Discussion
Bit quiet here innit? Best bet is probably to do a search on forums, I do recall some negative reports a while back, cant recall exactly what....best bet probably to do regular oil changes although i do have this stuff in my Alfas engine but it only does about 3k per year....I`m sure someone will wake up soon, go to the loo and slump in front of the pc to avoid Coronation Street!!
Merry Xmas,
Dave.
Bargepole.
Dupont (who invented PTFE which is the active ingredient of Slick 50) tried to prevent them using it, apparently because they believed it was ineffective as an oil additive and using it for this would tarnish the reputation of PTFE. I believe they were charged with restrictive trading and eventually forced to supply it. If you do a search for "snake oil" and "slick 50" you will find plenty of articles from people who think it is a waste of money, and quite a few who think it is positively harmful.
Dupont (who invented PTFE which is the active ingredient of Slick 50) tried to prevent them using it, apparently because they believed it was ineffective as an oil additive and using it for this would tarnish the reputation of PTFE. I believe they were charged with restrictive trading and eventually forced to supply it. If you do a search for "snake oil" and "slick 50" you will find plenty of articles from people who think it is a waste of money, and quite a few who think it is positively harmful.
I used Sick 50 in my TR7 many years back. It transformed the feel of the engine from a rough lump to a much smoother, easy running machine. I have also used it Slick in an Audi 2.3E and my 2 Alfas [ 155 and 166 ], The difference noted with these was minimal I guess because the manufacturing tolerences were much closer that the TR.
I haven't yet tried it on the Tiv, but I see no reason why not.
For a real snkae oil thread try this one for size www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=225143&f=66&h=0
Never used any of these additive products so I can't possibly comment on how effective the may or may not be, I can only go of what others say. I just change my oil freqently with my favourite flavour and it always seems to do me well.
Having said that wasn't there a famous demonstration of Slick50 once at somewhere like mallory park where they added this stuff, ran the engine for a bit, then sent the car off round the track again with no sump attached? Or is that drink induced urban myth?
Regards
Iain
Never used any of these additive products so I can't possibly comment on how effective the may or may not be, I can only go of what others say. I just change my oil freqently with my favourite flavour and it always seems to do me well.
Having said that wasn't there a famous demonstration of Slick50 once at somewhere like mallory park where they added this stuff, ran the engine for a bit, then sent the car off round the track again with no sump attached? Or is that drink induced urban myth?
Regards
Iain
most of the PTFE will end up in the filter.......you pays yer money....
"In 1997, three subsidiaries of Quaker State Corp. (the makers of Slick 50) settled Federal Trade Commission charges that ads for Quaker State's Slick 50 Engine Treatment were false and unsubstantiated. According to the FTC complaint, claims such as the following made in Slick 50 ads falsely represented that without Slick 50, auto engines generally have little or no protection from wear at start-up and commonly experience premature failure caused by wear"
" The Infamous "No Oil" Demo
At at least three major motorcycle rallies this past year, we have witnessed live demonstrations put on to demonstrate the effectiveness of certain oil additives. The demonstrators would have a bench-mounted engine which they would fill with oil and a prescribed dose of their "miracle additive." After running the engine for a while they would stop it, drain out the oil and start it up again. Instant magic! The engine would run perfectly well for hours on end, seemingly proving the effectiveness of the additive which had supposedly "coated" the inside of the engine so well it didn't even need the oil to run. In one case, we saw this done with an actual motorcycle, which would be rid den around the parking lot after having its oil drained. A pretty convincing demonstration - until you know the facts.
Since some of these demonstrations were conducted using Briggs and Stratton engines, the Briggs and Stratton Company itself decided to run a similar, but somewhat more scientific, experiment. Taking two brand-new, identical engines straight off their assembly line, they set them up for bench-testing. The only difference was that one had the special additive included with its oil and the other did not. Both were operated for 20 hours before being shut down and having the oil drained from them. Then both were started up again and allowed to run for another 20 straight hours. Neither engine seemed to have any problem performing this "minor miracle."
After the second 20-hour run, both engines were completely torn down and inspected by the company's engineers. What they found was that both engines suffered from scored crankpin bearings, but the engine treated with the additive also suffered from heavy cylinder bore damage that was not evident on the untreated engine.
This points out once again the inherent problem with particulate oil additives: They can cause oil starvation. This is particularly true in the area of piston rings, where there is a critical need for adequate oil flow. In practically all of the reports and studies on oil additives, and particularly those involving suspended solids like PTFE, this has been reported as a major area of engine damage."
"In 1997, three subsidiaries of Quaker State Corp. (the makers of Slick 50) settled Federal Trade Commission charges that ads for Quaker State's Slick 50 Engine Treatment were false and unsubstantiated. According to the FTC complaint, claims such as the following made in Slick 50 ads falsely represented that without Slick 50, auto engines generally have little or no protection from wear at start-up and commonly experience premature failure caused by wear"
" The Infamous "No Oil" Demo
At at least three major motorcycle rallies this past year, we have witnessed live demonstrations put on to demonstrate the effectiveness of certain oil additives. The demonstrators would have a bench-mounted engine which they would fill with oil and a prescribed dose of their "miracle additive." After running the engine for a while they would stop it, drain out the oil and start it up again. Instant magic! The engine would run perfectly well for hours on end, seemingly proving the effectiveness of the additive which had supposedly "coated" the inside of the engine so well it didn't even need the oil to run. In one case, we saw this done with an actual motorcycle, which would be rid den around the parking lot after having its oil drained. A pretty convincing demonstration - until you know the facts.
Since some of these demonstrations were conducted using Briggs and Stratton engines, the Briggs and Stratton Company itself decided to run a similar, but somewhat more scientific, experiment. Taking two brand-new, identical engines straight off their assembly line, they set them up for bench-testing. The only difference was that one had the special additive included with its oil and the other did not. Both were operated for 20 hours before being shut down and having the oil drained from them. Then both were started up again and allowed to run for another 20 straight hours. Neither engine seemed to have any problem performing this "minor miracle."
After the second 20-hour run, both engines were completely torn down and inspected by the company's engineers. What they found was that both engines suffered from scored crankpin bearings, but the engine treated with the additive also suffered from heavy cylinder bore damage that was not evident on the untreated engine.
This points out once again the inherent problem with particulate oil additives: They can cause oil starvation. This is particularly true in the area of piston rings, where there is a critical need for adequate oil flow. In practically all of the reports and studies on oil additives, and particularly those involving suspended solids like PTFE, this has been reported as a major area of engine damage."
Edited by snorky on Wednesday 27th December 14:22
Markh,your bang on the money,and Snorky thanks,i hate people being mislead by utter crap.The long and short of it is if you carry out regular oil and filter changes(does not have to be the most expensive)providing the engine is a sound design it will run and run and run for hundreds of thousnds of miles,its short runs with fuel diluted oil that knocks the knackers out of an internal combustion engine and thrashing when cold these are your engines biggest enemys along with overheating,you are not going to get over the RV8s cam problem with one of these wonder additives,anyway most pushrod engines suffer cam failure the lubrication design is poor,they depend on oil throw from the oil bleeding of the spinning crank or from the cam bearings/tappet housings(not oil baths or oil spraybars),engines that spring to mind are...PEUGEOT,FORD ESSEX,FORD COLOGNE,FORD X FLOW,and various pushrod deriatives of the X FLOW,and many yank v8S,its just the only thing that seems to crop up on the ROVER V8 its a great lump anyway.
Molyslip works although there are many that will disagree , but does need replacing every oil change , and if you notice mobil 1 i am told has now a low % of molybdenum in it. Try putting it in your gearbox , you will find instant change especially less notchy when driving from cold , also less lay-shaft bearing rumble. Hydraulic tappets and general engine noise does become quieter but this will not happen over night normally after a few oil/ molyslip changes.
snorky said:
I always wonder why, if this stuff is soooo great, don't oil companies add to their product and put slick out of business overnight ????
They do but a small % , also you use in C.V joints , not normal grease but the good more expensive grey stuff , that's the molybdenum. I know nuclear testing facility at Daresbury Cheshire who also have done testing on the compound and use it in various forms and applications for lubrication.( My old next door neighbour was the man on charge of the testing.)
How many 1.8 cvh ford engines do you know that don't use oil , are very quiet , dont smoke and have never even had the rocker cover off since new , not touched ( water pump only ) that have done 210,000 miles. Well there's one here it was my old mans I think that says enough. Oh and the gearbox / diff feel the same and sound the same as was when new , and I would know as i road tested thousands of them when they where new.( Dont put it in LSD's ).
Edited by Rum Runner on Thursday 28th December 11:01
Rum runner, you can get an engine to do that with out moly,i bet its had regular oil changes thats all,that was the biggest killer of the CVH, and that one you refer too uses roller cam followers so you wont get cam probs anyways,and it uses the modded stem seals its based on the yank CVH.im not saying moly does not help,just that its not neccesary thats all.I am not having a pop at you by the way.Its just my cents worth.
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff