I went to the Auto-Rx website and i am deeply concerned. I dont trust the data they
portray as "valid" in the website.
1. This is not a scientifically accurate test. This should be a blind test. ( you
know where the tester or technician doesnt know what sample he is testing. )
a. Not enough samples are taken. (In other words, not enough vehicles were looked at.
) For this to be statistically accurate you need about 12 to 15 vehicles minimum.
b. And some controls should added. This is simply where you substitute a
non-effective agent into testing of some of the vehicles. this would likely be some
regular ordinary 10W30 oil in this case. In this way you can easily tell if the product
is performing -or- that its the testing in and of itself thats causing the performance.
2. The data is presented in the most sophmorish form I've ever seen. It looks like a
9th Grader did this for his/her science project. No "key" or "legend" to all the
acronyms used in the test reports. No description of the test procedure. We are left to
imagine what they did in the test.
3. Yes they do have a nice PDF file that shows what a head from a 1986 Suburu looks like
*after* 500 miles. So what.
-dan k.
Dan K.
'92 Grey Dak CC, 318, 4x2, 46RH, 3.92 rear, 235/75R15, PS, PW, PB, PL, AC.
Mods: Trans-Go, APS Precision's 2400 stall, cool air induction, K&N oil & air filter, Autolite 3924s, & re-located IAT.
Future: 180* stat, MP PCM ( when Premium gas gets cheaper )
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 01 2005 - 05:44:45 EDT