Slick 50 - FROM THE BEGINNING?

Well, I used it in a couple of cars, they all lasted well, and I never saw any indication of problems of any kind. Maybe I was just lucky.

I had more problems with Pennzoil than with Slick 50.

BUT if the use of Slick 50 prejudices your warranty, I would not use it. Use good quality motor oil and change oil and filter regularly. Modern oils, whether synthetic or not, can do a really good job. I still have some 'unfavorite' brands of motor oil, mind you. I don't like oils which lead to varnishing and sludging, and some very well known brands are suspected of doing just that.

Reply to
HLS
Loading thread data ...

formatting link

Reply to
C. E. White

People still fall for that Tornado gas saving device crap. Including some smart people. Then they get the Tornado, drive more carefully, and notice their gas milage goes up on the next fill-up. But, they didn't notice they were on a hill so that the tank wasn't as full and they were on a hill the other way on the previous fill-up, so the tank is really fill.

No true. It will treat the makers of that stuff to some of your hard earned money.

I read in the New York Times that they are putting it in paint, so you can't do graffitti.

But, it doesn't belong in an engine.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

"HLS" wrote in news:d1c0em$dog$ snipped-for-privacy@news.chatlink.com:

Which ones? Got names?

Reply to
TeGGer®

Think he gave you one ;-)

Reply to
Some ga

Because car technology changes.

Reply to
Rebecca Webb

Question #2.

Will Fleet Farm accept a return on an unopened bottle of Slick 50 for store credit if I no longer have the receipt?

Maybe there's another use for it. Not a lot of graffiti around here...

Thanks, all.

Except you, Daniel. No call for that attitude. I wouldn't abuse you if you made inquiry in one of MY areas of expertise because you wanted to make wise choices.

RW

Reply to
Rebecca Webb

It's not a lubricant. It's just crud that floats in the oil doing nothing.

Reply to
TCS

Fail to think for yourself, ask a stupid question, and some responders will have no qualms about calling you thoughtless and calling it a stupid question. That's life.

Reply to
Daniel J. Stern

Another stupid question. Why are you asking us? Pick up a phone or go to Fleet Farm and go ask them!

Reply to
Daniel J. Stern

Emoticon-dependent, are we?

Reply to
Rebecca Webb

I avoid Pennzoil and Quaker State now. Quaker used to be a favorite of mine, ¨ but no longer. Castrol seems to do fine for me, as do a couple of others.

Reply to
HLS

I wouldn't put any additive containing PTFE in an engine. The dealer is right- additives do more harm than good, especially ones like Slick 50 that contain PTFE. I've heard that one study found that PTFE-based additives actually cause MORE cylinder wall wear because the solids in the additive fill microscopic voids in the cylinder walls that should be filled with oil.

And aside from that, I've had a lot of engines last over 200,000 miles using nothing but engine oil, and some not even with very good oil:

'66 Dodge 383- 265,000 miles on the original engine '73 Plymouth 318 - 430,000 miles on the original engine, still going '93 Eagle Vision 3.5L- 220,000 miles on Mobil-1, still going.

And other members of my family over the years:

-92 Dodge truck 5.2- 215,000 miles still going (using cheap dino oil)

-68 Ford 302- 210,000 miles (never saw a "modern" oil, much of that life on straight 30-weight oil)

-84 Cadillac 4100 (and if you know engines, you know this one SUCKS)-

136,000 miles when sold, still running great (well, as well as it ever did...)

-83 Plymouth 318- sold with 215,000 miles and running strong- never saw a drop of synthetic oil.

Rebecca Webb wrote:

Reply to
Steve

Not "passages," but the microscopic irregularities in the metal surfaces, especially cylinder walls. A test (I think it was conducted by Briggs&Stratton since their engines are popular "demonstrators" with the snake-oil comapanies) showed that the PTFE fills the cylinder wall voids and prevents real lubricant (oil) from getting in there to do its job.

Reply to
Steve

Not as much as people think, and not always in the AREAS that people think. If you look at ring materials, cylinder wall materals, bearing materials, and the clearances that "modern" engines require in these ares, you'll find virtually no change since 1962 or so.

There have been HUGE changes in engine control, ignition, and fuel management since then (computer fuel injection and engine control systems, digital transmission controllers, etc.) but almost no fundamental changes in the "wear" parts of engines. About the biggest change in that area was the switch to roller cam followers, and that happened in the 80's. Hypereutectic pistons and "cracked cap" sintered connecting rods are examples of internal changes that have come on the scene in recent years, but the rods aren't metal-to-metal wear parts like the bearings and piston rings are, and HE pistons have the same basic wear characteristics and lubrication requirements as 1965 aluminum pistons for the most part.

Reply to
Steve

I agree, there is no call for that sort of response. You probably should do some research at the links mentioned, read them carefully, and see what you can pick up.

For a long time the Slick 50 product was panned by a lot of people who 'had heard', or 'believed', or 'imagined' it to be either trash or treasure.

The original lawsuit, I believe, had nothing to do with damaged engines nor was it about the ability of the product to perform or not. It was that Slick 50 made wildly optimistic advertising claims that, when they were asked to document them, they could not prove. They had not done the homework they claimed they had. Maybe the product worked, and maybe it didn't, but they had broached some serious truth in advertising rules.

I have heard a lot of anecdotal commentary about Slick 50 plugging filters, plugging engines, fouling engines, etc but I have never yet seen proof positive of this...just opinions, old wive's tales.

It is very possible that some engines have failed into which Slick 50 was used as a last ditch measure, and that the ultimate failure was blamed, rightly or not, on Slick 50.

It might be bad stuff. I really don't know. I have used it, as I said before, with never a hint of a problem.

Don't let people dog you. Your question was a fair one, and it is a shame that you have been treated so shabbily. Unfortunately, I doubt that anyone here has the total truth about this product....

Reply to
HLS

Don't get a bad opinion of Dan's advice because he's crusty, its very accurate.

And as I tell my daughter: YES, there IS such a thing as a stupid question :-p If you're new to automotive things, then I don't consider the Slick 50 question to be in that category simply because you gotta learn sometime. But the Fleet Farm question is pretty far out there....

Reply to
Steve

I haven't experienced any engine breakdown by NOT using Slick 50. I use Castrol 10 W 30 motor oil.

Save you $$$ and change the oil & filter as regularly scheduled & your motor will last a long time.

Good Luck

Harryface =D8=BF=D8

1991 Pontiac Bonneville LE 300,484 miles

000,006 - Feb 4,1991

100,000 - Sept. 4, 1995 200,000 - June 19, 2001 1/4 Milllion - Jan 16, 2003 300,000 - March 3, 2005
Reply to
Harry Face

Why do you think your engine will go neglected without Slick 50? API-certified SL quality motor oil contains all the protective additives an engine needs and is far better than the SF and SG quality oils of 15 years ago. The maker of Slick 50 has not proved that their product reduces engine wear at all, even receiving a reprimand by the FTC for making false claims, and Consumer Reports (July 1996) found the addition of Slick 50 produced no significant reduction in engine wear over SH quality oil, the best available back then (now the best is SL).

Reply to
do_not_spam_me

A couple of data points:

-Slick 50 is now a part of Shell Consumer Products.

-Shell also owns Pennzoil & Quaker State

-Oil foumulations and additive packages have changed many times, the latest being the GF4 spec. Those changes are not always in the interest of minimizing wear. In fact, it is likely that the oil you bought 10 years ago was better from an anti-wear standpoint.

-When oil needs changing, it is not the oil that is used up, but the additive package.

-Aftermarket oil additives are usually concentrated detergent packages of the same sort that the refiners use. Slick 50 is an exception due to the PTFE. I suspect the balance is oil and detergesnts.

-The company I work for has sold about 1000 quarts per year of Slick 50 for many years. I have yet to hear of any consumer complaint or damage claim through any of our over 100 retail outlets.

Reply to
Rex B

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.