2000 Contour SE V6

It went to the dealer, where they had to replace the plug because it was damaged.

Reply to
Andy
Loading thread data ...

lol good one

Reply to
ShoeSalesman

They are the best, testing proves this, why you have such a hard time reading test results is beyond me.

Reply to
Andy

Who's tests? If they seriously ARE the best, and want to hit the wider market they HAVE to go though the SAE hoops. Until they do, they are just wannabees. They may not (definitely DO not) like it, but regardless HOW good they are, the PERCEPTION will always be they have something to hide. Between that and their MLM marketing system - - - -

- .

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from
formatting link
***
Reply to
clare at snyder.on.ca

Their own self-serving promotional test results. If everyone was as gullible as you believing a company's biased test results we would still be swallowing Vioxx and dying.

Reply to
I. Care

There are plenty of test results out there. www.bobistheoilguy,com for one. Agh, so what you dont like in the MLM marketing system they use. Now the truth comes out

Reply to
Andy

What about all the independent test data?

Reply to
Andy

Well that's just the thing isn't it... they refuse to do any legitimate testing like the rest of the oil manufacturers. Instead they do there own biased testing and rely on fools like you to market it for them. I'll bet you also have magic gas mileage pills in your fuel tank, magnets on the gas line and a tornado in the intake. They've all been "proven" to work by some scammer as well. Bob

Reply to
Bob

They have done certified testing on products, there are plenty of independent test results. Like the rest of the oil manufactures? Gimme a break. Fools to market them? Don't be assanine. None of those pills, magnets, swirling intakes things work. Synthetic lubriants are proven to be better, go look at the Mobil 1 wesbite, they have lots of information on why synthetics are better. Only fools like you don't use synthetics lubricants.

Reply to
Andy

Nobody's arguing that synthetics are not better. Although saying you are a fool not to use synthetics, period, is stretching it, and not juast a little. In some engines, under some conditions, synthetics give you no significant advantage. What we ARE saying is SpamZoil is NOT NECESSARILLY better than Mobil 1 or Syntek, or any other synthetic oil - and in all probability is not as good as some.

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from
formatting link
***
Reply to
clare at snyder.on.ca

So now your calling is SpamZoil... seems like you are resorting to calling names now. Is that what you do when don't have a valid argument? Once again tests both Amsoil's own and independent test show its is better than Mobil 1. All engines can benifit from synthetic's. Give one example where synthetics are not as good or dont give you an advantage.

Reply to
Andy

I could give a shit about the tests amsoil has conducted, but I'd really like to see links to some of these independent sites that say amsoil is better than mobile 1.

You do know this isn't the first time the subject has come up don't you? You're just the latest in a long list of people spamming amsoil on the newsgroups and trying to convince the world how wonderful amsoil is. Bob

Reply to
Bob

Synthetic oil will give no advantage if the engine running regular oil is already, statistically, outlasting the vehicle it is installed in while running a non-synthetic energy conserving oil, changed at specified intervals.

Also, synthetics are NOT the oil to use in an engine that gets very little use and never gets up to full operating temperature. This is because the commonly employed Polymerized alpha olefin synthetics are not particularly profficient at preventing corrosion. They are also incompatible with some older elastomeric materials used in seal construction (they do not cause the materials to swell - which is a requirement of some older seal designs.) This means synthetic oils are not the lubricant of choice for many older engines.

Also, synthetic oils and high lead fuels such as 100LL Av-Gas do not play well together - meaning I cannot safely use synthetic oils in my aircraft engine if I run 100LL Av-Gas (my aircraft engine is a converted automotive power plant) unless I change the oil at 25 hour intervals. Six liters of $10 per liter oil every 25 hours is NOT going to happen. The alternative to 25 hour changes is NOT an option - lead sludge buildup in the crankcase.

I'm not saying AmZoil is not a good oil. It is likely more than adequate for a large majority of engines in daily use. But so is any major manufacturer's synthetic offering, and MOST of the premium non-synthetic or synthetic blend motor oils on the market today.

What I take issue with is the almost religous zeal of the vast majority of AmZOil proponents who claim the product is better than any other lubricant out there, for absolutely all applications. This is patently untrue.

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from
formatting link
***
Reply to
clare at snyder.on.ca

Its Mobil not Mobile. Second, try

formatting link

Reply to
Andy

Harldy spaming about Amsoil. Someone asked what oil I was using, so I mentioned it. Then they started lying about Amsoil.

Reply to
Andy

The seal myth has been busted a long time ago. Engines that dont get up to opoerating temps need a by-pass filter to get rid of the water and other stuff that would otherwise boil off.

Maybe. But then you need to run aviation certified oils. All jet engines use syntheic lubricants, since conventional ones can't stand up to the low temps of high altitutes.

Its not AmZoil it's Amsoil. Geeze

Reply to
Andy

They admited the damaged it by over tightening it, and had to replace the plug.

Reply to
Andy

As for the "seal myth", it is NOT A MYTH. CURRENT seal materials are not adversely affected, but do NOT run synthetic oils in a mid fifties engine, or even some early seventies engines with either original or NOS seals. The seals WILL harden, and they WILL score the shaft, and they WILL leak. Not a problem with today's engines, but definitely enough of a problem to make synthetic oils a "definite no-no" for some older engines - which was my point. Synthetic oils are NOT necessarilly the best for ALL applications.

A bypass filter will NOT provide the corrosion protection that is lacking in synthetic oils, even if it did remove the water(which it won't, as the condensation occurs as the engine cools down, when it is NOT running, and therefor the bypass filter is not active) The only way to get adequate corrosion protection is by running a "blend" (mixing some petroleum based oil)

I do NOT need to run certified oil in a non-certified engine in my home-built.And conventional oils stand up just fine to operation below

10,000 feet - and I can't fly higher than that without supplemental oxygen. As for all jets running synthetic oils, that is pretty well true, but it is a totally different synthetic than what you run in your car. Many of the jet synthetics are totally incompatible with petroleum base stocks.Look up "diesters" or "phosphate esters".

PAO synthetics are the commonly used automotive synthetics, which blend well with petroleum base stocks.

A rose by any other name would be as sweet, as the old Bard once said.

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from
formatting link
***
Reply to
clare at snyder.on.ca

From the Mobl1 wesbite:

Myth: Mobil 1 will leak out of the seals of older cars.

Reality: Mobil 1 does not cause leaks. In fact, new Mobil 1 was tested in dozens of industry standard and original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) tests to prove its seal performance. It is fully compatible with the elastomeric materials from which all automotive seals and gaskets are made. If an older engine is in good condition and does not have oil leaks, Mobil 1 provides the same advantages as when used in a new engine. ExxonMobil recommends taking measures to repair the leaks, then using Mobil 1. ExxonMobil also recommends following the automobile manufacturer's manual for the proper oil to use.

So you are wrong on that count.

Reply to
Andy

the only test there I could find was air filters (Amsoil came in second worst to K&N) and gear oil (aimsoil held water and foamed up worse than the other) Can you give a more precise link? Or at least one that shows something *good* about Amsoil... :)

Reply to
ShoeSalesman

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.