Auto RX a good idea??

[basils]

I'm perplexed. Most of you people on this board really seem to know your stuff when it comes to lubrication, yet so many of you advise using this Auto RX product. To me, an admited "lube" novice, putting a product into an engine in order to clean it, sounds very hokey. How can it not possibly cause harm to an engine when it removes sludge and contaminates and puts it directly into the oil? Now I've read where people say that the the filter cleans this out but how can that be? The oil still has to circulate until it gets to the filter and that can take enough time to cause grit and other nasty stuff to get in between the minor tolerances of the engine. I just can't see how the benefits, if any, would outway the possible harm that this could do. So many well intentioned motorists, me included, have accepted many products in the past that further research has shown to be needless at best and even harmful in some cases. (Slick 50, Duralube, Mystery oil, Prolong, STP, Zmax etc.)
Maybe it would be best to wait a while until a scientific and unbiased study can confirm if this product is worth using in the long term?

 

[darkdan]

There are several already. =)

That dirt and sludge doing anything important sitting between your rings?

Auto-RX does seem like snake oil, but it does work.

Auto-rx is made from natural esters. Sure, there are many types of esters, but other esters are already put into some motor oils. Esters are great cleaning agents and seal conditioners. So think of this as a super concentrated cleaning oil!

There, are you less scared now?

 

[michaelc80]

Basils,
I was just as skeptical as you when I first heard about AutoRX. I finally decided to try it for myself on a very neglected 87 Nissan Sentra. My thoughts were...if it ruins the engine, it's no big deal because the car was free anyway. If it doesn't do anything and is simply snake oil, then I'm only out the price of the bottle.

Using AutoRX made a big difference in the car and, what was most important, did it without damaging the car in any way that I could find. When I started, you could see a significant amount of varnish and buildup on the rocker arms. It's gone now. The car is more like I remember it when it was newer-fairly peppy-not after it was used by a relative for the last 7 years. I liked the results so much I have started a treatment on my beloved 92 300ZX (to which I would never add anything that I did not have 100% total confidence in). I also plan to use it on my wifes Cherokee at the next OCI.

 

[XS650]

quote:

---

Originally posted by basils:
Now I've read where people say that the the filter cleans this out but how can that be? The oil still has to circulate until it gets to the filter and that can take enough time to cause grit and other nasty stuff to get in between the minor tolerances of the engine.

---

In a modern engine, oil is picked up from the pan by the oil pump, run through a full flow filter then sent on to bearings etc. It doesn't circulate without getting filtered each time it goes through the engine. There isn't much to worry about there. Also, one ARx claim to fame is that it works slowly so doesn't send a bunch of crud surging through your engine.

I used ARx in on engine with under 50,000 miles and didn't notice any difference. I'm currently running it in a truck with 100k miles and it has made a big improvement in how it runs in a few hundred miles. YMMV.

 

[Terry]

Auto-RX slowly solves and disburses ( safely) the contaminants in a lubricious protective micel what is not filtered.

Same idea that motor oil is supposed to do but RX does it better !


Spend a few hours reading the reams of info here from Molakule,Frank Miller and Rick20, all chemists and all familiar to some degree with the RX capability to clean safely.

From a oil analyst point of view , I haven't observed RX ever cause increased wear in a engine it is cleaning. That after 3 years of near continous UOA testing. Most I was never compensated for.

And most importantly I use it in my own cars.

Terry

 

[Jakebrake]

Try it...I think you will like it. I am a firm believer in Auto-Rx!

 

[Pablo]

If anyone was skeptical about Auto-Rx, I was. I won't now lather on about the product, but I can say it cleaned the ring packs on my 250,000 mile turbo of crap that had been there for years. The engine was otherwise very clean (no sludge) but the rings were just gummy and didn't seal well, almost seemed like serious bore wear. After treatment the cylinder pressure is way up and the car boosts and GOES!

 

[XS650]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Terry:
lubricious protective micel

Terry

---

I thought sex talk was off limits here

 

[dkcase]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Terry:
micel


Terry

---

Is this a word ? What is this? Online dictionary missed it.

I hate to think I'm missing something here.

 

[Terry]

OK OK,

Websters spells it "micelle". Scientific spelling is understood as micel.

Disclaimer: I know a few chemists here and I am NO chemist.

No I didn't sleep at Holiday Inn Express ? last night.

Key to understand is that dispersancy and cleaning are two different activities.

Motor oils are terrible at cleaning and average at dispersing especially if the cleaning needed is layer upon layer.

Most solvents are poor dispersants and while they may be very strong at initial cleaning , in a engine environment the lighter ends of the solvent volatizes out too soon leaving a partially done job, usually with 0 inherent lubricity.

For instance LubeControl is a EXCELLENT lubricious solvent and rather long lasting which is antithetical to what I described above.

It however is not a good disperant and thank goodness breaks stuff down to such a small size that the oil can disperse it.


Auto-RX is much slower and methodically strips layer upon layer of build up, and has the added benefit of carrying the junk to the filter in protective coatings ( we are talking small here folks), where the trash is safely stripped if it is large enough.The Auto-RX heads back out in the host oil looking for more, while the smallest contaminants are being carried by the oil and RX until safely drained.

Remarkable effect really .

 

[TallPaul]

So Lube Control and Auto Rx do similar things in cleaning out deposits, but LC is faster. However, LC also is an antioxidant and will maintain longer oil life. Does ARx have a similar property? I assume one or the other of these products should be used, but not both. So how to determine which to use?

 

[basils]

I've got a better understanding now how this product works without damaging the engine (thanks especially to Terry).
How many miles and what indications would one recommend the use of this stuff? I've got a 2001 Ford Ranger 4 cylinder with about 53k miles on it; would this be a candidate? I've ran Mobil 1 5w30 in it since it had 500 miles on it.

 

[Eric Peterman]

TallPaul: Here's how I read Terry's last post:

Auto-Rx is a better dispersant, so excellent for cleaning out sludge, especially layered sludge.

LubeControl, because it is anti-oxidant, may be better for the oil itself as it controls pH and dissolves deposits and solids. So LubeControl for maintenance (it is less expensive) and Auto-Rx for initial and periodic house-cleaning.

That's how I see it.

 

[TallPaul]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eric Peterman:
LubeControl, because it is anti-oxidant, may be better for the oil itself as it controls pH and dissolves deposits and solids. So LubeControl for maintenance (it is less expensive) and Auto-Rx for initial and periodic house-cleaning.

---

Gotcha. Clear as a bell now. Thanks.