrophic failure is the metric, you're clearly not going to see that each time, or even most times.

As to WearCheck, they are an oil analysis lab. I don't provide non-sponsor sales links, but you can type WearCheck into any search engine and you'll find them very quickly. There are a fair number of oil analyses on this site from WearCheck. They're certainly not unknown to BITOG users.
 
I'd be willing to give their waterless wheel cleaner a try. Only $3 + $7.25 shipping. Ok maybe not.

wipeoff.png
 
Always there will be haters and doubters
unfortunately they rarely seem to make it into becoming experimenters having never tried it
and therefore remain stuck in their box or being the last ones to come around to anything

Ive got an engine investment to protect.. its getting a try
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by insanecoder
I've just got my order in.. my bottle is coming this week
so I plan to blackstone a before-after and over several iterations to see what its doing to be sure
so I'm not exactly putting faith into it either I want to see results in terms of
whether I am getting any efficiency gains at all which should show in RPM, operational temperature, vibration
as far as the most important goal (for me) is engine life so I want to see a baseline blackstone and then look @ with motorkote in over time
but I have to say the fear mongering based on nothing but negative belief is wholly unscientific and keeps people from maybe getting a product which may benefit their engine investment


Lets start at the bottom and work our way up. First an engine is not an investment. " fear mongering based on nothing but negative belief" Is that how you explain a lack of data supporting the product?

People here do more that just pour a product into their engines to evaluate it. Perhaps a VOA of the product might have some value, but not everything shows up on a VOA.

I have always considered a UOA to be an evaluation of how the oil is holding up in use, not the engine. Except for coolant, I'm not convinced that UOA's can determine engine wear. I seem to remember some well known bmw engine bearing issues that did not necessarily show up on UOA s but still failed.

Originally Posted by insanecoder

unfortunately they rarely seem to make it into becoming experimenters having never tried it


Originally Posted by insanecoder
You know I have been reading these Motorkote threads and I notice a few things about the naysayers
1) they never tried Motorkote


You are implying that you should not evaluate the product unless you purchase it and put it in your engine.

You joined and immediately jumped into a conversation on the product and you state you can really judge it unless you try ( purchase) it. You have no other posts on this site other than about this product.

Sounds spammy to me.

Originally Posted by insanecoder

Ive got an engine investment to protect.. its getting a try


What if it does not protect it, since your only measure is pouring it in to see if it works. Have you tried wd-40, maple surup, or murphys oil soap, or citronella oil in your engine?

Remember , you can't knock it unless you've tried it.
 
Last edited:
Well theyre not going to reveal their secret sauce for reasons you can probably intuit
If you want some semblance of quantitative data or experience then look at the arm-less timken tests (minus the arm != one-arm bandit) against other oils
Also the myriads of non-engineers buying the crap about Timken test instruments as somehow frauds needs to know TImken is a longstanding engineering company with a bearing division

We have word of mouth testimonials which aren't quantitative but the qualitative positive data is fairly large sampling
We have alot of unsubstantiated claims against this product.. one often wonders why but the keyword is unsubstantiated
Please if you have evidence, launch a class-action.. please the lawyers would be all over it (sound of crickets).. exactly

All the experiential data points to the fact its worth a try imo
If you dont wish to then dont.. simple

I recently saw a presentation by the founder doing timken tests on all the additives and synthetics and he seems convincing..
you ask why motorkote isnt all over the world in every engine..
engineers and scientists arent the best marketers.. study Nikola Tesla for a grand example (he had his pocket picked many a times) and is barely known if not for his name on a unit of magnetic flux density and that ridiculous car company
history is repleat w/ superior products which did not succeed
get it into your mind that the product which wins is often the one perceived as better not that which IS better
gotta love the marketing and finance guys.. blame them

and sorry putting maple surup, or murphys oil soap, or citronella oil is unscientific and a bad example.. use common sense..
 
Last edited:
The Timken test (and the 4 ball) are valid tests...for what they are testing, and have error bands of the range of 20%...

But they have ZERO relevance for anything to do with engine oil, in your engine...could you please tell me which part of your engine looks like the Timken test apparatus ?

They, and the people pushing them ARE fraudulent in their claims that the test relates to engine protection...and the gullible are duped every time (even as a young engineer, I was duped...learned more about it, understood what was going on and how it's meangless to my engine, then started to see how charlatans could use it to appear convincing).

Struggling to see what Tesla has to do in the context here...you have polyphase AC...Tesla's work is everywhere.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top