Notices
86-95 Trucks & 4Runners 2nd/3rd gen pickups, and 1st/2nd gen 4Runners with IFS
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: DashLynx

lucas as a gear oil additive

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-17-2007, 11:32 PM
  #21  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
mochester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i will definitely use synthetic next time. right now its just regular valvoline dino oil
Old 03-18-2007, 06:48 AM
  #22  
Registered User
 
MMA_Alex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Downeast, ME
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
One more thought I had as far as price. Lucas heavy duty oil stabilizer (dino) is like $9-10 a quart, and the synth stuff is like $20-21 a quart. Unless you have a leak, and are lazy, or some other transmission problem that you're just hoping to put off for a few thousand more miles then its probably not worth wasting the money on the stuff.

I used heavy duty oil stabilizer in a slightly leaky dana 35 once in a 50/50 ratio, and all it did was make a sticky mess all over my driveway. Trust me you dont want to have to try to clean up that stuff because it has the consistancy of honey.
Old 03-20-2007, 06:39 AM
  #23  
Contributing Member
 
rdharper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Morgan Hill, Ca
Posts: 1,066
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
One more point. The argument has been made that if the major oil manufacturers, which have all the research money, such as Mobil 1, have realized that they could make a better product, they'd have provided it.

Here is my best example. None of you, apparently, believe Monroe Shocks are the best choice for your vehicle.

Yet they outsell everyone by an order of magnitude or more. It is Monroe that has all the research money. Why don't they provide the best shock?

Your argument should mean they'd provide the best shock.

On a side note, I see that the major vendors of oil derivative products have recognized that aftermarket additives deserve attention. All of them are marketing such products either under their own name, or alternative names.
Old 03-20-2007, 06:56 AM
  #24  
Registered User
 
Brenjen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Searcy, Arkansas
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by rdharper
One more point. The argument has been made that if the major oil manufacturers, which have all the research money, such as Mobil 1, have realized that they could make a better product, they'd have provided it.

Here is my best example. None of you, apparently, believe Monroe Shocks are the best choice for your vehicle.

Yet they outsell everyone by an order of magnitude or more. It is Monroe that has all the research money. Why don't they provide the best shock?

Your argument should mean they'd provide the best shock.

On a side note, I see that the major vendors of oil derivative products have recognized that aftermarket additives deserve attention. All of them are marketing such products either under their own name, or alternative names.
I think Mobil-1, Amsoil etc. are better products than lucas additive & don't need it added into the mix. It's my personal opinion from my own experience that synthetic fluids are the best additive & don't require anything more to do their job.

Also, I use Monroe shocks on three of my four vehicles & they perform fine for me. What's wrong with Monroe? I was thinking of trying Bilsteins or OME for the runner because of all the support they receive here but who knows; I might end up with Monroes on it too.
Old 03-20-2007, 07:09 AM
  #25  
Contributing Member
 
rdharper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Morgan Hill, Ca
Posts: 1,066
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Brenjen
I think Mobil-1, Amsoil etc. are better products than lucas additive & don't need it added into the mix. It's my personal opinion from my own experience that synthetic fluids are the best additive & don't require anything more to do their job.

Also, I use Monroe shocks on three of my four vehicles & they perform fine for me. What's wrong with Monroe? I was thinking of trying Bilsteins or OME for the runner because of all the support they receive here but who knows; I might end up with Monroes on it too.
To totally confuse the issue, I've had good luck with Monroe too. But if I do a poll, I'm sure the minor players will receive big-time support. Tough to get the facts here. The lesson may be that some aftermaket minor players have better products. Which was my point.
Old 03-20-2007, 07:33 AM
  #26  
Registered User
 
Brenjen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Searcy, Arkansas
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
LOL, ok. I thought maybe you had some numbers for me to peruse; I'm always interested in seeing other peoples successes or failures when it comes to vehicles or their parts or supplies.

Sorry for the hijack Mochester...
Old 03-20-2007, 08:16 AM
  #27  
Contributing Member
 
bob200587's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 3,546
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/images/lucas/lucas.htm

Didn't a thread like this happen like 2 months ago? I stopped using lucas after I felt and saw no change in performance. And I read the above link.
Old 03-20-2007, 10:11 AM
  #28  
Contributing Member
 
rdharper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Morgan Hill, Ca
Posts: 1,066
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bob200587
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/images/lucas/lucas.htm

Didn't a thread like this happen like 2 months ago? I stopped using lucas after I felt and saw no change in performance. And I read the above link.
For what its worth, I have strong doubts about "bobs" impariality. I suspect he is more than a shill for other products.
Old 03-20-2007, 10:49 AM
  #29  
Contributing Member
 
bob200587's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 3,546
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by rdharper
For what its worth, I have strong doubts about "bobs" impariality. I suspect he is more than a shill for other products.
Why risk it when we know it's not neccessary? It doesn't hurt not to have it, and we don't know if it hurts or helps to use it. Not to mention it's expensive.
Old 03-20-2007, 11:20 AM
  #30  
Contributing Member
 
X-AWDriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Littleton,CO
Posts: 10,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree with the "just buy a better synthetic oil" crowd since there's nothing else that needs to go in the crankcase;all these so called additives to help your already expensive oil can be likened to the phrase "too many cooks in the kitchen....".

I've been running nothing but synthetics in all my engines since '93 and one of those was a well raced turbo 4banger in my 1st gen DSM and I never added anything to the oil and the motor was still going strong at 120k (90k of it was modded and raced) when I sold it.

I run M1 syn in the engine and Redline in all my gear boxes and I go about 9k between changes on my Runner which is about 9-10 months and it works for me.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
smthwsn357
86-95 Trucks & 4Runners
14
12-04-2023 02:08 AM
XtraCab
Solid Axle Swaps, All Years
18
04-12-2020 05:25 AM
mskalmus
86-95 Trucks & 4Runners
9
05-28-2017 07:51 AM
rushw
General Electrical & Lighting Related Topics
4
07-18-2015 01:46 PM
Nickdigg
86-95 Trucks & 4Runners
1
07-07-2015 06:04 AM



Quick Reply: lucas as a gear oil additive



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:23 AM.