I'm tired of hearing about Auto-Rx

[Merkava_4]

Many of you may disagree, but I think this product is over hyped on this board. I have not seen any evidence that Auto-Rx restores an engine to like-new condition. I have not seen any evidence that Auto-Rx completely removes sludge and deposit build up; nor have I seen any evidence of it completely removing varnish stains. For the cost of the product, I would expect it to provide miracle like results. I just have not seen or heard the kind of results that I expect, given all the hype about this product.

For the cost of a shipment of Auto-Rx, a person could fill up there engine with a high quality synthetic oil like Amsoil and get much better results (in my opinion).

DISCLAIMER!

The above post in just my opinion; that doesn't necessarily mean I'm right. If you've had good results with the aforementioned product, then please post your positive comments for the rest of us to evaluate.

 

[Quest]

LOL Merkava,

If you understand how ester works in PAOs, you'll understand how/why AutoRx works.

G'day!

 

[smokey1]

yeh got some FLACK on that MERK 4 .

 

[Colt45ws]

Maybe it is, but I believe it works.

 

[Rlc2500HD]

Guess I will find out soon enough, gonna be running it through Moms sludged 3.1 V6. If I can I will take pics.

 

[sprintman]

If you think any synthetic cleans like RX you have lost it. And where does it say it completely cleans sludge/varnish you name it. Too many hung up on pics of valvetrain area which only gets splash fed. Should be compulsory to do a compression test first IMO.

 

[Craig in Canada]

It made immediately and demonstrable improvements to my very well cared for 1998 BMW M52. Assuming you aren't simply trolling, I think the fact that you're dwelling on "COMPLETELY" is an issue. Why are you stressing complete cleanup? No one, anywhere, has claimed that AutoRX will completely do anything and many times it's been posted (with pictures) where the job wasn't complete. It's hard to get pictures of ring packs and whatnot, which is where most of my improvements came from since I had no sludge or varnish to speak of. It also substantially improved a ticking lifter. Instead of being able to hear it most of the time you can only hear it for 1-2 minutes when partially warmed up.

Was it worth $20 to me? Absolutely. Don't get hung up on the word "completely" in order to bash the product.

 

[Brogy]

All I know is I ran 3 autorx treatments on my '94 corolla with 140k miles on it. Previous owner changed oil every 3000-3500 miles, with reciepts to prove it. Engine burned a quart every 1000 miles, which is why I ran the autorx.

After completing everything, the car did not run smoother, it did not get better gas mileage, it still burned oil, no different than before. Cost me about $80 in those 6 months I was using it, including oil I had to dump at only 1000 and 1500 miles, and the autorx. The real kicker is not too long after I finished autorxing it, I ended up getting in an accident, totaling the car. So all that effort and money wasted. I also put some in the transmission for 1000 miles, no difference.

If a car has seen resonable OCIs, It probally doesnt need autorx. My new car I think wasnt taken care of by the previous owner, and seems to be a little dark under the valve cover, but im still hesitant to try autorx again, engine runs fine and gets me great MPG, and I have other things that are more pressing that i'd rather spend my money on.

 

[JAG]

Merkava, it's best to do research and then form an opinion. My three cats might know as much about Auto-RX as you do, which sounds like next to nothing.

But you can change that by spending time on the Auto-RX website, it's forums, and the additive forum on this site.

 

[TallPaul]

Quote:

---

For the cost of a shipment of Auto-Rx, a person could fill up there engine with a high quality synthetic oil like Amsoil and get much better results (in my opinion).

---

I don't think PAO does much cleaning, but Redline with it's ester base oil should do some cleaning in a similar manner to that claimed for Auto Rx.

 

[JAG]

Polyolesters and the esters in Auto-RX are worlds apart in chemistry. BrianWC used Redline in his sludged Saab and it did not clean while Auto-RX did. Read his posts if you want the story first-hand.

 

[mcrn]

There are so many people on here that have had nothing but good experiences with Auto-Rx and so few that have had anything negative to say that I believe it works.

 

[Thermo1223]

For the little time it was in my mil's Saturn SL2 she couldn't stop commenting on how she gained power and it seemed to smooth it out. Car was burning 1qt/1k miles and seemed to start slowing down. They traded it in shortly after the cleaning phase though.

Current car it is in 1993 Saturn SL1, oil changed pretty frickin regulary with invoices going all the way back to date of purchase but I figured what the h-ell. With 86HP every little bit helps and I should pull the valvecover off. Maybe I'll do that this weekend and post of some pictures.

 

[Auto-Union]

ARX is cheap, and there are instances where it did an impressive job. ARX maintenance dose plus good SM oil is an excellent lube.

 

[ConfederateTyrant]

I do not intend to bash Auto-RX, but I do not agree with the whole "solvents cause harm" because no one has ever shown any evidence that it plugs up oil passages, screens, or starves the engine of lubrication.

Auto-RX is a solvent, by definition, and there is not argument to that. So obviously, this solvent is "good," but in my opinion, if you want to remove varnish, get a thick 20w-50 and do a 50/50 fill with it and kerosene. Idle the engine for 10-15 minutes, shut down, wait a few hours, repeat. Drain the oil, and repeat the process one more time. Until someone actually shows true evidence that this method will cause true harm, then I'll believe it, but no one has. Same goes for acetone in the gas tank, no one shows evidence, they just spout bulls***.

 

[wgtoys]

Maybe the truth is that Auto-Rx helps in some situations AND that it is overhyped on this board. There certainly is an echo chamber effect here.

 

[ConfederateTyrant]

By the way, I should add that I am currently using Auto-RX in my transmission and engine. I have used it in my power steering and differential as well.

Nothing yet to report with the engine, but the transmission has smoothened out some and I will be flushing it again soon. The power steering got quieter, but nothing noticeable with the differential.

And for my acetone comment, let me clarify that I am referring to the talk of acetone "harming components in the fuel system." I am testing right now to see if there are mpg differences in my car.

 

[Ramblin Fever]

I'm not knocking Auto-Rx, because I've never tried it, but *maybe* it's benefits are truly seen more in the cars that actually NEED cleaning of the ring packs, etc.

I would think a car of decent OCI's, 3-4k on older SJ/SL oils, and perhaps 5k OCI's on SM oils for 95% of their lives, truly don't really need Auto-Rx; which could be why some people do not see improvements.

I have been recommended from people here more then once to try Auto-Rx in a 3.2L sohc Isuzu engine because it does have 175k miles now; but I haven't tried Auto-Rx, and I won't, because I don't feel the need. This engine has no leaks, does not burn more then 1/8qt oil in 4k miles; gets 19-20mpg city (EXCELLENT for a 5,000# truck) and I'm the original owner, having always changed oil between 3-4k oci's with Havoline.

So, honestly, before one can doubt Auto-Rx, maybe they need to rethink whether or not it's truly needed; if that engine is putting out exceptional mpg, doesn't burn too much oil, etc, there may not be a need to spend $80.

Likewise, had I purchased this Rodeo say with 75k+ miles, then perhaps I would use Auto-Rx, IF I was getting barely 13-14mpg (which some Isuzu owners do average), and if it was burning 1 qt every 500-1k miles, which again, most of the 3.2L dohc engine's do.

 

[nyr197]

I'm not convinced either.

 

[M1Accord]

I haven't tried Auto-RX out yet but from reading actual usage on this site as well as many others in addition to looking at the explanation of ingredient on Wiki, I feel that some benefit is definitely there. However, a true test would be to buy a old car with poor maintenance and do a pre-use checkup by opening up the valve cover and takes pics as well as measurement. Then repeat this after running the Auto-RX.

Personally, I don't feel comfortable to knowlingly purchase a bad engine car and afraid that if Auto-RX does work wonder, the result would be a leaking engine. This is the same issue M1 has when people putting it into very old engine; it cleans out stuffs and, being too thin, start sipping out. So either way, I am doomed with either stuck with a shatty engine or a leaker.

I feel much better sticking with M1 as it is well known to keep engine very clean inside. Please no flaming on this statement.