Auto RX as a motor oil

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Not the Autorx Frank

Joined
Mar 2, 2003
Messages
1,096
Location
So Cal
Just wondering if auto rx has been maeketed to oil companies as part of the motor oil formula so a maintenance does would not be nec. If it os recommended in small amounts as a maintenance does why couldent a major oil co just include the formula in thier motor oil to prevent sludging and maintain seals. Seems to me if it checks out to the average user it would check out to a major oil co? just wondering?

Frank
 
I think there has been serious interest by the big boyz. The issue is the longer chain esters in AutoRx don't make a beautiful amber clear on the shelf motor oil. I mean have you seen the stuff? She ain't pretty but she works!
 
They nearly all have. Mobil and Chevron to name just two. And of course major additive supplier Lubrizol. Mobil and Chevron trying to get RX to work in small ratio's but can't as RX is natural not synthetic and can't be fractionalised...s
 
quote:
Originally posted by sprintman:
They nearly all have. Mobil and Chevron to name just two. And of course major additive supplier Lubrizol. Mobil and Chevron trying to get RX to work in small ratio's but can't as RX is natural not synthetic and can't be fractionalised...s
Click to expand...
I would think the 2 oz "maintenance dose" that Frank recommends is a "small ratio" considering that most sumps hold 128 oz (or more) of oil. Am I missing somethig here.
confused.gif
 
The Auto-Rx maintenance dose assumes that you have gone thru the full cleaning procedure. In the absence of a cleaned engine it would not make sense to use a maintenance dose by itself.

[ August 22, 2003, 11:34 AM: Message edited by: LarryD ]
 
"BTW, not knocking the product, just wondering why a major oil co hasen't shown interest?"

Many have shown plenty of interest but they want Frank to give it away.

The way I understand it as a testing consultant the ONLY reason they haven't purchased Auto-RX is the cost to produce the product isn't cheap enough for them. The esterfication process of Auto-Rx is very time consuming, complex and costly.


I personally think they will use the cheaper less effective adds until the EPA forces them to buy Frank out. Or someone steals the formula which is a real threat.

"high mileage oils" ; Those oils have the adds that ALL oils should have so you wouldn't be able to tell the difference in wear regardless of mileage. The extra adds are knock offs of Auto-RX and poor excuses in durability and efficiacy IMHO.

[ August 23, 2003, 03:38 PM: Message edited by: Terry ]
 
quote:
The Auto-Rx maintenance dose assumes that you have gone thru the full cleaning procedure. In the absence of a cleaned engine it would not make sense to use a maintenance dose by itself.
Click to expand...
So wait a minute.... are we saying that a maintenance dose without an initial cleaning has no value?? I find that hard to believe. I would think that it would work in lower doses, but that it would take longer. Please expalin why this is not true, as this is very confusing to me.
 
It would make sense that in a relatively new engine, a maintenance dose would be called for. On a higher mileage engine, the maintennce dose may just do marginally well and not provide a noticeable/measurable difference.

A lot might depend on how the engine was maintained to begin with.


JMO
 
quote:
Originally posted by timzak:
Theoretically speaking, would it be safe to fill an entire crankcase with AutoRX?
Click to expand...
I don't know if "theoretically" speaking it would probably be okay, but FINANCIALLY speaking, it would be a disaster.
grin.gif


I don't think Auto-RX is designed to perform adequately by itself as a lubricant. It's sole function is to clean. The FM and AW properties you've heard Terry (I think) and MK mention are serendipitous.
 
I think the Maintenance dose unloads the oil adds from dispersing duties,less than cleaning if that makes sense. The liquid filter aspect has not been tested enough for me to address throughly.
While RX has a propensity to clean it also disperses in a inert way. I can't pin down exactly by what process. Does it dissolve the contaminates or does it help carry them to the oil filter and safely hold them, there?
It also seems to form a protective layer around the offending debris and allow it to "slip"safely between rotating/moving parts with NO damage occuring. This is the aspect of the product that other solvents have a really hard time with,even if they are high flash and hang around long enough
to clean and solublize contaminants effectively, they have problems protecting the engine metals from secondary damage after cleaning..... a point forgotten in many discussions here about "in-situ" cleaners.
 
Another way of looking at the maintence dose is to equate it to exercise. Let say I am in already in great physical shape 6'2" 220lbs 6% bodyfat. I want to maintain my muscle mass and cardio fittness. I can work out 3 times a week in a circuit fashion or combine weight lifting in it's purest fashion with 15-30 minutes of aerobics and acomplish this. Now lets say that I am 5'8" 350 lbs and 180lbs of that weight is fat. I want to transform my body composition. Doing 2-3 hours of working out a week is not going to going to create enough of an effect to accomplish my goals. This off course rules out amphetimines, extreme diets or surgical procedures.

So vastly different situations will have vastly differnet outcomes even when the same prescription is applied.
 
John

Another way of looking at it using your analogy is that a little activity over a long time would be better than high impact activity for a 350# person. Sudden stress on the heart could kill someone if they don't slowly and gradually get into shape.
tongue.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom