Why is Slick 50 still in business?

They've been sued by DuPont, had their asses slapped by the FTC for their
snake-oil claims, been outed for marketing a product that has no genuine
benefits and can actually damage an engine, so how do they manage to stay in
business, still making essentially the same claims?

Doc wrote:
> They've been sued by DuPont, had their asses slapped by the FTC for their
> snake-oil claims, been outed for marketing a product that has no genuine
> benefits and can actually damage an engine, so how do they manage to stay in
> business, still making essentially the same claims?

Don't know much about Slick 50, but it sure sounds like it could be
slick.

I've worked on cars long enough to know there is money to be made from
peddling cans of goop to: make engine engine oil slippery, enhance
transmission fluid, condition power steering fluid, stabilize gasoline,
clean fuel injectors, improve fuel economy, improve engine performance,
and plug a leaky cooling system. In my experience most of the products
do no harm, and that's a good thing.

What about Anal Care Kits?

Marco Licetti wrote:
> What about Anal Care Kits?

?????????????????

The Anal Care Kit is sold by Bull**** Productions, Inc. Is it useful at
all? I have hemorrhoids

"John S." > wrote in message
oups.com...

> I've worked on cars long enough to know there is money to be made from
> peddling cans of goop to: make engine engine oil slippery, enhance
> transmission fluid, condition power steering fluid, stabilize gasoline,
> clean fuel injectors, improve fuel economy, improve engine performance,
> and plug a leaky cooling system. In my experience most of the products
> do no harm, and that's a good thing.

From what I understand, the Teflon while doing nothing to actually assist in
lubrication, can build up in oil channels, causing oil starvation and
excessive wear, the exact opposite of what it claims to do.

"Doc" > wrote in message
ink.net...

> From what I understand, the Teflon while doing nothing to actually assist
in
> lubrication, can build up in oil channels, causing oil starvation and
> excessive wear, the exact opposite of what it claims to do.

Much debated, Doc, but we have gone through this thread several times in the
last 4-5 years. Many people believe the stories of PTFE buildup in filters,
plugging
of oil passages, etc but nobody yet has actually documented an incident, if
my
memory serves correctly. ( Like the story of the guy waking up in a tub of
ice
with a kidney stolen...Many believe it, nobody can document it)

PTFE does have some lubrication properties, and it can be burnished onto the
surface of metals. Both are true. I have done it under lab conditions..but
that
is where the truth peters out. (STP was poly(alphaolefin). Believe it or
not,
this was an excellent lubricant, the effects of which seem to concentrate on
metal surfaces.)

Whether engines are saved by, or damaged by, Slick 50 use would have to be
determined by statistical analysis of considerable objective data. And I
have
not seen this....just shop talk, to date.

It is my position that the use of good lubrication oil (not necessarily
synthetic)
and timely oil changes will give you all the protection you need.

> wrote in message
m...

> PTFE does have some lubrication properties, and it can be burnished onto
the
> surface of metals. Both are true. I have done it under lab
conditions..but
> that
> is where the truth peters out. (STP was poly(alphaolefin). Believe it or
> not,
> this was an excellent lubricant, the effects of which seem to concentrate
on
> metal surfaces.)
>
> Whether engines are saved by, or damaged by, Slick 50 use would have to be
> determined by statistical analysis of considerable objective data. And I
> have
> not seen this....just shop talk, to date.

I would imagine if they could have proved the efficacy of their product,
they could have easily avoided paying fines to the FTC.

DuPont was seemingly unimpressed as well, suing to get their name taken off
the packaging.

"Doc" > wrote in message
ink.net...

> I would imagine if they could have proved the efficacy of their product,
> they could have easily avoided paying fines to the FTC.
>
> DuPont was seemingly unimpressed as well, suing to get their name taken
off
> the packaging.


Hard to say.. They made claims they couldn't document.

Doc wrote:
> "John S." > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
> > I've worked on cars long enough to know there is money to be made from
> > peddling cans of goop to: make engine engine oil slippery, enhance
> > transmission fluid, condition power steering fluid, stabilize gasoline,
> > clean fuel injectors, improve fuel economy, improve engine performance,
> > and plug a leaky cooling system. In my experience most of the products
> > do no harm, and that's a good thing.
>
> From what I understand, the Teflon while doing nothing to actually assist in
> lubrication, can build up in oil channels, causing oil starvation and
> excessive wear, the exact opposite of what it claims to do.

Well, I have heard that problem either does or does not occur. Thus my
statement that "most of the products do no harm". That's faint praise,
or a subtle way of saying purchasers are wasting money on those
fixes-in-a-bottle.

A lot of driving experience leads me to believe that the fuels,
lubricants and other fluids produced by the major companies are pretty
good as produced. I'm unconvinced that some mom-and-pop operation can
improve on the products that come from the research of hundreds of
chemists and engineers that Shell, Mobil and the other big guns employ.
I've found that following a program of regular changes of fluids and
filter as appropriate will extend the life of any car. I've also found
that in general people who reach for products in the automotive elixir
section of Pep Boys are usually trying to reverse the effects of
deferred maintenance.