Rev-X Oil Additive

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Quest
Originally Posted By: jonny-b
I think it was a nice gesture of you, to give us all your inner thoughts.

Besides, have you ever thought about asking questions to some of the thinking, that any expert share with others?

Why don't we all just listen to what the "experts" say?

Don't you know that they can be wrong, some times?

Some times, doing the complete opposite of what the "experts" tell you, can be very profitable.

Besides, doing something that isn't accepted by the majority of people, can be totally correct 6 months later.

Do you really think that my manual transmission is going to explode, because of this Rev-X?

I really don't think so.

But, if it does so 4 years from now, I still had fun the 4 years it was working!

+1

 

[doitmyself]

jonny-b,

I think I understand your frustration. Unless I have missed something, MolaKule has only given luke warm comments regarding MMO (especially in oil) and the herd mentality here has ignored him in this case.

In this thread, MolaKule makes a comment, and the water parts and any possibility that this product works is not to be considered.

Experts can be wrong, so you keep trying, and share your results with us.

But, for the sake of your credibility, you (and others) sometimes get very close to making personal attacks, and that ruins the debate for everyone.

Keep up your trials and keep us posted.

 

[FiremarshalRob]

I'm still satisfied with my 70 dollar purchase (with shipping) of rev-x oil additive.

I would love to know what the "trade secret" is in the stuff.

Will I use it again? I'm not sure. Maybe in my oil change before next winter in November.

I have been reading up on LubeGard. They appear to make a nice product also, but the amounts you have to use on a per qt basis make it too expensive for a diesel holding 15qts of oil.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: jonny-b


I really don't think so.



Truer than you realize.

 

[Trajan]

Q – How often should I change manual transmission fluid that has been treated with REV-X Performance Oil Additive?

A – It is safe to run any treated manual transmission fluid 300,000 miles before needing to replace the fluid.


I doubt that anyone with any sense, especially one who is aware of BITOG, would even think about doing that for even a nanosecond.

I have a hard time with this statement too: "As the treated lubricating fluid continues to flow across the work hardened surface the additive continuously replenishes itself..."

 

[postjeeprcr]

Wow, when I started thiss 3 months ago I never thought it would become this big of a thread.

 

[jonny-b]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Q – How often should I change manual transmission fluid that has been treated with REV-X Performance Oil Additive?

A – It is safe to run any treated manual transmission fluid 300,000 miles before needing to replace the fluid.


I doubt that anyone with any sense, especially one who is aware of BITOG, would even think about doing that for even a nanosecond.

I have a hard time with this statement too: "As the treated lubricating fluid continues to flow across the work hardened surface the additive continuously replenishes itself..."




Hi, Trajan.

Well, according to their homepage, it should be safe to run it for 300000 miles.
I guess it should have some time limit, too.
For your piece of mind, it could be wise to be sure about what happens, and get the transmission fluid analyzed after some 150 000 miles.

The Synlube manual transmission fluid(which I have used in this same transmission)has the same 300000 mile guarantee.
It was very convincing, the 80000 km I had it in the tranny(I drained it, just to try out the RVS ceramic stuff), and on this transmission, the fluid should be changed every 40000 km, according to Nissan.

About the additive repleneshing itself, it is mentioned that it actively seeks hot spots. If it is so, this could be the reason.

I don't feel well about ranging two products up against each other, but when only judging by how the transmission feel when you shift gears, the Rev-X is actually slightly better than the Synlube.
Again, analyzing what really happens, is the way to find out what really happens.
But, since I am able to notice changes in how the transmission(and the engine)perform, I will only analyze the fluid if something negative happens.

I bought this car, some 120000 kilometers ago, and it performs a lot better now,compared to when I bought it(with 358000 km on the odometer). It now has some 475000 kilometers on.

For whatever reason, this seem to happen with every car we buy used, so I must be doing something right.

The other car, that I mention in the additive section, we bought a couple of weeks ago. I have started to improve that one, too.
Since the things I am doing with the cars, improve their performance(without paying a lot in any mechanical parts), I think I will continue doing so.

I have also learned that a fuel or oil additive, should be used some thousand miles, to see any possible changes with it.
We(me AND my wife), log our fuel consumption, as well as writing down the kilometers driven, in a log book.

If I find a good additive, I stay with it for a long time, until the need to try something else, gets to strong.
Pretty much like women.

 

[jonny-b]

Originally Posted By: Smokintires
Hey there guys,
I just want to say that if you have not tried this product you should! The REV-X product was recomended to me by a diesel shop mechanic for my 2003 F250 with the problem plagued 6.0 PowerStroke. I will say that what I read on their web site understated the results of what the product achieved with my vehicle. My truck never ran as good new as it does now with their product and 126K on the odometer. Within a very short time the fuel mileage of my truck went up 2.3 mpg on the highway as well. I have suggested REV-X to everyone I know who owns a 6.0 Powerstroke and they have all seen the same results. Get past the [censored] website and check em out. They have got something that I can't explain, but, it works.


Sorry about it, but I totally overlooked this post, at the first page.
And, this comes as a shock to me; it was working in his car, too.

All the 3 persons here, that have tried it(2 engines and 1 transmission), have seen some positive.

Another thing worth noticing, is that you won't have to do 7 cleaning and 11 rinse cycles with it, like another well known product, here!

 

[jonny-b]

Sorry, if some of you feel offended, with this last post, but it was meant to be ironic and sarcastic.....

 

[jonny-b]

Originally Posted By: FiremarshalRob
I'm still satisfied with my 70 dollar purchase (with shipping) of rev-x oil additive.

I would love to know what the "trade secret" is in the stuff.

Will I use it again? I'm not sure. Maybe in my oil change before next winter in November.

I have been reading up on LubeGard. They appear to make a nice product also, but the amounts you have to use on a per qt basis make it too expensive for a diesel holding 15qts of oil.

Hi, marshal.
You know that you only need 1 bottle, second time you use it in your truck?

For a car with less than 6 quarts of oil, it is 1 bottle, and the second time, only half a bottle.

 

[jonny-b]

Check out once again, the link Jag provided, where you can see what only 1/2 % of optimised polyol ester, can do.

I don't say that Rev-x is excactly that, but you can get an idea about what benefits that can be achieved.

2 ounce in 5 liters of oil, should be some 1.2% , more than twice as much as in the test.

 

[jonny-b]

Originally Posted By: FiremarshalRob
I'm still satisfied with my 70 dollar purchase (with shipping) of rev-x oil additive.

I would love to know what the "trade secret" is in the stuff.

Will I use it again? I'm not sure. Maybe in my oil change before next winter in November.

I have been reading up on LubeGard. They appear to make a nice product also, but the amounts you have to use on a per qt basis make it too expensive for a diesel holding 15qts of oil.


The Lubeguard needed, will cost you $46.44(without freight).
The Rev-X needed, will cost you 32.99(without freight).

 

[benjamming]

jonny-b,

Hypothetical situation:
Lets say someone tests product A & it causes harm to the test subject. Product B has the same active ingredients claiming a similar mechanism. Does another test have to be conducted to logically conclude that product B will harm the test subject? If so, then you might want to alert the scientific community as this is why trillions of trillions of variables are eliminated in testing (real world & lab alike). Otherwise, we would never make progress b/c we would be out testing all the time & not have any forward progress.

 

[benjamming]

Originally Posted By: doitmyself
Experts can be wrong, so you keep trying, and share your results with us.


I wholeheartedly agree. I've yet to see results vs. control yet though.

 

[jonny-b]

Originally Posted By: benjamming
jonny-b,

Hypothetical situation:
Lets say someone tests product A & it causes harm to the test subject. Product B has the same active ingredients claiming a similar mechanism. Does another test have to be conducted to logically conclude that product B will harm the test subject? If so, then you might want to alert the scientific community as this is why trillions of trillions of variables are eliminated in testing (real world & lab alike). Otherwise, we would never make progress b/c we would be out testing all the time & not have any forward progress.


I think that if this was the case, you should be very careful, even if this is another product, but contains the same harmful ingredient.
However, since you don't know how it reacts with the other ingredients(if it isn't exactly the same ingredients), it doesn't have to do the same, as the harmful product A.
Therefore, I mean that another test should be conducted with product B, to ensure that the foreseen damage, will occur. This is because product B could have other ingredients, that makes the "harmful" ingredient, behave in another way.
Isn't this the way it is meant to be, if you are going to do it scientifically?
If you start to "think" or "believe" in science, you are very rapidly changing the science into religion

 

[jonny-b]

Originally Posted By: benjamming
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
Experts can be wrong, so you keep trying, and share your results with us.


I wholeheartedly agree. I've yet to see results vs. control yet though.


Hi, again.

Other than the experienced smothness, and that a small issue with the transmission has been solved, this testing of Rev-X in the transmission wasn't intended to be a big deal.
Here, I just decided to tell that it is working(and actually much better than expected).

When it comes to putting it in the engine, things will be slightly different.

I will have a quite reliable baseline(more than 5000 kilometers)of the fuel consumption.

Besides, this is a small, underpowered diesel engine, with a manual transmission, that is mainly being used from one place, to another, each day.
The fluctuations in MPG is much less, than in a petrol engine.

Besides, if something positive happens, I have the acceleration test performed in 5th gear, in two different hills.
It was done when there was no snow on the road.
It will be interesting to see if the Rev-X will do something.

To be sure that the oil change isn't a contributing factor, I will do the test with only the new oil, first, before adding the Rev-x.

These things should at least indicate what difference Rev-X is doing in an old diesel engine.

I am only sorry that it doesn't smoke, anymore.
It doesn't seem to use any oil, either.

 

[Trajan]

Work hardened metal surface.

Absorbed into the pores.

2500 times denser.

300,000 miles on the same oil.

Additives that replenish themselves.

All of it marketing shill.

I don't want the marketing, I want the science behind it all.

Use it or not old boy. No one really cares. But the rest of us need more than marketing.

 

[MolaKule]

Quote:
If you start to "think" or "believe" in science, you are very rapidly changing the science into religion


Since we're being philosophical:

There are those who attempt to turn faith in a product into a religion.

 

[jonny-b]

Hi, Mola.

Yes it is.
I knew that one was coming, since I asked for it.

But, then it should also be remembered, that about this product, I was never claiming the testing to be highly scientific.

Hopefully, if more people are having effects from the use of this product, it will be more info about what it does, and how.

 

[jonny-b]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Work hardened metal surface.

Absorbed into the pores.

2500 times denser.

300,000 miles on the same oil.

Additives that replenish themselves.

All of it marketing shill.

I don't want the marketing, I want the science behind it all.

Use it or not old boy. No one really cares. But the rest of us need more than marketing.


Of course I will use it, if it continues to give good results, in performance.
It would be rather stupid, not to use it, if it is saving money.

However, that remains to be seen.

The wants on this board, however, is very hard to satisfy.
Some people here want technical info, so that they can read about it(and do no more with it).

Others, want to learn about products that can give a slightly better performance, in some way(MPG, improved performance, longer OCI, etc.).

Learning by doing, is the best way for me, to see if a product is doing something.

Telling about it, shouldn't be such a big deal, since I have nothing to gain from it.

For those people who wants technical info,just for reading, ignore this tread.
For those who want to hear about the small differences in performance that this stuff made in a particular application, this could be interesting.

Everybody doesn't want the same thing, and there should be room for most people, here.

You make a bold claim about this product being nothing, except marketing shill.
Well, I simply don't agree with you, after trying it.

And, that's the big difference; you really don't know what you are talking about, since there isn't enough info about it for you to read about.

I read about it, then I found it interesting that 10 people at another oil-board, had good results with it(everybody that tested it, had positive results).
Of course, I found a lot of negative writing about it.
But, it was all from persons that didn't try it.
What these people think about it, is rather useless, most of the time.
I then decided to give it a try, to really see what it is all about.
I have personal experience with it, and you don't, that's the difference.