Diamond Lube

[P-hack]

Originally Posted by DiamondLube

and it doesn't conform to current scientific theory

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Originally Posted by DiamondLube

, but it means something to racing people like the guys car on my webpage.

This ISN'T the numbnuts racing forum, where they laugh at fuel efficiency, I think maybe you did make a wrong turn.

[slownugly]

It's always the same thing with the testimonials. Sounds like an info-mercial over and over and over. This isn't about horsepower or how well my rifle works its about mileage. Do you have any data on YOUR OWN A-B testing or one of your beloved customers? About the closest weve come to that so far is the link to the 60 mpg geo and that has zero testing.

My advice is to grab a friend or relatives car. Document with pictures a fuel log of maybe 1-3 weeks before treatment. Remember when doing an experiment the more data the more accurate you will get. Then post pics of when you do the treatment. And then report the filling fuel results. Very very very simple.

Did I mention it's simple?

[DiamondLube]

An FCC Driver has been awarded top MPG driver of the year for 2 or 3 years in a row. Fremont Contract Carriers is in Fremont NB, Even though this drivers personal semi went from 6.2 to 9 MPG, these people are so afraid of this diamond coating they wont even look at it. He later postponed an oil change out to 120,000 miles w/ oil analysis every 5000 miles showing good oil all the way. For some criminal reason, FCC ignores their own GPS fuel data. Could be Cat or Detroit Diesel said diamonds are forbidden and will void any warranty, even though oil analysis showed that wear was drastically reduced. Can't let the sheeple have that now, can we?

I have one year post treatment data directly from the city of Rock Hill, SC on a garbage truck showing about 20% MPG increase and their people refuse to talk with me now. MPG is a secondary benefit to wear resistance of treated parts, like cooler hydraulic fluid and longer lasting hoses. Just happens that NAPA is setup in the City garage to supply hydraulic and other oil, filters and parts - and NAPA has the data, and they both buried me to protect NAPA sales. Rock Hill refuses to provide additional data. They ignored their own data to protect the status quo, and ignoring ebay feedback from product users accomplishes the same thing.

Lets say you don't know how it works on ebay, so you charge someone $1 extra for shipping and negative feedback gets posted. You ship out the package and it gets lost, another negative feedback. Customer lost his job, breaks the object on purpose, blames you for false advertising and bingo - another negative. I sell 3ml bottles of diamond coating at $15-$25 and $150 - $600 car kits and the buyers realize 1: they did not buy oil and 2: whatever they bought works as advertised.

Again, I didn't come here to peddle my wares, I popped in to say hello, and tell you what I invented. The rest is up to you.

Contact our NC distributor Michele through Home Page for the SC garbage truck data

Originally Posted by slownugly

Diamondlube- I'm assuming you run this in your personal vehicle. If you can get your hands on a vehicle that doesn't have it and do extensive AB testing to actually prove those large 15-35% or whatever increases then it might spark something. That's such a large claim it should show night and day in a fuel log. It would be like takin your vehicles drag coefficient from .35 to .2 or maybe even lower.

[ChazInMT]

Originally Posted by DiamondLube

You are assuming that the oil will always be Stuck to the metal providing a protective barrier - then why the need for an oil filter? ..........Blah Blah Ditty Blaahhhh Bl Blah....... rings and cylinders is the primary Key.

Sooo, you can't explain anything technically then can you? You just ask more questions.

You refuse to answer any real questions. I'm OK with that. It shows you really are ignorant to reality and choose to stick to your anecdotal evidence (stories told by others without real proof) that your stuff works in cars.

As well, it appears you have no skin in the patent game whatsoever because you continually illustrate a glaring ignorance to that process. I've noticed no mention of a patent on your web page. After carefully reading what you've said here you have never said you filed a patent either, just that you filed in 2006. I filed in 2006 too, I filed my lawnmower blade, and I put some papers in a properly marked folder for later reference. That's good, cause I'm sure it is a serious breach of law to say you have a patent pending when in fact you have nothing of the sort. I'm guessing you filed, it was rejected, and you gave up, thus "Intentionally Delaying" the process.

I'm done here, there can be no reasonable discussion with someone of your mindset with no knowledge of physics as I've found with other "Buy my stuff and get 30% better mileage" people who show up here. As the guy on Shark Tank says, "You're dead to me."

[P-hack]

"testimonial, testimonial, not here to make a buck, here's my distributor"

You don't understand at all. To have credibility requires rigor, you can't say "add this abrasive to your engine and change a bunch of other fluids, all these other people did." and expect instant credibility. Testimonials are COMPLETELY worthless, yet that is all you have. It is your problem if you want to make money, that is nobody elses problem, and doesn't relieve you from the responsibility of proving your claims by documenting EVERYTHING, including what other fluids you are adding, other changes being made, testing procedures, control procedures. If you rush out to make a buck, then you are at a conflict of interest with good science, and that is exactly what you have done, and the ONLY reason you are here.

BTW, you did agree to this when you signed up:
"The posting of commercial ads (including links in signatures and profiles) is not permitted without permission of the site admins."

[slownugly]

Here's my scientific evidence

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-54Y...e_gdata_player

[Fat Charlie]

The biggest problem has to do with apples and oranges. A lube is not an MPG product, it's a lube. Reducing internal friction in an engine does not result in a predictable amount of gain in mpg, in the way proposed:

Originally Posted by euromodder

From their website :

That's like saying a particular performance product will take a second off your quarter time or a pill will let you lift an additional 10 pounds. These enhancements may (and probably do) help, but there are too many variables involved in mpg, racing times and physical capabilities to package the products with a claim of percentage gain.

I don't need to be a chemist, I don't even want the raw data. I want to be reassured that someone who isn't selling it has tested it and agrees. Anecdotes and a mil-spec smokescreen don't even rate the dignity of an unimpressive rating. Painting people as illiterate and saying they don't understand science is even less impressive when one's assertations of what constitutes proof show a lack of understanding of both language and science.

I'm just saying, is all.

[RedDevil]

So Diamondlube does not contain fullerene. It just contains microscopic particles of the hardest material on earth, the best abrasive powder you can get. Maybe that might just work, smoothing out the surfaces in contact? Would be a first though.

Sadly, I lost interest in the matter. Time to unsubscribe from this thread.

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by ChazInMT

Sooo, you can't explain anything technically then can you? You just ask more questions.

You refuse to answer any real questions. I'm OK with that. It shows you really are ignorant to reality and choose to stick to your anecdotal evidence (stories told by others without real proof) that your stuff works in cars.

As well, it appears you have no skin in the patent game whatsoever because you continually illustrate a glaring ignorance to that process. I've noticed no mention of a patent on your web page. After carefully reading what you've said here you have never said you filed a patent either, just that you filed in 2006. I filed in 2006 too, I filed my lawnmower blade, and I put some papers in a properly marked folder for later reference. That's good, cause I'm sure it is a serious breach of law to say you have a patent pending when in fact you have nothing of the sort. I'm guessing you filed, it was rejected, and you gave up, thus "Intentionally Delaying" the process.

I'm done here, there can be no reasonable discussion with someone of your mindset with no knowledge of physics as I've found with other "Buy my stuff and get 30% better mileage" people who show up here. As the guy on Shark Tank says, "You're dead to me."

. . . you show a lack of deep physics in many of your posts as well as practical common knowledge. Piston ring drag is by far the greatest singular source of friction in an internal combustion piston engine. DiamondLube may not be forthcoming on how it works, but if his product does reduce ring drag an appreciable amount there will be significant improvements. And the cylinder wall to ring interface would be an ideal place to test nano lubricants as there is little to no fluid lubrication.

[slownugly]

correct me if im wrong but the compression rings cause the most drag. there may be little to no lubrication at the pistons for a reason. i wouldnt really want that stuff toying with a good compression ring seal. what if the stuff slips past and ruins the ring seal?

we have enough problems with ethanol slipping past our rings as it is. ive seen more vehicles with oil burning problems in the last year than the last 9 weve owned our shop. regular oil is slipping by these rings, whats to say this stuff wont make things worse. 3 chevy cobalts in 6 months that burned the oil out and released the timing chain tension. bent valves.

yea ill let someone else risk the investment.