Synthetic Tongue-Lashing...

["Al Powell" <APOWELL@agcom.tamu.edu>]

Resident Lovemeister and Gadfly "Meron" <phwomp@cosmoslink.net> 
quoth:

> In what subject did you get your PHD in? I don't think in engine research,
> did you?

<VBG>  The subject that Robert A. Heinlein hisself referred to as 
worthless: Education!!!  So I know a lot about practically nothing at 
all!!  I glory in my educated ignorance!  (Where's my beer?????)

> Well the diffrence beween you and me is that I worked with syhnetic oil, in
> engine research and you did not, all the informaion you have come from
> reading and use in your own vehichles and DOES NOT have as much value as
> you think.  I do recognize the value of synthtics in some cases (which are
> based on far more information than you have), I have logeed many miles on
> my own vehicles over 1 Million with documented reports and oil analysis
> done periodically so I know a bit about what I am talking about.
> So here is my suggestion to you, before you JUDGE my knoledge MAKE SURE you
> are correct and this case you are way off. 

I would really like to hear your comments about the circumstances in 
which synthetics ARE superior, and a better definition of "As MUCH 
value as you think".....  With a background such as you indicate, you 
should be able to help us with specifics about what increased value 
there IS, and under what circumstances.  I perceive that you do not 
say it has no increased value at all.

> The reason I don't particularly care for Amsoil is because I don't want to
> deal with an "Amway" type company I have dealt with Mobil on a professional
> level and used their syntetic products during research and my own personal,
> specifically Delvac 1 and various type of gear oils so I am familiar with
> Mobil, just as side note, when I was involved in engine research we tested
> Mobil syntetic and the the result was that if you used it in our engines
> the warranty is voided (this is on $100K-500K engines). I never EVER said
> anything againest using synthetic in transmissions and your comment WAS
> TOTALLY OF BASE.

I can surely understand your aversion to dealing with a company which 
markets as Amsoil does.  The "pyramid style" organizations leave a 
very bad taste in my mouth, too!  The reasons I'm with them are that 
1) I do believe their products are high quality (and I have read much of 
their research literature to arrive at that conclusion, in addition 
to reading such suplemental information as I can lay hands on), and 
2) they meet my MAIN qualification for a reputable 
"pyramid style" organization:  they focus more on selling PRODUCTS 
than on selling memberships.  Given that an organization has THIS 
product emphasis and sells good stuff, I can live with the tackiness 
which I associate with "Amway-type" sales organizations.  (Boy, the 
Amway types will be honing their stickers for me after that!!)

Your comment about Mobil Synthetic oil is most interesting.  Within the 
bounds of whatever confidentiality agreements you work with, can you 
tell us what the reasons for the warranty problems were??  You see, 
as a consumer one wonders whether such an edict originated for 
political or factual reasons - and what the reasons were.  In some 
cases, I'm convinced that warranties have been argued about simply 
because the person making the warranty decision didn't know 
whatinheck he or she was judging.

BUT - you will have to come up with VERY specific information to 
convince me that Mobil 1 is inferior to conventional lubricants, as 
your post might be seen to imply.  Is that actually the implication?  
And if so, is this intended to be specific to Mobil 1, or to other 
synthetics as well?  If the problem is "Only Mobil 1", I sure would 
like to know what the problem is so that I can give my friends good 
better advice.

> I still love you, even if you shoot your mouth at me without getting all
> the facts, not nice Al!!

I've got warm fuzzzies up to here......

> Back to the subject, the reason I am iterested in synthetic for my 5Kcs
> auto is because the transmission has a failure rate a mile long!!!! If that
> transmission was designed correctly ( using Std. ATF) it would not need any
> band aids, read syntetic ATF.

Amen, brother.  That design should have been material for a class 
action suit years ago!  I think yo're making an excellent call.  However - 
I am curious about your calling synthetic ATF a band-aid.  Your 
request clearly implies that it has advanantages over petro-ATF.  
Being better is not a band-aid, it's BETTER.

Are you totally unwilling to admit that synthetic lubricants have ANY 
advantages under ANY conditions compared to petro-lubricants?   Is 
it your opinion that only synthetic ATF has advantages, and that 
engine oil is same-same??

I just can't understand why one would be reluctant to take advantage of 
any superior characteristics of an improved class of lubricants.  Your 
position may simply be that most synthetics are SO little better that 
they're not worth the $$.  That is certainly a judgement I can 
understand; each of us should make that decision themselves.

> Now that I answered you Al, I feel I can proceed with the rest of the
> posts, I want you to know that I was very amused by your comments and I
> don't have any negative feeling WHAT SO EVER toward anybody else (still
> making my mind about Bernie!!!!), I rather enjoy being the devil advocate. 
> Also thanks again for the information about Red Line and Amsoil,

Hey, if no one ever disagreed on this list, I wouldn't bother to read 
through the ENDLESS FRI**IN DIGESTS!!  GEEEZ!!

Have a nice MLK-day!


.......................................................
Al Powell, Ph.D.                 Voice:  409/845-2807
107 Reed McDonald Bldg.          Fax:    409/862-1202
College Station, TX 77843      
Http://agcomwww.tamu.edu/agcom/satellit/alpage.htm
.......................................................