Just had to ask....my Chevy S-10 has over 400,000 miles so throwing in a quart of Lucas Oil Stabilizer make a lot of sense to me. Then on my 914 transmission it make sense to me to throw a little of the Lucas product in there. So now the question is....do I dare add it to my engine oil? My usual is to try to fix what is not broken and then mess it up....really a bad habit....so is this a safe move to add the Lucas or should I wise up and just not rock the boat? Look forward to hearing from you all...
Thank you,
gg

I think Lucas makes some great products But, with our 50 year old air/oil cooled engine I would buy a quality oil (like Driven) and change it often. Best, Mark

I'm like you - always tempted to try these type of products. I might try them in my "appliance" vehicles like my Corolla and the old pickup but not in the 914.

Like others have said, keep it simple, keep it safe in the 914.
Use a high quality oil with high zinc and change it often. Avoid using any additives.

My plan is to work through my stash of VR1 and then switch to the Driven DT50. The DT50 was developed for our type of engines. To me it looks like the best out there - no additional additives needed.

How about using it in the gear box? I called Lucas and they said it will ot alter the GL 4 qualities.....any comments on this use of the product?
gg

Snake oil

Don’t take this as a personal attack on you - it’s a valid question to ask. I’ll use it as an opportunity to educate others on marketing hype.

Their own ad copy is complete and utter bull promising magic oil that solves all problems with otherwise worn out engines not addressed by oil itself. Notice there is no friction data, engine dyno data, or engineering specs comparing it to conventional oil to support their claims.

Their mix recommended mix ratio of 20% - 60% is so large as to be meaningless. Heck - you can even used it at 100% on worn out engines - great

There is nothing claimed here that conventional oil or synthetic oils don’t already do or could be done by moving to a higher viscosity oil. Not to mention the price point for a quart of this snake oil is about $12/qt vs. a quality synthetic oil at $8 - $9 / qt. So what are you getting for that 30% price premium? Answer: nothing but marketing.

Every time you are tempted to spend money on this, put the money aside into a savings account. That way, when the time comes for a rebuild, you’ll have “extra” money available for the rebuild instead of it having gone out the tailpipe or having been dumped into a drain pan.

Will it hurt anything? Not likely. It’s just a higher viscosity oil just like STP was/is. At some point too high of a viscosity is harmful during cold starts and is hard on oil coolers but I’m sure they aren’t that thick otherwise you would have trouble pouring it out of the bottle.

Click to view attachment

Thank you for your reply and no offense taken. Remember that counter display made out of clear plastic with a bunch of plastic gears and a wind up handle? They had two columns...one with regular oil and the other with the Lucas Oil Stabilizer......and the Lucas side would keep the oil on all the gears better than the regular oil. Does the Lucas product have anything sticky in there to do that? Pretty good marketing alright.
Thanks.
gg

Yeah those countertop demonstrators must have made Lucas tens of millions over the years. I’ve gotta’ admit they are cool and they are a compelling marketing tool.

The problem is it is comparing apples to oranges. Equalize both sides of the display for viscosity and the demo wouldn’t be nearly as impressive.

Good news is that for slightly more than the price of a quart of snake oil - anyone can have their own display to play with!

Click to view attachment

With Superhawk. Run a quality 20-50 with ZDDP like Brad Penn, and change it once for every two valve adjustments, roughly 3500 miles.

That's how I've treated my old VWs, 356 and 911s for years and have never had an issue. Our '64 Bus has driven over 275,000 miles (more than half by us) and the case has never been split.

Are you saying that this display is misleading? How can that be? What about the STP Sumo wrestler trying to pick up a screwdriver or what ever it was? If that isn't solid proof then I don't know what is .
gg

my only concern with any additive is that oil is oil. SYnth is identical hydrocarbons and dino is a mix of sizes. The additives in the oil (by the producer) is what makes oil from one brand different from the next. You start messing with those additive levels and I would not trust the outcome. The people at amsoil/mobil/valvoline wherever probably know exactly what should be in that oil for additives. Putting something else in there might have unexpected outcomes.

I know he gets on some people's nerves but I enjoy reading 540rats stuff on the topic.

https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/

I remember on my old MG, anything with LUCAS on it didn't work.

Thanks for the link. Not sure how I’ve never seen that before.

But damn . . . You would think he might organize the site or tell you what his magic test set up is in order to reach a broader audience.

As a fellow engineer, I’m highly skeptical of a guy that supposedly has developed such a unique test but yet won’t share it. If the testing were that good, that unique, that well correlated to real world performance, then patent it. Write academic journal articles, let it be widely validated. Monetize it with others in the industry. As engineers, we try to move the world forward.

I’m not convinced about an engineer that has a secret test method and then uses it to support a blog that has less than a million views and is published in a giant rambling word salad that is hard to read and search.

Interesting though - I’ll just have to do it in smaller bites! @emerygt350

My only tidbit is that I have found the Lucas transmission atf treatment has saved my 928 auto transmission. It would leak and no longer does.

As to auto oil I only use zddp fortified oils for our air cooled engines.

The strange defensive rambling adds to the mystique. I don't think there is anything magical about what he does, simply seems to be two surfaces coming together with careful measures of pressure and temperature. He simply compares that failure among oils. Most of the arguments seem to be whether that is a good way to judge oil.

Like other products, solvents can be used to swell and soften seals that have age hardened. It works for a while, but eventually you’ll have to replace the seals for a lasting fix.

Yup, the main thing is I’d like to see data on test repeatability. Basically want a gauge R&R to know how variable the test is. Without knowing that, could have wild test variation that places one product high in the list based on a random, less than repeatable data point. Why an engineer wouldn’t share that is suspect. Don’t even have to reveal the details of the test to provide the R&R data - but would have to allow someone other than himself perform the test to introduce operator variability.

Somewhere in that mess he does mention taking the average across several test and I believe he says the variance is little test to test. He does go back and retest oils frequently as well so I don't think it's a one and done. I was just reading through some bits of it again. What a character. He is definitely somebody's crazy uncle.

Yes absolutely correct. I am definitely just dipping a toe in the water here. I have extensive background in testing oils , types, weights etc in my aviation days. Don’t get me started on k&n oil filters.


I am not going to add to what really is an abundance of information

Wow. Interesting read (attempted).

540 Rat has a lot of verbal diarrhea in that blog. Painful to even try to get through without speed scrolling.

Not addressing any of it's validity, I just love what he considers his repeated boasting of his marvellous qualifications for being an expert...

Mechanical Engineer (A Mechanical Engineer is clearly the most qualified Engineer to test motor oil that was formulated by Chemical Engineers, for wear protection capability between mechanical components under load.)
Holder of two U.S. Patents, for breakthrough designs of Mechanical devices for Military and Commercial Aircraft
Member SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers)
Member ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)
Lifelong Gear Head, Mechanic, Hotrodder, Drag Racer, and Engine Builder

None of that makes him "clearly the most qualified". I might agree with the term "self proclaimed expert". Sounds more like self marketing hype than anything.

I have two degrees in Mechanical Engineering, was a member of the SAE, ASME, SME, ACerS (you can be members too - just pay for the membership) and have been in the automotive, nuclear, defense manufacturing industries. Anyone can get a patent - you don't have to prove that what is in the patent actually works.

Hey! I must be an expert like him too!!! and I have and extra degree on him...

Now if in his credentials he was a tribology engineer at Exxon/Mobil, maybe I would have more faith. (Tribology is defined as 'the study of friction, wear and lubrication, and design of bearings, science of interacting surfaces in relative motion').

I agree with @Superhawk996 . I'm skeptical too.
It would have been fun to look at his patents but sadly he doesn't give the patent numbers - maybe because they are public domain? 540rat needs to show his oil testing methodology, then I'll decide.
Until then, 540rat can spare me the tub thumping conclusions.

Like @emerygt350 says "a character". Definitely more than a bit crazy...

double post

Disclaimer: I haven't read the article.

Describing methods well enough that another person could repeat the test and publishing the variance along with results are minimum requirements for passing peer review. Peer review is what separates science from hearsay.