[Shotimes] AMSOIL By-pass filter

[Ron Porter]

Paul, being the VOD that I am......

Your claims about the good qualities of Amsoil are BS, as you bearings
should have been fine at that mileage. An ATX SHO is easier on bearings,
since you really cannot lug their motor as you can with an ATX. My former
'89 has well over 200K at this point, and has been driven hard it's whole
life and does not have a bearing issue.....and it has had dino oil up to
190K (don't know what Tim's doing now, but I suspect that it's not
synthetic).

IMNSHO, the "opinion" that synthetic oil, particularly Amsoil, being
"better" for an engine is absolute sheep droppings to me.

Ron Porter

-----Original Message-----
From: shotimes-admin@autox.team.net
[mailto:shotimes-admin@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Paul L Fisher
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 12:52 PM
To: Jim and Debbie Leyden; shotimes@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] AMSOIL By-pass filter


Let me guess, local expert was Doug Lewis?

He is the only person I have heard bad mouth synthetics. My cams look good
after 169K miles on synthetic. The rod bearings have been replaced but I
abused my oil several times (ran 50,000 miles on one filter and one oil
change).

Paul L Fisher
'93 Ford Taurus SHO Crimson Clearcoat ATX 169K Build date 11/18/1992
- K&N Panel filter, Tokico Struts, Eibach Springs, Dynomax cat-back, Holley
190lph fuel pump, FPS rebuilt ATX, 26mm rear sway bar, Performance-Plus
Stainless Steel Y-pipe, Delrin sub-frame bushings, Amsoil Series 2000 0W-30
oil, Amsoil Synthetic ATF.
'00 Ford Explorer XLT 5.0L V8 AWD Oxford White Clearcoat 39K Build date
11/19/1999
- Amsoil Series 2000 0W-30 oil, K&N Fuel Injection Performance Kit

SHO Club member http://www.shoclub.com/
Check out my web site http://www.paul-fisher.com/
Amsoil dealer http://www.paul-fisher.com/oil.htm

Get $5 free from Paypal! https://www.paypal.com/refer/pal=P3XEFFBFUFKN6

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim and Debbie Leyden" <jndleyden@mindspring.com>
To: <shotimes@autox.team.net>; <dmall@mwonline.net>
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 11:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] AMSOIL By-pass filter


> > When your cat converters failed, was it because of a bad
> > thermostat?
>
> The cause of the cat failure is unknown.
>
> >In your note you seem skeptical of synthetics,
> > but you had a car go 200,000 before a non-oil related
> > failure took out the motor.  And you said you used
> > synthetics in it. So I don't get your comment above about
> > doubting the use of synthetics in SHO's?  Your note reads
> > like you used synthetics in it, but I suspect you meant to
> > say you used regular oil and changed it at 3000 mile
> > intervals....right?
>
> Correct, after going back and reading it, it guess I worded that poorly.
>
> As far as being a skeptic about synthetics is concerned,  I used Mobil 1
in
> all my cars until I got the SHO.  Before I purchased the SHO I took it to
a
> local SHO guru and had an evaluation done on the car to see if it was
worth
> the purchse price.  At that time I was warned off of synthetics in the SHO
> motor and shown several valve shims and camshafts that had failed.  I was
> told at the time that the only common denominator between the failures was
> the use of synthetic oil.  Further, I used to know a professional
motorcycle
> racer that felt that synthetic oil and motorcycle engines just did not
mix.
> He also cited several failures on the top end of bucket/shim style motors
> that he attributed to synthetic oils.
> I'd love to be convinced otherwise as I have always felt that that
> synthetics are better all the way around, but the idea of trashing my SHO
> motor just plain scares the heck out of me.
>
> Thanks,
> Jim
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
_______________________________________________
Shotimes mailing list
Shotimes@autox.team.net
http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes