Originally Posted By: Tempest
He's a sponsor, he gets to do that.
I guess it's time for me to wake up to that sad fact.
He's a sponsor, he gets to do that.
I guess it's time for me to wake up to that sad fact.
Oil consumption cut in half after 'solvent' flush?
- Thread starter va3ux
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Rick20
va3ux,
Sounds like alot of waste is generated by this solvent flush protcol. Step 1 adding volitile organic compounds to the original host oil before dumping. Then fresh oil run for about 100 miles with another solvent added, and drained. Now we have almost 10 quarts of oil contaminated with volatile organic compounds needed to be recycled. In most cases I would think that this is a waste of oil reserves.
That's quite true Rick. It is a somewhat wasteful process when you look at the whole thing. But it also isn't the sort of thing someone would be doing on a frequent basis. However all used oil here is recycled. It all goes to Safety Kleen in Breslau, Ontario where it is re-refined and sold again. So the resource itself is not lost or wasted. All in all - about 19 oz of solvent type product (the way I did it) plus one extra oil-changes worth of oil is used.
va3ux,
Sounds like alot of waste is generated by this solvent flush protcol. Step 1 adding volitile organic compounds to the original host oil before dumping. Then fresh oil run for about 100 miles with another solvent added, and drained. Now we have almost 10 quarts of oil contaminated with volatile organic compounds needed to be recycled. In most cases I would think that this is a waste of oil reserves.
That's quite true Rick. It is a somewhat wasteful process when you look at the whole thing. But it also isn't the sort of thing someone would be doing on a frequent basis. However all used oil here is recycled. It all goes to Safety Kleen in Breslau, Ontario where it is re-refined and sold again. So the resource itself is not lost or wasted. All in all - about 19 oz of solvent type product (the way I did it) plus one extra oil-changes worth of oil is used.
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
I too find this "odd".
Q: Have you done a compression check after your solvent routine? I saw that you said you had no improvement over the good readings that you had with Auto-Rx ..but I don't see where you checked after the solvent usage.
Compression Tests done today Gary. Essentially no change from the previous test results. This is now 3700 miles (6000 km) after the solvent flush :
Cylinder
1 - 165
3 - 173
5 - 165
2 - 165
4 - 175
6 - 165
On every cylinder, these are all within +/- 5 psi of the previous 4 sets of measurements taken since November 2006 (the end of ARX rinse #3). Chrysler spec calls for 100 psi minimum; Max variation of 25%.
When I look back at all the test results, it's interesting that I've never had exactly the same numbers on consecutive tests. Sometimes one or two cylinders will produce the same number as last time, but in general the numbers all seem to float within a well defined range.
Also interesting that the middle cylinder on each bank (Cyl #3 and #4) produce the higher numbers.
I too find this "odd".
Q: Have you done a compression check after your solvent routine? I saw that you said you had no improvement over the good readings that you had with Auto-Rx ..but I don't see where you checked after the solvent usage.
Compression Tests done today Gary. Essentially no change from the previous test results. This is now 3700 miles (6000 km) after the solvent flush :
Cylinder
1 - 165
3 - 173
5 - 165
2 - 165
4 - 175
6 - 165
On every cylinder, these are all within +/- 5 psi of the previous 4 sets of measurements taken since November 2006 (the end of ARX rinse #3). Chrysler spec calls for 100 psi minimum; Max variation of 25%.
When I look back at all the test results, it's interesting that I've never had exactly the same numbers on consecutive tests. Sometimes one or two cylinders will produce the same number as last time, but in general the numbers all seem to float within a well defined range.
Also interesting that the middle cylinder on each bank (Cyl #3 and #4) produce the higher numbers.
Originally Posted By: BarkerMan
I've got a problem with your analysis and you have a problem with Auto-Rx. One thing that is not well understood about Auto-Rx is that it attacks deposits and modifies their chemistry but does not mechanically remove them. Deposits take a long time to remove, sometimes long beyond the rinse cycle. All the real work is done on the rinse cycle and continues long after that. It's the way this stuff works.
I also have a problem understanding how you remove all the solvent from an engine by drain the oil and running more oil and draining it. There is always oil left behind, enough to hold some solvent again and again. The fact is that it appears that Auto-Rx worked so well that it helped remove or halt the action of the solvent long after it was drained. Your post reads something like Auto-Rx worked even in the presence of contaminants like strong solvents and still protected my engine.
The tough sell with Auto-Rx is that much of the benefit is not realized immediately. This is also the secret of how it works. It attacks contaminates by modifying the deposits and not the oil. You have a great post as long as you understand that it's a roaring endorsement for Auto-Rx. You just have to gain some understanding of the process and reassess your analysis. If Auto-Rx survived you just think what it can do if you follow the instructions and understand how Auto-Rx works.
Can I offer one suggestion. Put some Auto-Rx back in your engine to clean out the solvent. There is almost no other good way to get rid of that stuff. Good luck and thanks for the post.
Perspective, very often, really is everything.
I've got a problem with your analysis and you have a problem with Auto-Rx. One thing that is not well understood about Auto-Rx is that it attacks deposits and modifies their chemistry but does not mechanically remove them. Deposits take a long time to remove, sometimes long beyond the rinse cycle. All the real work is done on the rinse cycle and continues long after that. It's the way this stuff works.
I also have a problem understanding how you remove all the solvent from an engine by drain the oil and running more oil and draining it. There is always oil left behind, enough to hold some solvent again and again. The fact is that it appears that Auto-Rx worked so well that it helped remove or halt the action of the solvent long after it was drained. Your post reads something like Auto-Rx worked even in the presence of contaminants like strong solvents and still protected my engine.
The tough sell with Auto-Rx is that much of the benefit is not realized immediately. This is also the secret of how it works. It attacks contaminates by modifying the deposits and not the oil. You have a great post as long as you understand that it's a roaring endorsement for Auto-Rx. You just have to gain some understanding of the process and reassess your analysis. If Auto-Rx survived you just think what it can do if you follow the instructions and understand how Auto-Rx works.
Can I offer one suggestion. Put some Auto-Rx back in your engine to clean out the solvent. There is almost no other good way to get rid of that stuff. Good luck and thanks for the post.
Perspective, very often, really is everything.
Quote:
Why so upset?
Not upset at all. The use of caps for a couple of words is meant only to make sure someone doesn't misread the entire sentence. When all caps are used, it is seen as yelling/shouting/etc. However, if people read the entire thread, then they would read who I quoted. If not, but scrolled up to who I "replied" to, then they'd see that you didn't write the statement.
And as for wiping again, I used Gojo, scrubbed, washed, wiped, and it was still there. I have had instances where I have re-applied Gojo, several times and still, the use of kerosene was much more effective.
I've used kerosene to clean off oil/grime from parts as well, and it was more effective than any degreasing agent. And the rubber parts did not deteriorate either.
Why so upset?
Not upset at all. The use of caps for a couple of words is meant only to make sure someone doesn't misread the entire sentence. When all caps are used, it is seen as yelling/shouting/etc. However, if people read the entire thread, then they would read who I quoted. If not, but scrolled up to who I "replied" to, then they'd see that you didn't write the statement.
And as for wiping again, I used Gojo, scrubbed, washed, wiped, and it was still there. I have had instances where I have re-applied Gojo, several times and still, the use of kerosene was much more effective.
I've used kerosene to clean off oil/grime from parts as well, and it was more effective than any degreasing agent. And the rubber parts did not deteriorate either.
Slightly
Re: hand cleaners. The best hand cleaner I've ever used is ATF. I have several bottles of Dex II I found while cleaning out my dad's garage. A little rubbed on my greasy hands and wiped off with a towel will leave my hands clean and soft.
Re: hand cleaners. The best hand cleaner I've ever used is ATF. I have several bottles of Dex II I found while cleaning out my dad's garage. A little rubbed on my greasy hands and wiped off with a towel will leave my hands clean and soft.
Originally Posted By: va3ux
Craftsman, I realize that I ended saying some of what you had already said. I guess I should really read the entire thread before hitting the keyboard. Apparently we're thinking along similar lines. It's still all conjecture but interesting none the less.
No worries. We Canadians have to stick together!
Craftsman, I realize that I ended saying some of what you had already said. I guess I should really read the entire thread before hitting the keyboard. Apparently we're thinking along similar lines. It's still all conjecture but interesting none the less.
No worries. We Canadians have to stick together!
Originally Posted By: txrhino
Its kinda humorous reading through this thread and others on the forum. If anyone gets any good results from anything other than auto-rx, the results are questioned, this one has an agenda, had to be something else, etc..etc.. Not saying auto-rx doesn't clean an engine, but some of these folks seem to think it's a "be all, end all" product.
I agree completely on this point. I don't believe anyone is saying that Auto-RX doesn't work for it's intended applications but too many people are saying you should use it for whatever troubles your engine... All that will do is give Auto-RX a bad name if it doesn't work.
Its kinda humorous reading through this thread and others on the forum. If anyone gets any good results from anything other than auto-rx, the results are questioned, this one has an agenda, had to be something else, etc..etc.. Not saying auto-rx doesn't clean an engine, but some of these folks seem to think it's a "be all, end all" product.
I agree completely on this point. I don't believe anyone is saying that Auto-RX doesn't work for it's intended applications but too many people are saying you should use it for whatever troubles your engine... All that will do is give Auto-RX a bad name if it doesn't work.
Originally Posted By: va3ux
Originally Posted By: Rick20
va3ux,
Sounds like alot of waste is generated by this solvent flush protcol. Step 1 adding volitile organic compounds to the original host oil before dumping. Then fresh oil run for about 100 miles with another solvent added, and drained. Now we have almost 10 quarts of oil contaminated with volatile organic compounds needed to be recycled. In most cases I would think that this is a waste of oil reserves.
That's quite true Rick. It is a somewhat wasteful process when you look at the whole thing. But it also isn't the sort of thing someone would be doing on a frequent basis. However all used oil here is recycled. It all goes to Safety Kleen in Breslau, Ontario where it is re-refined and sold again. So the resource itself is not lost or wasted. All in all - about 19 oz of solvent type product (the way I did it) plus one extra oil-changes worth of oil is used.
Of course, you have to remember the end result that was observed - 50% less oil consumption. The oil that was consumed cannot be recycled, or reused - it's gone. That's the biggest waste of the whole process.
Originally Posted By: Rick20
va3ux,
Sounds like alot of waste is generated by this solvent flush protcol. Step 1 adding volitile organic compounds to the original host oil before dumping. Then fresh oil run for about 100 miles with another solvent added, and drained. Now we have almost 10 quarts of oil contaminated with volatile organic compounds needed to be recycled. In most cases I would think that this is a waste of oil reserves.
That's quite true Rick. It is a somewhat wasteful process when you look at the whole thing. But it also isn't the sort of thing someone would be doing on a frequent basis. However all used oil here is recycled. It all goes to Safety Kleen in Breslau, Ontario where it is re-refined and sold again. So the resource itself is not lost or wasted. All in all - about 19 oz of solvent type product (the way I did it) plus one extra oil-changes worth of oil is used.
Of course, you have to remember the end result that was observed - 50% less oil consumption. The oil that was consumed cannot be recycled, or reused - it's gone. That's the biggest waste of the whole process.
Originally Posted By: va3ux
When I look back at all the test results, it's interesting that I've never had exactly the same numbers on consecutive tests. Sometimes one or two cylinders will produce the same number as last time, but in general the numbers all seem to float within a well defined range.
Thats very common. Its hard to make the engine crank exactly the same on the same cylinder the next time you test.
When I look back at all the test results, it's interesting that I've never had exactly the same numbers on consecutive tests. Sometimes one or two cylinders will produce the same number as last time, but in general the numbers all seem to float within a well defined range.
Thats very common. Its hard to make the engine crank exactly the same on the same cylinder the next time you test.
I have to wonder if the rings are simply seating better now. It is entirely possible that the "flush" allowed enough wear to occur on the ring to cylinder interface that they seated better.
I took one of our aircraft engines apart at 90 hours since new. It consumed enough oil to make life interesting. I did not find any worn parts, but I did find out of round cylinders on 4 of the 6. No way the rings were going to seat anytime soon without some help from me.
Your situation reminded me of those who use mild abrasives in cylinders to get the rings to seat and reduce oil consumption.
Chris
I took one of our aircraft engines apart at 90 hours since new. It consumed enough oil to make life interesting. I did not find any worn parts, but I did find out of round cylinders on 4 of the 6. No way the rings were going to seat anytime soon without some help from me.
Your situation reminded me of those who use mild abrasives in cylinders to get the rings to seat and reduce oil consumption.
Chris
Cujet, interesting post. In your case the cylinders must have been egg shaped from the start. Over at the ARX site there is a test on a Harley V-Twin that obviously didn't break in well. It had very poor compression readings at approximately 10K on the clock. In this case an ARX cleaning freed up stuck rings and compression was restored to spec in short order. My guess is that the Harley owner babyed the thing for the first 10K and never really seated the ring/wall interface.
Originally Posted By: rshaw125
va3ux from your experience if you could have any one oil for the 2.7 what would it be? In other words if you were to be given several cases of oil for use in your 2.7 what would that oil be??
Mr. Shaw - sorry for he delay. Been travelling on business for the past 8 days.
Good question. I've tested a lot of oils in this engine via UOA and there are plenty of brands that produce good results, depending on the UOA interval and driving conditions.
I would have to say my #1 choice would be Amsoil, since it has produced the best UOAs in virtually every category. I've only ever used Amsoil TSO 0W30 since I got a bunch of it on sale at a cheap price. The newer Amsoil SSO 0W30 is supposed to be even better than the TSO. For but for overall general driving, the Amsoil 5W30 is supposed to be a better choice yet for this engine.
If they didn't have Amsoil at this imaginary store, then I would be looking for Mobil 1 High Mileage 10W30, again based on two excellent UOAs from my engine. If they didn't have that I would be looking for either Pennzoil Platinum based on it's reputation (I've never used it though) or Valvoline Maxlife HM Synthetic based on it's reputation. If none of those were available, I'd choose Quaker State Q-Advanced Full Synthetic without hesitation based on very good UOA from my engine - but only for a 5K UOA max. It's pooped out by that time (low TBN).
Those choices are based on my experience and UOAs, and the fact that I do a lot of highway miles. If I lived in a city, in the same climate that I do now and did a lot of short trip driving, my choices would probably change based on economics and the fact that I would be doing much much shorter OCIs (at least for this engine I would). I would not want to be spending the big $$ on Amsoil for OCIs of only 3K or 4K. But again, I would be doing UOA to determine what the OCI should be under those conditions and which oil(s) produced acceptable results.
va3ux from your experience if you could have any one oil for the 2.7 what would it be? In other words if you were to be given several cases of oil for use in your 2.7 what would that oil be??
Mr. Shaw - sorry for he delay. Been travelling on business for the past 8 days.
Good question. I've tested a lot of oils in this engine via UOA and there are plenty of brands that produce good results, depending on the UOA interval and driving conditions.
I would have to say my #1 choice would be Amsoil, since it has produced the best UOAs in virtually every category. I've only ever used Amsoil TSO 0W30 since I got a bunch of it on sale at a cheap price. The newer Amsoil SSO 0W30 is supposed to be even better than the TSO. For but for overall general driving, the Amsoil 5W30 is supposed to be a better choice yet for this engine.
If they didn't have Amsoil at this imaginary store, then I would be looking for Mobil 1 High Mileage 10W30, again based on two excellent UOAs from my engine. If they didn't have that I would be looking for either Pennzoil Platinum based on it's reputation (I've never used it though) or Valvoline Maxlife HM Synthetic based on it's reputation. If none of those were available, I'd choose Quaker State Q-Advanced Full Synthetic without hesitation based on very good UOA from my engine - but only for a 5K UOA max. It's pooped out by that time (low TBN).
Those choices are based on my experience and UOAs, and the fact that I do a lot of highway miles. If I lived in a city, in the same climate that I do now and did a lot of short trip driving, my choices would probably change based on economics and the fact that I would be doing much much shorter OCIs (at least for this engine I would). I would not want to be spending the big $$ on Amsoil for OCIs of only 3K or 4K. But again, I would be doing UOA to determine what the OCI should be under those conditions and which oil(s) produced acceptable results.
Thought Gary,s post would be of interest to posters on this string.
Gary Allan Offline
Registered: 09/28/02
Posts: 17896
Loc: Pottstown, PA
Originally Posted By: txrhino
Originally Posted By: G_lo
currently has alot of lifter noise
You probably need to verify the problem; nothing you add to the oil is going to fix a mechanical problem
Well, it typically won't fix anything "broken" ..this much is surely true. If the lifter noise is due to being stuck or fouled/varnished ..or from lack of proper oil distribution along some gallery or rail, then surely something that cleaned up the supply and or the stuck, normally freely moving, part could fix the problem. In terms of HLA noise, I tried just about everything and had pretty much given into just living with it. I just tried ARX for the heck of it. It worked.
Now here's one that I'll let you in on that I was pleasantly surprised by. I have a fellow member that had a totally clean looking engine. I was hoping to do a back up experiment to Dan's two bottle 750 mile test ..but this time do 1000 miles. He pulled the valve cover and showed a totally clean engine. He did a compression check as part of the deal and found two adjacent cylinders were low. After some diagnostics (compressed air with the rockers loose) to determine that the head gasket and valves were intact, we determined that the rings were the problem. A freeze plug between the two cylinders was the cause of an overheat ..and we ventured that this had coked those two cylinder's piston oil control rings. Now the engine had no notable consumption and no symptoms of merit. His compression, after 1000 miles was totally restored on one cylinder ..and came up substantially on the other. He's going to post the entire thing once he's got the rinsing end done with and rechecks the compression. He was another one of my gems of discovery, much like Dan, in that he too was a mild skeptic in the value of such treatments. It's not some "secret" ..but that's about all I want to post for now. I'll leave it to him to post his findings. This one will have the premium of him being an engineer ...so butt dyno isn't in his DNA
_________________________
http://lube-direct.com/gallan/
Gary Allan Offline
Registered: 09/28/02
Posts: 17896
Loc: Pottstown, PA
Originally Posted By: txrhino
Originally Posted By: G_lo
currently has alot of lifter noise
You probably need to verify the problem; nothing you add to the oil is going to fix a mechanical problem
Well, it typically won't fix anything "broken" ..this much is surely true. If the lifter noise is due to being stuck or fouled/varnished ..or from lack of proper oil distribution along some gallery or rail, then surely something that cleaned up the supply and or the stuck, normally freely moving, part could fix the problem. In terms of HLA noise, I tried just about everything and had pretty much given into just living with it. I just tried ARX for the heck of it. It worked.
Now here's one that I'll let you in on that I was pleasantly surprised by. I have a fellow member that had a totally clean looking engine. I was hoping to do a back up experiment to Dan's two bottle 750 mile test ..but this time do 1000 miles. He pulled the valve cover and showed a totally clean engine. He did a compression check as part of the deal and found two adjacent cylinders were low. After some diagnostics (compressed air with the rockers loose) to determine that the head gasket and valves were intact, we determined that the rings were the problem. A freeze plug between the two cylinders was the cause of an overheat ..and we ventured that this had coked those two cylinder's piston oil control rings. Now the engine had no notable consumption and no symptoms of merit. His compression, after 1000 miles was totally restored on one cylinder ..and came up substantially on the other. He's going to post the entire thing once he's got the rinsing end done with and rechecks the compression. He was another one of my gems of discovery, much like Dan, in that he too was a mild skeptic in the value of such treatments. It's not some "secret" ..but that's about all I want to post for now. I'll leave it to him to post his findings. This one will have the premium of him being an engineer ...so butt dyno isn't in his DNA
_________________________
http://lube-direct.com/gallan/
Update :
Currently at 3800 miles (6200 km) since the flush and the oil level is just a hair below the Full mark - which means I'm getting ready to tip another 2 or 3 ounces of oil into the crankcase ( I always keep the oil level slightly above the 'Full' mark on this engine.)
This means I'll just be starting into the second half-quart of make-up oil for this OCI. Oil consumption this low has never happened before. In the past, I would have been through a full quart by now, and a few ounces into the 2nd full quart of make-up oil. And I'm using Amsoil 0W30, which showed higher than normal consumption rate when I last used it a year ago (even greater than 1 quart per 3K miles at that time with this oil).
We'll just keep rolling along and see if the improvement hangs-in.
Currently at 3800 miles (6200 km) since the flush and the oil level is just a hair below the Full mark - which means I'm getting ready to tip another 2 or 3 ounces of oil into the crankcase ( I always keep the oil level slightly above the 'Full' mark on this engine.)
This means I'll just be starting into the second half-quart of make-up oil for this OCI. Oil consumption this low has never happened before. In the past, I would have been through a full quart by now, and a few ounces into the 2nd full quart of make-up oil. And I'm using Amsoil 0W30, which showed higher than normal consumption rate when I last used it a year ago (even greater than 1 quart per 3K miles at that time with this oil).
We'll just keep rolling along and see if the improvement hangs-in.
This is the most complete third party test done so far regarding
my chemistry. With others testing I would like to offer this as proof positive of what Auto-Rx -Cycle-Rx -Transmission does in an oil lubricated engine.
/www.auto-rx.com/cycle-rx/carlos_test_overview.html>
my chemistry. With others testing I would like to offer this as proof positive of what Auto-Rx -Cycle-Rx -Transmission does in an oil lubricated engine.
/www.auto-rx.com/cycle-rx/carlos_test_overview.html>
Hello Frank,
Are you sure you meant to post that statement on this thread ?
Are you sure you meant to post that statement on this thread ?
An update : I just hit 5K miles (8100 km) since the solvent flush and I've used exactly 30 oz of makeup oil (Amsoil TSO 0W30). When I used Amsoil 0W30 at this time last year, oil consumption was approx 1 quart per 2500 miles. It may have been even worse than that; I know I was shocked at the increase in oil consumption rate when I first used Amsoil 0W30 last year. As I recall I went through about 2 quarts of Amsoil 0W30 during a 4800 mile OCI. The same high oil consumption rate also occurred during two runs with Mobil 1 HM 10W30 last summer. But consumption rate always dropped to 1 quart per 3K miles whenever I used dino.
Anyhow, the improvement continues. See Post #1 for details.
Anyhow, the improvement continues. See Post #1 for details.
Originally Posted By: va3ux
Hello Frank,
Are you sure you meant to post that statement on this thread ?
LOL, Not paying attention
Hello Frank,
Are you sure you meant to post that statement on this thread ?
LOL, Not paying attention
- Status
Similar threads
