Docj78

OK. So on my first (and obviously careless dose) of MMO, I accidentally dumped in 12 oz. . I pumped 13.3 gallons of 93 into the tank.

Is 12 oz. going to potentially goof things up? Should I refill at 1/4 or 1/2 tank to dilute what I can? Or, should I just not worry about since this is the first dose, and more is always better...right ?

Seriously, what would be my best recourse?

rev44

I am not a expert but I think you are fine. Run it and add gas to the tank to dilute it if you want. My first dose was 10oz and nothing went weird except that Mint smell. I use 8oz every tank now.

Jax_RX8

You are fine and did not overdose - Since it was your first tank, you should have added a little more than 8oz as you have a 15.9 gallon tank total. Future refills should be at the 6-12oz range (min-max) for a 12-13 gallon refill, I prefer 8oz.

Standard dose is 4oz/10 gallons (1oz/2.5 gallons), but you can obtain additional lube and cleaning up to 1oz/1gallon - above that no more improvement, but no harm other than maybe some excess carbon generation from too much oil in the fuel.

So you accidentally did the right thing.

Zephyrzone

I'm so sold on this stuff. Value for benefit is great and the bottle is even easy to use. I carry 3 in my trunk now as standard practice. Went down to 6oz per 13 gallon fill, but it's difficult to estimate the 'in between marking' so I'll probably go back to 8oz since it's easy and I doubt there are any long term negative effects based on you comments. All good, no bad and cheap. That must be a first for the RX8 owner!

Zephyrzone

Better than MMO?

Jax_RX8

Stealth will say yes - try it out if you are curious and let us know what you think.

THey are both good products, but MMO is quite a bit cheaper.

New Yorker

Found an interesting article by Fred Rau, editor of "Road Rider Magazine," which is now "Motorcycle Consumer News". (Yeah, they're only about bikes.) I've always respected this publication, as they don't accept advertising, and conduct their own research. Anyway here's an excerpt from a piece called "Snake Oil! Is That Additive Really A Negative?"

Detergents And Solvents

"Many of the older, better-known oil treatments on the market do not make claims nearly so lavish as the new upstarts. Old standbys like Bardahl, Rislone and Marvel Mystery Oil, instead offer things like "quieter lifters," "reduced oil burning" and a "cleaner engine."

Most of these products are made up of solvents and detergents designed to dissolve sludge and carbon deposits inside your engine so they can be flushed or burned out. Wynn's Friction Proofing Oil, for example, is 83 percent kerosene. Other brands use naphthalene, xylene, acetone and isopropanol. Usually, these ingredients will be found in a base of standard mineral oil.

In general, these products are designed to do just the opposite of what the PTFE and zinc phosphate additives claim to do. Instead of leaving behind a "coating" or a "plating" on your engine surfaces, they are designed to strip away such things.

All of these products will strip sludge and deposits out and clean up your engine, particularly if it is an older, abused one. The problem is, unless you have some way of determining just how much is needed to remove your deposits without going any further, such solvents also can strip away the boundary lubrication layer provided by your oil. Overuse of solvents is an easy trap to fall into, and one which can promote harmful metal-to-metal contact within your engine.

As a general rule of thumb these products had their place and were at least moderately useful on older automobile and motorcycle engines of the Fifties and Sixties, but are basically unneeded on the more efficient engine designs of the past two decades."



You can read the entire article here: http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~rblander/snake_oil.txt

robrecht

This is very much related to my question to you about fuel injection cleaners. I know that the primary active ingredient in Techron is PEA, but I believe it is also delivered in a solvent based carrier. My concern is whether this is more of a potential issue in a rotary that relies upon a (possibly insufficient) OMP combustion chamber lubricating system. As much as we all hate carbon build up, we should also be attentive to how it is removed from a rotary engine. Again, I am no expert, really just trying to learn about these issues.

robrecht

I've been reading through expo1's rebuild thread (I know, I know, most of you read this months ago but I'm new here). I saw where Paul recommended backing off of his 4 oz per tank premix a little because of carbon build-up on the rotors.

I'm thinking my next ratio will be 3 oz of Idemitus and 1+ oz of FP+

The bigger issue is probably just the rich AF mix, and it's hard to imagine such minor differences in a premix to 13 gal fill-up making much of a difference. But my workshop is in my garage and it's still kind of fun to do this stuff. Reminds me of being in chemistry class in high school.

Jax_RX8

I find these "General Rule of Thumb" articles useless - and by the way, this one has been re-cycled many times.

The writer is correct in that there are many snake oil companies out there, and only a handful of good ones - but to talk in generalities and lump everyone together is meaningless. This is like saying some doctors are quacks, so you no never go to any of them because yours might be a quack too - useless advice.

Each product needs judged on it's own merits as to what it is and what it is not - and not by someone who don't actually know anything about the details of the products they are "reviewing".

I did not see one actual fact of what these products contain and how they operate - just a bunch of fear mongering from someone with no data and a suspicious mind.

New Yorker

No facts? Fear mongering?? How ironic. You've got half of the people here believing their engine is doomed if they don't premix. With no independent, unbiased scientific evidence to back it up. Just a big fat pile of anecdotal evidence—"I started premixing and now I'm getting smoother idle and more power". I get that after I Zaino my car.

Want to say Marvel Mystery Oil helps prolong Renesis engine life? Fine. Have an independent lab (that means a lab NOT hired by the people who make MMO) get two new Renesis engines and run 'em—one with premix; one without—to 50, 100, 150K miles. Then you can say people should be premixing.

Brettus

iTrader: (2)

So - Mazda admitting they got it wrong is not enough for you ?

swoope

iTrader: (5)

not really scientific, but i had enough proof for premixing to sell me on it..

on my first motor. i could make it go into the dry apexseal loss of power mode. in a series of steps i could make it happen at will.. and this was with the flash from cali that was supposed to fix the problem..

after premixing, nothing i could do to the car would make it happen..

beers

almost wish i had not let them replace my first motor...

New Yorker

Get your facts straight; Mazda never "admitted" they "got it wrong," because they didn't "get it wrong". How many times do I have to explain this?

• If Mazda "got it wrong," Consumer Reports would not have just upgraded the 8's reliability rating to "average"; it would be going the other way.
• If Mazda "got it wrong," Consumer Reports would not have named the 8 to their list of "Recommended Cars," which must have reliability of average or better.
• If Mazda "got it wrong," Car and Driver wouldn't have rated reliability "average" in their 40K+ long-term road test.
• If Mazda "got it wrong," Road & Track wouldn't have rated reliability "excellent" in their 40K+ long-term road test.
• If Mazda "got it wrong," the tens of thousands of 8's out there would be experiencing poor reliability, assuming only 2 or 3% of them get premix.

There's a huge difference between trying to fix an engine with a serious design flaw—and trying to make a good engine… better. I changed a word in a headline I wrote last week. It was a good headline before; now it's better. But I didn't get the headline "wrong" the first time—I simply improved it.

robrecht

That's quite an exaggeration. My sense is, especially with the more recent flashes, that most people are merely saying they want to add an extra layer of protection to keep their engine running well for a longer period of time. If Mazda improved the design, why shouldn't we also try to duplicate their improvement? And, as I've tried to point out, another significant motivation for premixing is to prevent carbon build-up with lubricious cleaners, which isn't that much different from your shock use of Techron, but seems to be based on a more judicious rationale. BTW, I don't expect Techron to answer your email saying that they've had an independent lab test their product in new Renesis engines 50, 100, 150K miles, but let us know if I'm wrong about that.

New Yorker

How is it an exaggeration? Anyone reading this thread would come away thinking they'd be a fool not to premix. If that's not fear mongering, I don't know what is.

Second, it's fine to say people premix because they merely "want to add an extra layer of protection" but, unfortunately, it's not that simple. As Rau says, if a cake recipe calls for 2 eggs, it doesn't necessarily follow that 4 eggs is better. Too much premix—whether lubricant or solvent—might be worse than none at all. How much is "too much"? Who knows?

Third, I don't "shock use" Techron, which implies using either a) a greater amount than Chevron recommends, or b) using it more often than Chevron recommends. I use as directed.

Fourth, why on Earth would Chevron tell me whether or not Techron has been tested by an independent lab when that's not the question I asked them? I asked them if they recommend its use in rotary engines. (I don't need independent test results for products like Techron or Idemitsu Premix because, unlike Marvel Mystery Oil, there's no issue about whether any of these products work when use as intended by their manufacturers; no one considers them "snake oil".)

Finally, unlike those who premix, I would never suggest everyone—or anyone—use Techron. I choose to use it because my it's my hunch that occasional use helps clean the engine with no adverse side effects. But, to your point, maybe Techron isn't good for a rotary engine. I could be wrong in choosing to use it; though I doubt my very occasional use hurts anything. It's a chance I'm willing to take.

Flashwing

I guess the bottom line is premixing is an individual choice just like your preference of oil. Clearly there's several debates which may or may not be settled. Since each engine is driven differently I imagine it will be tough to point out that X behavior caused this engine to fail.

Being in Phoenix, we have plenty of RX8's and none of them that premix have had their engines replaced under the recall. Again, I would be curious to know how many of those who had their motors replaced premixed at least 10,000 miles prior to the motor failure.

Even more so when I see ambient temps of 110+ degrees, I don't mind a little extra oil protection in the motor. Mazda has to balance OMP output with maintaining environmental regulations.

At the end of the day, deciding whether or not to premix is up to you. For the same reasons that people gamble running 87 octane fuel, I guess we'll have to meet up at 100,000+ miles and see who is still on their origional motor.

Brettus

iTrader: (2)

oops - hit a nerve there didn't I

I should explain what I meant .
*Mazda upped the oil useage on the 8 after issues with premature wear on many engines
*Given that people still are having issues perhaps they face a catch 22 situation - they really can't inject enough oil to improve reliability without sacrificing emmissions .
*The 16x has 3 injectors - somewhat an admission that 2 didn't do the trick .

So in a round about way Mazda has admitted they got it wrong ....... Or perhaps I should say "did not quite get it 100% right" .

robrecht

Because in my opinion Jax_RX8 has not engaged in fear mongering and he has not convinced half the people here that their engines are doomed if they don't premix. Is it wise to premix and therefore less wise or perhaps even foolish not to? You decide for your car. I'll decide for mine, etc. I, for one, am extremely appreciative of the obvious expertise and advice Jax and several others have been offering here. BTW, I certainly did not use the term "shock use" of Techron to imply that you were using more than recommended. As should have been very clear to you from my previous posts I am merely differentiating your use of 16 oz in a single tank every so many miles from those who use a much smaller amount in every tank at fill-up. Sorry if the use of that terminology offends you.

robrecht

Not just the 16x but already the 2009 1.3 Renesis will have the additional oil injectors.

robrecht

What exactly is your support for the contention that MMO is or might be snake oil?

New Yorker

Good one!!!

babyboyx8

iTrader: (2)

hey guys my name is dan...im very interested in premixx because i want my car to run perfect and have a longer life by lubrificating the engine parts...i curently have a 2005 rx8 with 35000...i jus tstarted readin the this forum and it has alot and im just wondering if some one could make it easier and tell me wut i should start with how much of it and when should i change to something better

MikeTyson8MyKids

iTrader: (1)

I think it was a question. haha

xsnipersgox

idemitsu, 4 oz per fill up. 1 oz per quarter.