Mobil 1 better cleaner than AutoRx?

[moribundman]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
Car manufacturer specific oil specs DID EXIST even in the '80s. Just because they did not exist in the US indicates something, doesn't it? As for GC, it existed way before 2002!



I'm sure that they did. We just did not have access to most of the fluids in WIDE DISTRIBUTION.

..and I'm sure GC existed somewhere before 2002 ..but no one had cause to give it a second glance unless you were required to adhere to some Euro spec ..which a limited number of WIDELY DISTRIBUTED oils conformed to.

Q: Is the above statement(s), however inaccurate for anal teutonic precision detailed purposes, more TRUE or more FALSE in the message(s) it attempts to convey?

What message(s) are you attempting to convey with your false statements?

Consider common sense, Gary: if I own a Euro car, I better " adhere to some Euro spec." Blatantly ignoring the manufacturer's requirements shows ignorance and arrogance.

 

[moribundman]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
We just did not have access to most of the fluids in WIDE DISTRIBUTION.


Who cares? If you own and drive a (relatively) rare import (in Hicksburg), you better make sure you get the proper fluids. Is that too much to ask?

 

[Gary Allan]

You're proving my point, mori. If you sell to idiotic American knuckle dragging fools like me, who only read the instructions when all else fails ..and only scan read when they do, what does one expect? (I, btw, had my 78 320i serviced by the dealer ..and I DID read the very simple manual)

You appear to be defensive here ..as though I'm somehow insulting the ultra perfection of German engineering. I'd say that their only failure is marketing their refined (or crude ..since they're apparently a complex as a lever/fulcrum) to simpletons in America. Engineering aside, they were really stupid on this note. The response, after picking up some unwarranted tabs ..was a RASH of motor oils for everyone to buy at Homer's Dumbbell Auto Parts and Broasted Chicken Shack.

That is, instead of a manual stating "here are your acceptable fluids if you can't find an agency" ..many oils were spec'd 500.xxx ..229.. LL etc..etc.

This evolution was undeniable and as bold and in your face as can be.

 

[moribundman]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
You appear to be defensive here ..as though I'm somehow insulting the ultra perfection of German engineering.


Well, you are dismissive of the facts. You should know by now that won't go over well with an "anal teutonic precision detailed" [sic], manual-reading *insert further insult of your choice.*

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted By: moribundman
Not all sludge is the same. You can produce sludge with moisture contaminated oil by driving only short distances without the engine ever reaching operating temperature. Oil thickening, as it occurs during long OCIs, or if the operating conditions are demanding (for example 7-hour Autobahn trips at high speed) can produce sludge. That's why modern engine oils are designed with lower evaporative losses: these oils resist thickening better.


And you can produce "Sludge" with Photoshop too right Mori?

(J/K)

 

[sprintman]

My indy shop owner does BMW, Porsche, Mercedes. Told me that there are so many sludged BMW's it prompted investigation. Sump temperatures average 105C and they had seen 135C with hard street driving. A tough ask for any oil.

 

[moribundman]

Originally Posted By: StevieC
And you can produce "Sludge" with Photoshop too right Mori?

(J/K)


I'd use Bosco.

 

[sprintman]

Bosco?

 

[moribundman]

It's chocolate syrup, mate!

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted By: moribundman
Originally Posted By: StevieC
And you can produce "Sludge" with Photoshop too right Mori?

(J/K)


I'd use Bosco.


You're a good sport!

 

[sprintman]

Chocolate syrup gratis with any BMW.

 

[Trajan]

Hershey's for mine.

 

[Gary Allan]

Originally Posted By: moribundman
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
You appear to be defensive here ..as though I'm somehow insulting the ultra perfection of German engineering.


Well, you are dismissive of the facts. You should know by now that won't go over well with an "anal teutonic precision detailed" [sic], manual-reading *insert further insult of your choice.*

Naturally

 

[moribundman]

Originally Posted By: moribundman
Originally Posted By: Volvohead
Originally Posted By: moribundman


Do you know what the term "conflict of interests" means in the case of friends and family giving testimony?

Friends and family? I don't think so. A positive testimonial does not make transform a consumer into a "friend" or family member. Where's your "proof" of that?


Only since you ask: look at the posting history of some of the more prolific endorsers. For example, check this one, from the topic of his first post seven years ago to the topic of his last post, with everything in between:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=userposts&id=193

Do you notice a common theme?

Don't get me wrong, as a consumer I love particular brands that make a variety of products, but I don't go out of my way, on a mission really, posting about them incessantly. Why should I?


Volvohead, did you read my reply? I know Gary made a decent effort to bury my reply over the course of several hours.

 

[GROUCHO MARX]

Originally Posted By: moribundman
It's chocolate syrup, mate!


Bosco' a milk "amplifier"

 

[Rick20]

It's kind of funny. I checked out King Arnold's Kingdom and all the news was about Annika Sorenstam. I can't understand why the Germans can't engineer a superior golf club. Or may be they have but are stuck on the instruction manual. My guess is that they don't like BOSCO in either Germany, nor Sweden. I think the Germans like beer and the Swedes drink glogg.

 

[Rick20]

Gosh, I lost my train of thought, not glogg related. We all want to prevent Bosco like formations in our motors. Variable timing and turbo motors are likely to become the main improvements in the gas side of motor technology, as we try to reach goals under the new administration. Battery technology excluded, I think ARX and modern oils have a bright future.

 

[Gary Allan]

Quote:
Volvohead, did you read my reply? I know Gary made a decent effort to bury my reply over the course of several hours.

Bury it? Here. I'll bump it to the top. How's that?

 

[Volvohead]

Originally Posted By: moribundman


Volvohead, did you read my reply? I know Gary made a decent effort to bury my reply over the course of several hours.

I read it. I didn't think it needed a reply. XOM has its Buster, and ARX has its Rick20. That is probably not the mainstream for either camp.

The testimonials I take more seriously are consumers that post once or twice about their experience with the product. There are a number of other users, here and elsewhere, that have reported good results with the product.

Fact is, the OP opened this thread with "Seems like most people are disappointed with AutoRx when it comes to cleaning" That's a troll's salvo if ever there was one. It's also not supported by anything credible. it certainly flies in the face of my experience with the product, and I concede it doesn't always work as advertised. The rest of the original post was a cut and paste of M1 marketing materials. That's about as transparent as it gets.

It's a shame that this sort of thread has grown like this. I was reluctant to add to it, and probably won't continue to do so.

There is no doubt that we have had a little pack of XOM groupies around here who have harassed anyone off the board who presented legitimate criticism of M1 or some other XOM product. Some are employees or retirees. That some others have now resorted to attacking other products to push their agenda I think further dilutes the credibility of this board, and justifies the loss of expert voices such as Terry and Tom. We used to have detailed technical discussions around here. Now we witness straight marketing bilge as original post content. And I now stare at a box declaring "Use Mobil 1" on every page here, so it should all come as no surprise.

M1 is a good enough oil that it doesn't need this sort of [censored].

 

[es350]

Originally Posted By: Volvohead


Fact is, the OP opened this thread with "Seems like most people are disappointed with AutoRx when it comes to cleaning" That's a troll's salvo if ever there was one. It's also not supported by anything credible. it certainly flies in the face of my experience with the product, and I concede it doesn't always work as advertised.


This is the way this forums works at times...If you say anything neg about certain products here, people FLIP....I do however disagree that a user with low posts is a troll. If not for new user (aka $$$), this site would be bye bye. Plus there are other "old" users that have posted the same.


Originally Posted By: Volvohead

It's a shame that this sort of thread has grown like this. I was reluctant to add to it, and probably won't continue to do so.
see my post above.

Originally Posted By: Volvohead
That some others have now resorted to attacking other products to push their agenda I think further dilutes the credibility of this board, and justifies the loss of expert voices such as Terry and Tom. We used to have detailed technical discussions around here.


See post above and what I have stated in this thread prior..I agree 100%