As to all the discussion about MMO

[kasedian]

Originally Posted By: MetalSlug
I dont want making another topic about MMO, so Imma just ask it here, what benefic running MMO on engine ?


I've never had any luck running MMO on an engine. Now, when I put it IN the engine, I have had good results. And who's Imma? Is she cute?

 

[Loobed]

Originally Posted By: jamesintexas
I had a '78 Buick Regal for 23 years and used MMO in the gas religiously. After 23 years, it still had the intact original exhaust system and the engine burned very little oil! I think it was due to the continual slight oil vapor through the exhaust.



What stopped the exhaust from rusting on the outside?

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I have no scientific testing to back up my claims, although many people here seem to make the same claims. To some that just isn't good enough. Then the antis make the same attacks, if not in this thread, in another. It's getting old now. Didn't we already go down this road? LOL

Oh, it's quite fresh to me.

My main problem is with terminology. As I and others have repeatedly said, there are a few steps you have to take to test a claim before you can expect other people to believe it. You and others label that "science" or "scientific proof", which makes it easy to write off anyone who doubts your claims as naysayers or science chauvinists. It creates a false dichotomy between "science" and "personal experience," as if they're just two comparably valid ways of getting at the same thing, and darn those science folks because nothing's ever good enough from them. It diverts attention from the fact that the original claim has absolutely nothing to back it up, and that the person making it could be completely mistaken or even lying.

This kind of thing is at the root of so many discussions on BITOG, and it's senseless. Asking for the most minimal amount of substantiation isn't "science." It's just basic intellectual honesty.

By the same token, when someone points out flaws, that's an opportunity to test your evidence and possibly improve it. If we are truly interested in finding the truth rather than making ourselves feel good about this product or that, we should welcome challengers, not marginalize them.


Originally Posted By: demarpaint
All I can say is I wish I had pictures of engines I cleaned up with the stuff, problem is many were before digital cameras and the Internet. Then someone will say they were photo-shopped, so what's the point?

The fact that someone says something doesn't make it valid. That's kind of the point of what I'm saying. In fact, it's the essence of everything I'm saying. I hope that's clear.

If you collect good enough evidence to back up what you're saying, and if you lay it bare for all to see and duplicate on their own, your claim will be more credible than it would be otherwise. It's that simple.

 

[hounddog]

I seen cars that sat for several years smoke like a freight train when put back running. I've seen MMO added by the quart within in a few days of driving,using,smoke cleared up and run better. Freed up stuck rings.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I have no scientific testing to back up my claims, although many people here seem to make the same claims. To some that just isn't good enough. Then the antis make the same attacks, if not in this thread, in another. It's getting old now. Didn't we already go down this road? LOL

Oh, it's quite fresh to me.

My main problem is with terminology. As I and others have repeatedly said, there are a few steps you have to take to test a claim before you can expect other people to believe it. You and others label that "science" or "scientific proof", which makes it easy to write off anyone who doubts your claims as naysayers or science chauvinists. It creates a false dichotomy between "science" and "personal experience," as if they're just two comparably valid ways of getting at the same thing, and darn those science folks because nothing's ever good enough from them. It diverts attention from the fact that the original claim has absolutely nothing to back it up, and that the person making it could be completely mistaken or even lying.

This kind of thing is at the root of so many discussions on BITOG, and it's senseless. Asking for the most minimal amount of substantiation isn't "science." It's just basic intellectual honesty.

By the same token, when someone points out flaws, that's an opportunity to test your evidence and possibly improve it. If we are truly interested in finding the truth rather than making ourselves feel good about this product or that, we should welcome challengers, not marginalize them.


Originally Posted By: demarpaint
All I can say is I wish I had pictures of engines I cleaned up with the stuff, problem is many were before digital cameras and the Internet. Then someone will say they were photo-shopped, so what's the point?

The fact that someone says something doesn't make it valid. That's kind of the point of what I'm saying. In fact, it's the essence of everything I'm saying. I hope that's clear.

If you collect good enough evidence to back up what you're saying, and if you lay it bare for all to see and duplicate on their own, your claim will be more credible than it would be otherwise. It's that simple.


Very well put. Too may times it occurs. Using MMO as an example, a poster claims that he got a 2mpg increase. And the next post starts with "Good report."

Taking things at face value......

I remember all the synlube claims. And did we accept them at face value? Certainly not. So why give a pass to some and not others?

Then we have the "respected members" gambit. Such a member says something favorable about, say MMO, and the platitudes stream forth.

But when another "respected member" waxes poetic about how good Zmax or ARX is, a near deafining silence. Or a volley of anti Zmax/ARX/whatever posts.

Why the different standards?

 

[Ursae_Majoris]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Oh, it's quite fresh to me.

My main problem is with terminology. As I and others have repeatedly said, there are a few steps you have to take to test a claim before you can expect other people to believe it. You and others label that "science" or "scientific proof", which makes it easy to write off anyone who doubts your claims as naysayers or science chauvinists. It creates a false dichotomy between "science" and "personal experience," as if they're just two comparably valid ways of getting at the same thing, and darn those science folks because nothing's ever good enough from them. It diverts attention from the fact that the original claim has absolutely nothing to back it up, and that the person making it could be completely mistaken or even lying.

This kind of thing is at the root of so many discussions on BITOG, and it's senseless. Asking for the most minimal amount of substantiation isn't "science." It's just basic intellectual honesty.

By the same token, when someone points out flaws, that's an opportunity to test your evidence and possibly improve it. If we are truly interested in finding the truth rather than making ourselves feel good about this product or that, we should welcome challengers, not marginalize them.

The fact that someone says something doesn't make it valid. That's kind of the point of what I'm saying. In fact, it's the essence of everything I'm saying. I hope that's clear.

If you collect good enough evidence to back up what you're saying, and if you lay it bare for all to see and duplicate on their own, your claim will be more credible than it would be otherwise. It's that simple.


Would you please give up already? It gets REALLY annoying when you stick you 2 cents in EVERY thread that mentions MMO even in passing. You have nothing to add, other than criticizing other members, so stay in your corner and play with your toys, please!

Welcome to my Ignore list.

 

[d00df00d]

I'm sorry you feel that way. The feeling is not mutual.

Take care.

 

[addyguy]

I'm just suprised you got a 1978 Regal to last 23 years.

That's a feat in itself!

 

[maxa]

MMO/user...Religiously

My weekend fun car is 911-Turbo- I did a top end rebuild back in 1994.(cams-turbo-blah).. I drove the car until 1998. I put the car back on the road in the last 3yrs. Car was stored in a heated garage until I came back to the states.. Fuel pumps were changed, injectors, plugs, oil&gas filter, All fluids,.Batttery..
It drove well for awhile..then died..Fuel head gummed up..Got it going again..Porsche guys swear by Techron--Used it..Worked ok..Car was still stumbling-here and there.. My wrench mentioned MMO. I was not familiar with this product.. After one try I was hooked.. 1st time I thought my car was going blow-smoke.(panic mode). A few minutes later all clear.. Car is so smooth and a rocket.. Its nice to feel the cams in neutral/overlap/lopey..again.. This stuff works for me period.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: maxa
MMO/user...Religiously

My weekend fun car is 911-Turbo- I did a top end rebuild back in 1994.(cams-turbo-blah).. I drove the car until 1998. I put the car back on the road in the last 3yrs. Car was stored in a heated garage until I came back to the states.. Fuel pumps were changed, injectors, plugs, oil&gas filter, All fluids,.Batttery..
It drove well for awhile..then died..Fuel head gummed up..Got it going again..Porsche guys swear by Techron--Used it..Worked ok..Car was still stumbling-here and there.. My wrench mentioned MMO. I was not familiar with this product.. After one try I was hooked.. 1st time I thought my car was going blow-smoke.(panic mode). A few minutes later all clear.. Car is so smooth and a rocket.. Its nice to feel the cams in neutral/overlap/lopey..again.. This stuff works for me period.

to Bitog!
Nice report! Someone will come along and pick your positive comments about MMO apart, you've been warned!

 

[Trajan]

Without any data, it is nothing but comments.

Products like synlube and Zmax had favorable comments, and got crucified.

To say nothing of ARX.....

 

[demarpaint]

........................And then then there are the people that make it a point to point out anyone who had good results with MMO really didn't, after all they had no "data". Funny when a lifter stops ticking and everyone around hears it stopped, it really didn't, after all "no data". Or when sludge is visibly cleaned from under the VC and people see it, it really wasn't the MMO it was the fresh oil and new filter, or a change in the climate, or something else. I've had to many success stories, visible, audible, and on the butt dino to have anyone convince me that MMO doesn't work, or I need data to back it up. Lets not forget all the success stories here that further confirm it. LOL YMMV

 

[maxa]

911-Turbo guy left something out. I drive an 06FusionSEL-6cyl..From day one from my pruchase the freakin car would tap/lifters/valves... I changed my oil at 1800miles..with MC-SEMI-SYNTHIC OIL(GOOD STUFF). I figured the tapping would stop eventually...NOT...Went on the fusion blogs..Not the only one with this problem..There was a TSP-from Ford. Some fusion guys did it. After a weeks or sooner..The tapping came back again..I Tried using GERMAN-LIQUI MOLY..Worked for a day or two..

Tried MMO---Yes--it stopped the tapping..I use it in gas fillups--every 3-4weeks...approx. 3ounces maybe--12-15gallons...Does it work..YES--DO I KNOW WHY??? What I read from their site and blogs..Thats it....NO TURNING BACK.

One more story--sis 89-jeep wrangler-22yrs driving this bad boy..approx-70,000miles..Not much mileage..Her transmission started sticking-auto--Used syntheic trans. oil..Still sticking after a couple of days...Started looking for a rebuilt trans..LAST RESORT--PUT approx. 6-8ounces MMO in the transmission..and laughed...Yup...laughed..Said to my sis-time to pay up and get a new car.....Guess what..the freakn transmission-no sticking--Can't believe it..Its been 6-8months now, ALL GOOD.. The only thing I wish this stuff would fix the rust under the wranglers' chassis...

 

[MysticGold04]

I will continue to use it, although I have not seen anything remarkable happen in my vehicles. Love MMO

 

[Darkfire]

A lot of comments about MMO here: http://www.jamestowndistributors.com/use...ystery-Oil.html

 

[mechtech2]

It IS true that MMO in the fuel was more useful when leaded gasoline was around.
And this is why many light aircraft guys use it today - leaded fuel problems. Guys at shows with classic aircraft pour in qts and qts. in the fuel.
But even if the lubing is minimal, and the cleaning marginal, it still exists to various degrees.

BTW, I got a 5 MPG improvment with MMO. [NOT!]

Let's throw out the high and low claims, and concentrate on the average review.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
........................And then then there are the people that make it a point to point out anyone who had good results with MMO really didn't, after all they had no "data". Funny when a lifter stops ticking and everyone around hears it stopped, it really didn't, after all "no data".

At this point I have to imagine you're not even reading, but I'm going to keep trying anyway in case anyone else is.

No one's saying the stories are false. We are simply saying we have no way to tell them from all the other fluff that people post on the Internet.


Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Or when sludge is visibly cleaned from under the VC and people see it, it really wasn't the MMO it was the fresh oil and new filter, or a change in the climate, or something else.

PLEASE tell me you know the difference between "I don't believe the story" and "I believe this didn't happen."


Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I've had to many success stories, visible, audible, and on the butt dino to have anyone convince me that MMO doesn't work, or I need data to back it up. Lets not forget all the success stories here that further confirm it. LOL YMMV

Great! Sounds like you have had a lot of experience, and that your opinion is based on a good deal of fact. More power to you. I can't speak for anyone else but I wish I had had that much of a history with a product.

But I haven't. Most of us haven't. Most of us have nothing to go on but words on the Internet. If we can't see what you see, why should we believe what you believe?

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d


Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I've had to many success stories, visible, audible, and on the butt dino to have anyone convince me that MMO doesn't work, or I need data to back it up. Lets not forget all the success stories here that further confirm it. LOL YMMV

Great! Sounds like you have had a lot of experience, and that your opinion is based on a good deal of fact. More power to you. I can't speak for anyone else but I wish I had had that much of a history with a product.

But I haven't. Most of us haven't. Most of us have nothing to go on but words on the Internet. If we can't see what you see, why should we believe what you believe?


I figured you'd reply.

I think I have a few years on you, probably several. Maybe when you're my age and have used a product as long as I have you'll have similar experiences. That's if the company is still in business long enough to use the product as long as I've used MMO. I respect people who've been there done that, you can learn from them, just keep an open mind.

You're correct about the Internet, you have to see and test for yourself, I have. As far as science, and data, while its all well and good, it can be flawed. In fact I almost lost a loved one this week due to a screw-up in science and data, common sense saved him. Thank God for a smart doctor thinking out of the box. Go figure.

I see you keep singling me out, what about the others in this thread that had positive results? Just wondering that's all.

 

[Mystic]

Watch out demarpaint when people start singling you out here. That happened to see in the Computer section. I had used Apple Computers for a long time and for several reasons switched back to Windows. All of the Microsoft/Windows haters soon came after me. The would even attack me in other sections like this Oil Additives section or elsewhere.

Seems to me that MMO is an easy and cheap experiment. Nobody is being forced to use the stuff. And as long as a person does not get carried away and use too much of the stuff it probably can't do any harm. The stuff has been around for a very long time. If it destroyed engines people would probably know that by now.

I think personal experience counts for something. If somebody has used MMO and gotten positive results what is wrong with that person saying that here? Seems to me we are trying to find out what oil supplements are good and which ones are bad here. If people are not allowed to comment we will never find anything out.

You seem like a very honest person to me, demarpaint. So keep up the good work.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I see you keep singling me out, what about the others in this thread that had positive results? Just wondering that's all.


You're the only one who keeps complaining about skeptics and misrepresenting what they're saying.