I'm just about to service my 2002 Vectra which I got around a month ago. It has 37K on the clock and my question is this.
Is it advantageous to add Slick 50 oil treatment when I fill up with Synthetic oil or will the oil give just as good protection?
Also, I'll be changing the cam-belt/rollers and tensioner soon and I've heard to change the water pump as well as a precaution. Is this advisable or are some people just a little too worried?
Thanks in advance
Gaz
|
|
No, search the net for "snake oil slick 50"
|
|
|
the oil will give as good protection.whether fully or semi synthetic.it would be overkill to put slick 50 in.
it is worth changing water pump as well as if it siezes while running you will need to do it all again.only my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Don't waste your money on oil treatments. Put it towards the water pump, cam belt etc. This will give you real peace of mind.
|
|
|
This is a previous opinion of mine on the subject of slick 50.
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=17...6
|
I used Slick 50 in a Mondeo several years ago. At the time, I was keeping logs of mileage per tank, and the application of Slick 50 made absolutaly no difference whatsoever to fuel consumption.
Save yourself the money.
V
|
|
|
DD,
With the greatest respect, your 'previous opinion' wasn't really an opinion, just a statement that you had used the stuff in an engine at 44,000 miles and the engine was still running well at 104,000 miles.
That's no proof at all that the stuff works, only that no harm was done to your particular engine. No doubt you would have had the same 'no harm' result if you had done a witch doctor dance around the car every six months.
|
Dizzy, what I was trying to say was that the engine was regularly thrashed, and after 104,000 miles it still ran sweet as a nut and used very little oil between services (never needed to top it up). It was only a 1300cc, and had no 5th gear, so when in top gear (4th) the engine was revving higher than a newer model Astra with the 5th gear. I remember driving along the M40 from High Wycombe to Oxford late one night, and driving down the steep hill at one point on the M40, the Astra topped 120mph on the speedo and the revs were almost in the red!
Yes, I agree, it proved slick50 never harmed the engine, but I wonder what would have happened had I not used Slick50 at all - given the abuse that it regularly got.
For reference, a mate had a similar Astra and it was a right oil burner at 60,000 miles, and no oil treatment ever used. Another friend added Slick50 to his 1981 Escort 1.6 CVH engine, and it's still going strong at 150,000 miles, without burning any oil. Most unusual for a Ford of that era.
|
DD, So no witch doctor dance then? I was enjoying myself visualising it!
I'll say no more about that 'stuff', except that I can't even bring myself to mention its name. The world would be a boring place if everyone agreed on everything. No wars though!
|
|
|
|
DD: its the thrashing that keeps it clean internally, surely:) Taxi's are a case in point: keep the oil warm, and it'll run and run. Further, if an oil mfr wanted to make a better product, don't you think that the experts (Lubrizol and maybe others) would gladly add the few pence worth of additive to a bespoke oil as a USP? They haven't so far as I know.
|
|
|
most of the cars made by them used to and still enjoy high revs
I think it was down to materials used to make the various components.I have found some that have been treated like a baby
have worn out before they should.so am not so certain that any additive to oil actually works.I am under the impression that no proof has yet been found.may be wrong.and yes I have looked at site`s that sell them and some that have tested.so I think its an open debate at the moment
|
|
|
|
|
|
see report by u.s. federal trade commission - equivalent of uk trading standards
www.ftc.gov/opa/1997/07/slick.htm
"Three subsidiaries of Quaker State Corp. have agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that ads for Quaker State's Slick 50 Engine Treatment were false and unsubstantiated. Under the terms of the settlement, the companies will be barred from making certain claims and required to have substantiation for claims about the performance, benefits, efficacy or attributes of their engine lubricant products ... "
|
In the same vein look at my posting in the same thread as DD:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=15483&...2
My own experience is that you should use a good oil (you cite fully synth) and change it according to HJs recommendations. As an example, my own car is a 97 Rover 820 Vitesse Sport. This is the later 200bhp version with 17 inch alloys and proper suspension, not the feeble original 180bhp Vitesse turbo. It is just a few dozen miles short of 130k now. I bought it from the previous owner with 88k up. like me he is a car nut and looks after his cars well. Also like me he's an ex-motorsport driver and drives "enthusiastically". The car has been run on Mobil 1 or GTX Magnatec under the previous owner and on Halfords FS by me. Believe me when I say this car is as clean inside the cam covers as the day it was bought new. It also drives like new - at a Revs sponsored event I managed 30-70 in 6.6 secs, 'book' is 6.8 secs!!! i run it on Tesco fuel all the time.
I had much the same experiences with my previous cars, some of which were highly tuned for road use and all of which took a lot of stick from my right foot over quite extended mileages.
An automotive engineer colleagues Uncle also had this to say about Slick 50 oil additive: "I love it. As long as people keep adding it to their engines and keep bringing them to my workshop for rebuilding I'll be able to retire at 50 no problem".
One other golden rule: warm up and cool down sympathetically
Sorry to waffle, but now you know my opinion.
|
|
Also, DuPont who own the PTFE patent sued Slick50 for tarnisjing their own brand by making false claims which DuPont disagreed with.
|
|
it wasn`t proved that PTFE worked.according to tests that were done more wear occured using PTFE based additives than without part reason was the ptfe built up in the areas of the engine that only transmitted the oil ie oilways rough sections of the cylinder head and block.this caused a partial blockage in the oil ways preventing full flow of oil.hence causing wear that should not have occured.ptfe is after all a compound or dust tough as it is if it gets stuck in places where it should not it aint gona work.
|
|
Worthy of note though, is that some 2-smoke motorcycles have teflon-coated pistons, and really do look like a baking tray finish... however, they are coated with a special process, not just had a load of oil mixed with PTFE dust poured over them! - that's just probably the least likely thing to "coat" metal in the world!
|
|
|
|
Most synthetic and many semi-synthetic oils have chemistry which allows them to adhere to bare metal ( hence the magnatec ads ). There are several different chemicals which do this but none will work on a PTFE coated surface. Also the PTFE will adhere to and reduce the diameter of vital oilways which could have the effect of reducing the oil pressure or flow at that point. My advice would be to use a quality engine flush like Forte and the a reputable brand of oil with oil and filter changes every 5000 miles.
|
|
Any PTFE additives are just snake oil, PTFE BLOCKS the oil filter and causes oil ways to become clogged. It sits in the oil filter and reduces the flow thru the filter causing oil starvation to bearings. Remember that test were they drove a PTFE coated car engine 4 miles before it seized? well the untreated car went just as far. Both engines were write offs.
|
There is from this thread a concensus that it is snake oil. So, I ask the question, if it is useless and does not do what is claimed, how is it that Office of Fair Trading/ Trading Standards have not jumped in and taken it off the market?
DVD
|
I don\'t know how to post a link, but for anyone who can be bothered, some interesting reading at
www.fordscorpio.co.uk/snakeoil.htm
|
An execellent article, thank you.
DVD- The law of the land will not allow something to be banned just because it is rubbish. If it is proven seriously damaging to health and people want it (i.e. tobbaco)it's difficult enough even with hard hitting education to put it down. IMHO.
|
|
|
|
There is from this thread a concensus that it is snake oil. So, I ask the question, if it is useless and does not do what is claimed, how is it that Office of Fair Trading/ Trading Standards have not jumped in and taken it off the market? DVD
i would like to think that it is because unlike the usa, uk oft and trading standards are either not proactive or lack the resources.
if you look up the usa
www.ftc.gov/ and
www.econsumer.gov/english/
links you will see that they are pretty tough on any dubious claims. they require manufacturers to provide rigorous scientific proof of claimed consumer benefits to allow claims to stand.
|
|
|
DVD, Does this partly answer your question?
In addition, there is some evidence that certain supplies of PTFE powders (from manufacturers other than DuPont) are of a cruder version than the original, made with larger sized flakes that are more likely to "settle out" in your oil or clog up your filters. One fairly good indication that a product contains this kind of PTFE is if the instructions for its use advise you to "shake well before using." It only stands to reason that if the manufacturer knows the solids in his product will settle to the bottom of a container while sitting on a shelf, the same thing is going to happen inside your engine when it is left idle for any period of time.
The problem with putting PTFE in your oil, as explained to us by several industry experts, is that PTFE is a solid. The additive makers claim this solid "coats" the moving parts in an engine (though that is far from being scientifically proven). Slick 50 is currently both the most aggressive advertiser and the most popular seller, with claims of over 14 million treatments sold. However, such solids seem even more inclined to coat non-moving parts, like oil passages and filters. After all, if it can build up under the pressures and friction exerted on a cylinder wall, then it stands to reason it should build up even better in places with low pressures and virtually no friction.
This conclusion seems to be borne out by tests on oil additives containing PTFE conducted by the NASA Lewis Research Center, which said in their report, "In the types of bearing surface contact we have looked at, we have seen no benefit. In some cases we have seen detrimental effect. The solids in the oil tend to accumulate at inlets and act as a dam, which simply blocks the oil from entering. Instead of helping, it is actually depriving parts of lubricant."
Remember, PTFE in oil additives is a suspended solid. Now think about why you have an oil filter on your engine. To remove suspended solids, right? Right. Therefore it would seem to follow that if your oil filter is doing its job, it will collect as much of the PTFE as possible, as quickly as possible. This can result in a clogged oil filter and decreased oil pressure throughout your engine.
|
|
I think that colloidal PTFE may be better suited to environments such as gearboxes where it may have a cushioning or anti-backlash effect, and most of the drawbacks seen in an engine are irrelevant. But even then, I'm sure lubricant manudacturers would adopt it if there was a benefit to be had.
|
A gearbox oil has three very important functions. It must lubricate the bearings, not break down under the pressure between engaged gear teeth and allow sufficient friction between the syncromesh cones to avoid crash changes.
Adding any unapproved stuff to gearbox oil is likely to have a harmful effect on at least one of these functions. Please don't even think about it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
