Scrub Hunter Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Disclaimer: (JAG from BITOG) I am not affiliated or paid by any company to do testing on oils. I do tests out of my own interest. I'm posting this to provide information that I find useful enough that others should know about it. These are the results of high temperature deposit resistance tests that I performed last week on 3 virgin oils: Mobil 1 0W-40 (API SM), Green GC, and a mix of 5% Auto-RX and 95% Mobil 1 0W-40 (from same bottle as in other sample). This ratio of Auto-RX to motor oil was chosen to be similar to what is used during the cleaning phase of an Auto-RX treatment. I put 2.00 grams of each oil into separate anodized aluminum cups along with one clean, uncorroded penny per cup. I then placed the cups on an upside down clothes iron that gets the oil temps to 330F (measured with a thermocouple). I weighed the cups before the test and after each hour to get volatility data. I took pictures of the pennies still in their oil cups to show the onset and progression of deposits. This test ran for 9 hours. In the pictures below, you'll see "M", "MA", and "C" written next to the cups or the pennies. "M" is M1 0W-40, "MA" is the Auto-RX / M1 mix, and "C" is Green GC. The penny in the M1 0W-40 cup started getting deposits between 2.5 and 3 hrs. The deposits got worse and worse as hours passed. The Auto-RX / M1 0W-40 mix didn't start to form deposits on its penny until between 4.5 and 5 hours. As more time went on, the deposits on the M1 0W-40 penny formed at a much faster rate than those on the Auto-RX mix penny. The Green GC penny did not show any deposits until between 7.5 and 8 hours. The pictures below show the pennies at various stages of the tests to show the onset and growth of deposits of each penny. After 9 hours of testing, the pennies were removed and cleaned with soap and water to prepare them for very good photographs and a closer look. The M1 0W-40 penny is completely covered in a tough, crusty (hard) layer of deposits. Under 10x magnification, it looked nasty and showed that the deposits are like thousands of little spheres piled on top of each other and vary in color from grey to black. The color of the deposits on the Auto-RX / M1 mix penny are somewhat different than those on the other two pennies, possibly indicating that they are composed of different chemical species. As noted already, it had a different (slow) growth pattern as well. Interestingly, the anodized aluminum cups themselves did not have any deposits, not even varnish so the copper on the pennies must have acted as a catalyst for some kind of reaction (scientists know that it's an oxidation catalyst for oils). There is copper in engines so deposits on the copper in these tests are not irrelevant. The iron, aluminum, and lead in engines actually make the catalyst effect even stronger. However, these tests are not designed to accurately simulate oil aging in an engine. I also noted the oil odor. The M1 0W-40 got a foul odor early in the test...first observed after only one hour. Green GC did not smell foul until after 6 hours. The odor comes from the reaction products of the oil so it's a sign of thermal degradation. By the end of the test at 9 hours, M1 smelled quite horrible while Green GC smelled mild and like burnt corn. At 9 hours, the Auto-RX / M1 mix smelled less foul than the pure M1 0W-40 did but more foul than GC did. This finding suggests that perhaps Auto-RX's esters slowed down the thermal and oxidative degradation of M1 0W-40. Anyhow, this theorizing doesn't matter as the deposit results are what really count. As previously stated, volatility data was collected and as I expected from past tests, M1 0W-40 was considerably more volatile than GC. After 4 hours, M1 lost 0.165 grams while GC lost 0.105 grams. Auto-RX had essentially no effect on the volatility of M1 0W-40 as the Auto-RX / M1 mix lost 0.160 grams to evaporation in 4 hours. Volatility trends in later hours were the same as in the first 4 hours. Summary: Green GC showed much better high temperature deposit resistance on copper than M1 0W-40. It is significantly less volatile as well. Adding 5% Auto-RX significantly reduced the onset of high temperature deposits of M1 0W-40 and greatly slowed the rate of deposit deposition once they started. Auto-RX had essentially no effect on the volatility of M1 0W-40. The inventor of Auto-RX was not aware that Auto-RX would have this benefit for preventing high temperature deposits. He was aware that it can clean up dirty piston rings, but these findings indicate it likely has the ability to keep relatively clean piston rings even cleaner compared to using pure motor oil. That is, it may benefit piston rings in new engines as well as engines with some life on them. Turbocharger deposits are another high temperature area that Auto-RX can likely help based on these results. Future testing will likely be designed to determine the effect of Auto-RX on Green GC's high temperature deposit resistance as well as determine how effective smaller dosages of Auto-RX are. Additionally, adding iron and aluminum metal pieces to the copper in the oil is planned to add additional catalysts. Below are the links to the pictures along with a description (time and anything noteworthy) for each picture. 3 hours - onset of M1 penny deposits http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h294/groftja/3hrs.jpg 4 hours - M1 penny deposits grew considerably http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h294/groftja/4hrs.jpg 5 hours - onset of "MA" penny deposits http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h294/groftja/5hrs.jpg 8 hours http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h294/groftja/8hrs.jpg 8hrs - close-up of GC (onset of deposits) and "MA" penny http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h294/gro...hrs-closeup.jpg 9 hours - close-up of GC penny http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h294/gro...hrs-closeup.jpg 9 hours - degreased pennies http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h294/gro.../DSC01986-a.jpg The test showed that AutoRX was really effective and preventing deposits even in a synthetic oil. The test didn't show ARX in the GC but if it did I'm pretty sure it would have made that oil more effective too. I think I found a winner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKperformance Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 If i had a penny in my engine or copper i would be impressed instead i'll stick with seafoam and high end synthetics which leave my engine deposit free. Copper oxides very fast and as such cleans very fast so i am not sure it proves anything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrub Hunter Posted January 9, 2007 Author Share Posted January 9, 2007 So you have a better seafoam test posted somewhere? Looks like the guy went to some work testing this, and I'm pretty sure it at least shows Autorx works better than straight oil at getting deposits and keeping them away. I'm an open book, I'd really like some information on Seafoam, it too is a very popular product. Thanks in advance.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mburnickas Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 If i had a penny in my engine or copper i would be impressed instead i'll stick with seafoam and high end synthetics which leave my engine deposit free.Copper oxides very fast and as such cleans very fast so i am not sure it proves anything? I agree. So many variables in today’s engines, a penny in a little jar does not really add a lot of value. Plus I find it really funny that these are the same people that whined and complained when (1) person said Mobil was a Group 3. Penny’s are not subjected to normal internal combustion environments, by-products etc. Plus no comment from JAG on sludge removal.. Why does it seem like people do these tests half %$##. Use ARX, and about 6 other adds/fluids. I would say seafoam or some other common engine fuels (diesel, Kero. etc) would win (aka do the same). If the tests did not show ARX the winner the post would not even be on the forum (based on past history). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrub Hunter Posted January 9, 2007 Author Share Posted January 9, 2007 Plus no comment from JAG on sludge removal.. Why does it seem like people do these tests half %$##. Use ARX, and about 6 other adds/fluids. I would say seafoam or some other common engine fuels (diesel, Kero. etc) would win (aka do the same). If the tests did not show ARX the winner the post would not even be on the forum (based on past history). I have zero doubt if it can do that to deposits that it would remove sludge. Deposits are by far the hardest thing to remove. What theory would you have to why Autorx can remove deposits like that but not sludge? Also, still wondering if either of you have a test on Seafoam, any link anywhere. I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'd really be interested especially if it has good results like this test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mburnickas Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 I have zero doubt if it can do that to deposits that it would remove sludge. Deposits are by far the hardest thing to remove. What theory would you have to why Autorx can remove deposits like that but not sludge? Also, still wondering if either of you have a test on Seafoam, any link anywhere. I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'd really be interested especially if it has good results like this test. I do not disagree that the chemicals in ARX can remove desposits from a penny. What I dislike about the test, I think it means nothing in terms of engines, is that how does a penny finish coralate to a gas engine deposits and sludge. Am I missing something? there is a person on this forum that loves seafoam and he know his stuff. I think seafoam can do everything ARX but 75% cheaper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrub Hunter Posted January 9, 2007 Author Share Posted January 9, 2007 Isn't the application of sea foam a pain? I saw guys that were putting it in their gas lines and when they'd start the car about ten buses worth of smoke came out the tailpipes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mburnickas Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Isn't the application of sea foam a pain? I saw guys that were putting it in their gas lines and when they'd start the car about ten buses worth of smoke came out the tailpipes. Not treally. Pull the brake booster and pour in to clean TB etc. I did not ever put in gas but a few did in oil and boy, did it clean pretty good for $5.95. I know when I put in brake booster the smoke was unreal since my lexus needed a good clean. Ran 10X better when done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKperformance Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 1 toysarme has pics somewhere of the inside of his engine after tear down of almost no carbon deposits. 2 I did a friends IS300 which was taken apart after for an elusive ticking from a cam lobe minimal wear. The tech who is a Japanese master tech working in Canada said it was the cleanest engine he had ever seen and wanted to know how one could clean it without tearing it down at 80 000 km. That along with my personal use makes sea foam a clean winner in my book . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92Lex Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I can vouch for seafoam. I use to be a smog tech and had a really good relationship with this car charity place. Well, one day they came in with a car that failed badly (high NOx)...he came back a few days later and the car passed with flying colors. I asked out of curiosity what method of repair was used (just for added knowledge) and his response was 1/2 a can of seafoam. I was still a little scepticle as to how a that liquid could help this car pass as if it were a new car, so I tried it on my own. I took emission readings reading prior to "seafoaming" and ran the same tests the next day, after I ran seafoam through it. The emission levels dropped over 50%. I've been a fan of seafoam ever since. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrub Hunter Posted February 25, 2007 Author Share Posted February 25, 2007 Seafoam looks good too, but this is a heck of a review about Autorx in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KBRX330 Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 This "penny" test is hideous. Put a penny in a bottle of coca-cola and it will disolve to nothing.....but who is going to pour a coke in their Lexus? If autorx was a bona fide engine cleaner they would pay for some real world documented testing. I think it's just some retired chemical sales guy in Florida who has decided to mix his own blend of group V ester based oils & fats that have a cleaning effect on some engines. The results posted on BITOG are really a mixed bag of results. But nobody wants to feel silly about sending this guy $40 for POE that you could use seafoam instead for 1/4the cost. IMO If I ever get a copper alloy engine...I'll be certain to try autorx. BTW, I flush my engines with rislone for $3...works fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3po Posted October 19, 2013 Share Posted October 19, 2013 Anyone who wants some info can Google a thread called ARX & Aluminum Engines, the owner of auto-rx has known for 10 years that his product does not clean up Varnish and other contaniments from Aluminum Engines, he has done nothing to change his SNAKEOIL PRODUCT. You can also GOOGLE a thread called Mobil 1 better cleaner than AutoRx. You can forget about this product cleaning up any kind of sludge, there was a guy on a BMW forum who went through 9 bottles of auto-rx over 45,000 miles and the product did nothing. There is also a thread called 3 ARX cycles didn't do much bummer.. The owner of auto-rx claimed the guy used the wrong dino oil, anytime arx has not worked the arx people say that the customer did something wrong. This product was kicked off BITOG back in January of 2009 because the owner of the board realized this product was nothing but SNAKEOIL, the only people who have ever gotten any results are the so called Paid Posters For Auto-Rx, these are the people: 1. Trajan 2. Donald 3. badtlc 4. Gary Allan 5. dnewton3 6. sprintman If your engine is dirty or you have a noisy lifter from some dirt or debris, try some Rislone or MMO with a quality oil like Mobil 1, Pennzoil Platinum, or Pennzoil Ultra. The owner of arx is a retired chemist who put a few esters together and never got his product tested by a independent lab. There are a bunch of tests on the auto-rx site, the problem here is that the results were controleed by auto-rx since free product was given to run the so called tests. dnewton3 did a test with Gary Allan and Frank Miller's help, Frank Miller is the owner of auto-rx, and Gary Allan did his so called test with free product from auto-rx. dnewton3 is on the auto-rx payroll. Auto-Rx got rid of its money back guarantee, guess everyone was asking for there money back since the product does not work. Things are so bad for this snake oil product that they changed there name from auto-rx to auto-rx plus. Thankfully since this product has been exposed as the most expensive snake oil as far as oil additives that do some cleaning this product is not being discussed on BITOG. This product is guaranteed to do one thing, and that is to take money from your wallet and then putting it in the wallet of a SNAKEOIL SALESMAN. This company is run out of a townhouse in Jacksonville Beach, Florida. If anyone reading this lives down there, look up the address of auto-rx and knock on the door. Ask whoever answers the door that you want to see the bathroom, because underneath the bathroom sink is the auto-rx warehouse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.