bahama flier
Pre-takeoff checklist
Anyone know about this additive, the adds say reduces oil burn?? Is it a good additive, or just aircraft oil?
I have yet to see that confirmed by independent testing, but if you can point to some published results, I'd love to see them.Ron....it keeps the rings cleaner....and prevents them from sticking, which causes blow by and oil consumption.
I have....on two engines (one Lycoming 0-540 and one CMI IO-520). It usually takes two oil changes to notice a difference.I have yet to see that confirmed by independent testing, but if you can point to some published results, I'd love to see them.
I'd love to see your published results, including the control group, even though that's an awfully small sample size.I have....on two engines (one Lycoming 0-540 and one CMI IO-520). It usually takes two oil changes to notice a difference.
I'd never just give that to ya........so, you'll have to just try it and see.I'd love to see your published results, including the control group, even though that's an awfully small sample size.
Those are CamGuard's tests, not independent. Suggest checking Aviation Consumer for independent test results, which show positive results for most oils, but no significant advantage to adding CamGuard to Exxon Elite.Camguard's website provides lab test results for corrosion, wear, and deposit formation. It has benefits in all categories. The corrosion tests include use with Phillips X/C, Exxon Elite, Aeroshell 15-50, and Aeroshell 100. Review them for yourself and make your own decision.
Those are CamGuard's tests, not independent. Suggest checking Aviation Consumer for independent test results, which show positive results for most oils, but no significant advantage to adding CamGuard to Exxon Elite.
And it's probably the only aircraft engine oil additive that has any real value (other than the LW-16702 additive required for a few Lycoming engines and included in many aircraft engine oils such as Aeroshell W100+).
Those are CamGuard's tests, not independent. Suggest checking Aviation Consumer for independent test results, which show positive results for most oils, but no significant advantage to adding CamGuard to Exxon Elite.
I had not heard the claim for lower oil consumption, but I use it with Phillips 20/50 oil. I consider it a sleep aid. I used to worry about my camshaft rotting because I don't fly everyday, or even every other day. I am a typical GA owner and fly like 3-4 times a month. With Camgaurd I can tell myself that I have done all I can and go back to sleep.
It may be snake oil, but every oil change brings a sigh of relief and so I continue...
Better read my post again, because I never said it was. It's an anti-scuffing additive required for a few Lycoming engines, and nothing else, but for those engines, it does (as I did say) have real value.better read that AD again, corrosion protection is not what the additive LW-16702 is for.
for as long as CamGuard has been around you would think that a simple twin engine comparison would be the best marketing possible.
Such a simple test, use CamGuard in one engine on a twin and do not use it on the other. Both engines are run by the same methods and conditions. What better test could there be. Does CamGuard have any results for any type of test like this?
Kinda makes you wonder, doesn't it ???????????????????
That's a favorite word game, you bring a totally unrelated product into a corrosion discussion.Better read my post again, because I never said it was. It's an anti-scuffing additive required for a few Lycoming engines, and nothing else, but for those engines, it does (as I did say) have real value.
Continental bottom ends have the reputation of lasting longer. Lycoming top ends have the reputation of lasting longer.
Pick your poison.
Continental bottom ends have the reputation of lasting longer. Lycoming top ends have the reputation of lasting longer.
Pick your poison.
That's a favorite word game, you bring a totally unrelated product into a corrosion discussion.
It's not even a antiscuffing agent.