The Peckish Synapse

[customboss]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

FILM STENGTH is FILM THICKNESS period. 

Molecular structure that forms film = strength. ESPECIALLY OVER DRAIN INTERVAL.  

[customboss]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Don't be absurd. Load and speed are the very definition of cylinder pressure and rpm.  

 

Yes and if load only needs a certain film thickness / strength more isn’t better. 

[Grumpy Bear]

4 hours ago, customboss said:

Molecular structure that forms film = strength. ESPECIALLY OVER DRAIN INTERVAL.  

 

How many ways can you indirectly define viscosity?  

 

4 hours ago, customboss said:

Yes and if load only needs a certain film thickness / strength more isn’t better. 

 

True and obvious.  

 

Your saying 0W16 or W20 is enough and I'm saying  

Not what WEAR STUDIES indicate. GM, University, SAE or Military. 

 

Problem has been here that humanity NEEDS a thing to be true that can never be true. Humanity needs  a different set of physical laws to control the universe they can't have, and they can't make a thing true by regulating it, wishing it or saying it's so. What they can do it market it until you get one hundred monkeys to believe it, get the world to follow and suffer the consequences that sort of stupidity delivers every time. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[customboss]

50 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

How many ways can you indirectly define viscosity?  

 

 

True and obvious.  

 

Your saying 0W16 or W20 is enough and I'm saying  

Not what WEAR STUDIES indicate. GM, University, SAE or Military. 

 

Problem has been here that humanity NEEDS a thing to be true that can never be true. Humanity needs  a different set of physical laws to control the universe they can't have, and they can't make a thing true by regulating it, wishing it or saying it's so. What they can do it market it until you get one hundred monkeys to believe it, get the world to follow and suffer the consequences that sort of stupidity delivers every time. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Im stating that if an engine is is designed for 6 cSt  150 C that putting something in that’s 10 cSt @150C   is not needed. What do you not understand about that?

[customboss]

I’m not talking about humanity. I can’t deal with my humanity. I’ve formulated for engine makers and using what you describe is ridiculous. 

[Grumpy Bear]

31 minutes ago, customboss said:

Im stating that if an engine is is designed for 6 cSt  150 C that putting something in that’s 10 cSt @150C   is not needed. What do you not understand about that?

 

That there is something new under the sun? That part?

 

Asperity height is the unmovable object in the way of less vicious oils. 

 

I ran some Honda's a quarter million with 5W20 oils. Just not any that were under a W30 HTHS 150 C value. Not even after KRL. 

 

These GF-6A oils are the polar opposite of this: 

 

Red Line HP 5W20

 

Valvoline 0W20 GF-6A

 

 

This second oil is 2.7 for a hot second and a 8.4 at 100 C until stressed. The SSI is awful. 

 

GF-6B oils...

 

And again, you can't SAY at thing true. 

 

 

[Grumpy Bear]

57 minutes ago, customboss said:

I’ve formulated for engine makers and using what you describe is ridiculous. 

 

Ridiculous as used is an opinion. You are welcome to yours. Blind belief in a product that when used has gotten every manufacture in the USA sued...that's ridiculous. Oil consumption class actions speak against such silly thinking. Just no one is listening. But hey...you do you. 

 

 

[Grumpy Bear]

I don't live in the land of Porsche or Bentley with exotic plating's on both bore and ring. I live in the world of experimental GM DLH ring coatings on ultra thin very low tension rings and in iron bores still plateau honed. That world is sued silly for power cylinder FAILURES of seal. It's asperity height is the same today as it was 50 years ago AFTER  the break in. Plateau honing gets it sealed quicker to the same roughness. 

 

The very fact that they seal almost universally to about 80K miles then fail in concert SCREAMS oil issues. Ring coking. Plating failure. Extreme wear rates. Take you pick but thinner isn't the answer. Less of what made it work is not the answer. Elves living is stumps isn't the answer either. 

 

The LV1/LV3 and the V8's of the Ecotech3 series motor use the same ring type in the same bore type and prep. They live in the same world driven by the same Joe Average. They have the same power density +/-. They have the same TSBs on oil consumption. Yet the LV1/LV3 motors have a fraction of the RING/BORE failure rates the V8's do. They use the same cam materials and use the same part number lifters with a VLOM made from the same parts sans the casting. they also have a fraction of the cam/lifter issues. FRACTION. 

 

The difference is? The oil GRADE specified. 

 

 

[Grumpy Bear]

On 12/13/2024 at 10:37 PM, Grumpy Bear said:

Ford Model A

 

https://modelafordclub.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Ford-Model-A-Which-Oil-to-Use-Petroleum-vs-Synthetic-March-2012.pdf

 

I'd hoped this would have gotten more traction. Model A is an interest of mine as it was my fathers and my grandfathers first cars. Also David Granquist of Red Line. An owner and tourer. As well as a dozen others I knew from clubs and just growing up.  

 

This motor had a spec oil of SAE40 summer and SAE20 winter with an OCI of 500 book miles per Ford. Oil was, well....different then. Straight cuts solvent dewaxed. What we call Group II didn't exist. It has zero additives. A true "Conventional" mineral oil. 

 

These motors hadn't any air filters nor oil filters. Oil was pumped to a trough and splashed/dripped and whipped. On a rural dirt road this was good for as little engine life as 8K miles. By the time dad bough his they had been around a few years and he's no dummy. He fitted his with an air filter, changed oil like life depended on it every 500 miles as did many others that were now seeing 40-60K miles from these same no frills, no additive SAE 40 oils. If a guy fit a filter to one he could see 80K without much more effort. 

 

Today allot of guys use 10W30 or SAE 30 in them and get less life now than they did by the 1940's. Full of additives and using much more refined oils that we call Group II and Group III. Those that use SAE 10W40 are well over 100K between rebuilds and a few fellas using 20W50 breaking 150K. 

 

So...let that sink in a minute. I can get 80K miles from a 100 year old mechanical technology using a SAE40 SA additive free Group I/II oil and get the same miles to ring failure as todays best tech and factory spec GF-6 0W20 oils?  

 

 

[Grumpy Bear]

Standing in a Burning House

 

Lot's of people are doing this. Standing in the living room. Looking out the picture window at a guy waving his arms and yelling, "Your house is on fire", holding a cuppa joe and laughing shouting to the wife, "You see this nut case out here?"

 

 

Romans 1:19,20 makes this observation about humans, "......what may be known about God is clearly evident among them, for God made it clear to them. For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable."

 

 

 

[Grumpy Bear]

BS on steroids

 

Just read a paper on HTHS vs Wear and could not believe the amount of double talk going on in such a paper. 

 

Run down then. Pull an oil off the self by HTHS WITHOUT knowing anything but the number and you will find that wear is all over the map vs HTHS and so the paper concludes. Some *w20 can have better wear than some *W30's. OMG are you kidding me.  Because? Not all VM's are the same. Not al VM treat rates are the same and as such not all stressed viscosities are the same even for the same grade. 

 

Paper also states that straight weigh monograde HTHS correlation to wear is pretty straight forward. Imagine that!

 

Much discussion on VM TYPE and AMOUNT. No kidding. But OEM recommendations are not given on HTHS or HTHSV values. They are given in API Grade.  

 

A clue for the clueless. You can have a GF-6 5W30 oil that uses a OCP polymer with a stellar cold flow thus a very low base oil viscosity and thus a huge amount of polymer that under stress is <2.6 cP at 150 C under HTHSV conditions. 

 

You can also have a 5W30 non-GF-6 oil with a less stellar CCV but STILL IN SPEC thus a higher viscosity base and thus less polymer of a 0-5 SSI Star configuration and have an oil that under those same conditions will execute 3.7 cP!

 

So you can by 5W30's that in the 'real world' behave like SAE grades between 0W16 and SAE30 and all meet the SAE 5W30 requirements. Same it true for 0W20 oils with a one grade SAE call out. 

 

There is so much focus on cold start and fuel economy that wear gets lost in the weeds. 

 

Cold start is absolutely a concern. IF YOU ARE A SHORT TIPPER whose oil never gets up to temp. 0.5% to 4.0% increase in fuel economy can span a 30% range in wear. 

 

There is an absolute PUSH to keep the water turbid and fear high and knowledge suppressed and more than a few actual oil experts are falling prey to the shear volume of 

 

 

[NaturallyAspirated]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Bear said:

BS on steroids

 

Just read a paper on HTHS vs Wear and could not believe the amount of double talk going on in such a paper. 

 

Run down then. Pull an oil off the self by HTHS WITHOUT knowing anything but the number and you will find that wear is all over the map vs HTHS and so the paper concludes. Some *w20 can have better wear than some *W30's. OMG are you kidding me.  Because? Not all VM's are the same. Not al VM treat rates are the same and as such not all stressed viscosities are the same even for the same grade. 

 

Paper also states that straight weigh monograde HTHS correlation to wear is pretty straight forward. Imagine that!

 

Much discussion on VM TYPE and AMOUNT. No kidding. But OEM recommendations are not given on HTHS or HTHSV values. They are given in API Grade.  

 

A clue for the clueless. You can have a GF-6 5W30 oil that uses a OCP polymer with a stellar cold flow thus a very low base oil viscosity and thus a huge amount of polymer that under stress is <2.6 cP at 150 C under HTHSV conditions. 

 

You can also have a 5W30 non-GF-6 oil with a less stellar CCV but STILL IN SPEC thus a higher viscosity base and thus less polymer of a 0-5 SSI Star configuration and have an oil that under those same conditions will execute 3.7 cP!

 

So you can by 5W30's that in the 'real world' behave like SAE grades between 0W16 and SAE30 and all meet the SAE 5W30 requirements. Same it true for 0W20 oils with a one grade SAE call out. 

 

There is so much focus on cold start and fuel economy that wear gets lost in the weeds. 

 

Cold start is absolutely a concern. IF YOU ARE A SHORT TIPPER whose oil never gets up to temp. 0.5% to 4.0% increase in fuel economy can span a 30% range in wear. 

 

There is an absolute PUSH to keep the water turbid and fear high and knowledge suppressed and more than a few actual oil experts are falling prey to the shear volume of 

 

 

Informative. Rings true with what a mechanic friend has always said to me. Thank you.

[diyer2]

[Grumpy Bear]

29 minutes ago, diyer2 said:

 

 

What we get out of a document is less about what is said and more about HOW it is said. Sometimes what is eluded to but left out. What is 'dropped' sans context. Poly-tish'ns do it all the time. They call it SPIN. I call it lying. 

 

I guess in a round about way the OEM's do specify more than an SAE Grade. GM in example calls out say a 5W30 Dexox1Gen3 which is a " minimum spec" 2.9 cP oil with a 0.9% ash content. Porsche calls out a 5W30 C-30 oil which has a "minimum spec" of 3.5 cP and a maximum 1.5% ash. Both are 5W30's and you can run the C-30 oil in the GM BY THIER SPEC without warranty issues but not the Dexos1Gen3 oil in the Porsche. Yes there are plenty of C-30 oils under 0.9% ash.

 

What does it tell you? GM (USA), Porsche (Europe) 

[Grumpy Bear]

https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4442/6/3/73#table_body_display_lubricants-06-00073-t001

 

Quote [Specifically, for this paper, we are examining the difference between a high quality Group III mineral oil and PAOs in regards to friction in a passenger car engine oil. Furthermore, this reduction in friction will be evaluated relative to potential energy efficiency improvements.] Close quote.

 

This the last sentence of the first paragraph of the Introduction. Note that for this paper wear is not a consideration nor was it even measured and kiddo's wear and friction are NOT interchangeable. Not any more the viscosity and lubricity are. 

 

What this entire test is measuring is DIFFERENCES in fluid LUBRICITY and there is a difference even though all three fully formulated oils are the SAME VISCOSITY. 

 

 

Got the cap on? Good. Can a motor last forever. No. Okay so life is finite. Can we influence the length of finite? Absolutely. 

 

First tool of choice for a tribo guy is, "It was designed for a X cP fluid" and that is what you should run in it. Okay. I'll bite. At what temperature? Under what shear rate? and if you can answer that then you should be able to tell me for how long and what he can't tell you is anything useful. 

 

"70% if wear happens during start up", he says. Okay. How many starts per thousand miles and how long between starts. Yea...he doesn't know because we all use our vehicles differently. 

 

Mom uses hers three times a week. Twice to church 10 miles away for a 2 hour service and once to the store for grocery and the beauty parlor inside. Average oil temperature 130 F with one cold start for half those starts and one warm start for the other. 

 

Dad's in sales and has a huge district. He never turns the key for under 100 miles and often as long as 500 miles. About a tenth of the starts and average oil temperature is 212 F. 

 

Uncle hauls heavy and fast and spends the day doing it. He fills three times a day and the motor spins 4,000 rpm all day. Bulk oil temp is 245 F. 

 

OEM call out is 0W20 for all of them but only one of them is even close to a pan viscosity of a 0W20. MOST newer books don't even make a distinction for service harshness for service intervals. 

 

Okay, unless you own a supercar with track day requirements and yea, what are those based on? Right. Heat, rpm and load increases. 

 

But yea, even though the OEM call out is for a MINIMUM HTHS value lets ignore the service and the goals of the OWNER and GM is NOT the owner. 

 

So, full circle. How long? Well, if I'm the OEM the shortly past the warranty period and perhaps a shade longer if my reputation matters to me whatsoever. If I'm the owner however,.......