Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 12:37 pm Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

Well, since you were replying to a message that I wrote when you posted this Richard, I will assume that you were directing your reply and tongue in cheek comments to what I wrote.    

 

Let me say again for the record.  I do not recommend MMO to anyone for any purpose in any engine.  Many others actually do, and there are numerous articles supporting it's use for lead reduction, but since this topic has been discussed "Ad Nauseum" on this list, and since many readers are sick and tired of hearing the same old song and verse, I am not about to start up that whole tired argument yet again.  

 

That said,  I have seen numerous engines with lead fouling on the valves, and it has happened to my engine twice.  Since I have run MMO, I have not had any problems with leading on the valves.  That is far from a good analysis, nor is it scientific, and it is not something I am going stand up on a soap box and argue about.   

 

If you need information about MMO, this is not the forum to get it from (IMHO).  However, to address your question about how CamGuard compares to MMO, the answer is that they are two totally different products intended for two totally different purposes at least for the use I was discussing.  CamGuard is an additive supplement formulated to address the complex and interrelated problems of corrosion, wear, deposits and seal degradation in piston engines.  Quote Unquote.  

 

It goes in the oil.  I am putting MMO into the FUEL.  Kind of different applications, don't you think?  

 

If you want a sample size of more than "one", maybe you ought to look around on the Internet for more comments on the matter.  You can start with this one:  http://www.pipercubforum.com/marvel.htm

 

In the end, regardless of what you feel like kissing Richard, I fully intend to continue using this product in the engines I operate.

 

Mark Bitterlich 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



________________________________



From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of RICHARD VOLKER

Sent: Fri 10/8/2010 9:15 AM

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: TITUS at Titusville, FL TICO Airshow

I need information about MMO. Is there any aviation engine testing available with this additive? Are aircraft owners that are using this oil actually trusting anecdotal evidence or it's performance in non-aviation engines?  How does this additive compare to CamGuard? The engine teardown testing by Monte Barrett and others completely reinforces CamGuard claims, as has many independent, scientifically performed studies. A sample size of one is statistically useless in proving anything. Wait a minute,  I kiss my Sukhoi after every flight and it is running better than ever. Anybody else care to try that? 

Rick Volker



On Oct 7, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E wrote:

	Hello Javier, 

	 

	Glad to hear you are happy with the ignition upgrade kit from Dennis.  I have been involved with that  mod on  several aircraft and in each case, the improvement has been very noticable, especially at idle.  

	 

	Yes, I do use MMO... but clearly I am no expert in it's use.  I am one of these stupid people that think: "if a little bit is good, then a lot is even better!".  That is not an especially "informed or wise" point of view, but you asked, so I am admitting it!    

	 

	My YAK-50 holds about 32 gallons.  I put about 1/2 quart or more in for a full tank.  In some cases, I've put as much as a full quart in, but that is not common and I usually have done that just because I did not want to carry an open container around in the aircraft so I just poured it all in.  Probably not too smart.   CLEARLY this is over the recommended amount... but I really don't think it has hurt anything since I have been doing it for almost 10 years now.  So, I suppose the answer to your question is to simply run the recommended amount but if you go a little over ... it doesn't seem to hurt anything.     This is subject to change by someone who knows more than me about the issue!  

	 

	As for oil.... I use MMO as a kind of "cleaner".  When I get ready to change the oil in my engine, I pour in TWO QUARTS of MMO and then go for a short flight and run the engine hard.  I then come back and immediately drain it all out.  Again, this might not be a great recommendation, but it is what I do.  

	 

	In short, the subject of MMO, how much to use, when to use it, and whether it is even any good in the first place.... is something that has  been a hot topic on this list server for quite a number of years.  In no way would I dare to recommend a certain amount, or even claim that the stuff really works!   I use it because it does not seem to hurt anything, and APPEARS to have helped me regarding valve leading issues.  

	 

	Mark

	 

	

	

________________________________



	From: Javier Carrasco

	Sent: Wed 10/6/2010 8:57 PM

	To: Mark Sorenson; yak-list(at)matronics.com

	Subject: Re: TITUS at Titusville, FL  TICO Airshow

	

	

Hi Mark!



Hope you are doing great!



Hey I got the Spakplug kit from Dennis Savarece and the difference is just unbelievable!



Hey are you using the Marvel Mystery Oil?



If so in what proportion?



And do you add it everytime you put gas? or how often?



Regards, Javier

--- On Sun, 3/14/10, Mark Sorenson <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com> wrote:



	From: Mark Sorenson <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com>

	Subject: TITUS at Titusville, FL TICO Airshow

	To: "Mark Sorenson" <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com>

	Date: Sunday, March 14, 2010, 7:43 AM

	

	

	Sorry about the previous misfire with no photo attached.

	

	This was captured yesterday at the TICO Airshow, in Titusville, FL.  Other than having to deal with winds up to 30 mph it was a grrrrrrrrrreat day among grrrrrrrrrrreat people.

	

	

	Best regards, 

	Mark Sorenson 

	678-GO-FLY-HI

	www.tigerairshows.com

	

	

	

________________________________



	Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protGBL/go/210850553/direct/01/">Sign up now. 

	

	

	et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List

	p://forums.matronics.com/

	blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution

rick(at)rvairshows.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 1:04 pm Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

Would you use CamGuard?

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry



--

keithmckinley

Joined: 11 Aug 2008
Posts: 434

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 1:17 pm Post subject: Re: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

Mark,



I disagree with your HO. This IS the place to get information about a products such as MMO. 



I don't care about the methods of it's delicious smelling madness or it's chemical formula. I do care that it works or not, and as you mention, it does. I know numerous M-14 owners that have eliminated sticking valves since using this stuff. I use it in my Housai and I can tell you that I run my engine very hard and have not had a problem in my 250 hrs of ownership using MMO.  I can absolutely feel the difference in the smoothness of my engine after going without for a couple tankfuls. There are a lot of folks here (you included) that have so much experience with trial and error regarding these machine and I appreciate the shared knowledge. 



Semper Fi,



Keith

radiopicture

Joined: 23 Jun 2008
Posts: 263

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 2:24 pm Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

I didn't take Rick's remarks as comparing the functions of the  

products, but rather a comparison of the evidence of their efficacy.



Probably, we have all tried things that we swear worked without much  

scientific confirmation. MMO is a weird case, because it has a lot of  

fans and apparently was even a Mil Spec product during the war.  

Theories for why it works (if you believe it does) vary quite a bit.  

Chemists seem to think that the "vapor blast" explanation is whack.  

Appropriately, this stuff has "Mystery" in its name.



I haven't had one particular M-14P for a thousand hours as is the case  

with some folks, so I don't have the tear down evidence to examine.  

However, you'd think that an engine that has to be run up before you  

shut it down wouldn't have the valve lead salt deposit problem.



I'm guessing MMO doesn't hurt. That TCP stuff seems pretty nasty to  

touch or transport.



Imagine how fun it will be when we get the new fuel.





On Oct 8, 2010, at 4:33 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,  

MALS-14 64E wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil>



 Well, since you were replying to a message that I wrote when you  

 posted this Richard, I will assume that you were directing your  

 reply and tongue in cheek comments to what I wrote.



 Let me say again for the record.  I do not recommend MMO to anyone  

 for any purpose in any engine.  Many others actually do, and there  

 are numerous articles supporting it's use for lead reduction, but  

 since this topic has been discussed "Ad Nauseum" on this list, and  

 since many readers are sick and tired of hearing the same old song  

 and verse, I am not about to start up that whole tired argument yet  

 again.



 That said,  I have seen numerous engines with lead fouling on the  

 valves, and it has happened to my engine twice.  Since I have run  

 MMO, I have not had any problems with leading on the valves.  That  

 is far from a good analysis, nor is it scientific, and it is not  

 something I am going stand up on a soap box and argue about.



 If you need information about MMO, this is not the forum to get it  

 from (IMHO).  However, to address your question about how CamGuard  

 compares to MMO, the answer is that they are two totally different  

 products intended for two totally different purposes at least for  

 the use I was discussing.  CamGuard is an additive supplement  

 formulated to address the complex and interrelated problems of  

 corrosion, wear, deposits and seal degradation in piston engines.   

 Quote Unquote.



 It goes in the oil.  I am putting MMO into the FUEL.  Kind of  

 different applications, don't you think?



 If you want a sample size of more than "one", maybe you ought to  

 look around on the Internet for more comments on the matter.  You  

 can start with this one:  http://www.pipercubforum.com/marvel.htm



 In the end, regardless of what you feel like kissing Richard, I  

 fully intend to continue using this product in the engines I operate.



 Mark Bitterlich

 ________________________________



 From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of RICHARD VOLKER

 Sent: Fri 10/8/2010 9:15 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: TITUS at Titusville, FL TICO Airshow

 I need information about MMO. Is there any aviation engine testing  

 available with this additive? Are aircraft owners that are using  

 this oil actually trusting anecdotal evidence or it's performance in  

 non-aviation engines?  How does this additive compare to CamGuard?  

 The engine teardown testing by Monte Barrett and others completely  

 reinforces CamGuard claims, as has many independent, scientifically  

 performed studies. A sample size of one is statistically useless in  

 proving anything. Wait a minute,  I kiss my Sukhoi after every  

 flight and it is running better than ever. Anybody else care to try  

 that?

 Rick Volker



 On Oct 7, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,  

 MALS-14 64E wrote:

 	Hello Javier,

 	

 	Glad to hear you are happy with the ignition upgrade kit from  

 Dennis.  I have been involved with that  mod on  several aircraft  

 and in each case, the improvement has been very noticable,  

 especially at idle.

 	

 	Yes, I do use MMO... but clearly I am no expert in it's use.  I am  

 one of these stupid people that think: "if a little bit is good,  

 then a lot is even better!".  That is not an especially "informed or  

 wise" point of view, but you asked, so I am admitting it!  

 	

 	My YAK-50 holds about 32 gallons.  I put about 1/2 quart or more in  

 for a full tank.  In some cases, I've put as much as a full quart  

 in, but that is not common and I usually have done that just because  

 I did not want to carry an open container around in the aircraft so  

 I just poured it all in.  Probably not too smart.   CLEARLY this is  

 over the recommended amount... but I really don't think it has hurt  

 anything since I have been doing it for almost 10 years now.  So, I  

 suppose the answer to your question is to simply run the recommended  

 amount but if you go a little over ... it doesn't seem to hurt  

 anything.     This is subject to change by someone who knows more  

 than me about the issue!

 	

 	As for oil.... I use MMO as a kind of "cleaner".  When I get ready  

 to change the oil in my engine, I pour in TWO QUARTS of MMO and then  

 go for a short flight and run the engine hard.  I then come back and  

 immediately drain it all out.  Again, this might not be a great  

 recommendation, but it is what I do.

 	

 	In short, the subject of MMO, how much to use, when to use it, and  

 whether it is even any good in the first place.... is something that  

 has  been a hot topic on this list server for quite a number of  

 years.  In no way would I dare to recommend a certain amount, or  

 even claim that the stuff really works!   I use it because it does  

 not seem to hurt anything, and APPEARS to have helped me regarding  

 valve leading issues.

 	

 	Mark

 	

 	

 	

 ________________________________



 	From: Javier Carrasco

 	Sent: Wed 10/6/2010 8:57 PM

 	To: Mark Sorenson; yak-list(at)matronics.com

 	Subject: Re: TITUS at Titusville, FL  TICO Airshow

 	

 	

 Hi Mark!



 Hope you are doing great!



 Hey I got the Spakplug kit from Dennis Savarece and the difference  

 is just unbelievable!



 Hey are you using the Marvel Mystery Oil?



 If so in what proportion?



 And do you add it everytime you put gas? or how often?



 Regards, Javier

 --- On Sun, 3/14/10, Mark Sorenson <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com>  

 wrote:



 	From: Mark Sorenson <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com>

 	Subject: TITUS at Titusville, FL TICO Airshow

 	To: "Mark Sorenson" <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com>

 	Date: Sunday, March 14, 2010, 7:43 AM

 	

 	

 	Sorry about the previous misfire with no photo attached.

 	

 	This was captured yesterday at the TICO Airshow, in Titusville,  

 FL.  Other than having to deal with winds up to 30 mph it was a  

 grrrrrrrrrreat day among grrrrrrrrrrreat people.

 	

 	

 	Best regards,

 	Mark Sorenson

 	678-GO-FLY-HI

 	www.tigerairshows.com

 	

 	

 	

 ________________________________



 	Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protGBL/go/210850553/ 

 direct/01/">Sign up now.

 	

 	

 	et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List

 	p://forums.matronics.com/

 	blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution

rick(at)rvairshows.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 2:31 pm Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

OK, 

 seriously then....



It looks as though there are countless testimonials supporting the helpful properties of MMO.  I respect your opinion regarding its use.  It is difficult to find scientifically supportive documentation of this product on line, piper site and all.  I would be interested in MMO, particularly after reading how Swift fuel may be coming our way. After the FAA test run of an IO540 engine for 150 hours, some mention was made of slight fuel pump wear or leaking as the only problem.  MMO might be a way to counter this effect.  A product like MMO might be the best thing since sliced bread, but no one stands to make extra money from the product certification for the tiny aviation market. I realize that CamGuard is different, but the testing related to its certified use is what I was referring to. 

     I have not heard anything bad about its use. I will review the Yak List archives to read more.  Up until now, I have treated my M14P's as though they were certified engines, thinking resale might be better from the buyer's increased confidence level in my care. Now, maybe thats not the best course.  I have never had lead deposits in the engines I've used. Piston scuffing and cracked rings were seen in a past  engine.  I am counting on rigorous control of CHT's and CamGuard to improve this behavior in my new engine. Monty Barrett has claimed that these two things were the bane of the original design. 



Thanks for the info



Rick Volker

On Oct 8, 2010, at 4:33 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Well, since you were replying to a message that I wrote when you posted this Richard, I will assume that you were directing your reply and tongue in cheek comments to what I wrote.    

 

 Let me say again for the record.  I do not recommend MMO to anyone for any purpose in any engine.  Many others actually do, and there are numerous articles supporting it's use for lead reduction, but since this topic has been discussed "Ad Nauseum" on this list, and since many readers are sick and tired of hearing the same old song and verse, I am not about to start up that whole tired argument yet again.  

 

 That said,  I have seen numerous engines with lead fouling on the valves, and it has happened to my engine twice.  Since I have run MMO, I have not had any problems with leading on the valves.  That is far from a good analysis, nor is it scientific, and it is not something I am going stand up on a soap box and argue about.   

 

 If you need information about MMO, this is not the forum to get it from (IMHO).  However, to address your question about how CamGuard compares to MMO, the answer is that they are two totally different products intended for two totally different purposes at least for the use I was discussing.  CamGuard is an additive supplement formulated to address the complex and interrelated problems of corrosion, wear, deposits and seal degradation in piston engines.  Quote Unquote.  

 

 It goes in the oil.  I am putting MMO into the FUEL.  Kind of different applications, don't you think?  

 

 If you want a sample size of more than "one", maybe you ought to look around on the Internet for more comments on the matter.  You can start with this one:  http://www.pipercubforum.com/marvel.htm

 

 In the end, regardless of what you feel like kissing Richard, I fully intend to continue using this product in the engines I operate.

 

 Mark Bitterlich 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 ________________________________

 

 From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of RICHARD VOLKER

 Sent: Fri 10/8/2010 9:15 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: TITUS at Titusville, FL TICO Airshow

 

 

 I need information about MMO. Is there any aviation engine testing available with this additive? Are aircraft owners that are using this oil actually trusting anecdotal evidence or it's performance in non-aviation engines?  How does this additive compare to CamGuard? The engine teardown testing by Monte Barrett and others completely reinforces CamGuard claims, as has many independent, scientifically performed studies. A sample size of one is statistically useless in proving anything. Wait a minute,  I kiss my Sukhoi after every flight and it is running better than ever. Anybody else care to try that? 

 Rick Volker

 

 On Oct 7, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E wrote:

 

 

 	Hello Javier, 

 	 

 	Glad to hear you are happy with the ignition upgrade kit from Dennis.  I have been involved with that  mod on  several aircraft and in each case, the improvement has been very noticable, especially at idle.  

 	 

 	Yes, I do use MMO... but clearly I am no expert in it's use.  I am one of these stupid people that think: "if a little bit is good, then a lot is even better!".  That is not an especially "informed or wise" point of view, but you asked, so I am admitting it!    

 	 

 	My YAK-50 holds about 32 gallons.  I put about 1/2 quart or more in for a full tank.  In some cases, I've put as much as a full quart in, but that is not common and I usually have done that just because I did not want to carry an open container around in the aircraft so I just poured it all in.  Probably not too smart.   CLEARLY this is over the recommended amount... but I really don't think it has hurt anything since I have been doing it for almost 10 years now.  So, I suppose the answer to your question is to simply run the recommended amount but if you go a little over ... it doesn't seem to hurt anything.     This is subject to change by someone who knows more than me about the issue!  

 	 

 	As for oil.... I use MMO as a kind of "cleaner".  When I get ready to change the oil in my engine, I pour in TWO QUARTS of MMO and then go for a short flight and run the engine hard.  I then come back and immediately drain it all out.  Again, this might not be a great recommendation, but it is what I do.  

 	 

 	In short, the subject of MMO, how much to use, when to use it, and whether it is even any good in the first place.... is something that has  been a hot topic on this list server for quite a number of years.  In no way would I dare to recommend a certain amount, or even claim that the stuff really works!   I use it because it does not seem to hurt anything, and APPEARS to have helped me regarding valve leading issues.  

 	 

 	Mark

 	 

 	

 	

 ________________________________

 

 	From: Javier Carrasco

 	Sent: Wed 10/6/2010 8:57 PM

 	To: Mark Sorenson; yak-list(at)matronics.com

 	Subject: Re: TITUS at Titusville, FL  TICO Airshow

 	

 	

 Hi Mark!

 

 Hope you are doing great!

 

 Hey I got the Spakplug kit from Dennis Savarece and the difference is just unbelievable!

 

 Hey are you using the Marvel Mystery Oil?

 

 If so in what proportion?

 

 And do you add it everytime you put gas? or how often?

 

 Regards, Javier

 --- On Sun, 3/14/10, Mark Sorenson <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com> wrote:

 

 

 

 	From: Mark Sorenson <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com>

 	Subject: TITUS at Titusville, FL TICO Airshow

 	To: "Mark Sorenson" <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com>

 	Date: Sunday, March 14, 2010, 7:43 AM

 	

 	

 	Sorry about the previous misfire with no photo attached.

 	

 	This was captured yesterday at the TICO Airshow, in Titusville, FL.  Other than having to deal with winds up to 30 mph it was a grrrrrrrrrreat day among grrrrrrrrrrreat people.

 	

 	

 	Best regards, 

 	Mark Sorenson 

 	678-GO-FLY-HI

 	www.tigerairshows.com

 	

 	

 	

 ________________________________

 

 	Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protGBL/go/210850553/direct/01/">Sign up now. 

 

 

 	

 	

 	et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List

 	p://forums.matronics.com/

 	blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 6:03 pm Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

I stand corrected.  

 

Aragota Nai. 

 

S/F,

 

Mark

 



________________________________



From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of keithmckinley

Sent: Fri 10/8/2010 5:17 PM

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)






Mark,



I disagree with your HO. This IS the place to get information about a products such as MMO.



I don't care about the methods of it's delicious smelling madness or it's chemical formula. I do care that it works or not, and as you mention, it does. I know numerous M-14 owners that have eliminated sticking valves since using this stuff. I use it in my Housai and I can tell you that I run my engine very hard and have not had a problem in my 250 hrs of ownership using MMO.  I can absolutely feel the difference in the smoothness of my engine after going without for a couple tankfuls. There are a lot of folks here (you included) that have so much experience with trial and error regarding these machine and I appreciate the shared knowledge.



Semper Fi,



Keith



--------

Keith McKinley

700HS

KFIT





Read this topic online here:



http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=315150#315150

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 6:06 pm Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

Short answer:  Yes I would.  

 

Long answer:  I have not used CamGuard personally, but am considering it.   From what I can read it is a good product.  In the past, I have run my engine every weekend or more.  I have changed the oil every 50 hours or less.  I had not really considered CamGuard necessary.  However.... my YAK-50 does not fly as much as it used to and CamGuard might be a wise investment. 

 

To be perfectly candid, I was kind of hoping someone else would run it for awhile first and let me gain from their experience. 

 

Mark Bitterlich

 

 

 



________________________________



From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of rick(at)rvairshows.com

Sent: Fri 10/8/2010 5:02 PM

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)






Would you use CamGuard?

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry



--

William Halverson

Joined: 27 Feb 2010
Posts: 88

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 6:47 pm Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

What about Microlon?  Anybody have experience with it?

+--

rick(at)rvairshows.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 7:01 pm Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

I have been running  CamGuard during daily flights at 100 % power for half of each flight. Max cruise for the other half. Will let you know how it turns out compared to past M14P engines with same service history.  CHT's never get over 380 degrees F. And oil temperatures in the green. I am looking for wear protection, obviously.  

Rick Volker.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry



--

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 7:27 pm Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

Are you saying that you feel that CamGuard impacts cylinder head temperatures and oil temperatures?  

 

 



________________________________



From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of rick(at)rvairshows.com

Sent: Fri 10/8/2010 10:58 PM

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)






I have been running  CamGuard during daily flights at 100 % power for half of each flight. Max cruise for the other half. Will let you know how it turns out compared to past M14P engines with same service history.  CHT's never get over 380 degrees F. And oil temperatures in the green. I am looking for wear protection, obviously. 

Rick Volker.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry



--

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 7:27 pm Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

I put it into my M-14 10 years ago and did not see any impact. 

 

Mark Bitterlich

 



________________________________



From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of William Halverson

Sent: Fri 10/8/2010 10:44 PM

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Re: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)






What about Microlon?  Anybody have experience with it?

+--

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 7:44 pm Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

I fully concur with Monty Barrett that cylinder head temp. is a SERIOUSLY important factor in the life of these engines.  

 

I have no idea how MMO will react with Swift fuel.  Swift fuel does not contain TEL.  

 

One of the reasons you have avoided valve leading is because you run your engine so hard, and I have pointed out that fact in the past.  Running the engine at low RPM impacts exhaust gas temperature.  It increases your chances of valve leading issues.  The lower the temperature of your cylinder head, the more chance you have of the TEL coming out of a gaseous state back into a precipitate.  

 

Swift fuel may have the octane, but it will likely not have the lubrication properties of fuel containing TEL.   The Russians have said that their hardened valve seats combined with their sodium filled valve bodies will be able to handle this.  

 

I hope they are correct. 

 

If not, it's only money.   

 

Mark Bitterlich

 



________________________________



From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of RICHARD VOLKER

Sent: Fri 10/8/2010 6:28 PM

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)






OK,

 seriously then....



It looks as though there are countless testimonials supporting the helpful properties of MMO.  I respect your opinion regarding its use.  It is difficult to find scientifically supportive documentation of this product on line, piper site and all.  I would be interested in MMO, particularly after reading how Swift fuel may be coming our way. After the FAA test run of an IO540 engine for 150 hours, some mention was made of slight fuel pump wear or leaking as the only problem.  MMO might be a way to counter this effect.  A product like MMO might be the best thing since sliced bread, but no one stands to make extra money from the product certification for the tiny aviation market. I realize that CamGuard is different, but the testing related to its certified use is what I was referring to.

     I have not heard anything bad about its use. I will review the Yak List archives to read more.  Up until now, I have treated my M14P's as though they were certified engines, thinking resale might be better from the buyer's increased confidence level in my care. Now, maybe thats not the best course.  I have never had lead deposits in the engines I've used. Piston scuffing and cracked rings were seen in a past  engine.  I am counting on rigorous control of CHT's and CamGuard to improve this behavior in my new engine. Monty Barrett has claimed that these two things were the bane of the original design.



Thanks for the info



Rick Volker

On Oct 8, 2010, at 4:33 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 Well, since you were replying to a message that I wrote when you posted this Richard, I will assume that you were directing your reply and tongue in cheek comments to what I wrote.   



 Let me say again for the record.  I do not recommend MMO to anyone for any purpose in any engine.  Many others actually do, and there are numerous articles supporting it's use for lead reduction, but since this topic has been discussed "Ad Nauseum" on this list, and since many readers are sick and tired of hearing the same old song and verse, I am not about to start up that whole tired argument yet again. 



 That said,  I have seen numerous engines with lead fouling on the valves, and it has happened to my engine twice.  Since I have run MMO, I have not had any problems with leading on the valves.  That is far from a good analysis, nor is it scientific, and it is not something I am going stand up on a soap box and argue about.  



 If you need information about MMO, this is not the forum to get it from (IMHO).  However, to address your question about how CamGuard compares to MMO, the answer is that they are two totally different products intended for two totally different purposes at least for the use I was discussing.  CamGuard is an additive supplement formulated to address the complex and interrelated problems of corrosion, wear, deposits and seal degradation in piston engines.  Quote Unquote. 



 It goes in the oil.  I am putting MMO into the FUEL.  Kind of different applications, don't you think? 



 If you want a sample size of more than "one", maybe you ought to look around on the Internet for more comments on the matter.  You can start with this one:  http://www.pipercubforum.com/marvel.htm



 In the end, regardless of what you feel like kissing Richard, I fully intend to continue using this product in the engines I operate.



 Mark Bitterlich

 ________________________________



 From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of RICHARD VOLKER

 Sent: Fri 10/8/2010 9:15 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: TITUS at Titusville, FL TICO Airshow

 I need information about MMO. Is there any aviation engine testing available with this additive? Are aircraft owners that are using this oil actually trusting anecdotal evidence or it's performance in non-aviation engines?  How does this additive compare to CamGuard? The engine teardown testing by Monte Barrett and others completely reinforces CamGuard claims, as has many independent, scientifically performed studies. A sample size of one is statistically useless in proving anything. Wait a minute,  I kiss my Sukhoi after every flight and it is running better than ever. Anybody else care to try that?

 Rick Volker



 On Oct 7, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E wrote:

       Hello Javier,

       

       Glad to hear you are happy with the ignition upgrade kit from Dennis.  I have been involved with that  mod on  several aircraft and in each case, the improvement has been very noticable, especially at idle. 

       

       Yes, I do use MMO... but clearly I am no expert in it's use.  I am one of these stupid people that think: "if a little bit is good, then a lot is even better!".  That is not an especially "informed or wise" point of view, but you asked, so I am admitting it!   

       

       My YAK-50 holds about 32 gallons.  I put about 1/2 quart or more in for a full tank.  In some cases, I've put as much as a full quart in, but that is not common and I usually have done that just because I did not want to carry an open container around in the aircraft so I just poured it all in.  Probably not too smart.   CLEARLY this is over the recommended amount... but I really don't think it has hurt anything since I have been doing it for almost 10 years now.  So, I suppose the answer to your question is to simply run the recommended amount but if you go a little over ... it doesn't seem to hurt anything.     This is subject to change by someone who knows more than me about the issue! 

       

       As for oil.... I use MMO as a kind of "cleaner".  When I get ready to change the oil in my engine, I pour in TWO QUARTS of MMO and then go for a short flight and run the engine hard.  I then come back and immediately drain it all out.  Again, this might not be a great recommendation, but it is what I do. 

       

       In short, the subject of MMO, how much to use, when to use it, and whether it is even any good in the first place.... is something that has  been a hot topic on this list server for quite a number of years.  In no way would I dare to recommend a certain amount, or even claim that the stuff really works!   I use it because it does not seem to hurt anything, and APPEARS to have helped me regarding valve leading issues. 

       

       Mark

       

      

      

 ________________________________



       From: Javier Carrasco

       Sent: Wed 10/6/2010 8:57 PM

       To: Mark Sorenson; yak-list(at)matronics.com

       Subject: Re: TITUS at Titusville, FL  TICO Airshow

      

      

 Hi Mark!



 Hope you are doing great!



 Hey I got the Spakplug kit from Dennis Savarece and the difference is just unbelievable!



 Hey are you using the Marvel Mystery Oil?



 If so in what proportion?



 And do you add it everytime you put gas? or how often?



 Regards, Javier

 --- On Sun, 3/14/10, Mark Sorenson <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com> wrote:



       From: Mark Sorenson <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com>

       Subject: TITUS at Titusville, FL TICO Airshow

       To: "Mark Sorenson" <captainsorenson(at)hotmail.com>

       Date: Sunday, March 14, 2010, 7:43 AM

      

      

       Sorry about the previous misfire with no photo attached.

      

       This was captured yesterday at the TICO Airshow, in Titusville, FL.  Other than having to deal with winds up to 30 mph it was a grrrrrrrrrreat day among grrrrrrrrrrreat people.

      

      

       Best regards,

       Mark Sorenson

       678-GO-FLY-HI

       www.tigerairshows.com

      

      

      

 ________________________________



       Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protGBL/go/210850553/direct/01/">Sign up now.

      

      

       et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List

       p://forums.matronics.com/

       blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution

rick(at)rvairshows.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 4:47 am Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

I do not believe that CamGuard impacts cylinder head and oil temps. The engines used for the testing were run at full power at temps close to redline for both CHT and oil temp in the air show environment. That means 15 minutes running time and abrupt cool down every flight for 500 hours.  Comparing engines with and without CamGuard following this same use pattern showed shocking differences in cylinder head and piston wall wear.  The tests suggested that there is great wear protection for engines flown at their temperature limits while using CamGuard. 

Rick Volker

On Oct 8, 2010, at 11:18 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E wrote:



[quote] 

 

 Are you saying that you feel that CamGuard impacts cylinder head temperatures and oil temperatures?  

 

 

 

 ________________________________

 

 From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of rick(at)rvairshows.com

 Sent: Fri 10/8/2010 10:58 PM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

 

 

 

 

 

 I have been running  CamGuard during daily flights at 100 % power for half of each flight. Max cruise for the other half. Will let you know how it turns out compared to past M14P engines with same service history.  CHT's never get over 380 degrees F. And oil temperatures in the green. I am looking for wear protection, obviously. 

 Rick Volker.

 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

 

 --

MarkWDavis

Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 104
Location: Syracuse, KS

Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 5:42 am Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

Mark,

     I had a Ford field engineer tell me several years ago that the new 

ultra low sulphur diesel fuels lack lubricity which will result in wear on 

component that weren't common with the former blends of diesel.  He 

recommended adding two stroke oil to diesel to restore the lubricity (a 

small bottle which will make one gallon of premix gas to each fill up). 

This was in regard to the 7.3L Powerstroke.  I'm not sure how the oil will 

go with the new generation diesels with EGR and DPF systems.  It is an oil 

designed to lubricate recipricating components and bearings then burn 

without excessive residue in the combustion cycle.  Who knows what residual 

remains to protect the exhaust valve seats.  Anyway, the point being, if TEL 

goes away, we may need to look at other ways to replace the lubricity in our 

fuels.  MMO does that, but a purpose designed oil like two stroke oil may be 

better when TEL eventually goes away entirely.



Mark Davis

N44YK

---

radiopicture

Joined: 23 Jun 2008
Posts: 263

Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 6:29 am Post subject: MMO vs. Camguard (subject change)

Man, I feel like we're just guessing at this stuff.

On Oct 9, 2010, at 9:39 AM, Mark Davis wrote:



[quote] 



 Mark,

    I had a Ford field engineer tell me several years ago that the  

 new ultra low sulphur diesel fuels lack lubricity which will result  

 in wear on component that weren't common with the former blends of  

 diesel.  He recommended adding two stroke oil to diesel to restore  

 the lubricity (a small bottle which will make one gallon of premix  

 gas to each fill up). This was in regard to the 7.3L Powerstroke.   

 I'm not sure how the oil will go with the new generation diesels  

 with EGR and DPF systems.  It is an oil designed to lubricate  

 recipricating components and bearings then burn without excessive  

 residue in the combustion cycle.  Who knows what residual remains to  

 protect the exhaust valve seats.  Anyway, the point being, if TEL  

 goes away, we may need to look at other ways to replace the  

 lubricity in our fuels.  MMO does that, but a purpose designed oil  

 like two stroke oil may be better when TEL eventually goes away  

 entirely.



 Mark Davis

 N44YK

 ---

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum