ZMax oil and gas treatment any good?

[shelbyville]

Has anyone used the Zmax oil and gas treatment with any success. I have a 90 Ford Ranger with a 2.3L engine. Its not the original engine. It has abut 50K on it. I have owned the truck for about 6 months. Runs OK but wondering if XMax in the oil and gas would help it along, or could it hurt it. Anyone use this stuff and have a bad experience with it?

[bazzman1953]

Try here...
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2001/02/zmax1.shtm
and here...
http://blog.sfrcorp.com/2006/09/13/d...s-really-work/
better yet, go here
http://63.240.161.99/motoroil/
Then you deceide.
I'll stick with a good grp3 5w20 or 5w30 in my '94 4.0 w/178.xxx mi on it.
http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/69...oil-101-a.html

[wendell borror]

Alot of this stuff is snake oil designed to lighten your wallet. If there were a magic bullet for better mpg and what not, the factory would allready be using it. I usewd slick 50 for awhile, all it did was raise my oil changes by 15 bucks. I use a good mobil 1 synthetic motor oil and outlaw fuel injector cleaner and that combo works well for me. I also use synthetics in the rest of the drivetrain, for less heat friction, wear and tear on parts and it seems to help the mpg a tad a long with a light foot and proper air presure.

[BuffmanLT1]

skip the zmax. enough resources already been given. Fuel system cleaners that work; Gumout Regane, Redline SI-1, Chevron with Techron Fuel System cleaner.

[shelbyville]

Thanks for all this info. This is what I suspected which is why I posted this. I do use Techron in my Ranger and 02 Stang because I did hear that it works. I'll just stick to regular oil and filter changes. I use Valvoline high mileage and Motorcraft filters for the Ranger.

[priorityexpress]

The Federal Trade Commission has filed suit in U. S. District Court seeking to halt false and misleading advertising for zMax auto additives and has asked the court to order refunds to consumers who bought the products. The agency alleges that enhanced performance claims for the product are unsubstantiated, that tests cited to support performance claims actually demonstrated that motor oil treated with zMax produced more than twice as much bearing corrosion than motor oil alone, and that the three different products - an engine additive, a fuel line additive and a transmission additive - were all actually tinted mineral oil. zMax is manufactured by Oil-Chem, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Speedway Motorsports, Inc. Speedway, based in Concord, North Carolina, operates NASCAR race tracks in the South and in California, in addition to marketing the zMax products.
According to the FTC complaint, since at least May 1999, zMax ran infomercials touting its "Power System," a $39 package of three additives to be used in the engine, fuel line and transmission of automobiles. The infomercials feature testimonials from consumers and race car drivers making claims such as, "I was averaging about 22 miles to the gallon on the highway. I installed the zMax and so I jumped right up to about 28 miles per gallon;" and "zMax guarantees a minimum of 10 percent gas mileage increase." Other marketing and promotional pieces claim, "zMax with LinKite has the scientific, CRC L38 proof it takes your car to the MAX!" and "Why zMAX Works - Cuts carbon build-up on valve stems 66%; Lowers wear on valve stems 66%; Lowers wear on piston skirts 60%; Reduces blow-by leakage 17.7%; Increases combustion efficiency 9.25%; Lowers fuel consumption 8.5% - Results of an independent CRC L38 test."
According to the FTC, the CRC L38 test is a standard auto industry tool to measure the bearing corrosion protection properties of motor oils. In February/March 1997, an independent laboratory performed two CRC L38 tests of zMax for Speedway and Oil Chem. In those tests, motor oil treated with zMax produced more than twice as much bearing corrosion as motor oil alone. The complaint also states that the defendants fabricated one "report" from the two test reports, eliminating the bearing corrosion results and all other negative test results, and then used that report and the "official laboratory results" - similarly edited to remove detrimental data results - as sales tools in the infomercial and on the zMax Web site.
The FTC's complaint alleges that the defendants did not possess and rely on reasonable substantiation for the following claims in the infomercial, on the Web site and in brochures that zMax:

• increases gas mileage;
• increases gas mileage by a minimum of 10%
• reduces engine wear;
• reduces or eliminates engine wear at startup;
• reduces engine corrosion;
• extends engine life; and
• reduces emissions.

The agency's complaint also alleges that the defendants falsely represent that the results of the CRC L38 test proved that zMax:

• increases gas mileage;
• reduces engine wear;
• extends engine life;
• lowers fuel consumption by 8.5%
• lowers wear on valve stems by 66%
• lowers wear on piston skirts by 60%; and
• cuts carbon build-up on valve stems by 66%.

Finally, the FTC charges that in consumer testimonials and endorsements in their advertising, the defendants did not have substantiation for the representation that the endorsers' experiences were, "The actual and current opinions, findings, beliefs, and/or experiences of those consumers; and the typical or ordinary experience of members of the public who use the product."
The FTC is asking the court to bar the defendants from violating the FTC Act, which prohibits deceptive acts and to order consumer redress or require that they give up their ill-gotten gains.
This case is the latest in a series of FTC law-enforcement initiatives targeting unsubstantiated claims made by auto additive manufacturers. The FTC previously halted allegedly deceptive advertising by the marketers of Dura Lube, Motor Up, Prolong, Valvoline, Slick 50, and STP, other major brands of engine treatment products.
The Commission vote to file the complaint was 5-0. It was filed in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, in Greensboro, January 31, 2001.

[TexasGuy001]

Zmax etc is just crap. I think its funny that Carrol Shelby promotes it in the commercials. All that stuff is just garbage. I do know that some of the stop leak stuff does help with oil leaks, but all the stuff like Zmax, Prolong, Slick 50 etc belongs in the trash.

[BuffmanLT1]

zmax is just fancy colored mineral oil.

[matt's2.9STX]

I use Valvoline high mileage and Motorcraft filters for the Ranger.[/quote]

I think it was Paw Paw who suggested the trouble with high mileage oil blend is that it doesn't know when to stop softening seals, which is its primary purpose. Until that statement, I considered it a waste of shelf space. So like him, I'd use it at most for 1 or 2 changes watching the dipstick appearance then switch back to - well my pref is Castrol Syntec of OEM weight. Heard funny stuff about that notion for late-model 4-cyl though. I would never go heavier in any Ford 2.9 or 4.0l unless I planned a long stay in a desert. As for the Vulcan & Duratecs, most probably wouldn't notice much difference far as I can tell of what I've read this year. Just change it whenever it gets enough deposits to look darker than that fresh brew.

[cooljman1]

it is a rip off i tryed it back about 8 years ago it did nothing for me. you should try sea foam to clean it out and then use a good oil.

[wendell borror]

Yep, that sounds about right to me.

[wendell borror]

I am however a big believer in synthetic oil, it does reduce heat and friction which saves wear and tear on parts, lower operating temps. Also less friction = better mpg. I've become a big fan of mobil 1 over the years, it's good stuff. However, if you didn't want to pay the price for a full synthetic, I would recomend motorcraft oil as it's a synthetic blend and cost about the same as other dino oils in it's class. With mobil 1, I get 5,000 mile oil changes easy, it could go longer, but it will need a new motorcraft filter by then anyway. There's mobil 1's that can go up to 15,000 miles between changes, but there's no 15,000 mile oil filters that I know of ha ha.

[BuffmanLT1]

the filter life depends on insoluble levels in the oil. If you have a clean engine a good filter should have no issues going many miles on it. if standard STP filters can go 6K with ease on my wife's cavalier, you should be fine.

[cstem]

I have used slick 50 with good results in a 86 S-10 Blazer and a 99 Chrysler 300M.The Slick 50 did lower colant temp and increase gas milage by 2 to 3 mpg.I have also been witness to the bearing pressure test where they use a roller bearing and a electric motor and put pressure on the bearing usingdifferant oils.Mobil1 did not fare very well but if you add Teflon to any oil it did well,but Castrol took second place.Try switching to Motocraft filters and Castrol GTX high millage or there Syntech. I have been using Castrol for 31 years in many different Ford vehicles including my 06 F-350. Castrol oil is rated right bellow Amzoil in there (Amzoils) own tests.

[Aggie05]

Originally Posted by wendell borror

I am however a big believer in synthetic oil, it does reduce heat and friction which saves wear and tear on parts, lower operating temps. Also less friction = better mpg. I've become a big fan of mobil 1 over the years, it's good stuff. However, if you didn't want to pay the price for a full synthetic, I would recomend motorcraft oil as it's a synthetic blend and cost about the same as other dino oils in it's class. With mobil 1, I get 5,000 mile oil changes easy, it could go longer, but it will need a new motorcraft filter by then anyway. There's mobil 1's that can go up to 15,000 miles between changes, but there's no 15,000 mile oil filters that I know of ha ha.

I run the mobil 1 extended performance in my 350z and the oil stated good for 15k but the oil filter did not. I sent an email to mobil 1 and asked them if their mobil 1 extended performance was also good for 15kmiles and they said yet. I dont have the email but its the mobil1 gray bottle with Extended performance in yellow writiing.