Last post on Jan 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives
What is this discussion about?
Fuel System, Performance Mods, Fuel System, Truck, Sedan, SUV
#373 of 391 Re: Just thought I would reply [skywatcher1973]
by Stever@Edmunds HOST
Oct 31, 2010 (11:21 am)
Perhaps you are just trying to sidetrack the issue, but yeah, I know what Lucas is. I also know that the only additive I'll put into my car is Techron, and that's only when I happen to buy Chevron gas. The rest of it gets categorized under snake oil until proven. I don't even believe that synthetic oil is worth it and it's "proven" to help fuel economy. Just not enough to justify the extra expense in my book.
I'm sorry none of us regulars are excited to read about your experiences but we've been kicking this stuff around for just about a decade now and have yet to see anything worthwhile come down the pike.
#374 of 391 Re: Just thought I would reply [steve_]
Oct 31, 2010 (7:58 pm)
We have a saying in my house when we disagree. It's "do you want to be right or do you want to be happy?"
So my reply to you is I want to be Happy!!!
Have a good time bye!
#375 of 391 Re: Just thought I would reply [skywatcher1973]
Nov 01, 2010 (9:12 am)
The next question is, "Do you want to look like a fool when you advocate products that are nothing better than snake oil (your miracle fuel economy additive and Lucas products among them), or do you want to advocate products that actually work?"
#376 of 391 Re: Just thought I would reply [shipo]
Nov 06, 2010 (7:11 pm)
I am advocating a product that really works. Those #'s are real #'s! You believe what you want. My question is: How can you tell me that this product doesn't even work? You don't know what it is! You haven't used it before! So why run your mouth on something that you haven't ever heard of?? You may know alot, but you don't know anything about this product or anything about me!! I will stand strong in what I believe in!
Oh & I haven't replied back because I stopped receiving updates on this, just thought I would check in to see what you were downing me on this time!
#377 of 391 Re: Just thought I would reply [skywatcher1973]
Nov 06, 2010 (9:21 pm)
I am advocating a product that really works. Those #'s are real #'s!
No, sorry, by definition your numbers are anecdotal and as such are anything but real.
My question is: How can you tell me that this product doesn't even work? You don't know what it is! You haven't used it before! So why run your mouth on something that you haven't ever heard of??
Ummm, I don't have to eat a dog poo-pie to know very well that, A) it won't taste as good as my pumpkin pie, and B) it won't be healthy for me. So why do I run my mouth, errr, fingers? Because after the billions of dollars (yes, billions with a big honking "B" in front of it) the world's automakers have spent on improving fuel economy, there is an absolute zero percent chance the product you're advocating is what you say it is. Why? Because if it was, said automakers would have long since lined up and paid big money to test it and to build engines that could take the greatest possible advantage of it. Said another way, it would be in near universal use world wide right this very minute.
The above said, I do know what the product is, I've looked it up and Bobbie Smith should be thanking you for getting me to go even that far. The thing is, the internet hype around this product is straight out of the MLM/Snake-Oil marketing handbook, so much so that any studying of this product will generate more questions than answers and further convince anyone of any intelligence that this is just the latest in a long-long line of fuel economy scams to be visited on the motoring public.
You may know alot, but you don't know anything about this product or anything about me!! I will stand strong in what I believe in!
In many ways this world we live in is divided into two; a part that has religion and will believe blindly, and those that are atheistic and can only be convinced when incontrovertible evidence is presented to them, evidence that is verified by multiple non-aligned third parties. Long story short, if you want to believe this product works, you can easily make yourself believe. For my part I call “shenanigans” on your claims.
#379 of 391 Re: Just thought I would reply [shipo]
Nov 22, 2010 (11:13 am)
So my post is not here anymore the one where I asked what the name of the product was & who is Bobbie Smith? So why not answer those questions?
#380 of 391 Re: Just thought I would reply [skywatcher1973]
Nov 22, 2010 (11:19 am)
And I also want to know how can you tell me my product doesn't work when you have no clue what the name of it is & you have no clue "cause you haven't used it" if it works? You may know alot, but you don't know crap about me or my product that I am talking about.
#381 of 391 Re: Just thought I would reply [skywatcher1973]
Nov 22, 2010 (11:24 am)
Unless you can post a link to tests by an objective laboratory proving mpg gains, you will have no credibility here. You may have seen what you think are benefits, but they are either caused by you driving more carefully or doing maintenance at the same time you started using this. Not one of these products has ever been found to work.