Re: LRO: Re: Marvel mystery oil

From: Stephen West-Fisher (steve@coastaldatasystems.com)
Date: Tue May 29 2001 - 18:12:09 EDT

  • Next message: Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus: "Re: LRO: GM alternator recommendations"

    "Faure, Marin" wrote:
    >
    > Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 18:26:34 -0400
    > From: "Alex Maiolo" <Rovernut@nc.rr.com>
    > Subject: LRO: Re: Re: Marvel mystery oil
    >
    > >Marin-
    > Sometimes I think *you* have bananas in *your* rocker cover...
    > I can only repeat what I have been told by a lot of mechanics over the
    > years, automotive and aircraft, and to a man they lumped all additives
    > together into their "worthless snake oil" categories. Marvel Mystery
    > Oil was given the same cynical review as Slick-50, Prolong, STP, etc.
    > Clever marketing, worthless product. That's what I've been told by
    > a lot of professional mechanics who I figured knew what they were talking
    > about, so I have no reason to dispute them. But I have no concrete proof
    > of my own that additives do or don't work.

    Actually, I have heard of (and used) a good use for STP. When you are
    building up an engine use STP (straight) instead of oil. Back when my
    dad had a garage (late '60s early '70s) they built a lot of race engines
    and used this method. Seems the STP did a good job of lubricating
    everything on the first start before the pump got pressure up (and made
    STP happy -- they could say they used STP in advertising).

    He never did this on aircraft engines, just used straight mineral oil.

    Steve



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue May 29 2001 - 19:37:06 EDT