ORIGINAL: downunder
Could you expand on that? $8/litre seems ok to me.
Sure. Those who buy Castrol M at my clubs today pay 2006 pricing, not 1993 pricing.
However, your post persuaded me to take the head off my G51 to see what it was like inside. The photo shows the result of 30 hours of running with 25% Castrol M.
Show us the image of the outside
-BEFORE - you cleaned the baked on brown scum and gummy goo off.
Times change, people move on even if in 2006 the occasional oddball can still present a showroom example of a 1972 Datsun 180B with 30,000km on the clock which has been religiously polished every week and kept garaged its whole life. Your post proves what exactly? That Castrol M lubricates? I don't believe anyone including myself inferred it didn't.
It carbonises too.
I like my engines to still look like that (or cleaner on the inside) at 200hrs running, not 30...but on the outside as well without having them look like a bad cook's attempt to bake a cake. [X(]
Whether you accept it or not, the fact remains that there are simply better lubricants and superior quality Castors available in 2006 for the same or better pricing. But of course, no-one is forcing
you to use them. If we can accept that, you should too. it doesn't mean you're somehow less worthy because in your stubbornness you prefer to remain an anachronism.
Castrol M. Overrated locally = yes. Overpriced locally = yes. Thank you for playing. You are the weakest link. Good-bye. [sm=lol.gif]