CounterAct Corrosion Protection

[jmbinjax]

Does anyone have any experience with products like this? Any thoughts? I saw it breifly supported on Two Guys Garage and was wondering what your thoughts are.

[heimue]

Save your money. If it wasn't worth anything, it would be standard on new cars.

Dieter

[jmbinjax]

I'm not considering purchasing but was just wondering what others thought about it. Besides, the auto industry is built around planned obsolescence.

[BDD]

I was just going to say that. Not judging this "system" because it is different and seemingly related to cathodic corrosion protection, the fact is the automobile industry does not want your new car purchase or any car purchase to last forever or even for a long time. Either it must wear out or next year you start not liking it so much because the new years models look a bit better and have a perceived higher status than the older ones.

Either way, the industry definitely wants you to become dissastisfied with your current vehicle so you are compelled to get a new one.

Is ther an electrostatic way to prevent corrosion of metal? I dunno but I'd be skeptical. They should be able to prove that it works and works over time in real conditions with a salt solution sprayed under pressure all over your car and into metal seams in the winter, etc.

If they mention Nikola Tesla, I'd stay away.

[traytodd]

I looked at there first "description" page and only got that this is not the traditional cathodic protection method that has been used by industry for many years. Drilling down one more layer got a quasi explanation of the method with claims of patents. No patent numbers were released. All I got was that it was a pulsed system that applies a negative potential to the metal surfaces of the vehicle.

First, I am always leary of products that make such universal claims. I am even more leary when all they do is tell you what they are not. In these 2 pages there was no explanation of the science or a release of the patent number so that you could read it for oneself. Once patented, the technology is public domain so there is no reason to be vague or secretive.

Cathodic protection and sacraficial anodes have been used for years in refineries to protect pipes from salt water corrosion. Typically, they require a the corrosive medium to be fluidic and conductive to transport the corrosive ions away from the surface being protected to the sacraficial anode. So at first pass, I do not see how this system works in air on cars. I especially do not see how this works in the cracks and crevices were rust usually starts.

Yes, I do believe that Detroit likes planned obsolescence, however, most vehicles built today last about twice as long as they did in '50s and '60s. At 75 kmi on older cars, everything began to fail, water pumps, fuel pumps, stearing, brakes, transmissions, etc. By 100 kmi the cars were virtually wore out. It was rare back then for cars to go over 100-125 kmi. Today it is common reach 150 kmi and more without major repairs despite the fact that todays cars are far more complex.

Terry
'71 GT running strong and getting better all the time despite its 37 years

[Jeepsbeme]

Originally Posted by jmbinjax Besides, the auto industry is built around planned obsolescence.

Please tell me you really don't seriously believe this ancient myth!! Have you ever been exposed to any of the testing the OEM's perform?

Considering most of the OEM's test their vehicles to 150,000+ plus miles, how does the "planned obsolesence" factor fit into reality???????

[wrench459]

If I could go out and buy a product that would last a life time, be it a refrigerator,hair dryer,personal transportation device. I would.
The repairs on a modern vehicle sometimes is more than its worth.
Call it what ever you want.
Oh yes todays cars are better built last longer than there predisesors only because the japanese made major in roads back in the 80's in the US market.
They made the american company's improve there sorry quality.

[traytodd]

Consider this. 150 kmi divided by 50 mph is 3000 hrs. There are over 8700 hrs in a year. Hence the design life of a car is about 1/3 of year in continuous operation. Most factories would not allow that equipment into their plants.

I sat through a presentation by a GM VP in the mid 80s. At that time he said they were designing to a useful like of 150 kmi. It was rare Detroit iron that would last over 100 kmi at that time. Most cars are driven 12 kmi per year. That means the useful life is 12.5 years. For snowbelt cars, that is about the life expectancy of the body for cars that are heavily used in the winter.

I do not know if PA still has the biannual "safety" inspection that they had when I went to PSU in the '70s, but those dealers did not miss an opportunity to sell a new car twice a year. They vociferously supported that law.

That said, the average mileage I have gotten on 11 vehicles since my first car in 1967, is 110 kmi. Four of these vehicles are still rolling, although one is on life support at 200 kmi. One car went to the junkyard prematurely due to a collision. All the others were at the end of their useful life when we parted company excpet one. Several suffered severly from snowbelt rust. Two of them were Opels with 180 kmi and 130 kmi respectively. I am still adding miles to the latter.

Terry

[dcm013]

[QUOTE=BDD;172118]
Either way, the industry definitely wants you to become dissastisfied with your current vehicle so you are compelled to get a new one.

If this was really the case, why would we all still love our Opels

Don