teflon

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: jonny-b
Originally Posted By: Trajan
So little guts, so many excuses you have, eh johnny b?


Trajan, personally I believe that I have more guts than you.

Just being able to use an oil that is considered risky to use, will prove it too, don't you think?

The only thing you have the guts to do, is to make this sort of accusation, when you think that most members here, will back you up!

That would prove what kind of guts you have!


Wouldn't it?


My dear boy. I'm not hawking a product, nor do I have the temerity to insult those who question it. That attribute lies with you. It was also you how complained about those lacking guts.

And in case you forgot, according to that outdated website, I would have to use a micro glass filter with the initial fill. And in case you forgot, or more likely, don't realize, they don't make a filter for a Z4.

Now, you haven't seen too many of my posts. If you had, you would realize I'm a big believer in using the proper mfg approved oil. Something that a personage no less than Doug Hillary would agree with.

I'll spell it out for you. ACEA A3 oil is what is spec'd for a 2004 Z4 3.0i. Usually 5w30. However, I've used GC 0w30 and Mobil 1 0w-40. Both of which are both ACEA A3/B3 rated and meet BMW specs for long drain. They don't claim it, they put it to the required tests. So why doesn't this synlube carry the certs they claim to exceed?

So far, you've offered nothing beyond purile insults when questioned. You've offered nothing but things such as "I know it worked." But, sadly for you, it isn't what you know, it's what you can prove that matters.

There are a great many used oil analysis for the two oils I've mentioned. The product data sheets for both can be looked up. Can't say the same for this shilllube.

You're not going to convince anyone that it's a worthwhile oil with the attitudes you display. It isn't up to the skeptics to prove the claims made by a product, it's up to the pitchmen/shills.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Johnny
Originally Posted By: jonny-b

I don't have to justify to you that I use this oil.


And we don't have to justify to you or anyone else why we don't.

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Heck XOM or Shell might even buy the rights to it!


I highly doubt it.


I hope you guys realize I was kidding. XOM and Shell would be laughing. Like I am!

 

[Trajan]

http://neptune.spacebears.com/cave/syn-tolo.html

SynLube contains PTFE. PTFE naturally is attracted to itself, clotting much like blood. Dispersants can retard this behavior but we have to wonder whether the benefits of PTFE outweigh the risk in using it. We recognize that there are current studies regarding the use of PTFE in motor oils that we have not yet had the chance to read.
SynLube is a 5W50 oil. The LS1 engine in our test car requires 5W30 oil. SynLube is therefore far out of spec for this engine (see: SAE Technical Paper 970915).

Interesting read. Especially when you read things like: "I'm disappointed that you've chosen to attack me instead of discussing your oil. I never did anything to you. I'm not on any crusade against SynLube."

it does get better.

 

[demarpaint]

Nice find!

 

[Mystic]

Well, I am home from work! I got a chance to read a little of this at work. But I don't log in or post anything when I am at work.

Speaking just for myself I have had it up to here with jonny-b. Whatever he posts here in the future I likely will not even read it, except for possible entertainment. I really am not interested in the next miracle motor oil or miracle engine rebuilding chemical that he starts pushing here.

Based on what the one bitgo member who had experience using Synlube said, I will certainly never use Synlube. There is a possibility that that member's engine was being damaged by the oil. We can't prove that. But the dealership said the oil was badly sludged up and why should they lie? In any case, conventional motor oil seemed to solve the problems.

And based on what other people have said I think it is likely that in extended use this Synlube would pick up water and dirt contamination, metal particles from engine wear, chemical contaminates, and so forth. I myself repeatedly brought up just these things to the Synlube fans here who never seemed to be able to supply an answer. In fact an oil like Synlube might be even more prone to picking up water contamination just because of its chemical makeup.

I admit I used Tufoil (which contains PTFE) a long time ago. But today I feel that PTFE has no place in an engine. And Synlube has some in it. Dupont Chemical said at one point that PTFE had no place in an engine.

I certainly think it is wise that Johnny NOT volunteer his car for a Synlube test. However, it would be interesting to have a bottle of Synlube tested by an oil analysis guy.

I personally feel that motor oils such as Mobil 1, Pennzoil Ultra, Valvoline synthetic, etc., can supply all of the oil needs that we have.

 

[jonny-b]

I can see that you still haven't tried to find any info about why Synlube is performing so much better than other oils, and what info they provide on their homepage, that is wrong.

It should be very easy for you to prove that Synlube isn't working:
Just find some technical information(not just 1 line taken out of context)on their homepage, and explain why this is not possible, based on scientific studies.

Again, this should be very easy for you, since you have such a
tremendous knowledge about Synlube.

 

[jonny-b]

Also found other stuff that can be posted here:
"We have over 17,000 oil tests on file since 1985, but that is our proprietary information so we do not share it unless you are willing to pay at least $1.00 per result.
ALL tests are by Analyst or CTC."

"GM Research has been using SynLube since 1972, we have developed the AC MicroGlass
oil filters with them, they make them for us and they are available for the Corvette
as OEM filter".

"I have checked with guys at GM research the LS1 engine is designed for 7 year or
70,000 mile life with UP TO 100,000 or maybe 120,000 possibly possible.

That is why it is guaranteed for emissions that long, see owner manual emission
warranty.

It may run at 100,000 or even 120,000 miles but it will NOT meet EPA emissions by
then, i.e., by industry standard it should be taken out of service as the "useful
life" is officially over.

200,000 miles you are just dreaming no matter what oil you are using and yes both the
oil consumption and fuel in oil is indicative or serious mechanical problem(s).

Best got to GM dealer and have them plug in their OBD II $4,200 computer that will
tell you what is wrong with the fuel trim or injection.

3% fuel is absolutely horrifying".

And here is some info about their "PTFE", amongst other things:

"1) SynLube is a 5W50 oil but that doesn't mean your engine can't use it. I had 18K
miles on my ZX3 during the course of 1.5 years of driving. Though we don't have the
extremes of weather you have in West Virginia (I think that's where you are. Am I
right?) it never failed to provides less than full protection. Even though 18K miles
is not much distance in relation to the total life of an engine, it is probably
enough to reveal any problems with using SynLube and there were none. As you know
Ford specifies a 5W20 weight oil for the engine. Moreover, my understanding of
viscosity may be different than yours. It is my belief that a 5W50 oil flows like a
5 weight oil at low temperatures and has the film strength of a 50 weight oil. It
does not mean that the oil is actually that thick. The viscosity index of SynLube is
200 which is higher than any other oil, conventional or synthetic I am familiar with. This
high index makes the oil less prone to viscosity change with temperature than other
oils. I believe therefore that your engine would use SynLube without problem. On my
Focus SVT which must idle high as soon as the engine starts to minimize emissions,
SynLube never exhibited any problems at all this winter. I installed the oil at 668
miles. I have had no oil consumption since that time with about 3K miles on the oil.

SynLube is recommended for all engines except Mazda rotary engines. SynLube offers a
300K warranty for new cars maintained according to the guideslines SynLube
establishes for the car for any oil-related problems.

2) SynLube does contain PTFE but it is not a question of whether there is PTFE in the
oil that's critical. It is its implementation in the lubricant that's important.
PTFE comes in a number of different forms and this is extemely important as to
whether the PTFE is helpful or detrimental to the engine. I discussed this with Miro
Kefurt of SynLube who had the following comments:

"We do not use DuPont since they do not have Teflon in "colloidal" size, but they
have other products such as Fluon, and few others, that if you take time to go to
DuPont site you will find are specifically made for use in oil additives.

We use Nanoflon which is 0.3 to 1.2 microns [red blood cells are 7.5 microns] and
looks like an egg under 400X magnification, both SIZE, SHAPE and surface charge make
[a] difference.

The MAJOR reason why we use PTFE in SynLube is that engines have [a] measurable
reduction in noise (dB levels), as for wear reduction, in [an] "objective" controlled
test we would have to run 15 to 30 vehicles for 15 years to have "scientifically" and
"statistically" recognized proof.

For now 22 years of research and over 45,000 cars that have our products in them are
good enough proof both for us and for [the] FTC.

[Fifteen] years ago DuPont Teflon were chips from rod machining in 400 mesh size and
they indeed block filters and settle in oil pan they are 2,000 to 2,500 times LARGER
than the Nanoflon in SynLube - and further their surface charge is uneven so they
tend to agglomerate to much bigger globs even visible by naked eye. ..."

SynLube implementation of colloidal solids is very important because the solids do
not fall out of suspension because SynLube is a hydrophilic sol, that is the solids
are electrically attracted to the liquid lubricants at the molecular level. The
problems that arose with products like Petrolon (Slick 50) do not apply with SynLube.

One final point: SynLube's website is a bit unfortunate. Miro's a lubrication
specialist not a webmaster. His means of communication is a bit idiosyncratic too.
Still I would contend that his website is worth a second look. He offers a wealth of
objective information about viscosity principles and other information which I
believe to be very valuable for anyone interested in knowing more about lubrication.
One could spend hours reading all this information. When I was considering SynLube,
I had many of the same reservations you and others have expressed. Reading the
information on his site gave me confidence that the SynLube formulation makes sense".

Easy to cut and paste, what ever you like.

 

[jonny-b]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: jonny-b
Originally Posted By: Trajan
So little guts, so many excuses you have, eh johnny b?


Trajan, personally I believe that I have more guts than you.

Just being able to use an oil that is considered risky to use, will prove it too, don't you think?

The only thing you have the guts to do, is to make this sort of accusation, when you think that most members here, will back you up!

That would prove what kind of guts you have!


Wouldn't it?


My dear boy. I'm not hawking a product, nor do I have the temerity to insult those who question it. That attribute lies with you. It was also you how complained about those lacking guts.

And in case you forgot, according to that outdated website, I would have to use a micro glass filter with the initial fill. And in case you forgot, or more likely, don't realize, they don't make a filter for a Z4.

Now, you haven't seen too many of my posts. If you had, you would realize I'm a big believer in using the proper mfg approved oil. Something that a personage no less than Doug Hillary would agree with.

I'll spell it out for you. ACEA A3 oil is what is spec'd for a 2004 Z4 3.0i. Usually 5w30. However, I've used GC 0w30 and Mobil 1 0w-40. Both of which are both ACEA A3/B3 rated and meet BMW specs for long drain. They don't claim it, they put it to the required tests. So why doesn't this synlube carry the certs they claim to exceed?

So far, you've offered nothing beyond purile insults when questioned. You've offered nothing but things such as "I know it worked." But, sadly for you, it isn't what you know, it's what you can prove that matters.

There are a great many used oil analysis for the two oils I've mentioned. The product data sheets for both can be looked up. Can't say the same for this shilllube.

You're not going to convince anyone that it's a worthwhile oil with the attitudes you display. It isn't up to the skeptics to prove the claims made by a product, it's up to the pitchmen/shills.



I didn't realize that you had been introducing a new rule, here at BITOG, that every product you tell about, have to be followed by proof.
I think this place would be a fairly boring place to be, then.

I told you that I had been driving this oil 73000 kilometers over a period of 2,5 years in one car without changing the oil, and you don't believe me.

You want proof, and I am not capable of giving you that sort of proof that you want.

Another thing you should consider, is that you are equally good to insult people, that I am.

Besides, I am not your boy! Are you gay, or something?

This sort of thing to say, like "my dear boy", is clearly a very good attempt to state that you know so much better, than the one you are addressing.

I haven't seen so much informative from your side, either.

Where are all the facts that you so easily can include, about this oil not working?

 

[demarpaint]

Wow this thread won't go away. If I were these Synlube guys I'd try my pitch somewhere else, its clear it is not working here. Anyone can read a web page and gather information, believing it is another story. When something goes against conventional wisdom, and respected experts are saying the product won't work as advertised it would be your job to prove them wrong. With actual real world verifiable test results. Until then no one here is taking the bait. Seems pretty easy to understand. You are the one who needs to provide the burden of proof, not us. Until then all this thread is would be a waste of bandwidth, name calling, insults, and a great source of entertainment. As far as selling product, this thread is not selling product, in fact people reading it that might have been considering the product are not going be buying anytime soon. Why? The attacks, and lack of compelling proof about the product. Carry on!

Now if respected members were posting positive results it would be viewed differently, maybe. Seems jonny-b and Kirk are the only two. For all we know they're shills getting paid or a kickback. Or an owner and a shill? Or one in the same? Take your pick! JMO

 

[jonny-b]

Yes, the easiest thing to do, is to make Synlube into a conspiracy theory.

Wil the next thing, be that it is the direct cause to the financial set back?

Interesting that you deny that it is working as advertised, since 10s of thousands of people are using it, right now.

I remember from history class, that several hundred years ago people where thinking that the earth where flat, disregarding the facts.

It took several decades to convince people that it wasn't.

And still there are people that appears to be frozen in time....

Stay cooool!!!

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Wow this thread won't go away. If I were these Synlube guys I'd try my pitch somewhere else, its clear it is not working here. Anyone can read a web page and gather information, believing it is another story. When something goes against conventional wisdom, and respected experts are saying the product won't work as advertised it would be your job to prove them wrong. With actual real world verifiable test results. Until then no one here is taking the bait. Seems pretty easy to understand. You are the one who needs to provide the burden of proof, not us. Until then all this thread is would be a waste of bandwidth, name calling, insults, and a great source of entertainment. As far as selling product, this thread is not selling product, in fact people reading it that might have been considering the product are not going be buying anytime soon. Why? The attacks, and lack of compelling proof about the product. Carry on!

Now if respected members were posting positive results it would be viewed differently, maybe. Seems jonny-b and Kirk are the only two. For all we know they're shills getting paid or a kickback. Or an owner and a shill? Or one in the same? Take your pick! JMO


Well said.

No useful information of any kind is forthcoming. What is the HTHS? The TBN? No product data sheet to be had. And it even fails as an infomercial. Every thread linked contains insulting behaviour toward potential customers. That kind of nonsense works on the playground, not in the adult world.

 

[finalyzd]

Wow can you say. Way off topic lol. I guess teflon has no place in engine and a additive is doing nothing more then filling up space in the motor. Correct? And synlube, if johnny b says it works for him why argue? No matter what mystic says. Johnny b will use synlube and mystic will believe it is a garbage product, Arguement done!

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: jonny-b
Yes, the easiest thing to do, is to make Synlube into a conspiracy theory.

Wil the next thing, be that it is the direct cause to the financial set back?

Interesting that you deny that it is working as advertised, since 10s of thousands of people are using it, right now.

I remember from history class, that several hundred years ago people where thinking that the earth where flat, disregarding the facts.

It took several decades to convince people that it wasn't.

And still there are people that appears to be frozen in time....

Stay cooool!!!



As far as I can tell there are two people I've read about using the product. There is you, who lives in Norway, and Kirk, possibly from another Galaxy. I'll keep frozen in time, and hold onto my money. You keep smokin the wacky weed, and sipping the Kool Aid, OK?

No conspiracy theories, truth is I know no one using the product. It works for you, go for it. As far as trying to sell it to this group, far as I can tell, it ain't happening! I'll stay cool, smart, and save my money for proven products.

Thanks for keeping this thread alive.

 

[Vikas]

johny-b,

You have shown in this forum that you tend to purchase very expensive additive products with questionable claims. When pressed for concrete data, your answers are somewhat evasive.

I recall you paying over $150 for few ml of some expensive additive which claimed to "double" the torque at a specific RPM. I do not recall your conclusion about *that* product.

Now you have jumped on yet another additive.

- Vikas

 

[TurboJim]

Originally Posted By: finalyzd
Wow can you say. Way off topic lol. I guess teflon has no place in engine and a additive is doing nothing more then filling up space in the motor. Correct? And synlube, if johnny b says it works for him why argue? No matter what mystic says. Johnny b will use synlube and mystic will believe it is a garbage product, Arguement done!


I'm glad someone else noticed that the bantering back and forth for the last several days has had very little to do with the intended subject of this particular thread.

As far as Teflon having no business being in an engine I don't believe there has been any testing done in the 21st Century to confirm or dispute that. The formula's for Tufoil and Synlube were developed over 10 years ago. Slick50 has changed it's formula, removing the PTFE content.

No I don't think anyone has put forth a convincing arguement to stop Jonny-b from using Synlube. If he's found a benefit from it why would he?

As for Mystic I'm not sure what his favorite oils or additives might be. If he wants to share what he finds works best for him that's great.

 

[c3po]

Originally Posted By: Turbo Jim
No I don't think anyone has put forth a convincing arguement to stop Jonny-b from using Synlube. If he's found a benefit from it why would he?


jonny-b has certainly not put forth a good argument why BITOG members should even consider using Synlube. I have corresponded via PM with many members who know more than I do about motor oil's and they are very skeptical about this product.

I was on the other Forum where members were asking this Miro guy for some VOA and a used oil analysis on Synlube and they got nothing.

Just about every motor oil or oil additive that members have used here, we can either find a VOA or a used oil analysis on the product, when Synlube does not want to provide us with data then we get suspicious.

jonny-b has to realize that members here love to see VOA's and used oil analysis, that's just the way it is around here.

I believe back in 2007 jonny-b said he was going to provide us with a VOA and a used oil analysis on this Synlube when he reached 20,000 miles on this Synlube oil.

When he reached 42,000 miles on the oil, I believe Tempest asked him for a used oil analysis, and none has come.

jonny-b, I will give you one more chance, send me some of this used Synlube and I will PM Molakule or bruce381 and we will get it analyzed and I will send you back your used sample of Synlube.

You can tell me how much it would be to ship this small sample from Norway to me here in Maryland, or are there any used oil analysis Labs in Norway or Europe.

We had a VOA on Pennzoil Ultra before it even hit the shelves at my local Wal-Mart. I am sure you have a bottle of Synlube that you could let us use for a VOA, otherwise I just do not see anyone on this board who would consider using this Synlube Oil.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: TurboJim


No I don't think anyone has put forth a convincing arguement to stop Jonny-b from using Synlube. If he's found a benefit from it why would he?



I *know* that jonny-b has not only put forth no convincing arguement for anyone to even try it, but has convinced just about everyone *not* to.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: TurboJim


No I don't think anyone has put forth a convincing arguement to stop Jonny-b from using Synlube. If he's found a benefit from it why would he?



I don't see it as anyone is trying to convince jonny-b to stop using Synlube, he can use it all he likes, and probably will. Jonny-b should not try to convince us that his latest discovery, like so many of his others are the best in the world. I recall him pushing a product that could seek out worn metal, and replace it, restoring worn and damaged engines. [Just a quick summary, I put it on my ignore list when I saw it headed nowhere.] That didn't fly here, and now this.


When you toss these products that defy logic, physics and common sense there is a good chance you will get called out. He stated his opinions, when people didn't agree he started the attack, then the name calling. Then when the people put on defense turned this into retaliation he didn't like it and fought harder. Seems the harder he fights and the more names he calls people the more this thread will eat up bandwidth and go nowhere. So what comes around goes around I guess.

My guess is once he stops fueling the fire, this thread will die.


Trajan we must have been writing at the same time, LOL. Good point worth an edit to quote!

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: TurboJim


No I don't think anyone has put forth a convincing arguement to stop Jonny-b from using Synlube. If he's found a benefit from it why would he?



I *know* that jonny-b has not only put forth no convincing arguement for anyone to even try it, but has convinced just about everyone *not* to.

 

[jonny-b]

It is so simple that last time I spent 120-130 USD on a used oil analysis analyse, to satisfy some persons at BITOG(about Motorsilk), it wasn't good enough, since the TBN was not included.

If I want this TBN, I will actually have to pay some 190-200 USD.

I am not willing to do that.

Of course, just pay me the money, and I will do it.

Of course, you will still not know the number of miles on the oil, so I guess it wouldn't be good enough, anyway.

Do you see the problem?

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: jonny-b

About rocket scientists, NASA has also been using the Synlube, and I do believe that they where testing it, before they did.



Using it in what? IIRC, bruce debunked this the last time it was brought up.