Jump to content
happyguy82

is it OK to switch engine treatment?

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Philip said:

Alternative view: they are all snake oil, so it doesn't matter which one you use, but you'd be better off not using any. I've never seen a Toyota (or Subaru) recommendation to use any engine treatment.

 

Exactly! Premium engine oils have all additives required to give optimal performance under a wide variety of conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Silly claim. They are developed from ingredients too expensive to put into standard lubricants. Why would you assume that any engine oil cannot be improved?

As I said, I've used it across five different cars for a number of years. I wouldn't buy it if it didn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A note on ceratec and Slick 50, these are different classes of snake oil!

Ceratec is an oil additive that might change the effective oil properties for the better for certain degrees of usage, slick 50 is a teflon coating agent that hopes to coat and decrease friction between parts. I would avoid the latter as it can only work in areas where oil gaps exist and would only ever be of benefit if the car is abused when cold. Better to look after your car than to rely on additives that may also add debris or chemical effect in elements like pumps.

As for modifying the oil, it's probably adjusting shear resistance but it will inevitably bring a trade off of some kind. You might as well run a different grade of oil instead.

I imagine additives are of greatest relevance in workhorse machinery rather than track toys and light duty commuting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i feel tempted to reply to this just on the basis of how this conversation is developing. If oil additives really made a difference to the driving conditions a car is supposed to be driven in, a manufacturer in their R&D would've recommended it, like they do recommend premium fuel. No one spends more on R& D than these car manufacturers themselves and anything benefiting and worth copying will be copied by all Lubricant majors ( in their own proprietary form) for a fatter profit margin but they do not which suggests that its benefits are not proven. 

@MartinT Usage of something over a long time proves that it does not potentially do damage to cars engine but does not prove that it benefits in a measurable way unless you have some measured stats. Did you do an oil analysis showing something valuable? None of the Subaru engines have gone kaput due to the quality of (or lack of quality) engine oil used which highlights something otherwise forums will be abuzz with failures due to oil quality. 

I changed my oil in 10K miles/1yr and was told there is enough life left in the oil for another 5K, which is worth noting.  

OilAnalysis.docx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't measure it but I have noted the smoother running and quieter engine every time I've used Archoil. I've tried Slick 50 and Molyslip a long time ago, they did not have such a pronounced effect. It was a friend in the tuning business who first recommended Archoil to me.

Anyway, I'm not here to sell you anything, just adding my experience. Take it or leave it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile I gathered quite some info about additives. For the large oil companies it's small money to buy the rights to use certain additives. Their product span varies from very cheap oils to very expensive synthetic oils. So an oil with some extra fancy additives would certainly sell for a good profit. Then, why don't they offer such wonder lubricants? There must be a downside, which I haven't found... yet.

I can imagine that worn engines may benefit from some additives. Also, an engine which has to perform at any cost, say in an F1 car, may benefit from a special lubricant. After each event the oil will be changed anyway, plus the engine hasn't been designed to survive 100k miles or more. Interesting subject.... 🤓

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Placebo feel/positive affirmation bias/purchase self-justification feel has high chance of valuing product wrong. If there are any actual changes then it should be of extent not detectable by "butt dyno" and only in long term at best and if you have two identical and identically used cars. Otherwise only frequent oil sampling checks at laboratory may tell a story. So that own "personal opinion" is worth little. One shouldn't be able to tell difference. To me enough that makers don't advise such, that people that abuse cars most (motorsports) don't use such. My car expenses are already high (due sometimes tracking car too). There are better things (and wearables) to spend on, that actually make difference (or need due replacement).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Church said:

Placebo feel/positive affirmation bias/purchase self-justification feel has high chance of valuing product wrong. If there are any actual changes then it should be of extent not detectable by "butt dyno"

 

The number of times I hear this in the hi-fi forum I administer is laughable, always offered by someone as 'proof' that I can't be hearing what I'm hearing.

As for "butt dyno", I don't believe anyone here made any claims about increased performance?

I'll repeat: the Archoil product makes my engine quieter and run smoother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Audiophiles and wine-testing professionals can be quickly shamed with something very simple, called "blind testing" :). "butt dyno" was mentioned in meaning/context, as change to better or worse most probably cannot be felt and thus mostly product rating/evaluation, even if from own experience, plays little role.

And you are 100%, absolutely, swear on bible, sure that "quieter" & "run smoother" is not there because you expect it in subconsciousness and drive differently? For example, some exhaust bolt-on mods theoretically should add performance & let engine run more efficiently and should rise fuel economy .. but then again it's possible that simply driver's foot becomes "heavier", so to see that extra performance he paid for, and so to hear more audial pleasure he paid for, thus running more often at higher rpms or flooring more often, instead of granny eco-coasting and early downshifting, as result fuel economy drops, even though to driver it seems that he drove no different as before. Actual gain (or opposite) should be evaluated by leaving out personal/subjective bit and with trying to eliminate other variables. For example, that quietness/smoothness to be measured with actual sound level meter and something to measure actual vibrations of engine, with it operated in some mechanized/automated way for repeatability. Long term wear level - on larger number of engines (to reduce particular bad engine possibility) running with or without those additives, filled/operated/run in some specific testing rigs same way. One shouldn't undermine placebo feel/positive affirmation bias/purchase self-justification big role in personal/subjective tests. We are humans, it's our nature, it's known shortcoming of our psiche. We paid money for that, we expect it to enhance things, and we'd hate of opposite and feel remorse of finding out that money was spent for naught or if we need to admit own mistake. Unfortunately there are many less honest vendors/shops/institutions that are glad to exploit known shortcoming/trait to make money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blind testing has also been thoroughly debunked, it's an unnatural way of determining sound quality, putting listeners under duress to 'find' differences where there may be none.

I've had enough of this. A question was asked in this thread and I've provided my opinion based on my experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because of my job I visited lubricant research labs of a few large oil companies, in the past. Many identical test engines are being tested with different oils, 24/7. Every parameter one can think of is being monitored. Engines are taken apart and used oils are analysed for a wide variety of parameters. They know much more than they share or are allowed to share.

I'm not here to argue, the pub is a better place for arguing. 😁 I just want to share my thoughts and learn.

A great New Year's Eve to all! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×