A64Pilot Posted September 19, 2022 Report Posted September 19, 2022 5 hours ago, Pinecone said: Except in the case of CamGuard. It was developed in a major oil company, to be the best additive package for an aviation oil. they decided it was too expensive. So the guy who developed it, went out and packaged it and sold it. Is it as expensive as Lycomings additive, you know $70 per oil change for little motors, $140 for bigger ones or more. https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/lycoiladditive.php Funny how Shell and other oil companies can include this additive in their oils without a big price difference isn’t it. https://petroleumservicecompany.com/lycoming-lw-16702-additives/ Odd that Camguard couldn’t be done the same way as it’s about half as expensive as the Lycoming additive. I would pay a few bucks extra a quart for oil that had been tested either by the engine manufacturer or third party responsible agency and shown to measurably reduce cam wear, and I bet there would be a long line of us too, so much so that manufacturer would sell the majority of GA oil. I guess I’m the only one who thinks that way. Quote
PT20J Posted September 19, 2022 Report Posted September 19, 2022 The reason that oil Shell and Philips make an oil pre-blended with TPP is that the additive has been tested and approved by Lycoming and is required by AD for some engines. It’s more convenient and cheaper to buy the pre-blended oil than add the LW-16702 if you have an engine that requires it, and thus there is a ready market for the pre-blended oil. 2 Quote
DonMuncy Posted September 20, 2022 Report Posted September 20, 2022 11 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said: There are a lot of old wives tales in aviation. It seems everybody knows better than the manufactures how to do things and what lube/additive is necessary. Well, you do know that the manufacturers and the oil companies are in collusion, to make sure that consumers keep buying their products, rather than having their engines last for hundreds of thousands of hours. Quote
201Steve Posted September 20, 2022 Report Posted September 20, 2022 I thoroughly enjoyed this whole thread, MooneySpace was the Wild West back in ‘15! My favorites have been @DonMuncy and his compelling conspiracies. Quote
N201MKTurbo Posted September 20, 2022 Report Posted September 20, 2022 54 minutes ago, DonMuncy said: Well, you do know that the manufacturers and the oil companies are in collusion, to make sure that consumers keep buying their products, rather than having their engines last for hundreds of thousands of hours. Shell Oil is totally giving up on that auto fuel business and going all in on making their fortune with aviation grease. 1 1 Quote
Browncbr1 Posted September 20, 2022 Report Posted September 20, 2022 I’m just wondering where the thick chicks are hiding Quote
Pinecone Posted September 20, 2022 Report Posted September 20, 2022 11 hours ago, A64Pilot said: Is it as expensive as Lycomings additive, you know $70 per oil change for little motors, $140 for bigger ones or more. https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/lycoiladditive.php Funny how Shell and other oil companies can include this additive in their oils without a big price difference isn’t it. https://petroleumservicecompany.com/lycoming-lw-16702-additives/ Odd that Camguard couldn’t be done the same way as it’s about half as expensive as the Lycoming additive. I would pay a few bucks extra a quart for oil that had been tested either by the engine manufacturer or third party responsible agency and shown to measurably reduce cam wear, and I bet there would be a long line of us too, so much so that manufacturer would sell the majority of GA oil. I guess I’m the only one who thinks that way. 1) Maybe that is not the actual cost of the additive. So it doesn't cost that much to include it. 2) As someone mentioned, since the additive is mandatory for some engines, there is a built in market even if the oil is slightly more expensive. And some who don't have to use it, like the idea of having it, just in case. 3) The company decided that people would not pay extra for the better additive package. And yes, sometimes the logic does not track. Like in the 60s, the car companies not adding a safety feature, as it would cost 50 cents per car, which would be MILLIONS per year. Quote
A64Pilot Posted September 20, 2022 Report Posted September 20, 2022 11 hours ago, DonMuncy said: Well, you do know that the manufacturers and the oil companies are in collusion, to make sure that consumers keep buying their products, rather than having their engines last for hundreds of thousands of hours. Wonder what they did with that 100 mpg carburetor patent they bought in the 70’s? Maybe it’s in the closet with the intake vornado and fuel line magnet? https://www.amazon.com/Universal-Saving-Technology-Magnetic-Module/dp/B01H6PEW7I https://www.tornadoair.com Wow, more power and decreased fuel consumption, even increases engine life ! Quote
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.