Auto-RX in Turbo Volvo

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
4
Location
Vancouver, BC
After many weeks of reading about ARX on the forums I decided to order some up.
Just received my order today and added some to my engine oil and transmission fluid.
I'm really stoked as I just bought my 1990 Volvo 740 Turbo and its been consuming a bit of oil at weird intervals.
Its got 100,000 miles on it, so I'm doing a double treatement.
Ordering up some LC to treat the oil with after and plan on either running Redline 5w40 or Amsoil 5w40 after the treatment is done.
 
welcome.gif


Can you elaborate regarding the consuming oil at weird intervals?
 
I have a 87 745T 338K miles and run Mobil 1 10W30 and a maintenance dose of Auto-Rx.
The 97 960 75K miles was just cleaned with Auto-Rx and is run with M1 10W30 also and LC.

Again Welcome to BITOG.
 
Thanks. The consumption is never consistent. I havent done enough driving to really test it. I'd guess its doing a 3/4 of a quart every 2000 miles at the moment.

[ April 27, 2006, 11:32 AM: Message edited by: fluffernutter ]
 
ARX in my '96 850 turbo resulted in a smoother quieter engine, peppier engine, and about a quarter of the oil consumption. I also cleaned the transmission with ARX...it was smooth before, and is smooth after...no noticeable improvement, but maybe i added life to it.


Ken
 
Question:
Person A drives 1000miles a week.
Person B drives 200miles a week.
Both identical cars starting the ARX treatement.
Does person B benefit more than A because the ARX will be in the engine longer even though the mileage is the same on the change interval?
Also under what conditions does ARX do its job the best?
 
fluffernutter,

I'm a rookie, but from what I've read the benefits are affected by temperature and flow. This would say that it isn't a question of miles per week like you mentioned, but rather the driving pattern.

If the car was driven on many short trips to get 200 mile in a week and it never got up to temperature I suspect the benefits would be less.

I also expect that the inventor, Frank, has allowed for this in his set of instructions.

My experiances are on going but with my ECHO driving 75 miles a day on the commute it worked very well.

I'm on the second rinse cycle on the wifes 96 Camry which has 130K now and has many short trip miles. In every filter that was run with either clean or rinse cucles I have found carbon. I suspect that this would be viewed to be "As Expected" because of the short trip pattern this car sees. Those type of trips are I think prone to produce more carbon deposits, hence the greater amounts of carbon in the filters as I have seen.

In short, my guess is that operating temperature is more important that the number of miles per week.

I hope the wizzards here will correct my errors.
 
Temperature, flow, and pressure all contribute to ARX performance in cleaning. If the motor is not running nothing happens. However good results will occur in both senarios outlined above. Even in around town driving, rpms go up and down as the transmission goes up in gears, so you get spikes in oil pressure. The gearing in most cars today is high enough that your not running much more than 2100 rpms at highway speed. Taking longer to accumulate the cleaning and rinse miles has little negative impact as long as a good portion of the miles are run with the motor operating at full temperature. The highway miles are likely best for this reason, but not by much.
 
Did two cycles starting at 145k on my Wife's 96 850 Turbo Wagon. Worked great. Car sees 350+ miles a week on long hard commute on 15 in San Diego, lots of stop and go, plus maybe 10 percent at 80. I'm going to be sending in a sample for analysis in a week or so for 155k miles, using a synthetic 5w-30 with oil consumption that is so little it's hard to figure what it is. I don't add any makeup oil because it only moves about 1/16th of an inch between 5k oil changes.
 
I would have thought that with the severe driving, stop and go, with small bursts up to 80, the lubricity properties of ARX would serve you better from the oil side, for the same cost.
 
I did not know that ARX had any lubricity. I thought it treated oil as a carrier and only got involved in cleaning. LC is the one that gets involved with the oil.
 
Ken, I had a bad experience with M1 0w-40, and when back to Red Line 5w-30. I tried the M1 because a friend told me how good it was and how may high performance cars use it for a factory fill. I know I probably gave it a tough test, but the results were terrible. In the late summer I went from San Diego to Phoenix on a 120+ day with speeds around 80 or so most of the way. The combination of oil pressure drop and oil temperature rise caused the A/C to be blocked...in a black wagon. I changed the oil at a friend's shop in Phoenix, back to RL 5w-30 and sent off a sample. The results, a very thin 20 weight with advise to change the oil right away, after about a thousand miles. On the return trip with RL 5w-30, same temps, same speed, no problems. I don't want to try a spread like 0w-40 or 5w-40 and I'm not sure I want to use M1 in this application. I make that trip about a dozen times a year. The car has almost 10k miles since that adventure. The 5w-30 RL is working fine, in fact I have a sample ready to go to the lab, now. Oh, and I did a double Auto-Rx after I dumped the 0w-40 (aka 0w-15). It has been said here, often, that some oils work better in some applications, than others.
 
Larry,

ANY 0w-40 will shear like crazy in a turbocharged engine. Your best bet is a ACEA A3/B4 rated 5w-30 or 10w-30 that's made with little or no polymer....

TS
 
Larry,

I've been running the Amsoil 0w-40 in my 1.8L, 225 Hp Audi TT turbo, just to see how much I can get it to shear. I'll post the 10,000 mile test results sometime next month - I'm @ 8500 miles/9 months now.

TS
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top