Cadillac Owners Forum banner

Anyone use ZMax Treatment?

17K views 70 replies 17 participants last post by  550HP STSV 
#1 ·
Seems to get an above ordinary push on cable channel Speed. I can find no negative comments nor any real proof-positive comments on the web. So I ask - any one out there use it? OK, and if so, does it do what they say (besides just soak into metal)?
 
#6 ·
BaTu is very misinformed aboutthe zMax product. Cadillac Division issued a PI recommending zMax after conducting a 14 month field test on oil burn and piston noise cars and experienced a 73 % cure rate with zMax.

Go to Bob Is The Oil Guy web site. They have some great info on the zMax posted by one of their founding members named Johnny.
 
#7 ·
..........remember that the "bobistheoilguy" sites are sponsored by oil additive manufacturers - you have to read everything to get the correct picture........

BaTu is correct - zMax (like several other additive marketers) has been in and out of court with the Federal Trade Commission for unsubstantiated product performance and advertising claims.

Ask your Cadillac Service Writer to look up the TSB on engine oil additives for GM use. If you have an Alldatadiy subscription you can surf all GM TSB's to your hearts' content.

Bottom line: If these products are so good for your engine, oil, metal, mileage, longevity, economy - then why aren't they recommended by at least ONE automotive manufacturer in the world ??? (It's like my year group and the 100mpg carburetor - there ain't no such thing.............) I hate to tell you how much Marvel Mystery Oil I have gone through in 55 years of wrenching - hope springs eternal !!!!
 
#9 ·
Re: zMax successfully proved all their performance claims with ASTM/SAE Tests



BaTu...........

Sorry but your posting false information about zMax. zMax did successfully prove each and every one of their performance claims through extensive ASTM/SAE Testing. The BITOG site has members posting the independent test info.

GM Cadillac Northstar Division, did conduct a 14 month, 80 car field performance evaluation with zMax helping the oil burn and piston noise problems very successfully.

GM Cadillac Northstar Division then issued a PI ( Performance Information ) recommending the use of zMax. It's posted on the BITOG site so members, check it out.

Tech savy members will comprehend and appreciate all the field and lab test evaluating the product has done over the last 50 years.

zMax successfully tested and kept every performance claim when challenged once back in 2001 by the FTC.

Their marketing company hired to do their Infomercial had put a percent number next to the fuel mileage claim and that cost the company 1 million for that marketing error. Percent numbers are not allowed because of the variables in driving habits, vehicle types, etc for the average consumer driving a vehicle.

Today, years later ( well beyond a year and a half ) since the case was concluded in 2003, zMax continues to make each and every one of it's performance claims.

You'd be hard pressed to find another product with zMax's extensive lab and field performance testing background.
 
#11 ·
So Ahh,,, racetek27.... How long have you worked for Zmax ;) You on commission??? :D

Is the "27" your age? (just curious)

If the FCC claims were ultimately proved false, as you're claiming, please provide evidence of that to back up your claims... (this is, of course, something not from Zmax themselves or from the "shills" at BITOG. But rather an independent conclusion, preferably from the FCC)

Dose it exist, or is this just more smoke & mirrors? I certainly haven't followed the story since it came out, but then Zmax isn't putting food on my table :p
 
#18 · (Edited)
BaTu,

Lol, since you've asked.... Actually the 27 stands for several things.... that's the number of years that I've rebuilt aircraft engines in my FAA Certified Repair Station using AvBlend/zMax in all my customers engines .... also that's the number of our Dallara- Oldsmobile V8 powered Indy 500 car which we owned and built up our own engines for in the IRL. It's the same car that our driver Jim Guthrie beat Tony Stewart driving the Menard/Glidden car at the Phoenix 200 race in a 25 lap trophy dash finish.

Needless to say that I know my product and how it works in engines... very well ! The question is not how long I've worked for zMax but how many years as an experienced engine builder/technician, that I've used the product extensively and can talk engine theory-application very knowledgeable to anyone on this site...... unlike yourself who is throwing out unsupported and false post's about zMax.

Anyone can log onto the FTC site and look up the case as it's public information. The case lasted 2.5 years, which is not a 50 yard dash and when zMax satisfied the FTC and their expert witnesses, zMax was granted the right to make each and every performance claim ( less a percentage number on it's fuel mileage improvement claim ).

You ask does it exist ??? and you state you haven't followed the story ??? I ask then why are you making negative statements about the case when you haven't followed it, don't have a clue about it or taken the time to look up the information that's all available to read ?

Type in Bob is the Oil Guy zmax cadillac and something should show up to click on directly to. And BuTu, the actual Cadillac PI is shown on the post !!!!!!
 
#12 ·
On the internet you can find hundreds of testimonial letters about UFOs, astrology, alien abductions, and automotive oil additives. The problem is that they're all written by the same people.

In the court case that followed a falling out between the partners of "Slick 50", it came out that the product was ground up scrap plastic and reclaimed crankcase drainings.

STP paid the biggest consumer fraud fine in history after years of bilking the public with the crap they sold.
 
#14 ·
Unfortunately, Bob (the BITOG quoted above) has lost all his credibility since it has come to light that he is a consultant for, and in the general employ of, the "oil additive industry" :(

He's no source, he's someone else for whom Zmax is putting food on his table ;)

The FCC, on the other hand, isn't currently on Zmax's payroll, They were the one who brought the complaint, I'd like to see Their resolution (and the fact that they might not have further pursued the situation doesn't carry water either. I'm sure they have a "full plate" and have to prioritize their cases)
 
#16 ·
from Alldata: GM4718M Your vehicle's engine requires a special oil meeting GM Standard GM4718M. Oils meeting this standard may be identified as synthetic. However, not all synthetic oils will meet this GM standard. You should look for and use only an oil that meets GM Standard GM4718M. NOTICE: If you use oils that do not have the GM4718M Standard designation, you can cause engine damage not covered by your warranty.
SAE 5W-30 As shown in the viscosity chart, SAE 5W-30 is best for your vehicle. These numbers on an oil container show its viscosity, or thickness. Do not use other viscosity oils such as SAE 20W-50. Oils meeting these requirements should also have the starburst symbol on the container. This symbol indicates that the oil has been certified by the American Petroleum Institute (API). You should look for this on the oil container, and use only those oils that are identified as meeting GM Standard GM4718M and have the starburst symbol on the front of the oil container. Your vehicle's engine is filled at the factory with a Mobil 1 synthetic oil, which meets all requirements for your vehicle. Substitute Engine Oil: When adding oil to maintain engine oil level, oil meeting GM Standard GM4718M may not be available. You can add substitute oil designated SAE 5W-30 with the starburst symbol at all temperatures. Substitute oil not meeting GM Standard GM4718M should not be used for an oil change.
ENGINE OIL ADDITIVES
Do not add anything to your oil. The recommended oils with the starburst symbol that meet GM Standard GM4718M are all you will need for good performance and engine protection.
 
#17 ·
This excerpt is from GM TSB #05-00-89-072B dated June 5,2008 and pertains to GM passenger cars models 2009 and prior. Please note the last paragraph!

WHAT NOT TO DO: Engine and Fuel Additives, Alternate Fuels, and "Miracle" Products

Various unproven products with claims to improve vehicle fuel economy have been reported ranging from magnets that align molecules to chemical combustion improvers.

Most products claiming to provide benefits are based on unsubstantiated claims. Those that do present "scientific" results generally either have too little supporting data to be conclusive, have not conducted experiments in a controlled fashion, or cannot be substantiated by anyone else but the product's manufacturer.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission summarizes results for products tested by the federal government at www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/autos/aut10.shtm. A review of the list shows that the majority did not work, and for those that showed some effect, the benefit was too small to be cost effective.

Harmful Ideas That May Damage Your Vehicle and Increase Emissions

One more recent poor idea to improve fuel economy that should not be attempted is to blend either kerosene or diesel fuel into gasoline. Why? Both kerosene and diesel fuel are distillate fuels meant for use in compression ignition engines, not spark ignition engines. They have very low octane and since they are heavier (higher density) than gasoline, they will cause heavy engine deposits and degradation of engine oil.

Notice: Never put Kerosene or Diesel Fuel in your Gasoline Engine vehicle. This may result in inconsistent performance and permanent damage to your vehicle that is not covered by your New Vehicle Warranty.

Chemicals that are normally used as solvents also should not be used. These include acetone, ketones, and methanol. These solvents can be incompatible with your vehicles rubber or sealing components, and may dissolve the vehicle's paint finish. In the case of methanol, corrosion of metal parts in the fuel system also may occur.

Notice: Never use acetone, ketones, or methanol additives in your vehicle. Some of these solvents may damage or corrode your fuel system. They are also very damaging to the painted surfaces of the vehicle if spilled. Damage to vehicle components that result from non-approved or aftermarket additives and devices are not covered under the terms of the New Vehicle Warranty. The only fuel additive currently approved by GM is GM Fuel System Treatment Plus, P/N 88861011 (in Canada, # 88861012).

WHAT TO DO: Maximizing Fuel Economy/Minimizing Costs

The best fuel economy possible is the direct result of proper maintenance and good driving habits. Listed below are GM's recommendations to achieve the best mileage possible. The first group are things to consider for your vehicle, while the second are tips relating to your driving habits.

Vehicle Considerations:

^ Tire Pressure - One of the major contributors to poor fuel economy are under inflated tires. Tires low on pressure create drag that the vehicle's powertrain must overcome, wasting dollars in fuel. Always keep your tires inflated to the proper pressure as shown on the vehicle placard. This not only serves to increase gas mileage but cuts down on tire wear, further decreasing your costs per mile.

^ Air Filter - A vehicle that has a dirty air filter can't efficiently draw air into the engine. This restriction forces the engine to expend energy to "breathe" wasting fuel in the process. Change recommendations are found in your vehicle Owner's Manual.

^ Proper Viscosity "Starburst" Rated Oil - Always use the proper viscosity oil in your engine. Oil that has a higher than required viscosity will create more drag on the internal components of the engine, causing more work for it, especially when cold. Each Owner's Manual contains information on the proper type of oil for your vehicle. Look for the "starburst" symbol on the front of the bottle, and the SM rating on the API circle on the back label. If you are in doubt, stop by your dealer for an oil change, and any other services required. Most current GM vehicles are equipped with oil life monitors to further assist on the "when" to change your oil. (Aveo/Wave/Optra/Epica currently do not have oil life monitors).

Notice: GM Vehicles DO NOT require additional engine oil additives. Some additives may cause harmful effects to the internal seals and additionally void the terms of your vehicles New Car Warranty.
 
#19 ·
Re: Why zMax is not an Oil Additive



Slickcitystan raises a valid point on why not to use "Oil Additives " per GM's position.

For the members knowledge,since zMax is added to the engine oil, a misconception may exist that zMax is an additive for engine oils.

This is incorrect as the SAE J357 OCT99 Information Report Physical and Chemical Properties of Engine Oil's provides this definition. " A LUBRICANT ADDITIVE AGENT IS A MATERIAL DESIGNED TO ENHANCE THE PERFORMANCE PROPERTIES OF THE BASE STOCK OR TO IMPROVE THE BASE STOCK PROPERTIES THAT DO NOT NATURALLY EXIST WITH THE BASE STOCK ".

Clearly, zMax does neither of these who functions, as it is not designed to improve or enhance any qualities of the engine oil. Introducing it into the engine oil is merely the means to transport zMax directly to the engine's metallurgy.

For those members interested, here's the info on the GM PI :

Subject: Knocking Noises Or Excessive Oil Consumption-keywords
carbon cold piston valve zmax # PIP3951- ( 10/19/2006 )
 
#23 ·
This may sound simplistic and untechnical but if you ADD it, then it must be an additive. and I feel that being an employee might tend to make a person slightly biased in favor of his company product. So I would like to see this GM PI you refer to from a GM source. If you can provide a link it would be greatly appreciated. Or if there is a forum member who is a GM employee who can post the actual PI your help is needed.
 
#24 ·
Re: zMax is classified as a Micro-Lubricant



SlickCityStan,

Your right in saying that being added places us into the additive catagory. The SAE definition of an additive I posted , technically defines what an additive agent is.

I know that the product is classified as a Micro-Lubricant. In the aviation sector, the product is also placed into an additive catagory because that market as well doesn't have a catagory for Micro-Lubricant.

Be rest assured that when I discuss zMax on any of these forums, I can and do speak from a technical point and will always provide the necessary information using third party independent sources as much as possible.

My reason for participation is so the product is technically understood.

I can fax a copy of the PI to you on Monday if you can give me a call at my 708-728-0028 number or I know that a member named Johnny posted the complete PI on the BITOG site.

If you google Bob is the Oil Guy zmax cadillac northstar, it should lead you to the post showing the actual PI. If not, I've provided the PI info on one of the previous posts so someone can call one of their contacts at a Cadillac Dealership and pull it up.

Thanks
 
#29 ·
hehehhe

Poor ED.... :helpless:

As I'm thinking about all this, and wondering What's going on here?, I think of Ed. I mean, Ed's a smart guy - right? He certainly has No Problem tooting-his-own-horn (however accurate that might be,,,) BUT he's come here to get involved in an old thread that probably nobody would have ever read again!

What's that all about? How'd it start? AND has Ed actually done more damage to Zmax than if he'd simply "let sleeping dogs lay?"

What prompted Ed to do all this?:cookoo:

Has his contributions around the office gone unappreciated? Is he not as important to the effort as he thinks he is? Is it just Boredom that's gotten him to Google the word "Zmax" and head-out to do damage control? Maybe the "GM PI" he keeps touting is new and he's going around to GM sites with it......


[b}BUT[/b], in reality, what he's done by bringing this up again is to re-expose Zmax to the light!

In the original thread, I said "FCC / mineral oil / Scam" and provided a link.

How many people followed that link? maybe 1/2? Of that, how many read the entire thing? maybe 1/4? Not alot of people and certainly no one recently.

NOW, (since frankly I've read it thoroughly) he's got the specifics of the Civil Action like;

Damages bearings

"Fudging" tests

Colored Mineral Oil (again)

all in the post!

Maybe Ed's not as smart as he thinks he is....:canttalk:

I gotta believe the FTC hasn't retracted their accusations or Ed (who seems to have endless energy and time on his hands) would have found this document and posted it when I first asked him to. Instead, he blows smoke so, I'm pretty certain it doesn't exist.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe Ed will come back with something more from the Feds that exonerate Zmax, if he does, I'll say he's right!

BUT, if it were going to happen, I'd think it it would have by now....

note to Ed.... if you come back, come back with something REAL, Not your buddy BOB, Not some other source, the original accuser THE FTC and their resolution of the matter in your favor please :D
 
#30 ·
I put ZMax in my gas tank and now I'm spending all my spare time out in the driveway draining my gas tank as it overflows. This stuff is guaranteeed not to rip, rot, rust, bust, pull apart at the seams, or run down at the heels. It's good for coughs, colds, and sore holes; hacks, wheezes, and venereal diseases. Not a fart in a car load.

The guy that sold it to me just left town on his way to Florida for the winter.
 
#33 ·
The big clinker in the theory of the oil additive, or metal conditioner, or whatever current buzzword you're using is that before it can even come into play there has a be a failure of the primary lubrication element, the motor oil. As long as the motor oil does its job the additive is in no position to do anything. There is no metal to metal contact to fear. With the adoption of roller cam followers in nearly all modern engines, the last high pressure, sliding contact point in the engine, was eliminated. The amount of high pressure additive was greatly reduced in motor oils because it was no longer needed and it was a polluting chemical as well. Zmax now adresses a problem that no longer exists. There are millions of cars world-wide that go hundreds of thousands of trouble free miles without ever being within miles of Zmax because the original motor oils are more than sufficient for the job. At this point it makes very little difference if Zmax works or not because it could be salad oil and you'd never be able to tell the difference by the results observed.
 
#41 · (Edited)
Re:zMax works in the Heart of The Engine... The Combustion Chamber Region



I agree with you that Motor Oils have come a long way and do a nice job in the engine BUT you must look at TWO zones in the engine where Motor oil must function.

The lower zone of an engine is working in comfortable temperature ranges where oil works fine on moving surfaces and we haven't had wear problems in years with current designs and oils.

zMax addressed a problem back in 1938 and it still exists today which is heat in the Combustion Chamber Region. This is where failure of the primary lubrication element, the motor oil has a problem. The problem is how to deal with heat in the combustion chamber to insure proper valve and piston/ring sealing in order to allow the cylinder to produce it's Design Peak Pressure.

Metal surfaces do contain ripped machine edges that glow and produce fire like temperatures during operation on machined surfaces. These hot edges can Oxidize lubricants moving across the tops of their surfaces and do exactly that, especially in the Combustion Chamber Region where temperatures give motor oil problems. When the motor oil oxidizes and breaks down between the piston/rings and cylinder wall, metal to metal ( Work Surface Welding ) contact does occur and wear develops.

The developer of zMax named Joe Lencki determined that the problem was not the motor oil but the surface that the motor oil was moving across. His product soaks into the metal sub-surface and weeps out, cooling the raised edges of those hot tooling egdes. zMax reduces the " Excess Frictional Heat " by lubricating and dissipating heat both on and beneath the metal working surfaces.

zMax is all about reducing the excess frictional heat on working surfaces to help oils and fuels do the job they were designed for.

Twelve degrees ATDC on the power cycle is where the combustion pressure reaches around 700 PSI ( Gas) and up to 3000 PSI (Diesel ). This heat transfers ( Several thousand Degrees at ignition ) into the Piston/Rings and through motor oil and into the Cylinder bore. This is where the oil boundry film can oxidize and leaves deposits and combustion leakage ( Blow-by ) is created.

zMax's ability to keep working surfaces better lubricated and cooler helps keep the motor oil film 'Sealing " between the Piston/Ring-Cylinder Wall as well as keeps Valve/Guide clearances dimensionally correct and properly sealing so the correct design combustion pressure is obtained in which the fuel/air mixture is burned as designed.

Proper Combustion sealing is the key to maintaining Horsepower/Torque,Fuel Mileage,Low Emissions,etc as well as helping the oil maintain it's integrity, Lower Acid number,etc.

If you research our running SAE J1321 Fuel Mileage testing and Engine Lab Sequence VIII Testing with many different Motor Oil's, zMax improved performance in every run. All zMax knows is metal and it's performance is not hinged to any engine type or Motor Oil used.

Engines can and do run into the hundreds of thousands of miles, but be rest assured that they have had their performance baseline dramatically reduced as drive time increased.

Thanks
 
#34 ·
OMG ED!!!! I'm sorry but, you are just So FULL of $HIT!

You debate like a retarded 12yo. If you can't argue the Facts, attack the messenger,,,,,

Over & Over again, smoke and personal attacks because you can't simply dispute the FTC allegations :(

You're Pathetic, and have an amazing way of convoluting the facts while sadly trying to do a "Role Reversal" with me.

1) First you say I don't have any proof....

I have proof, it's the FTC proof (OF COURSE they did tests, what da think they did? Hold the bottle up to a light bulb and look through it to determine it damaged bearings? ;))

2) Then you say the FTC reversal is public info that anybody can see

But it's MY job to locate it to dispute my own findings (if it was there, you could have shut me up with your first post)

3) My new absolute favorite (and here you're out-done yourself with your demented reasoning) is that I'm the MOLE!!!!

Yea, I'm the devious one, I joined 2-1/2yrs ago, made 100's of posts just waiting for this day :D hehehe


The fact is Ed, you're a dishonest person, here dishonestly to ply your trade of a dishonest product.

You're come to our door, asking to be let in like the rest of us. All Cadillac owners & enthusiasts here to learn about our cars and share our experiences with them...

Is that You Ed? Is that why You joined us five days ago? Or are you, in FACT, the MOLE? You came wearing a mask, rang the doorbell and asked to be let in to the party. Once inside your true motives came out, you have a wonderful new product. It's a magnet that treats the whole houses water by putting it on the main....

The dishes will sparkle, our hair will be shiny and our clothes cleaner :hmm:

You're a Liar, You could have easily joined as a vendor and paid a couple of bucks and been honest about why you were here. But that's not you way is it Ed?

You want to talk about credibility and professionalism? You have none here, you've revealed yourself already. You're just a con man, a carnival barker with a prize in every bar of soap.

And ENOUGH ALREADY with the childish posts. If you finally have the facts from the FTC then post them.

Otherwise, put your tail between your legs and leave, no sense in continuing to make yourself look foolish.....:helpless:
 
#35 ·
Ok I read through the FTC documents and the Judges rulings from the FTC site. From what I get from it Zmax had to tone down it's advertising.They show independent testing of there product, but didn't show the bad side of the test results. They had infomercials claiming up to a 23 percent gas mileage increases. Zmax web site has their version on the FTC case and states their toned down claims of there product. Only stating a gas mileage increase instead of numbers. I think they also had to stop saying it decreases engine wear and instead say it decreases wear on vital engine parts.

It's hard reading those court documents, but it looks like they had to pay back customers who complained. http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0023256/0023256.htm I think I'll stick to regular oil changes.
 
#38 ·
Ahh, OK, so basically what the disposition of the action was.....

The FTC found that Zmax was making false claims and was ordered to stop lying about what their "colored mineral oil" would do.

Then, for those consumers who bought Zmax, the company was ordered to make restitution by returning money to the ones that were lied to.

I see.... ya think that's what Ed considered Zmaxs vindication? Could that even be possible???? (or was he just trying to "puff-up" and hope he could be a big enough blowhard that it would all gloss over....)

I guess be live in a Buyer Beware world and the FTC isn't going to stop products like this (nor would I want them to) or else J.C.Whitney wouldn't have been able to sell "Motor Medic" pills for the past 75yrs :D
 
#44 ·
Wow, ........ I had a similar experience with sales rep claiming an oil additive for our hvac compressors (large industrial hvac compressors and chillers) would make these compressors and a/c chillers much more energy efficient, thus reducing our energy costs. The sales rep's rhetoric convincing! Lots of claims, examples, and research, of sorts. (The retoric by Ed is scarily similar to what I listened to six years ago listening to the sales rep). Not convinced, I needed to hear the underlying science that would explain the technology, I scheduled a meeting mechanical engineer and a very educated hvac technician and prompted all folk involved that I wanted to discuss the worthiness of this product based on the science that may or may not have supported any beneficial claims. As a result of the meeting, I ended any relationship with the sales rep. The science just didn't support any claims.

I think Ed really believes in his product as did the sales rep selling the oil additive for hvac compressors. .... I'm ok with that. Though, I'm not "buying into" any claims of the product. I'll use the right oil and change regularly. I drove my last GM six banger for 214,000 miles ... it burned 1/2 quart of oil every 5000 miles when I sold it.
 
#54 ·
Don't worry malatu, we'll keep this thing from turning into a full fledged soap opera ......... I'll be posting field and lab test info as well as the full GM Northstar PI.

In addition to correcting the false posts on the zMax/FTC case, my full intent is to discuss combustion efficiency, which is the single most important factor for engines to maintain their performance baseline and post great technical data of which I'm sure once it's on, someone would be hard pressed to find another product that can match it being there's 70 years of field/lab testing.

Thanks
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top