Originally Posted By: ionbeam22
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
I'm almost 100% sure that was put up as ...well...not an outright joke ..but more in line with "mockery".
Bingo, as usual fundamentalists (be they religious, communist or ARX) have no sense of humor.
On a more serious note, for much less than the cost of a single ARX treatment cycle, you can do a 3000mi OCI with synthetic and 20% MMO/Rislone, which should remove plenty sludge and varnish without excess harshness.
Yeah, but why in the world would you take a perfectly good synthetic oil ...billions in former R&D dollars to get it to the state of the art (at some state of the art) that is highly advanced for all the benefits .....and throw a cheap solvent in with it and use it for 3000 miles?
Sure, you can do that ..and all the other home brewed techniques and manage just fine. Again, keep in mind that when most of these products served the most need when cars had routine consumption due to fuel management related normal wear and machining practices ..and we were miles ahead of the Brits. That is, the operational variable and the baseline insult to the engine made most of these agents negligible in potential harm or (otherwise) alteration of the typical life span of the engine. In terms of my earlier reference to (something like) a doctor not allowing you the easy way out of a risky behavior, in the case of these agents, when they indeed produced apparent benefits, it's like Newman and Redford as they're about to jump off of the cliff into the stream below. Redford says, "I can't swim". Newman replies, "You "darn" fool! The fall will probably kill you!"
That is, an engine's "death" was an assured thing for the most part. Anything you did to it could produce benefits ..but would be hard pressed to do any more harm than just operating it.