There was a recent posting about a de-carbonizing agent known as “X-66”, made by A.C. Delco. While I agree strongly with Stevebfl about the effectiveness of this stuff, serious attention should be paid to the cautionary statements as well as the directions for its use.

While it is sometimes difficult to find, (at least around here) it should be known that it is available as either a can of liquid or an aerosol spray. The directions for use vary for each, and it should be determined which is going to work best for your particular application.

I can attest that it works extraordinarily well, but is comprised of VERY nasty chemicals which you do not want to contact your skin AT ALL. People using it should be aware that it seems to be able to penetrate through latex gloves, and even the thin nitrile ones. I would strongly suggest using gloves that are intended for use with furniture refinishing products; they are usually made from a very thick nitrile rubber. Also wear a long sleeve shirt. Eye protection is important. If you are using the aerosol type, a respirator isn’t a bad idea either (for those that are truly paranoid).

A note of caution: Unless you really want to piss of your neighbors, check the direction of the wind when you intend to use it. When you run your engine after it’s use, (if your engine is very dirty) it will produce a huge cloud of noxious, dense smoke that the guys at the Pentagon would be envious of :) .

Boy, have you been there, done that. On the S500 that I thought I bent a rod on, the smoke continued for about two miles as I sneaked around the back streets of the industrial district. I sure didn't want anyone to see me and even though I have five acres in downtown Gainesville I sure couldn't leave it all there.

Sounds like its worth a try!
 

Hi guys,

I've been reading up on all the posts on MotorVac and X-66, and it does seem like a good measure to take before I bring my car in for an engine overhaul in the not-too-near future.

Does anyone knows where I can get the X-66? I've searched the internet for online stores selling this product, no to no avail. Tried AC Delco's website too, but no luck. Made several phone calls to local chemical companies with no luck too. :(

And Steve, I've read your instructions pertaining to the use of X-66. So does that mean that it is certainly a DIY job?

Thanks in advance!
:)
Mervyn
1983 W126 (280SEL)

[Edited by Mervyn on 06-28-2001 at 07:57 AM]

Where exactly on a 103 engine (300E) do you introduce the X66 into the system?

Take off the air filter unit and dump it into the fuel injector intake?

Thanks in advance for any advice


~~Paul

Ok, the X66 goes into the main plenum, but where is this? Sorry for the newbie ignorance here.

Is this the hose leading from air filter to the middle of the head unit? (M103 engine)

I really want to try this stuff, but don't want to blow up my engine in the process :D

Thanks!

~Paul

Would this X-66 stuff be worth it for someone who drives hard, usually long drives, and therefor has hardley any carbon build up? Or would I still benefit from it?

What And Where...
 

I also did some research, and from what I was able to find out, AC-Delco doesn't make this stuff, and it isn't called "X-66". The only product I could find was made by GM, sold only at their dealerships, and is called "Top Engine Cleaner", GM part # 1050002.

If anyone knows otherwise, please correct my findings...

Scott,
Your findings are similar to mine! I thought I was losing my way when somehow AC Delco's website doesnt seem to be carrying any engine cleaners, let alone something called X-66.

And yes, there IS this GM product called "GM Top Engine Cleaner".

So are we talking about the same product here? Gee....this engine cleaner is getting really elusive, must be some kind of "magic" potion.......

Mervyn
1983 W126 (280SEL)
PS. so far still no luck with online stores carrying this item.

Yes, there is a number on the cans that reads X-66. Yes, it is made by A.C. Delco. I am sitting here looking at a can of the aerosol version. Note that there is X-66A, which is the aerosol, and if my memory is right, X-66P is the liquid.

There is also a (part?) number below the “X-66A” which is 12302498. The label also reads: “Carburetor Tune-Up Conditioner” (remember, this is the aerosol can.)

Nowhere does it say anything about GM or “top engine cleaner”. Note however, that I did not source this at a GM dealer. I called A LOT of places and found the liquid was carried by one of the few remaining Gen-U-Wine auto parts stores left. Not a national chain store. The only reason THEY had it was because one of the owners was a long-time GM tech, and he knew about this stuff. They special ordered me some of the aerosol.

Good Hunting!
RTH

Sorry to bother again, but....

Would this X-66 stuff be worth it for someone who drives hard, usually long drives, and therefor has hardley any carbon build up? Or would I still benefit from it?

David,

My opinion (for whatever it’s worth) is that if there is very little carbon build up, then don’t bother. There will always be *some* carbon in an engine, but the question should be: Does the amount of carbon in a (that) particular engine affect the it adversely? Others may disagree, but “if it ain’t broke…..”

I should take my own advice sometimes :) .

Well I picked up a can of this Top Engine Cleaner today, and followed the instructions, except that I let it soak for an hour rather than 15 mins.

Started car up and ran around the neighborhood pissing neighbors off with all the smoke. Pulled into my driveway and popped the hood, and heard a very disturbing sound -- that of metal to metal clanking coming from the valve cover.

Is this sound normal after using this stuff, and will it eventually fade away? I also noticed that I blew about a quart of oil in that plume of smoke. I sure hope I didn't damage my engine.

~Paul

Well I hate to say it, but there IS a reason that I have been warning people that this stuff is nasty, at least from a chemical & personal safety standpoint. Come on people – think about it here; this stuff is removing CARBON! FYI Carbon is a very stable element - It isn’t exactly easy to remove from surfaces via chemical reaction.

X-66 should NOT be thought of in the same light as typical over-the-counter type products. It was never intended for use by anyone other than professionals. You don’t exactly see this stuff marketed like the latest snake-oil ‘miracle in a can’ on late night TV. When the directions state a given time period for this stuff to sit in your engine, FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS. Or better yet, if anyone is contemplating using it, and you have ANY doubts whatsoever as to what to do or how to do it, the best advice is DON’T use it.

As far as damage to your engine, pmizel, I can’t tell you what has happened. Did you really blow “about a quart of oil in that plume of smoke”? Burning a quart of oil in a quick jaunt around the neighborhood is NOT a good sign. I do know that X-66 should not be left sitting on aluminum for extended periods of time. Some alloys may be O.K., others may not be O.K., but do you really want to push the envelope?

Sorry if I am sounding harsh here, and I truly hope that your engine is OK. People learn from both their experiences & mistakes, as well as those of others. That is where this forum is an invaluable resource. I would just hate being in the shoes of the person that *makes* the mistake, although others will benefit.

Best Of Luck to you
RTH

Pmizell,
Sorry to hear about your engine. I think 1 hour is far too much to let the X-66 soak in it. But what's done is done, I would suggest you do an oil change now. Flush the old oil thoroughly, fill with new synthetic oil, replace filter, and voila, maybe the metal clanking sound will be gone! Just don't drive around too much with that old oil in there, I'm guessing pretty much of your carbon deposits is gone, but the extended soak has perhaps stripped away much of the protective lube coat.

Nevertheless, we all learn from mistakes. Thanks to Runningtoohot also for your advice. Like what you said, to anyone who is contemplating this job, please follow the proper instructions religiously.

Me? Should I count myself lucky that I couldnt get my hands on this nasty stuff? :)

Mervyn

[QUOTE]Originally posted by pmizell
[B]Ok, the X66 goes into the main plenum, but where is this? Sorry for the newbie ignorance here.

Even if this would be the right place, you need to be VERY careful with how much you allow to be sucked in at a time. I've tried a similar product on my '95 Miata and the Miata technical service bulletin has a reducing oriface to insert into a small hose so that too much isn't added at a time. Too much and your crankshaft bends from "water lock," as the liquid won't compress like air.

Granted the 1.8 liter Miata engine is half the size of my 3.0 1989 300E, but I'd be using locking plyers or soem other mechanism to insure that the can empties VERY slowly.

For what it's worth, Miata says to empty 1/2 the can while revving the engine and then allow the engine to stall at idle, sit for up to 24 hours, and then run the 2d i/2 thru. Worked verey well. Mazda sells the product as a top engine cleaner too for about $2.50.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Update:

PHEW! *wipes forehead*

The rattle was the result of the plastic cover over the distributor rubbing against the blower fan. Apparently it shook loose during the really rough start experienced after letting the cleaner soak.

Car is running better than ever; no rough idling, no hard starts -- all is well.

Also, the oil level was noticeably lower after the process but when checked again this morning, it had risen back to normal. (no explanation)

Sorry if I alarmed anyone, do not be afraid to use this cleaner... it DOES work.

~~Paul

. . . . whew, is right!!!
 

I been monitoring these posts with interest. And when you came back with *banging* noises, I thought this is not for me!

But glad it was nothing, as I know you are!!

Still Investigating...
 

First, armed with the ACDelco part #, I was able to find a local Mom&Pop auto parts store that claims they can order either the spray or the liquid for me @ $5+ change...

I have also sent an email to AcDelco for further info, and will update this thread with whatever I find out.

As for the GM Top End Cleaner, according to a Parts Manager at a local Chevy dealership with 38 years experience using it, it should be safe to leave the second half a bottle in the car for well over an hour or even two with no damage.

Local O'Reilly Auto Parts has a decarbonizing product called "Sea Foam" with very similar instructions...

Pmizell, glad to hear that your car is OK.

Longston: Easy does it there… Before you use it, ask yourself if your car *really* needs it.

Bstreep: Amzoil used to sell something called “Power Foam”, but this was 20 years ago. I don’t know if they still sell it or not. Seafoam. What on earth were they thinking when naming that product? :)

Pmizell,
Now finally we have someone address the million-dollar question: it works!

All I can say is that additive products may work for some, while for others, they may see no noticeable improvement. It all depends on how your car takes to the additive. Not noticing any improvements doesn't mean the product sucks, but when a product works for you doesn't equally mean everyone else would enjoy the same benefits. Which well-meaning driver do not want to always better his/her precious car? As with all modifications/additives, there is no sure thing. All it takes is a positive attitude to try and be educated in the process.

Having said so much, I just gotten myself 3 Lubro-Moly products today! :)

The "Motor Clean" (engine detergent used at idle for 10mins before oil change), "Motor Protect" (poured into new oil; contains molybdenum disulphide) and the "Ventil Sauber Valve Clean" (used in fuel tank prior to oil change). Costs me approx. US$32 for the lot. Yea, I know it could be a waste of money, but at least I know I'd tried it. Will let you guys know if it works when I have my oil change due mid-Aug.

:)

Mervyn
1983 W126 (280SEL)
PS. anyone has any leads on which online store to get the X-66 or GM's Top Engine Cleaner, please post here, thanks!

What ACDelco Said...
 

Thanks for taking the time to write ACDelco.

In regards to your inquiry on the ACDelco part number X66-A , GM part number 12302498 is the aerosol version of the Carburetor Tune-Up Conditioner.

The ACDelco part number X-66P, GM part number 12302500 is the 1 pint pourable version of the Carburetor Tune-Up Conditioner. There is also a 1 quart version. It's ACDelco part number X66-Q, GM part number 12302501.


Here is more information on the Carburetor Tune-Up Conditioner.

-Slowly pour or spray through the carburetor.

-Works effectively in a variety of engine types, from small engines to high-compression V8's.

This peak performance cleaner:

-Eliminates deposits in the carburetor intake, intake manifold, and combustion chambers.

-Frees vales more effectively.

-Restores compression losses caused by carbon deposits.

-Contains rust preventatives.

-Will not harm painted surfaces under normal conditions.

-Maintains the engine cleanliness necessary for peak performance.

-Removes carbon from inside the engine without adverse effects on emissions controls.

-Cleans clogged fuel injectors when used in injection cleaning devices.

-Makes tune-up adjustment faster and easier.

-Helps reduce the number of comebacks.

For more information feel free to contact us http://www.acdelco.com or consumer assistance at 1(800)ACDelco.


I found a local distributor and will be getting a can of the aerosol today to clean up my Ford Aerostar.

[Edited by longston on 07-13-2001 at 06:53 PM]

X66 DE-CARB
 

NOTE:
As of September 9 2009 this product is no longer available through any of our sources...

OK, you guys want A/C DELCO De-carb, you got it. You can order this through PartsShop section. The cost plus freight may make it a little spending so order lots. Part numbers are listed below. Don't forget Mercedes people, if you ask for it, we'll do our best to get it for you. Thank you, from your dedicated partsman, Phil

NOTE:
As of September 9 2009 this product is no longer available through any of our sources...

Hello to Pandora, the worms, and of course - who could forget Murphy too?
 

Phil AKA Partsman: Your intentions are honest & your efforts are admirable, but in this case, it may become problematic when people start using this stuff in a casual manner; treating it with the same type of lackadaisical attitude that is applied to oil additives & miracle snake oil treatments. Especially when it is used improperly i.e., directions not followed or having it incorrectly introduced into the engine.

O.K. people, so now it is going to be readily available. Just because people *want* something, doesn’t mean that it is always a *good* thing to actually get it.

I hear a loud creaking noise… what is that? OH, it’s the squeaky hinges on Pandora’s box that is now opening. And what do I see inside that infamous box – why it’s a giant can of worms! And Murphy is standing right over there with the can opener.

And with that, I will now gracefully bow out of this thread. Caveat Emptor. Literally.

RTH

Gee RTH,

I think we see the same crystal ball. I'm almost sorry I brought up the subject. Warnings are ever so important here. Not only for the chemical content but also for technique. In my example I about soiled my pants when I got a constant misfire, knowing how close a good treatment comes to engine damage. Luckily I was just a temporary victim of misfire identification and a key cycle solved the problem.

Million dollar question...
 

Can you use this on a diesel, if so how do you introduce it to the engine??

PS-The million dollars will not be provided by me :)

It’s not a million dollar question.
 

Well, actually it’s more like a $6,000 question. I think that’s about what a long block sells for. If you are willing to take the risk, let us know what happens. But DO NOT under any circumstances think that I am endorsing the idea. In fact, (no offense intended here mind you) your question only serves as an example of what Stevebfl & I have been warning about - the potential for misuse of this product, and the potential EXTREME consequences.

Your 45th page *could* be your last one.

RTH

Incoming... Here's another salvo - Heads Up
 

I know that I said that I would bow out of this thread, but I’m back. A deal is a deal, right Steve?

Steve made a very succinct point – that there is a fine line between proper treatment vs. engine damage. So, I would like to make an analogy.

Are you people out there aware of what chemotherapy is? An oversimplification follows.
It is where a relatively toxic substance is introduced into the body to fight cancer.
The amount infused is *just* below the amount that would kill a person.
That’s what an oncologist does – determination of type & amount.
Have you ever seen a person undergoing chemotherapy?
It is NOT a pleasant thing.
The toxicity causes you to barf your brains out & lose your hair, among other pleasantries.
It is a treatment of LAST RESORT.

Not to be a downer here, but odds are that a certain percentage of the participants in these forums are going to develop cancer at some point in their lives.
Does this mean that you would want to go to your doctor for chemotherapy every now & then ‘just in case’ you happen to have any cancer cells forming somewhere in your body?
I don’t think so. (Unless you are seriously whacked-out, in which case you need a psychiatrist instead.)

However, I am afraid that this is exactly what people are going to be doing with X-66.
X-66 is a treatment of last resort; it is chemotherapy for your engine.
Treat your car the same way that you treat yourself (or better, in some cases :) ) Do not use it casually.
It is a treatment of last resort.
Oh, whoops, did I already say that?
It is a treatment of last resort.
Again, repeat after me: IT IS A TREATMENT OF LAST RESORT.

Regards,
RTH

Gentlemen, Please...Let's not get crazy...
 

It's a simple carburetor cleaner/decarbonizing agent, not plutonium...

http://images.fotki.com/photos/1/106....jpg?995078901

I have used way more dangerous chemicals over the years, and I feel that the extreme cautions being expressed here are excessive in regard to the abilities of our membership to maturely acertain the effective application of this agent. You know, some of us have been around the block more than once, and are fully capable of making informed decisions. Besides, this is certainly not the "doomsday device" it is being portrayed as... A little respect, please...

I was solely responsible for getting Phil to research, and offer X-66 as an available chemical agent to the membership at large. I did so simply because I feel that the members here are mature and responsible enough to know what is right for their given appliction, and fully capable to make their own rational decisions.

Again, there are no implied warranties, or guarantees here, do your own research. Everyone should be careful to understand and use the instructions provided with any additives, or chemical agents that might be suggested by anyone on these forums.

Anyone who does otherwise, only has their own conscience and decision making abilities to answer to...

BTW, CJ, didn't I already tell you that this chemical was strictly for spark ignited engines? No diesels, please...

Please hear me out........
 

I must give due respect to RTH and Steve for sounding the warning bells here. Afterall, you guys belong to the "been there, done that" group of people.

However, I cannot help but agree more with Scott Longston. And also to our dedicated partsman Phil, who has really been showing his dedication in his job literally! This is what I like about this forum, we're not just hearing and helping each other member out, someone else is listening to our needs too. Making the X-66 available to members here does not translate into doomsday, afterall the choice still lies with the customer.

I too can give an analogy. The notion "Caveat Emptor" has been used widely in finanical/investment circles. Broking firms are clambering to provide a wide and diverse range of products and services for their customers, and these range from high-risk to low-risk investment instruments. Anyone knows jolly well that you are supposed to do your homework if you were to part with a substantial amount of your hard-earned cash, and if you don't, you may end up burning your fingers (and wallets too!). The idea is to practice caution, do your research, be responsible and finally always make a calculated informed decision. If anything goes awry after that, then at least you cant fault anyone nor yourself.

I think we owe it to ourselves to act like responsible and discerning adults, and it is with the likes of RTH and Steve that we get a good dose of cautionary advice(as well as many other enlightening words). Thanks! :)

Scott, I'm sure some members here will start ordering the X-66 from Partshop since it is now available. So in order that we make this thread useful for everyone, why not list a COMPREHENSIVE step-by-step procedure to using this product, along with the do's and the dont's. Then at least we do not end up maligning the X-66, nor do we cast "hopes" on less informed readers. Scott, do you think you could do such a writeup?

Ok, enough of my long-windedness. Thanks to all, this has been a real enjoyable thread. :) :)

Mervyn
1983 W126 (280SEL)

Watch out, here comes that a**hole caveman again
 

Longston:

Excellent. I like it. You must have one hell of a telephoto lens. And you caught me on a GOOD day!

For whatever it’s worth, I am not afraid of using X-66, and have done so under the right circumstances. It is truly an excellent product. It is not Plutonium, but did you notice the Cesium listed on the ingredients panel? ;). I too have been around chemicals much more dangerous than this stuff. You’ll need to shoot another picture while I’m spraying diazinon & chlorpyrifos around the house in my haz-mat suit. :)

Seriously, it is not just “a simple carburetor cleaner/decarbonizing agent”. That statement only promotes the ‘casual use’ of which I spoke. You haven’t even obtained the product yet, correct?

You stated <<”I feel that the members here are mature and responsible enough to know what is right for their given appliction, and fully capable to make their own rational decisions”>> I'm sorry, but I’ve seen too much evidence that contradicts your viewpoint. I respect the viewpoints of others; everyone is entitled to their own. (People that do not are the ones that start flame wars. I do not wish this to become one.) We just happen to disagree. Such is life. No big deal.

However, that said, I’ll alienate a lot of people for saying this, but your estimation of the level of expertise that is prevalent on these forums is much higher than mine. There ARE a lot of *extraordinarily knowledgeable* people here, but just as many that are still learning (to use a euphemism). Sometimes the truth hurts. But I gotta call it as I see it. And I see a lot of postings that are indicative of less than ‘common’ sense, let alone mechanical proficiency or theoretical understanding. There is at least one posting (name shall remain undisclosed out of respect) from someone that wants to use the product, and can’t even identify one of the major engine components to which a reference was made. Someone here already used it and did not follow the directions. What does this indicate to you?

Do you *really* and *truly* believe that *everyone* here is capable of making the *right* decision? How many times have you witnessed people that honestly thought they *absolutely* knew something that they really did not? Ego is a killer. I (hopefully) am cognizant of when I am out of my league - that is when I try to obtain additional information. I try not to let megalomania get in my way. :)

One of the purposes of this forum is education for those wishing to learn. To (potentially) steer someone down the wrong path does not help that person, nor the credibility of those that post here.

And Mervyn: you are absolutely right, and it bears repeating, so I am quoting you here: << “The idea is to practice caution, do your research, be responsible and finally always make a calculated informed decision” >>. So very, very true. But always take your *source* of information with a grain of salt. (Even if it comes from me :) ). The "been there, done that" group of people” carries a lot of weight in my book. That is why I am doggedly pursuing a problem in another thread – someone’s undoubtedly already ‘been there, done that’ and I’m looking for the information that that individual may be able to provide. All the hypothesizing in the world isn’t going to get me where I need to go, at least not efficiently.

To lighten things up a bit here, I feel compelled to throw out my favorite tag lines under my sign-off. It must be the fever from this cold getting to me, as one is really not applicable for this forum.

Best of Luck to All
RTH

Ignorance is due to the lack of information; Stupidity is the lack of ability to utilize information.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste, yet so many don’t even have the opportunity. :)

Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes to the core.

Do it right, do it once.



[Edited by RunningTooHot on 07-14-2001 at 01:51 AM]

YIKES!!!!!!!!
I do not want my last page to be a $6,000 page!!!

Thanks For Being A Good Sport...
 

I was not implying that you were afraid of USING X-66, just that you seem to be selling fear after having used it successfully yourself. To say that you are capable of using this product, but then rail against it's "casual" use by anyone else sends a somewhat condescending message indicating that you are one of an elite force of people who possess extrodinary intellect, judgement, skill and abilities far beyond those of we mortal men...

I don't think that's what you meant to say, and I certainly don't detect that in your intentions, but the Pandora's Box, Worms, and Murphy stuff was a little extreme. I hope you see what I am saying, and understand the PhotoShop photo-op was a joke to lighten things up. You see, to even imply that someone may not be able to handle this product sets off the "Testosterone Challenge" in all of us males. What do you mean, I can't drink as much, drive as fast, jump as high, punch as hard, lift as much weight, etc. You see, your warnings as stated may actually have the opposite effect from what you intended.

Every repair to our cars has the potential for injury, or harm to the car itself. Even simple interior repairs using a common screwdriver can result in ripped upholstery, and/or punctured skin. We all need to understand our skill level and operate within what we feel comfortable doing, and not attempt repairs that we haven't at least thought through carefully. remember Police Inspector Harry Callahan's famous line, "A man's gotta know his limitations"...

So lets do a little science here. First, if your car is less than 10 years old, you most likely don't need this stuff, especially if you have done proper maintenance on it. And I wouldn't suggest using it in a diesel engine because the diesel is an engine that operates on compression ignition, and the flash point of X-66 and it's Liquefied Petroleum Propellant component is likely to be much lower than that of diesel fuel. If you didn't understand what I just wrote, just forget about X-66.

Next, while I respect both RTH and Steve for their cautions on this product, there is nothing from ACDelco indicating that it is anything but what they call it, "Carburetor Tune-Up Conditioner". Their product literature doesn't indicate use by only qualified professional technicians, or indicate that any extreme precautionary measures be taken when using it. In fact, I've seen common household cleaners with harsher warnings and precautions.

And, there seems to be two seperate products here. There's ACDelco Carburetor Tune-Up Conditioner, ACDelco part # X-66(A,P,orQ), GM part # 12302498 (for the aerosol). And then there's GM Top Engine Cleaner, GM part # 1050002. When I initially did research on this product, I could only find the GM stuff, which pmizell ended up using successfully. Leaving it in the engine longer than suggested was not extreme, or out of line, and is perfectly within operating parameters. However, there is still some confusion as to whether or not these are two separate products, or the same one with two different labels. Perhaps pmizell could tell us if the chemical contents are identical to what I am listing here?

Now, I have a can of the X-66A aerosol right here next to me. There is a paragraph of danger warnings at the top of the label on the back that is the standard stuff about it being flammable, that it's under pressure, that it's harmful or fatal if swallowed, not good to get it in your eyes, may cause skin, eye, respiratory tract irritation, avoid eye, skin, and clothing contact, use with adequate ventilation, etc. Pretty standard stuff. The only indication of being exceptionally nasty stuff is that it can be absorbed through the skin.

It says that it "contains solvents and penetrating agents designed to remove gum, carbon, and other deposits from the fuel induction system. It frees sticky valves and sluggish compression rings, and removes excessive deposits from the combustion chamber. For best results, X-66A should be used in conjunction with an engine tune-up."

The contents listed are:

Petroleum Naptha CAS 8030-30-6
2-Butoxy ethanol CAS 111-76-2
9-Octadecenoic acid(Z)-, ammonium salt CAS 544-60-5
Liquefied petroleum propellant CAS 68476-86-8
2-pentanol, 4-methyl CAS 108-11-2

The directions are:

1. Warm engine up to normal operating temperature

2. Remove air cleaner, run engine at medium idle (about 750 rpm).

3. Spray cleaner directly into carburetor venturi, striking automatic choke plate, main throttle plate and shafts. Spray around venturi walls and over entire exposed area. NOTE: spray will reduce rpm to 400 - 500; this is normal.

4. When can is empty, immediately stall engine by turning off ignition.

5. Let engine stand for 5 - 10 minutes.

6. Restart engine, open and close throttle rapidly, within normal limits, for two minutes.

7. Replace air cleaner.

8. if necessary, adjust settings of air bleeds and idle screw.

I don't see anything out of the ordinary here, this stuff is just a carburetor cleaner and decarbonizing agent. Although it may be a particularly effective one, and consequently possess additionally harsh chemical agents in it. It should be treated with proper caution and respect, but there isn't that much difference I can see between it and say, Berryman B-12, or any other solvent carburetor cleaner. However, I would strongly suggest an oil & filter change after using it.

Here's my plan for using this stuff. I have a '92 Ford Aerostar with about 102K miles on the clock. The van runs pretty good, but has a hesitation and slight shudder at idle sometimes. It also is using a quart of oil every 1000 miles. Ford says that level of oil use is normal. I don't see any smoke, or any oil drips. So, I am getting ready to do an oil & filter change, and before I do, I will run this poop through the air intake into the plenum to clear out whatever nasty carbon has accumulated, and we'll see if this makes any improvement in the oil usage, idle, and/or general performance.

"...a page of history is worth a volume of logic."
Oliver Wendell Holmes

"We have nothing to fear, but fear itself."
Sir Winston Churchill

"The only dumb question was the one you were afraid to ask."
Anonymous

"Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong."
Oscar Wilde

"Give me six hours to chop down a tree and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe."
Abraham Lincoln

I must say, we have the best customers anywhere. It's so nice the way everyone works for the good of the mass..

Thank you,
Partsman

Hey everybody, it was such a gorgeous day that I decided to take a pleasure drive through the the Napa valley (wine country). There are some wonderful, scenic two-lane twisties throughout the region.

I was driving along, enjoying the scenery, when I happened upon some debris in the roadway. I had to swerve pretty hard to avoid a couple of pistons, some bent rods, & other assorted innards from an engine, all of which was strewn across the roadway. Then, as I rounded the next bend, I saw a Ford Aerostar on the shoulder, with smoke billowing up from under the hood. Darnedest thing, there was a guy, apparently the owner, calmly standing by the car chugging down some chardonnay right from the bottle.

I notice that Longston hasn’t posted here for a few hours; do you think it’s just a coincidence? :) - :) -:) -:) -:) -:) -:)

RTH

Sorry to say it, but I don’t have photoshop on my computer. This will have to suffice.


[Edited by RunningTooHot on 07-14-2001 at 07:50 PM]

geesh. is this a contest to see who can write the longest reply??!!!! cmon yall :)

I would say that this is one thread that gets better with time, just like good ole wine..... :)

Now, just two comments.

1. I'm wondering if the procedure for using the pourable version of the X66 (X66P/Q) is the same as the one Scott posted for the aerosol version?

2. For the liquid version, what should be the recommended discharge rate of the decarbonizing agent into the venturi?

Mervyn
1983 W126 (280SEL)

Gnats Buzzin' Around Here Somewhere...
 

But that's ok, it's just the nature of gnats. As with all things, I will give them the attention best afforded gnats.

Mervyn,

I think your question is best addressed by the only true expert involved in any of these X-66 threads so far. And that would be Steve Brotherton. As an expert Mercedes Tech with direct experience using this stuff, he is in the best position to advise anyone on the issues you have brought up.

As for me, I am just an interested party who enjoys doing research, and will continue to see what further information I can find out about both the GM and ACDelco products.

I would encourage anyone (tech or not) who has constructive experience or additional information to contribute on the subject of this thread to please do so.

The local GM dealer here(Vancouver) sells a product called
"Cleens" by GM.This is described as a "combustion chamber conditioner".When I asked about Delco X66 the guy said"this
is the same stuff". Part #992872 500ml cost me $4.25CAN.I am going to try it out on a '73 BMW 3.0 cs and will report the results.The instructions for use appear identical to what has been posted here already.There is not much in the way of precautionary language but that probably has more to do with the amount of space the French translation takes than anything else.

Who me? I am normally against the use of most additives. I haven't put anything in the oil of any car I have owned in the last 30 years. The only thing I have against them is that they cost money.

But thats not the question. Actually, I'm not sure what the question is. I do believe in the product's capability to reduce carbon. This is a useful capability. I might recommend it to those with 100k on most any engine. Its great benefit is that its cheap. The BG folks make a very good product but they get near 15 wholesale for one dose.

Personally, I think the Motovac does a better job, but people gotta get a lot for the service based upon the price of the equipment.

Overuse of most additives is usually just a matter of the cost of the additives. Improper use here can cause engine damage. I think the largest risk is in the technique. If you use the aerosol the flow rate is regulated. I never do it that way and I could swear the two products do not smell the same. I only use the poptop version for the internal cleaning with the aerosol used for throttle bodies/plates. If done carefully there is little risk. The mechanisms for removing carbon include softening, dissolving and smashing. It's the smashing that is not safe for those without experience which includes everyone including me. I don't know if you read the post where I talked about the old techs at the Chevy Dealer I worked at 30 years ago. They could mechanically dispense with carbon by flooring the throttle while keeping the engine at about 3000 rpm by drowning it simultaneously with water, carb cleaner, ATF, etc whatever was handy. It wasn't the detergent that was getting rid of the carbon but the mechanical force.

When I currently do decarboning it is usually an extreme case and I use a conservative mechanical approach using high amounts sucked into the plenum at low speed (1000rpm). I introduce enough to bring the speed to near stall and maintain this till the solvent is used up. I let it sit and then run the ***** out of it.

I believe that it takes skilled personnel to know when to use the product. I don't see much point in its use otherwise except maybe as a once every 100k service. There are products like Techron that do most of the same job through the fuel tank.

I think the warnings and fun used in this discussion should have gotten the point across. Please don't use the stuff unless for good reason, our atmosphere will thank you.

[Edited by stevebfl on 07-15-2001 at 10:12 PM]

Thank You, Steve...
 

Based on what we have learned so far, I thought it might be instructive to post a photo of someone deliberately misusing X-66A. Kids, don't try this at home:

http://images.fotki.com/photos/1/106....jpg?995256491

There is NO NEED to test this product at the auto parts store in this manner!

Now THAT's what I call Running Too Hot...

Clarification
 

I’ve received a couple of E-mails regarding my chemotherapy analogy. Apparently my intent was not clear to all.

The analogy was meant to point out that a proper diagnosis is a prudent course of action prior to initiating treatment. This is true of many things, human or mechanical.

If you are *absolutely* sure that you have a carbon build up problem, to the point of it *significantly* interfering with proper engine function, then by all means, try using the X-66. Since the alternative is (at minimum) partial disassembly of the engine, what do you have to lose? (Assuming that you follow directions.) If you are not sure what is creating a problem, then take the proper course of action. That means figuring out what *is* causing the problem.

My concerns about X-66 may seem overblown – even diametrically opposed to other viewpoints here. However, prudence is the better part of valor. I believe that many people will want to use X-66 as a shot of magic elixir for their engine when there is not any actual carbon problem. How many people will attempt to use it when it is unnecessary? Who knows. I can foresee that many will however.

Here’s what I see as a typical scenario: Lets say that my car was misfiring a little bit, and it’s about time for a tune up anyway. So I put in some new sparkplugs and check the timing. It’s better, but it still misfires a little bit. So now the ‘parts swap’ mentality kicks in, and I throw a new cap & rotor in. But it still runs a bit rough. What do I do next? It could be the plug wires, but boy those sure are expensive. Aw shucks, the car is X years old, so why not treat her to a new set of wires. But the problem remains. I’m getting a bit frustrated, I mean I just threw $200 at the problem and it’s still not fixed. So what do I do now? Well, you know, - the car *is* X years old, so it could be carbon build up. Heck, this here X-66 stuff is only five bucks, why not give it a shot? It would be the path of least resistance (read: easy). And guess what, after using the X-66, the problem is *still* there. So now I have unnecessarily subjected my engine to the X-66 treatment. AFTER the X-66 is used, I may or may not finally figure out what was *really* wrong, which could be any one of a myriad of things – from problems with the fuel injection system, or a vacuum leak, a bad coil or ignition box, etc., etc.

The point is that the X-66 would have been used, *with* it’s potential for harm, (not to mention the pollution) unnecessarily. This is why I kept using the phrase “a treatment of last resort” as a mantra. If you cut your finger severely, go get some stitches. Don’t have them amputate your arm because you *might* develop gangrene.

Excuse my morbidity here, but this subject has been beaten to death, pulled from the grave and beaten some more. What else can we do here? :)

RTH

Continued Abuse Of Deceased Equines...
 

While I see your point, and understand that we are all interested in providing accurate information to keep people from using the wrong "magic bullet" at the wrong time, I still don't see how this is a last resort product.

Again, on the can, it says that it: "contains solvents and penetrating agents designed to remove gum, carbon, and other deposits from the fuel induction system. It frees sticky valves and sluggish compression rings, and removes excessive deposits from the combustion chamber. For best results, X-66A should be used in conjunction with an engine tune-up."

The proper application of this product as stated by the manufacturer is to use it prior to doing a tune-up in order to eliminate carbon, gum and/or varnish from the fuel induction and combustion areas of your engine. In doing so, hopefully you eliminate two of the three possible areas of problems that call for a regular tune-up, namely the air and fuel systems, leaving the ignition system as the last area to be tuned in the process.

I just got off of the phone after an informative discussion with the parts manager at a local GM dealership. Bottom line? He sells cases of the GM Top Engine Cleaner to both independent and factory-trained mechanics all over our area who rave about how well it works. He has 38 years selling parts for GM dealerships, and can't remember a day when the didn't have it in stock, and after comparing the labels on the two products, GM & ACDelco, we agreed that they are identical. His suggestion for application of the product? Cars that don't get driven enough on the highway, idle in traffic a lot, only get driven on short trips around town, and/or have high mileage on them and haven't been tuned and driven regularly. I asked him if he thought it was a product of last resort, and his answer was a simple no.

However, I think we all know that there are no "magic bullets" in a can that can easily solve engine problems. This product is just a tool that when used properly may help your car run better, but certainly shouldn't be used before every oil change, or every 5 or even 10 thousand miles as a preventative measure. The best maintenance program is one based upon regular tune ups, oil and filter changes, proper cooling system and fluid changes, as well as proper adjustments and replacement of the parts that wear out like belts, brake pads, and the like. Not using chemicals to try to avoid, or make up for not doing proper maintenance

Sorry I don’t post here very much anymore, but I do look at stuff here from time to time. This X66 & GM top cleaner discussion really caught my eye. This stuff is something that I have used on different cars exactly 6 times. Why do I know exactly how many times? Because it workd really good the first 5 and on number 6 the engine seized up some pistons while I was blowing it out. It was an old girlfriends old chevy Corsica. She got rid of the car and I got rid of her. Ha ha. 2 problems solved. Who wants a girl that drives a chevy anyways, right? I know that we are in a Mercedes community here, but an engine is an engine. No offense, but it sounds like at least 2 people here know their ass from a hole in a block. Lighten up and chill out people!

No comment from me.
 

Would anyone else care to comment on this?

Anyone?
 

.

Nothing from the peanut gallery? The silence is deafening.
 

Where are all the advocates & know-it-alls now?

I can’t blame ANYONE for not wanting to keep reading this thread. I don’t even want to anymore. However, as is the case in many things, the best comes near the end. I’m sure that not enough people are going to be aware of at least this one persons’ experience of engine failure related to the use of X-66.

Perhaps 450 SLC 50 can elaborate a little bit on how the X-66 was used, what the prior condition of the engine was like, and what exactly happened?

I personally think it would be of great service for a new thread to be posted, as most *rational* people gave up on this thread long ago.

How about it 450 SLC 50?

RTH


[Edited by RunningTooHot on 07-20-2001 at 12:16 AM]

You Bet. I gotta go so I dont have time to write right now, but I will post over the weekend. You can count 2 motors here. I know someone else that had a meltdown when using it.

boat load? too funny
 

NOTE:
As of September 9 2009 this product is no longer available through any of our sources...

We haven't purchased any X66, nor do we plan on purchasing any.
I swore I wouldn't post here about this any more, however you guys seem to want to keep ranting about it.
A few customers inquired about it, I made it available.
It's was only by drop shipment.
Buy it or don't. I assume if you do, you know how to read the label.
I am not trying to piss anyone off here either but get real, it's only a decarb. I've used decarbs since the 70's and never did I loose an engine with it, in fact I've saved people money, thinking they needed an overhaul, ie carbon knock knock..
We want feedback from all of you but don't imply we're trying to dump a load of this off on our customers.
I must admit one thing, I've never had to put this into a Mercedes.
It all comes down to maintenance, doesn't it?
Have a great day everyone.

Partsman

NOTE:
As of September 9 2009 this product is no longer available through any of our sources...

It seems that a few people think I work here, I just play here. The only money ever changing hands between my business and theirs has been when I paid for advertising of our radio dept on this site.

I say this because for me to defend them I can't be seen as a part of them. I seriously doubt that Mercedesshops.com would remove your post without it at least having been viewed. Did you see your post? I suspect that you lost it at your end. I say that having lost at least ten long posts over my time here. I have always believed it was my machine or a lack of co-operation over the net that caused this, but I'm not a computer guy. I have watched the activity here enough to know that isn't the way it works. The only posts I have seen removed (my own included) were posts well off the group purpose of real information and definitly more towards personnal aggression. They just don't like a good fight (bg).

I can also vouch for the fact that their business style is based upon the modern inventory concept of "just in time". Meaning they don't stock anything (or not much). They are selling co-ordination; you need the part and they put it there. No profit in them touching it first.

As to X66, I have never seen the product do any damage, human or mechanical (does mess up the air we all breath). I can imagine serious consequences for its misuse in both catagories. I have never seen it bend a rod , but I thought I did it one time (turned out to be misfire identification problem reset with a key cycle, but I had a dead hole for much longer than it should have took to clear).

I think it is good that bad experiences get reviewed as a further warning but I just don't see a conspiracy here.