Originally Posted by oilman

Personally I wouldn't use them. If they are so great, why haven't the mighty oil companies started to market them afterall they have the technology. It's simple, a decent oil contains all the addatives the engine needs!

We were warned some time ago about the downsides of these products and here is the transcript of comments made by an eminent oil chemist.

It's your car and your money - you decide!

General Remarks on Chlorinated Additives.

A number of ‘add-on’ additives intended to improve the performance of commercially available automotive lubricants have been marketed in recent years, under such names as ‘Xxtralube ZX-1’, ‘Metol FX-1’, ‘PPL Anti-Friction’ and ‘Activ-8’.All such products share the following characteristics with ‘X-1R Friction Eliminator’:-

1)They all contain chlorinated paraffin ‘exteme pressure’(EP) compounds first used in the 1930s in heavily-loaded industrial gearboxes, and in some automotive transmission applications, mainly hypoid gears.

2)They all corrode copper-based alloys at moderate temperatures, easily exceeded in all engine, and most transmission applications.This problem was recognised in the 1930s, and chlorinated compounds were never used in transmissions with bronze bearings or gears. No responsible manufacturer ever suggested using them in engines where their increasing activity at high temperatures could lead to piston ring corrosion and bore glazing. (For the same reason, modern ‘hypoid’ additives are not used in engines, even though they are much safer than any chlorinated additive.)

3)X-1R Friction Eliminator and its clones are based upon very outdated technology, which was abandoned by responsible lubricant manufacturers for automotive transmission uses in the 1950s. Chlorinated compounds still find applications in metal working, but their use is on the decline because of health and safety considerations.

4)When burnt, chlorinated paraffins produce corrosive hydrochloric acid, and organo-chlorine compounds including the highly poisonous phosgene gas. Apart from these corrosion and health hazards, with petrol engines the deactivation of exhaust catalysts is also a problem.

5)Unfortunately, these additives give spectacular results in simple EP test machines such as the ‘Falex’. As a marketing ploy, a demonstration of this type looks impressive to those not aquainted with the above facts. Also attractive is the low cost of chlorinated compounds, allowing profits of several thousand percent to be made.

We also have the transcipt of the AA report on "Slick 50" and the upshot is that they make no difference at all.

Hope this helps to make an informed decision.

Cheers
Simon

Originally Posted by AA

This is the transcript of an AA article published in Motor May 10th 1986.

The widely-advertised oil additive Slick 50 has been soundly slammed by the AA’s Technical Services.
The AA claim that their tests show Slick 50 provides no fuel savings when it is added to a cars engine oil – and there is no evidence of any other benefits under normal operating conditions.
The AA have made no press or public announcement of their report, but have produced a leaflet for the benefit of any paid-up members who apply for one. An AA member on Motor’s staff applied for a report in the normal way.
The report states that whilst there is no evidence the product will do harm to the engine, one good point is that most of it will be very rapidly removed by the oil filter. “At about £12 per treatment�, say the AA, “it is a very expensive way of coating your oil filter element�.
The AA performed tests by taking three identical cars and carefully running them in, splitting the driving equally among their test drivers. Oils were changed at 1500 miles, the cars were run a further 500 miles to stabilise the oils’ viscosity, the cars’ tuning was carefully checked and steady speed fuel consumptions and power outputs were measured.
The report says: “The procedure is so sensitive that, for instance, leaving the headlamps of the car switched on will make a nonsense of the results due to the extra drag of the charging system�.
Engineers added Slick 50 to two of the cars in the recommended way at 3000 miles.
After a further 2000 miles, further dynamometer tests were carried out. “One car should show the sort of gradual change expected of a car in good condition� says the report, “whereas two should show a noticeable improvement . Here came the big disappointment. After our several months of careful testwork, we could not distinguish any difference between the three cars.�
The AA claimed that all cars were performing well, but performance was remarkably consistent , within a few percent.
The AA say that a detailed examination of the claims made for the product will explain what happens when Slick 50 is added to an engine. Of one gallon of petrol burnt in an engine, says the report, some 60 percent of the energy will be lost as heat from the exhaust and cooling system. That leaves 40 percent and some 25 percent is used to drive the car and its accessories. The remaining 15 percent goes to losses such as pumping air into the engine (6 percent) and some 9 percent is lost as engine friction. Of that 9 percent, 6 percent is lost in churning the oil and only 3 percent of the total input goes into the sort of “boundary� friction that a solid lubricant could affect. “If tests of Slick 50 did show a 16 percent decrease in this friction, as claimed in current advertisements�, says the report, “it would only affect the car’s overall consumption by a half of one percent�.
The AA also claim that their tests show there is no evidence that Slick 50 produces a surface layer on the engine wearing surfaces, let alone one that could last for 100,000 miles.

Originally Posted by corradoboy

Ooh, look HERE Scoobyclinic, one of the leading Subaru specialists don't include a VTA dump valve in ANY of their tuning packages ! I wonder why ?

It seems to be the same story at POWERSTATION ! You'd think they'd know all about the benefits and amazing power they give

I wonder why Prodrive never included one in any of their Subaru approved packages too. I mean, you say they make the car run better and would be more reliable, and if another 1/2 a second is available to 60 then it surely is a must !

I'm sorry, but you are talking nonsense. I'll quit whilst I'm behind here. Have fun spending your money on stuff you think makes enormous differences, and even more getting it repaired after. Bye !

Originally Posted by sarnyboy

does your car run better with the forge recirc over the stock recirc?