I am very interested in using HM oil in my 12 years old (260,000KM) VW eurovan. It consumes about 1L of oil per 3000KM. I am in the middle of ARX application and after it is finished I like to try Castrol HM oil.
All the short term reviews suggest that HM oils are good, however, I am not so sure of its long term effects! It seems HM oils have a ton of extra additives to stop leak, reduce friction and stop oil burning. I am affraid all these extra additive will have the same effect as popular oil additives such as STP etc.
What do you guys think? Are HM oils a good choice for long term usage?
any negative side effect for using HM oils?
- Thread starter kickster
- Start date
- Status
quote:Yes , especially the few that state on the label for both new and older engines but that does not mean the oils w/o that statement would not be a good choice either for an engine with 260,000 KM's
Originally posted by kickster: What do you guys think? Are HM oils a good choice for long term usage?
Since HM oil has additive to soften the gaskets, is there a risk of damaging the gasket in long run? People on this board are dead against oil additives that claim to stop leak (such as CD-2) that claims to clean the gaskets over 1000 KM. at same time they approve of HM oils which happen to have similar additives!! I am confused ![[Confused]](images/icons/confused.gif)
quote:Presumably you say that with the exception of Auto-Rx (which technically I guess is not an additive, but a supplement). I think the HM additive for seals is similar to what synthetic oils have to do to maintain seals. But the ARx website FAQs say they believe HM oil will cause leaks over time. Apparently the best seal conditioner is plain old dino oil, but that covers the seal with deposits that prevent the oil from condtioning the seals. Synth keeps the seals clean, but does not condition by itself. Supposedly the solution is run whatever oil you want (including HM) but give it the maintenance dose of ARx.
Originally posted by kickster: People on this board are dead against oil additives that claim to stop leak (such as CD-2) that claims to clean the gaskets over 1000 KM.
I'm going to give cheap Motorcraft and Lube Control(after an AutoRx wash and rinse) a try. Maybe the best of both worlds?
I have seen many, many references to an engine cleaner referred to as "Auto-RX". Many people on many oil boards extoll its virtues. Does it have any value in an engine that has been treated to timely oil changes? I don't often see references to engines that have lasted 200,00 to 300,000 miles that have used this treatment. I have never seen a sludged engine that used good oil, changed as the manufacturer specified.{Certain Toyotas excepted}. I have seen sludged engines where maintenance was poor.
I have come to think of these users and promoters of "Auto-RX" as the same kind of suckers who would use any of the other magic engine oil additives.
HM oils I also put into the category of mostly a sales gimmick. Engines were lasting just fine for hundreds of thousands of miles before we had these oils. However, I do not believe they will hurt your engine.
quote:I haven't had any experience with this product in regards to Engine use, but in my transmission the product does work as advertised. I would use kinder words than "suckers".
Originally posted by 1999nick: [QB] I have come to think of these users and promoters of "Auto-RX" as the same kind of suckers who would use any of the other magic engine oil additives. /QB]
![[No no]](/forums/graemlins/nono.gif)
Many on this board are frequent users of additives such as Lube control, auto-rx, schaeffers 131, even maxlife EP
![[Razz]](images/icons/tongue.gif){kind=icon}
quote:How about a 1990 Ford Festiva with 225000 miles? Has had 3000 mile Castrol GTX oil changes from day one. Was running so poorly and loudly that the original owner's mechanic told him it need a rebuild so he sold the car to me, making sure I knew that it needed a rebuild. Did a single AutoRx application and it now purrs and gets 34 MPG in city driving. How about a 1996 Chevrolet Impala with 82,000 miles? Transmission had a filter change at 36k, a fluid exchange at 50,000 miles, and at 82,000 miles started shifting VERY harshly. Had several people, including a transmission specialist, tell me that it was new tranny time. A single AutoRx application resolved the issue. I've got a few more sucess stories, but those are the highlights. 1999nick, I think you know not of what you are speaking, when it comes to AutoRx [ July 20, 2004, 11:22 AM: Message edited by: VaderSS ]
Originally posted by 1999nick: I have come to think of these users and promoters of "Auto-RX" as the same kind of suckers who would use any of the other magic engine oil additives.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,800
quote:Natural reaction ..and one I can relate to. I too am skepical of any "mass hype" about a product ..even one indexed for our little enclave here. I'm adverse to even trying GC JUST because of the wholesale bandwagon that many on this board JUMPED on. I would feel like "one of the herd" just moving on to wherever the group migration leads us to graze. Note that this attitude has nothing "in truth" to whether GC is a valid product or not. It is a personal dislike to being influenced by the group. We (if I read you right on the surface level) tend to feel that we are intelligent enough to know "enough" and that anything outside of our "realm of assigned credibility" is just some "fad" and has little true value. We (meaning "I" and assigning a like template to you), at times however find that some things do not fall into our "prepackaged/on the shelf" assigned order of validity. AutoRx truly appears to be that exception. Curiousity got the better of me. I overcame my "approach-avoidence" syndrome and ordered the stuff. Now I can't say that the product will cure athlete's foot, and I'm not done with the rinse phase, but every "apparent symptom" is showing itself just as described in the order that Frank (and the FAQ) predicted. ARX isn't something like "reflexology" or UFOs. That is, you don't have to display the poster on Fox Mulder's office wall, "I want to believe"
I have come to think of these users and promoters of "Auto-RX" as the same kind of suckers who would use any of the other magic engine oil additives.
![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif){kind=icon}
If this product does nothing for me ....I'll say so. If it doesn't fix certain things ..I'll say so ..but I'll also balance that with what it DID do. So far ..it's delivering as promised.
Now you could say that I'm just evidencing a natural defensive mechanism so that I don't feel like a "sucker" ..but if you think about it ..why? To justify the $20-25 that I would probably waste somewhere else in my weekly rat race?So, in my Jeep with 97K, running on Chevron Supreme 10W30 or Castrol GTX with no consumption or leakage at all, would that be a yes or a no to running HM oil?
I'm just doing the rinse phase of AutoRX.
Been hearing that the 4.0 likes heavier oils, so I thought the HM might be a good thing, but I do no want any problems with seals getting bad later on.
quote:1999Nick - As a suggestion, head over to the BITOG Additives, Fuel,Oil, Cleaners forum & do a search on Auto-Rx and put some time into learning about the product. Also, viewing an oil sample or two in the Used Oil Analysis section will get you familar with testing and key points of interest regarding the analysis of drained oil. The members here have a variety of education and experience in the chemical, petroleum and lubrication industries. I appreciate the info & contributions from these professionals and think it is a wise choice to take full advantage of the educational opportunities provided at the BobisTheOilGuy forum.
I have come to think of these users and promoters of "Auto-RX" as the same kind of suckers who would use any of the other magic engine oil additives.
quote:I can't say that I blame you. However, take a look at the application instructions for Auto-RX: do they look like the typical instructions for the usual snake oil? I know that that doesn't "prove" a thing, however, it should be an indication that they are at least earnest about what they're saying and selling: it isn't a quick-fix miracle cure by any stretch. To use it requires a very specific, somewhat rigorous approach (that, to be honest, a lot of people apparently don't have the stomach to follow correctly all the way through). When it comes to additives, I've had the best luck listening to independent, "chemically-aware" experts and other users who've had experience with them. I won't use an additive -- any additive -- based solely on what the maker of that additive is telling me.
I have come to think of these users and promoters of "Auto-RX" as the same kind of suckers who would use any of the other magic engine oil additives.[/QB]
quote:Speaking of that, I was just holding a bottle of Quaker State HM oil in the store the other day and noticed it does not even have the API donut on the bottle. As for seals (based on studying Auto-Rx for a while), it seems that the major issue with conditioning seals is first cleaning all the gunk off them so the conditioner can get to the seal. But at that point, according to the ARx site, plain old dino oil conditions the seals nicely.
Originally posted by Motorbike: Question might be , is the HM oil of your choice API rated ?
Speaking of cleaning my thoughts and opinion is with that API CF light duty diesel designation behind the Mobil HM oils and the fact it cost the same or less than other HM's it would be the one to go after IMO .
It's a true syn blend and demonstrated it's cleaning abilities through both bench and field test , per Mobil . I have no reason to suspect it's a marketing tactic only . Mobil has published and made available the reports to someone . This someone would certainly like to see the entire test results spoke about
Here
We do have an Exxon/Mobil site supporter . Maybe he could shed more light on this seemlingly grooooovy oil ![[Smile]](images/icons/smile.gif)
EDIT:
I just emailed this thread to George the E/M site supporter asking him to weigh in on Mobil's testing with what he might know and or heard about this oil . Hopefully he will have time to reply in this thread .
[ July 20, 2004, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: Motorbike ]
EDIT:
I just emailed this thread to George the E/M site supporter asking him to weigh in on Mobil's testing with what he might know and or heard about this oil . Hopefully he will have time to reply in this thread .
[ July 20, 2004, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: Motorbike ]quote:I'd say if it ain't broke .........yet at those miles a little extra seal conditioning should not hurt . I would not worry at all about it but the choice is yours . Maybe hi-mileage oil summer/what you've been doing so far during winter ? These low cost group II oil we have available to us have seal conditioners in them . The companies just do not market them . These seal conditioners may not be what the forum has been led to believe if one thinks of them as an ester . It's more than possible esterfied components such as VII's , zinc and boron are the conditioners , a tri-way of getting the job done per sey especially when one is speaking of Citgo Ultra Life HM oil if my memory of a conversation serves correct . Certainly though all these HM oils are made a bit different . At ethyl.com there is a Lube Handbook one can download . In it you'll see API oils have set provisions to protect engine seals when formulating . Question might be , is the HM oil of your choice API rated ?
Originally posted by MarkC: So, in my Jeep with 97K, running on Chevron Supreme 10W30 or Castrol GTX with no consumption or leakage at all, would that be a yes or a no to running HM oil?
FWIW: my buddy at work used has used Castrol GTX in his late 90's V6 VW Passat @ about 4-5000 mile OCI's. When he got to the "magical" 75,000 miles he decided to try the HM Castrol, the stuff in the green bottles. Up until this time his engine was completely dry, with no signs anywhere of oil leaks or seepage. Soon after using this HM oil, his engine was wet at all the gaskets/ seals. This was about a year ago. As soon as he noticed the oil, he immediately switched back to his original choice. Soon after, he traded to a 4runner and just switched over to M1 after break-in and is very happy with it.
So I guess, for me, I won't try the HM oils, (at least the Castrol variety) as long as what I'm using is working...
Any thoughts?
quote:No side affects, but they're contraindicated if you are now taking a monoamine oxidase inhibitor.
Originally posted by pscholte: any negative side effect for using HM oils? Maybe headaches, a scratchy throat and nausea?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
