Don't even remember why I removed the Dakota's intake plenum but the inside had a black and greasy looking coating.

Then I remembered I had sprayed in cleaner as the engine ran.

I concluded that the oily film mattered not at all because air didn't move through it as fast at a cruise speed of 2,000 RPM as it would a 12,000 RPM racing engine.

After I cleaned it.......I got exactly the same MPG as before.

Seafoam didn't do squat in my Bronco...not that it's a bad product, maybe the motor really was well taken care of and wasn't going to see a benefit from a cleaner but...it was a waste of my money.

Personally, I just use Chevron. It's the same price as everyone else's gasoline here and the Techron is one of the best cleaners out there. If I feel I need to run some cleaner through something, I use Lucas - I've heard it's easier on any gaskets it runs past on the way through.

i've heard techron is good as well, but there are no longer any chevrons or texacos near me. :(

lucas says on the container that it's an upper cylinder lube, so that makes sense. i just use a more cost effective means: a couple ounces of 2 stroke (ashless)motor oil.

Techron fuel treatment can be bought at WalMart and auto parts stores.

absolutely. i just liked getting it for "free", already in the gas. i'm not convinced fuel cleaners are cost effective, so i've been experimenting w/ making my own.

If you want to make sure your fuel injectors are cleaned. Remove them and send them to fuel injector cleaning company that flows them.

I used Arizona TPI. I do not work for them, but I have sent my injectors to them for two of my vehicles. They will also send you a print out of the before and after results.

I'm from Az, so turn around time was about a week. I do not remember how much it cost, I think it was around $60.00. (The cheapest I could find on the internet, plus I've heard good things about the company.)

Good Luck,
Ryan

my local Advance Auto Parts has sea foam on sale for $6.99, down from its reg price of $9.99. check your local store if interested.

Same here. Must be chain-wide.

Ditto in Indiana.

Chain wide, then.

I did not have to replace injectors on my Dakota. Went 623,000 miles on them. Used Costco gas.

I had to replace all four injectors on my Volvo. Used Arco gas.

shatto, how did your usage patterns differ? Did your Volvo get driven long-distance daily like your Dakota did?

The Volvo Doctor told me it was the Arco gas. I'm sure that in the ensuing twenty years their petrol has improved.

I have buildup in the intake from the PCV system, and I'm thinking about just spraying gasoline in through the PCV port. I'm guessing the O2 sensor will adjust the amount of injector pulse, so it will hopefully run. Does this sound like a good idea?

i don't have much experience or knowledge of E10's cleaning effectiveness. many swear by using sea foam in vacuum lines.

gotta wonder...w/ alcohol now in our gas and self cleaning injectors, do we really need FI cleaner? this is no to suggest that injectors don't leak or fail.

Redline

Let's say I try this water treatment - pour a quart slowly down the throttle body, with an assistant holding the RPMs at about 2000. Then I drive it hard around the city block, and park it.

Later I check the oil, and find it to be milky colored. I got water in the crankcase.

Would this water boil off, or should I change the oil?

CHANGE THE OIL NOW!

hehe...

YES SIR!

kind of stinks, cause I'm not even 100 miles into this fresh oil change...

How about the filter?

ABSOTIVELY!!!

Mine is better!
My way is best!
Do this!
Do that!

How about finding comparisons that use a common test method?

Here is the Amsoil test standards:

Standards

by Ed Newman
AMSOIL Marketing & Advertising Manager
This article appeared in National Oil & Lube News, March 2006
In 1986 I caught a PBS show that featured Tom Peters, author of the 1982 bestseller ?In Search of Excellence.? If you are familiar with Tom Peters you know his style is designed to shake things up. He doesn?t pull punches and at this point in time he was very harsh on U.S. companies for their lack of commitment to high standards.

The story I remember best is about a company that made hydraulic systems. They had sold one of their systems to a Japanese firm and after the unit was assembled and in operation there were six leaks with hydraulic fluid running out. The Japanese firm called the U.S. manufacturer to complain, but instead of the U.S. rep apologizing or offering to help resolve the issue, he defended the leaks. He said, ?There are 600 joints in that system. There is only one leak per 100 joints and that is pretty good, wouldn?t you say?? Now remember, this is a hydraulic system.

The point Peters made was not rocket science, just common sense. Applied common sense is probably Peters? claim to fame. In order for a hydraulic system to operate there should be no leaks. This, therefore, must be the standard for any manufacturer of hydraulic systems.

Around that same time I did a photo shoot for an AMSOIL ad that involved an old Toyota and a new Corvette. During the shoot I noticed something interesting. The bead of caulk around the windshield on the Corvette was applied in such an irregular and primitive manner that it was dreadful. The same windshield bead on the Toyota was perfect all the way around. This was a very expensive Corvette. I am not trying to be harsh, but it was evident there were different standards of quality applied by the two companies and you had to ask yourself, ?If what I can see is so poorly done, what about the things I can?t see??

BY WHAT STANDARD?
What is the measure of lubricant quality? There are two organizations especially devoted to the development of standards, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).

The API came into existence around the time of World War I. After the breakup of Standard Oil, the competing independent oil companies were brought together to ensure that petroleum supplies would be efficiently deployed to the U.S. armed forces. After the war this informal association of oil companies became officially established as the American Petroleum Institute.

At first they worked on standardizing oil field equipment. Eventually they began to standardize best practices and set minimum standards for oil quality.

Though not specifically an oil industry organization, ASTM develops uniform procedures that can be duplicated and verified by laboratories in any location. The goal of establishing standards is so important that the official publication of ASTM International is called Standardization News.

Founded in 1898 and completely voluntary, ASTM is now one of the largest non-profit standards development systems in the world. The organization currently has 134 committees that write standardized test methods for materials, products, systems and services. More than 8500 ASTM specifications have been established for products as diverse as metal, paints, plastics, textiles, energy, consumer products, medical services and instruments and even the environment.

Developing standard measurement methods is part of the task of ASTM. Equally important is determining what measures are important, tests that actually correspond to what the function of motor oil is intended to fulfill.

What follows here are some ASTM tests commonly used to evaluate motor oil performance.

ASTM D-445 Kinematic Viscosity
ASTM D-2270 Viscosity Index
ASTM D-5293 Cold Crank Simulator Apparent Viscosity
ASTM D-3829 Borderline Pumping Temperature
ASTM D-97 Pour Point
ASTM D-92 Flash Point and Fire Point
ASTM D-4683 High Temp, High Shear Viscosity
ASTM D-4742 Oxidation Stability
ASTM D-892 Foaming Tendency
ASTM D-5800 Noack Volatility
ASTM D-4172B Four Ball Wear Test









These are just a few of the common bench tests that lab directors and chemists have selected because they measure variables of lubrication that are critical to engine performance. Tests such as high temperature, high shear viscosity and oxidation stability are among the most important, but each of the tests plays a role in determining the value of a motor oil. And when you get to the bottom line, it?s an undisputed fact that by nearly every measure today?s premium synthetic motor oils are superior to conventional petroleum oils. This truth is never even questioned by industry professionals.

The key to identifying a quality lubricant is not by its advertising claims or memorizing the color of a label. In fact, standardized tests have shown that even within a product line there can be inconsistent levels of performance.
Hollywood films are often made memorable by a single line. In the Tom Cruise film Jerry Maguire, Cuba Gooding Jr. not only stole the show, he also brought home an Oscar with that now famous demand, ?Show me the money.?

In our industry, when it comes to performance the words I look for are, ?Show me the data.? Objective test results are the true measure of motor oil quality. What this means is that when your customer is running synthetics, good things are happening under the hood.

Ed Newman is Marketing & Advertising Manager for AMSOIL INC.

i know we're off topic, but i gotta support shatto on this...

price regarding true synthetics is a moot point because there are less frequent changing intervals--so i no longer debate it, it's dead. besides, time saved is money saved, period.

my thoughts go to the "extreme" NOW situations. heat and cold. if your car gets hot, synthetic is what you want. overheating can happen anytime to any vehicle, well maintained or not. that's cheap insurance.

how many know that cold does not weaken batteries? heat and time do. however, when it gets cold, the "thicker" oil taxes the battery at start up. having a synthetic w/ lower pour point combats this.

so for you "long term" doubters, that there's some short term benefit!

ran across this...https://www.cruzinperformance.com/injsteps.html in regard to injector cleaning and the process thereof. pretty cool!

Re: Opinion: Best Fuel Injector/Intake Cleaner
 

seafoam now has this...https://www.seafoamsales.com/sea-foam-spray.html w/ a funky straw shape to reach deep inside throttle bodies.

Re: Opinion: Best Fuel Injector/Intake Cleaner
 

Amsoil n seafoam for the win

Re: Opinion: Best Fuel Injector/Intake Cleaner
 

Well I guess theoretically this is somewhat true, but a battery will give a lower voltage and fewer amp in the cold, just ask an EV guy. The oil will cause very little difference, as when your starting the car; the engine has almost no oil in it. If you turn you engine by hand (with a socket wrench) I doubt you could really feel a difference hot weather vs. cold (based on working on my POS's in all types of honorable weather). But it's easy to see the voltage of your bat. change with the temp.

I picked up some sea foam a few weeks ago at Walmart when I got my winter jug of 0W30. I ended up changing the oil in a hurry before a trip, so I didn't mess with the SF in the oil. The bottle makes it sound as though it's fine to add to your oil and just, well, forget about it. I would think that it would evaporate and burn off (mostly through the PCV), but I'm a little hesitant to add anything to my oil. And if it did work than my oil would get really dirty, and need to be changed.
I once tried an oil additive which you put in just before and oil change, it didn't pass my test, but it didn't do anything bad.

Re: Opinion: Best Fuel Injector/Intake Cleaner
 

I once put seafoam into the oil, and went about 70 miles before draining the oil. The oil didn't look different when it came out, after sitting , a lot of sludge settled out of it.

Re: Opinion: Best Fuel Injector/Intake Cleaner
 

FYI...

don't know if it's nation wide, but my local advance auto parts had shell v-power fuel system cleaner on clearance for 95 cents(12 oz, up to 20 gal treatment). i bought the last 8!

Re: Opinion: Best Fuel Injector/Intake Cleaner
 

AWWW CRAP! No wonder I couldn't find any there! :)

Re: Opinion: Best Fuel Injector/Intake Cleaner
 

Ha! I did the same thing. Called a friend and he went by an Advance Auto Parts closer to him for 11 bottles from their shelf! I may hit up one tomorrow morning to clean house again.:D

I apologize for bumping this old topic, but I have done quite a bit of research on this, so I want to share my experience.
Seafoam, as with many additives, consists of a solvent in a light oil carrier. Iirc in the case of Seafoam the solvent is naphtha. It works OK for dissolving fuel varnish because that's what it's designed to do. The problem with injecting it into your manifold is that 1) It's not very effective and 2) You end up burning the oil carrier. That's why it smokes so badly. Burning oil from any source isn't good for your engine and it especially isn't good for your catalytic converter if you have one.

I prefer using water for de-carbonization https://wheelstips.com/best-diesel-injector-cleaner and using a top tier gasoline along with a PAE (polyetheramine) based fuel additive a couple of times a year. That'll keep everything including the injectors clean. Gumout Regane (the yellow stuff in the clear bottle), Redline SI-1, and Techron Concentrate are all PAE based.

I said what the consequences are in a recent thread. It was rebuked so I left it up to the members to decide. You have to remember I deal with this sort of stuff all the time so when I run into those who "know better" I back off.

I'll say it again: The product has it's uses but this isn't one of them. Using it this way only lightens your wallet and shortens the life of your cat without benefit. The product is mostly light oil. Where do you think all the smoke comes from? Since when is combusting oil in either the cylinders or converter good? Rich mixtures kill cats so oil won't? If it removes any carbon it'll only be a tiny amount. If all you have is a tiny amount you're doing more harm then good because a small amount works to protect the piston crown. Good thing it comes right back, which makes the "treatment" even more of a waste. If you want to clean excessive carbon use water injection, an overnight piston soak, walnut blasting, or any of the other *proven* methods. Once it's gone keep it at bay by regular use of a PEA based fuel additive.

Aside from all the other tests you could've done a simple way for verifying it's lack of effectiveness is to examine the motor, including the valves, before and after using a borescope. I have a surplus medical instrument I use for those jobs. It was originally designed for, well, lets just say it's been shoved inside far worse places than a motor. I would've suggested doing this except it's already been done by myself and many, many other people who aren't as gullible as most of the public. The results are always the same: it does squat. People who swear by it don't do science. They accept anecdotal evidence from others. Being ignorant is not the same as being a dumbass but imo anyone who uses something without understanding the science behind it, based on what others say who also don't, is.

At least you did some "research" even if it wasn't the best kind. And like most people you did it after the fact. Frankly, if I was going to rely on what others say about a product's effectiveness (and I never do) I'd sure as hell require a lot better than 50% odds before any cash came flying outta my wallet. And even if the product did work I'll point out injecting anything into the brake booster line results in a very poor distribution of it across cylinders. If you feel a need to dump stuff into your engine do it upstream of the plenum, through the throttle body for example.