Just Say No to Aftermarket
Additives
The performance benefits of aftermarket additives are mostly
unsubstantiated.
This
article appeared in AMSOIL DirectLine, December 1, 2001
AMSOIL has
long discouraged motorists from using any kind of aftermarket
lubricant additive. After all, AMSOIL synthetic lubricants use the
finest quality synthetic basestocks and additive systems. In the
"Questions and Answers About AMSOIL Synthetic Motor Oils" brochure
(G-359), in response to the question "Should oil additives or
aftermarket products be added to AMSOIL motor oils?" it states,
"No, you don't need them. AMSOIL motor oils are formulated under
the strictest quality control standards to provide superior
lubrication performance. Additives cost money and only detract from
the quality of AMSOIL motor oils."
A perfect
example of why AMSOIL discourages use of aftermarket additives is the
Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) recent lawsuit against zMax auto
additives, seeking to halt false and misleading advertising and gain
refunds for consumers who purchased the products. According to the
FTC, the enhanced performance benefits zMax claims its products
provide are totally unsubstantiated, and in the same tests cited to
support performance claims, motor oil treated with zMax actually
produced more than twice as much bearing corrosion than motor oil by
itself. They further allege that the three different zMax products -
an engine additive, a fuel line additive and a transmission additive -
are nothing more than tinted mineral oil.
The complaint
states that since at least May of 1999, zMax has aired infomercials
promoting its "Power System," a $39 package of three additives to
be used in the engine, fuel line and transmission of automobiles. The
infomercials are quite convincing, even going as far as featuring
testimonials from various consumers and race car drivers making such
claims as, "I was averaging about 22 miles to the gallon on the
highway. I installed the zMax and so I jumped right up to about 28
miles per gallon" and "zMax guarantees a minimum of 10 percent gas
mileage increase." Other advertising claims "zMax with LinKite has
the scientific, CRC L38 proof it takes your car to the Max!" and
"Why zMax Works - Cuts carbon build-up on valve stems 66%; Lowers
wear on valve stems 66%; Lowers wear on piston skirts 60%; Reduces
blow-by leakage 17.7%; Increases combustion efficiency 9.25%; Lowers
fuel consumption 8.5% - Results of an independent CRC L38 test."
The CRC L38
test is a standard auto industry test which measures the bearing
corrosion protection properties of motor oils. According to the
complaint, in early 1997 an independent testing facility performed two
CRC L38 tests of the zMax products. The results showed motor oil
treated with the zMax additives produced more than double the bearing
corrosion as motor oil alone. According to the FTC, the defendants
eliminated the bearing corrosion results, as well as all other
negative results, to produce one "report" from the two sets of
tests, using this "report" in its infomercials and on its website.
The FTC
charge alleges that zMax did not possess and rely on reasonable
substantiation for the following product claims:
.
increases gas mileage by a minimum of 10%
. reduces engine wear
. reduces or eliminates engine wear at startup
. reduces engine corrosion
. extends engine life
. reduces emissions
They also
allege that the defendants falsely represent that the results of the
CRC L38 test prove that zMax:
.
increases gas mileage
. reduces engine wear
. extends engine life
. lowers fuel consumption by 8.5%
. lowers wear on valve stems by 66%
. lowers wear on piston skirts by 60%
. cuts carbon build-up on valve stems by 66%
Finally, the
FTC charges that zMax does not have substantiation for the
representation that the testimonials and endorsements shown in zMax
advertising are "the actual and current opinions, findings, beliefs,
and/or experiences of those consumers; and the typical or ordinary
experience of members of the public who use the product."
The lawsuit
against zMax is the latest in a long line of FTC charges against auto
additive manufacturers. The FTC has previously halted allegedly
deceptive advertising by the marketers of Dura Lube, Motor Up,
Prolong, Valvoline, Slick 50, STP and other major brands of engine
treatment systems.
|