Any truth to PFTE aditives like Slick 50? - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

need2speed · #16 12-06-2002, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jackd
DuraLube and a number of other miracle additive producers have been sued by the Federal Trade Commission for deceptive advertizing and false statements. Read this:

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1999/9905/duralub2.htm
and
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/05/duralube.do.htm

This is from the FTC Order against Dura Lube:

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall:

A. Within fifteen (15) days after the date of service of this order, send by first class certified mail, return receipt requested, to each purchaser for resale of Dura Lube with which respondents have done business since January 1, 1994, notice of this order in the form attached as Attachment A. The mailing shall not include any other documents;

Did anyone receive such a letter? They should have required they post it at Point Of Sale locations!

tkd_M119 · #17 12-06-2002, 11:57 AM

Check out this link - Look under "Snake Oil"

http://www.miata.net/garage/garagemaintenance.html

#18 12-06-2002, 12:42 PM

Speaking of MOS2, (molybdenum desulfide), here's an extract from NASA tests on what they have to say about it:.
''The "Snake Oil!" article refers to NASA Lewis Research Center tests that concern MoS2. The "Snake Oil!" article quotes NASA as follows: "In the types of bearing surface contact we have looked at, we have seen no benefit. In some cases we have seen detrimental effects. The solids in the oil tend to accumulate at the inlet, and they act as a dam, which simply blocks the oil from entering. Instead of helping, it is actually going to deprive that part of the lubricant."
MOS2 is in fact a very good lubricant BUT it is a solid mineral which insoluble and never dillutes into oil. It always remain a solid (very fine powder) with particules ranging from 2 to 10 microns. As with teflon, this material has the very bad habit of clogging small oil passages and accumulates in parts of the engine where oil flow is slower.
Here's some good reading:

http://www.vtr.org/maintain/oil-additives.html

JackD

Ron Johnstone · #19 12-06-2002, 01:08 PM

Granted, there is an awful lot of advertising hype out there that the oil additive companies should get sued for and I'm certainly not defending them. However, for what its worth, when I was driving my 240D on a daily 80 mile mostly freeway commute, I consistently got 24 mpg and if I added STP to the 15-40 oil at a 3500 interval change, I got 26 mpg. I ran this test a number of times over a couple of years so I know that it was real. That increase certainly isn't going to make anybody rich, but it surely will pay for the can of STP and a decent lunch.
I can't tell if it affects my E car as that one is subject to varied driving routes so I can't do a controlled test.
Frankly, modern oil is so good that anything that is added to it can at best only produce a marginally better product, but some things can easily produce negative effects by having incompatible ingredients working against each other. We simply don't know what ingredients an oil manufacturer has used and we also don't know exactly what is really in an additive, so we are guessing about the safety to our engines. I think I'd get a lot of agreement that the best thing for an engine is to change the oil on an advanced schedule.

Kestas · #20 12-06-2002, 01:20 PM

Jack, as usual you're always the King of the oil threads! Thanks for your insight.

robi99 · #21 12-06-2002, 02:54 PM

This horse is almost dead but I have seen a copy of a memo, written by the Dupont company, who manufactures Teflon (PTFE) and it states clearly that Teflon should not be used as an additive to lubricants. I have not looked for the memo, nor am I going to but it is out there somewhere.

jsmith · #22 12-06-2002, 04:47 PM

i'd like to see the findings on MoS2, none of the links on this thread refer to it specifically. i believe that modern products such as lubro moly have superfine particles much smaller than before and have improved dispersion characteristics avoiding the older problems.

BTW, in another thread MoS2 was also lumped with the snake oil products which elicited a lot of learned response from many of the forum veterans:

MoS2

placo1 · #23 12-06-2002, 05:58 PM

Regarding Snake Oils (Duralube, Slick 50)
My opinnion is that they are have already spent milliions in false advertising and have made several more millions doing this. Why would they bother to make a better product when in reality it was all BS to begin with. They'll just continue to false advertise until they are shut down.

There are hundreds of startup companies created every day built on false claims. They continue to make their millions until the government steps in and finally shuts them down for false advertising. These people don't care because they've already pocketed their millions and are already moving on to the next big scam. I wonder if their are any Class action suits against these additive companies.....that would bring some attention to them.

#24 12-10-2002, 11:02 AM

Jack D - you stated "Mr Moedip: You said you've been using one of those miracle additive for 10 years and you still can ''feel'' a quieter operation, smoother idle, better mileage, reduced heat.....You have quite a memory. "
How dare you attack my integrity with such an ignorant statement. Can you remember things from ten years ago? No? Neither can I. Then don't suggest that I am so stupid as to make such a statement in an attempt to ridicule me in this forum. When the Duralube treatment wears off, I can hear and see the difference in the performance of my engines. Upon adding Duralube at oil change I CAN tell the difference in performance, and with 6 cars to maintain I have many opportunities to witness the difference and I don't have a miracle memory that goes back ten years.
The FTC took ALL additive companies, and some oil companies to court for over zealous advertising. As you can see, Duralube VOLUNTARILY settled and changed their advertising as it was cheaper than extended litigation. There are NO CREDIBLE TESTS the FTC recognizes for additives and they suggested the additive companies jointly develop such a test. Draw your own conclusions.
For your information - Duralube is unlike the other additives out there --- it is a PURE LIQUID. It does not have any PTFE's, molybdenum desulfide, lead, or graphite or any other SOLIDS in suspension. I agree wholeheartedly that these solids can and might do damage to an engine and might plug small oil passages, which is why I NEVER RECOMMENDED an additive that contained solids in suspension. The people I recommended Duralube to tried it, saw a difference, and continue to use it. Are you saying we are all nuts with super memories?
You may be very knowledgable in the oil field, but have you ever stepped out of the lab into the real world? Try the product in a car in real life and see if you don't see any differance. Then tell me I don't know what I am talking about.
Someone else on this thread basically said "You the Man" when it comes to oils. I will not stoop to your level to attack your credibilty or even your memory, but I will state that you can't know everything, I MUST know something. Having said that, the people I recommended Duralube to, and I will continue to use Duralube, which has NEVER harmed any of our engines, and continue to enjoy the IMAGINED benefits of the product.
Have a GREAT day!!:p :p :p

tkd_M119 · #25 12-10-2002, 11:52 AM

Yeow! I didn't realize that oil/oil additives was such a passionate topic!!!!

#26 12-10-2002, 12:52 PM

Oil additives and the dino vs synth debates, almost like, achem, "discussing" politics at the Thanksgiving dinner table with relatives!!

jsmith · #27 12-10-2002, 01:38 PM

here's another all liquid additive made by a reputable company. they made their name with transmissions and now have their own engine protectant that allegedly outperforms duralube.

lubegard bio/tech engine protectant

#28 12-10-2002, 07:09 PM

Mr Meodip: Please accept my very sincere apology if my comments offended you. I never intended to attack anybody personnally with my intervention. All I wanted to do was to give facts, references to other facts expressed by other competent parties. I don't know if what field of work you're in, but I would presume you would be decently knowledgable of your specialty after spending 25 years in it like I did in the lubricant business.
You have the full right to your opinion, but please allow me to totally/professionnaly disagree.
If you ''feel'' better using this product, please keep on using it.
Nothing is better than a good feeling. (do we agree on this?)
JackD

#29 12-10-2002, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Carrameow
Any truth to PFTE aditives like Slick 50?I seem to recall a commercial where they drained the oil out of a Slick 50 treated airplane engine and still flew it...obvious PFTE additives are not going to replace metal, but do they work? I a m somewhat skeptical

I bought my MR2 with 54K on it and used slick 50 twice, once at 80K and then again at about 140K, I stopped using it after that.

NP

#30 12-11-2002, 09:37 AM

Jack - apology accepted. Please forgive me if I do not put all my faith in professional opinions. Professionals told me that water and plastic are incompatable and water based adhesive products could never be made to lay smoothly in micro-thin layers on plastic without beading or breaking up unless a surficant was used to break the surface tension of the water. Unfortunately surficants also encapsulate the adhesive particles so they are no longer sticky. By being" outside the box" I invented a mechanical way of breaking the surface tension that I have been using in production for 4 years. Nobody else has accomplished this feat yet. I have 4 patents to my name because I did not listen to Academia. Careful observation has allowed me to accomplish these feats. Listening to the pros would have resulted in no new inventions. Technically you may be correct, by the book, but I see and hear a difference in engines with the Duralube. Your valued professional opinion says no, my experiences say yes. Maybe the external variables in my cases are such that improvement is there. Maybe the same variables are not present in lab tests. I don't know. So, once again, thank you for the kind apology, and for now we will amicably agree to disagree. Who knows - something in the future may change one of our opinions.
By the way - we are setting new records here in Manitoba - +5C today - Get ready - it is heading for Quebec!!!