PTK Posted March 27, 2014 Report Share Posted March 27, 2014 And now the truth: Continental Motors is planning to conduct a long term scientific study looking at the long term effects of Camguard in some engines in their Mattituck division. The decision to participate or not in the study is made by the aircraft owner. Participants will be required to adhere to very strict guidelines on oil changes, oil analyses, intervals and a host of other parameters. The warranty on these participating volunteer engines will be contingent on following these regimented guidelines and will be closely monitored. Camguard will be provided to participants by CM . CM is NOT "requiring the use of Camguard in all of their Mattituck overhauls and repaired engines to maintain their warranties" as has been implied in previous post. This is NOT to be construed as an endorsement, and in no way shape or form are other warranties voided by not using it. The additive is not an approved lubricant by CM (or Lycoming) for their engines. This info is what the program is about in a nutshell right from the "horse's mouth" at CM, Mr. Bill Ross. I think this is great news! Finally a major engine manufacturer is willing to conduct a long term scientific study which will produce real data. This is what we desperately need! I'm posting this in the interest of accuracy. My intention is not to offend anyone. I think all would agree that we all benefit from accurate information on this great site. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MooneyBob Posted March 27, 2014 Report Share Posted March 27, 2014 Great. I am not expecting any dramatic and clear conclusion from the study but that's the definitely one way to go. Solid and long term data collection under strict rules will bring a little light to the matter. We hope so. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DS1980 Posted March 27, 2014 Report Share Posted March 27, 2014 Still think we should wait to see what they say at Sun N Fun. So we have ASL saying that CM will be requiring it, and CM saying they won't. Aren't we back to where we started? Anyway, PTK, if you're right, it will be epic. You will have many I-told-you-so's to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTK Posted March 27, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2014 ...You will have many I-told-you-so's to say.I'm not interested in that. Not my intent at all. I am interested in the truth, pure and unadulterated, with no twisting or stretching. I'll take it from there and can decide for myself. Shouldn't be that difficult! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonMuncy Posted March 27, 2014 Report Share Posted March 27, 2014 PTK Where is your proof of these statements. Continental Motors is planning to conduct a long term scientific study looking at the long term effects of Camguard in some engines in their Mattituck division. The decision to participate or not in the study is made by the aircraft owner. Participants will be required to adhere to very strict guidelines on oil changes, oil analyses, intervals and a host of other parameters. The warranty on these participating volunteer engines will be contingent on following these regimented guidelines and will be closely monitored. Camguard will be provided to participants by CM . CM is not requiring the use of Camguard in all of their Mattituck overhauls and repaired engines to maintain their warranties as has been implied in previous post. This is not to be construed as an endorsement, and in no way shape or form are other warranties voided by not using it. The additive is not an approved lubricant by CM (or Lycoming) for their engines. This info is what the program is about in a nutshell right from the "horse's mouth" at CM, Mr. Bill Ross. I think this is great news! Finally a major engine manufacturer is willing to conduct a long term scientific study which will produce real data. This is what we desperately need! I'm posting this in the interest of accuracy. My intention is not to offend anyone. I think all would agree that we all benefit from accurate information on this great site. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cruiser Posted March 27, 2014 Report Share Posted March 27, 2014 I just came from the BeechTalk board and Ed Kollin is now stating over there, pretty much the same as what Peter has posted above., 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTK Posted March 27, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2014 PTK Where is your proof of these statements. I think I answered that in the post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quik flite Posted March 29, 2014 Report Share Posted March 29, 2014 PTK , It appears to me you are correct and I think a little bit of , lets see proof , is a good thing. I have used camguard for years, since around 2007. I appreciate your posts and a lot of others who post here so we all can learn a little. One more lesson learned. Now we will see if those couple dollars are well spent. Keep up the good work. I also have met and talked to Ed Kollin at Oshkosh and found him to be very knowledgable and a nice guy to talk to , he may have wanted to get some news out quickly and I can understand that . He has developed and tested his product and is justifiably proud and excited about it. Again, Thanks 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.