Jtc,
Bob has doubts about just about anything except Schaeffer's ,But it's Bob's site, and its primary function is to market Schaeffers products and to undercut the competition, albeit subtly
I don't agree, it's(bob's site) primary function is to help people understand lubrication principles and how they apply. The messg board's function is to elaborate on all the issues about different oils and questions and allow general discussions about feelings, experiences and concepts/theories.
Something You Missed... I am more of a skeptic than You or anyone else on this site! You must understand I didn't just jump on this oil just because some slick salesman told me it was good.
Quite honestly, I doubt everything until I either have it proved or prove it to myself.
Take for example, the neutra 131, I had not considered it as much of a thing until I ran into sludge issues with the Toyota's. Once I started to experiment with this stuff, did some oil analysis, tried it on many vehicles with many different problems, seen the solution to the cause take effect from this product, I ONLY NOW have started to stir the pot about its qualities and benifets, as well as did some testing with sufuric acid and fuels along with lucas's fuel additive.
I demostrated that lucas's fuel additive appears to be good in those results. Having no experience with it otherwise, I could not support it further. I don't think I put it down and I stated how it compared with schaeffers as being as good in that test..
I think you are suspect to my intentions. Yes, I use SCHAEFFERS as a guidline or yardstick to measure for quality. Why? Because I have personally seen it, tested it or been convinced either my self through experience,testing and education that schaeffers is a top knotch company with top knotch products.
So while I do believe strongly in Schaeffers, I don't do these tests to prove to others so much how bad something is as it is to prove to myself and help me understand more on what it is I am looking at and at the same time, allow others to see what I see so they too can conclude what they want from this.
So when I see results and post those Is that so much slanted in favor of schaeffers? I'm really sorry if that seems that way. I know you must really believe that no oil company can have blends that can perform like full synths' and that extended drains with low wear #'s ain't possible, especially when you consider having used the same filter all the way, no top off oil, and yet it did as well and maybe even slightly better than a top grade full synth that had a filter change in mid way with top off oil refreshing the additive levels?. WOW!, That's hard to ignore even for me. OPPS!, there it is! the subtle selling! dang, now I understand what your saying.
Well lets take this one step further to prove I'm not here to sell so much as to prove to me and others.
I posted testing results #'s with third party analysis companies doing the tests as an unbiased way to show just how well is this stuff, You really think I have to blow out others for sales?
The stuff works, and even when it is less than better, I'll post it. The analysis section is one of my favorite areas as it takes all the engineers comments and theroy's, all the salesman's comments and BS, and all the company propaganda comments and BS, and shucks them out the window and really lets you see just exactly what it really is about. That in my opinion is conclusive evidence that is not biased by me or anyone else on this board unless they post incorrect #'s, which is why I like many different ones as you can see actual #'s over a viraitaty of things.
I really have tried not to "push or sell" so much with schaeffers by condeming or faulting other oils as I don't like that and if I have come across that way, then I have to re evaluate how I come across in respect of being objective vers demeaning other oils to make schaeffers look good as that is not the way I want to sound.
