Which of these two fuel treatments is the most effective? Zmax or ATS 505 CRF ??
"Zmax" makes nonsensical claims such as "soaking into metal". The metals used in engines are not porous, is this stuff acid? That claim alone puts it into the category of snake oil.
Also note that in 2001 the FTC filed suit against Zmax "to halt false and misleading advertising for zMax auto additives" and stated that "enhanced performance claims for the product are unsubstantiated, that tests cited to support performance claims actually demonstrated that motor oil treated with zMax produced more than twice as much bearing corrosion than motor oil alone, and that the three different products - an engine additive, a fuel line additive and a transmission additive - were all actually tinted mineral oil."
The settlement had the Zmax marketers pay $1,000,000 in restitution due to false advertising claims, though the company was permitted to continue but had to significantly tone down its claims.
https://www.lubesngreases.com/lubereport/3_13/zmax-marketers-settle-for-1-million/
The SDS indicates as well that the product is simply mineral oil. A little searching will also produce comments such as "Zmax is garbage" in this forum thread:
https://www.challengerforumz.com/threads/z-max-is-garbage.86435/
So it would appear that the verdict on Zmax products is...
I didn't note at first that the product asked about was actually not their motor oil treatment but their fuel treatment. However the issues with that product go to the less than savory character of the company, and it was also stated in the FTC lawsuit that all of their products, including the fuel treatment, were basically tinted mineral oil.
Scotty would probably say the ATS.
