Worst Oil related Products, ones you would NOT use!

[ToyotaNSaturn]

quote:

---

from satterfi: That’s all hunky dory but for those of us who have used a top tier oil from the beginning, arx doesn’t make a lot of sense.

---

I don't believe that. I've owned the infamous Toyota Sienna and the Saturn 1.9L engines. Just because they were using top-shelf oils, doesn't make them any less likely to need periodic cleaing with A-RX.

Satterfi, you're placing too much emphasis on the type of oil used as the sole reasoning behind whether Auto-Rx is needed or not. (Perhaps I'm repeating myself here, but...) There's a larger picture here, namely engine and emission design that will dictate problems moreso than the type of oil. I could have run Delvac1 in that Toyota of mine and it still would have had sludge and still would have needed a cleaning. Today's engines place the highest demands on oil ever seen, couple that with automakers trying to snag the ULEV rating, even more stress is placed on the oil with higher operating temps, etc.

I'm just glad we *have* products like A-RX that DO work and aren't just an excuse to line someone's pockets. It works and works well.

quote:

---

from jtantare
Does ARX do anything that the long term use of high quality synthetic oil can't?

---

Yes. A thorough cleaning. See Terry's reasoning above. Synthetics don't clean. Do they help keep it cleaner? Yes. But there's a world of difference between a thorough cleaning and help keeping it clean.

quote:

---

from jtantare
The fact that people are willing to back this product so vehemently without any sort of empirical evidence is kind of scary. Anyone reading this thread should be very skeptical.

---

What more evidence does anyone need after they've used it with people noticing time & time again: "my car idles much nicer now" or "I get better MPG" or "that small leak is gone!" or "after seeing those photos of pre and post Auto-Rx, I'm convinced!"

What more evidence does a person need???

 

[ekpolk]

Posted by jtantare:

quote:

---

The fact that people are willing to back this product so vehemently without any sort of empirical evidence is kind of scary. Anyone reading this thread should be very skeptical.

---

I ask again, what empirical evidence do you have to back your claim that ARX is "snake oil" (or ineffective, or whatever language you choose)??? You claim the product is not effective -- where's your proof??? Ironically, all you've offered is your opinion, words, and nothing more, so yes, I'm skeptical -- of you.

 

[kingrob]

Ok, another burning question, if ARX works so great, why isn't everybody using it? If the claims offered by everyone are true, why isn't it available at Pep Boys or Advance, because if the claims of the users who say this stuff is the holy grail of additives can be believed, then it should be flying off the shelves, right?

I suppose the price has something to do with it. Why does it cost so much? What does it have inside it that warrants the price tag? This stuff ain't cheap! I don't trust anything you have to order directly from the distributors website.

But anyway, refer back to my previous posts to learn my experience with Auto RX. I actually tore down the top half of my motor before and after to see if this junk did anything internally. Also, gas mileage and horsepower are exactly the same as they were before I used RX.

And yes, the burden of proof lies with the manufacturer, not the user. Frank's little miracle "may" do something for somebody somewhere, but not on my engine. For now I put it up there on the shelf with Slick 50, overpriced feel good stuff.

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

kingrob,

"...why isn't everybody using it?"
Because any product -- good or bad -- is looked at with the same scornful eye as Slick 50, Ronco, and chia pets everywhere. Cracking into big business' mind set is HARD work. Remember the Tucker car company?

You use the word "junk". Why?? If it didn't work for you, and you don't like it, fine! But calling it "junk" is simply wrong in my book in light of so many other's positive experiences. It's not junk.

 

[Audi Junkie]

"This stuff ain't cheap!"

ARX is cheap, are you?

"I actually tore down the top half of my motor before and after to see"

Did you take any pics? What evidence do you have?

I guess the opinion of industry experts like Terry mean nothing to you, nor do all those pics of cut-open filters.

 

[ekpolk]

Posted by kingrob:

quote:

---

Ok, another burning question, if ARX works so great, why isn't everybody using it? If the claims offered by everyone are true, why isn't it available at Pep Boys or Advance, because if the claims of the users who say this stuff is the holy grail of additives can be believed, then it should be flying off the shelves, right?

---

Ummmmmmmm, maybe only those who need it should be using it. . . The product is also not mass marketed in the same fashion as MMO, for example. Are you suggesting that popularity = quality? Look, don't buy or use the product if you don't feel the need, but if you're going to take the further step of making specific claims that the product does not work, then you should expect to be challenged, and you should be able to back up your specific claims with some data. There are plenty of ARX customers here who've seen results (and some who have not) and posted the information they developed regarding the product. I don't expect that you'd be pleased as the product did not, apparently, work for you, but that doesn't mean that it's not effective in other situations. Are all those who've reported positive results halucinating? And again, while I agree that the seller has the burden to prove the claims it makes, likewise, you need to prove the claims you make. One or two instances of less-than-favorable results do not prove that the product isn't what it claims to be.

 

[kanling]

I think ARX is so expensive because the sales volume is pretty low. Frank needs to eat. I am kind of suspicious myself as to why, if ARX is so great, nobody has licensed the technology yet and put it in a mass market product (either as a stand alone product or as an additive in formulated oil). Maybe they just haven't had time yet, or maybe they know something that others don't. Not to dis the experts here, but you will find "experts" in every field disagreeing about plenty.

Personally, I would use ARX if I knew I had a problem. Currently I'm just wait and see.

 

[johnd]

To get back on topic, I vote for the Turbonator Electric Supercharger.

 

[JohnnyO]

Slick 50.

 

[denny2w]

"I vote for the Turbonator Electric Supercharger"

Don't you wish it was that easy!

 

[glennc]

I was and remain skeptical of A-RX but have decided to try it for myself based on the results of users here. I don't put much credence into subjective/seat-of-the-pants results, although some of them are surely legitimate - however, I when I started looking here I found MANY scientifically conducted, well documented trials of A-RX that resulted in measurable improvements in engine operation.

I used to buy the logic that if something ought to be in your oil then it would be in there off the shelf. I've more recently concluded that just isn't true, for several reasons, regardless of whether the oil is synthetic or dino. Whether a product is mass marketed, likewise, is not an indicator of quality or applicability. In fact there are probably dozens of products out there that would be great "finds," if only one knew about them, but which are limited to small markets through the mechanisms of our mass market economy.

I remain skeptical of many of the claims and explanations behind A-RX. I'd like to know what goes into it, and how it works at the molecular level (somebody, was it in this thread, said chemists never talk about things happening "at the molecular level." That is because it would be redundant - all chemistry is what happens at the molecular level. It is a perfectly good phrase.) I would also like to know why it is so expensive.

Nevertheless, all the good results here cannot be ignored, which is why I'm trying it, and I will add my own results, good or bad, to the existing data.

While healthy skepticism is good, it seems to me anybody claiming that A-RX simply doesn't work, or is junk, is going beyond skepticism and approaching an irrational disregard for countervening evidence. In that case, I would say the burden of proof is certainly theirs. As I heard somebody say in a political context recently, "a third of the people would vote against the sun coming up if they could.."

- Glenn

 

[Bill]

Posted by jtantare:

quote:

---

A lot of rhetoric but still nothing to back it up. But I'll try to ignore that and repeat my point. Does ARX do anything that the long term use of high quality synthetic oil can't? If it does accomplish the same thing as synthetic oil, the product is useless.

---

jtantare,

Something to think about, does or will synthetic oil remove sludge from the rings on the pistons?

Auto-RX does.

Look at this link:

Auto-RX Link

It took me two minutes to find this link...

Posted by kanling:

quote:

---

I think ARX is so expensive because the sales volume is pretty low. Frank needs to eat. I am kind of suspicious myself as to why, if ARX is so great, nobody has licensed the technology yet and put it in a mass market product (either as a stand alone product or as an additive in formulated oil). Maybe they just haven't had time yet, or maybe they know something that others don't. Not to dis the experts here, but you will find "experts" in every field disagreeing about plenty.

---

Auto-RX is cheap when you consider that the price of cleaning the rings packs cost how much???!!!
and how much labor would it take to open the engine and clean the rings on the pistons?

What other product cleans the ring area on the pistons this easily?

See the link above.

Both of you should do some more Searching and Reading on this site,
you are jumping to conclusions...

you don't know and you don't know that you don't know...

 

[Bill]

Here are two more links about Auto-RX and Ring cleaning:


Auto-RX and Ring Cleaning #1


Auto-RX and Ring Cleaning #2


It took me few minutes to find these links...

I am sure there are more links referring to Auto-RX and Ring Cleaning.


I am coming to conclusions about some people who post on this website...

they are very lazy !

No facts, just ungrounded conclusions

I think those who join BITOG should prove they know how to perform searches and read to...

It is getting really old asking people to use the Search function and do some reading.

 

[kanling]

I admit that I don't know, Bill. You are correct, ARX is cheaper than tearing apart an engine. But, you wouldn't tear apart an engine unless you had a problem. As I said, if I knew that I had a problem that ARX might fix, I would use it. From all accounts, it appears to be good stuff when an engine is dirty enough to be a problem.

So, does anybody who knows what they think they know... know why Auto RX has not licensed this chemistry to other manufacturers? I don't think it is because they are getting rich beyond their wildest dreams by selling a couple thousand bottles a year at maybe $15 bucks profit a bottle.

 

[glennc]

I don't know whether the formula is patented, or whether it is patentable, but that may have something to do with it. You would have to reveal the formula, and wouldn't you think that a prospective-buyer-oil-company might just try to tweak it a little to get around the patent, so you didn't have to pay a royalty? Or just steal it outright? It happens all the time.

- Glenn

 

[kanling]

Somewhere someone posted the patent number for Auto RX on here recently. Here it is.

If I were a manufacturer of "high mileage" motor oil, I might want to consider using ARX as a cleaning additive in my product. I don't think that has happened.

Would it be that the large manufacturers are just slow to recognize a good product? Or would it be that they just don't see that it is worth the cost to license it?

 

[kingrob]

quote:

---

You use the word "junk". Why?? If it didn't work for you, and you don't like it, fine! But calling it "junk" is simply wrong in my book in light of so many other's positive experiences. It's not junk.

---

You're right, just because it didn't work for me I shouldn't badmouth it. It may work for some but for me it was junk.

quote:

---

"This stuff ain't cheap!"

ARX is cheap, are you?

---

MMO is 3.00 a quart. That's cheap. ARX is 25.00 a bottle. Not cheap. ARX costs about 20.00 too much. I am also not cheap. If I was cheap I would go for that money back guarantee.

quote:

---

Did you take any pics? What evidence do you have?

---

The same evidence you have:

quote:

---

I got the 1998 CR-v on friday. It has 85k. Oil was dirty even though owner said it was done 1200 miles ago. I had a trip the same day 100 miles south to pick-up some wheels for it and I changed the oil there in a pizza parlor parking lot (crazy, huh?). Under the filler was dark brown in the corners of the oil gallery and all under the valve cover area. Spots of gunk were pea-sized. Did a full bottle of ARX with Clean 5000. Drove home 150 mi and another 300 miles since friday. Checked underneeth today and...it's cleaned. Whoa.
ARX skeptics...the same guys who were synthetic oil skeptics in a previous life.

---

I guess Audi that your posts are to be taken as gospel but if someone disagrees with you then they must be considered a liar until they pull out an archive of photographic evidence. You know it works for you, I know it didn't work for me. Don't hurt my feelings. Let's be friends and pretend that we're both not morons.

quote:

---

What other product cleans the ring area on the pistons this easily?

---

Ahem, MMO anyone?

 

[ekpolk]

Kingrob:

OK, it didn't work for you, and I can certainly understand the frustration that follows, especially given the price. That said, I still think the "junk" characterization (even "junk for me") is unduly harsh, but of course, you're entitled to your opinion. I don't expect you to perform a multi-run, statistically significant scientific study on the stuff, but on the other hand, your was only a one-bottle experience. That just isn't enough to draw a final, global conclusion about the product. Perhaps your situation was simply one for which ARX is not a particularly good choice.

 

[denny2w]

I think we need to add a new symbol like this one but with boxing gloves.

 

[Bio-T]

I think this is so far off topic it is time to let it sleep.