Change HistoryDiscussion of Boxsters and other Porsches |  |  |
|
Buying through this link, gets PB a donation. |
Expect the best, and accept no substitute. |
 | |
Message: mis information
Changed By: grant
Change Date: May 18, 2011 03:31PM
mis information
Change Date: May 18, 2011 03:31PM
mis information
Marc, its just not so.
Those people [apparently] don't recognize the long-established trade offs laid down by chemistry. I'm not a CE, but several friends are, and formulate lubricants. The base oil determines the range that it will flow within the APIs bounds. Therefore, wide ranges, *as a proportion, not as a delta* are difficult to achieve. Enter Viscosity index improvers. VIIs result in temporary extension of the range via molecules that are temperature sensitive. But they also shear down. Its a well known fact. And i know various test results at both API and ACEA that bear this out.
Its very difficult when facts are pitted against opinion.
many people [apparently] don't recognize the long-established trade offs laid down by chemistry. I'm not a CE, but several friends are, and formulate lubricants. The base oil determines the range that it will flow within the APIs bounds. Therefore, wide ranges, *as a proportion, not as a delta* are difficult to achieve. Enter Viscosity index improvers. VIIs result in temporary extension of the range via molecules that are temperature sensitive. But they also shear down. Its a well known fact. And i know various test results at both API and ACEA that bear this out.
Note that 20w50 as a proportion is vastly less than 10w40, although both represent a 30 delta. Actual ratios use neither measure. They use kinematic viscosity figures, typically at several different temperatures ( spec sheets often show 40 and 100 deg C).
therefore the only argument is "how severe the degradation is". The factual point is that there is no free lunch. perpetuating wishful thinking This siis not opinion. It is fact. Others should address this specifically, or accept that the trade off exists. Empirical evidence from samply wrong.
es of one don't count.
Democracy ends where science begins.
If you want DC-light, you give up durability, and likely acquire the fun of sludge building elements.
Now, i've also suggested that we worry a bit too much, if the car sees normal street service. But i dont go avigorously defend saying "the basic principles I've laid out. I get no benefit out of this - no commercial benefit, association etc.
But i do think we should have accurate info presented. Yes, if you see -25F by all means use thin oils . And don't worry too much about how it holds up at 250 deg F. Just don't try to tell me they are really thick" or "nothing shears" - which is one in the logical extension ofsame, at least not over those claims.
e long haul.
All the best.
Grant
Those people [apparently] don't recognize the long-established trade offs laid down by chemistry. I'm not a CE, but several friends are, and formulate lubricants. The base oil determines the range that it will flow within the APIs bounds. Therefore, wide ranges, *as a proportion, not as a delta* are difficult to achieve. Enter Viscosity index improvers. VIIs result in temporary extension of the range via molecules that are temperature sensitive. But they also shear down. Its a well known fact. And i know various test results at both API and ACEA that bear this out.
Its very difficult when facts are pitted against opinion.
many people [apparently] don't recognize the long-established trade offs laid down by chemistry. I'm not a CE, but several friends are, and formulate lubricants. The base oil determines the range that it will flow within the APIs bounds. Therefore, wide ranges, *as a proportion, not as a delta* are difficult to achieve. Enter Viscosity index improvers. VIIs result in temporary extension of the range via molecules that are temperature sensitive. But they also shear down. Its a well known fact. And i know various test results at both API and ACEA that bear this out.
Note that 20w50 as a proportion is vastly less than 10w40, although both represent a 30 delta. Actual ratios use neither measure. They use kinematic viscosity figures, typically at several different temperatures ( spec sheets often show 40 and 100 deg C).
therefore the only argument is "how severe the degradation is". The factual point is that there is no free lunch. perpetuating wishful thinking This siis not opinion. It is fact. Others should address this specifically, or accept that the trade off exists. Empirical evidence from samply wrong.
es of one don't count.
Democracy ends where science begins.
If you want DC-light, you give up durability, and likely acquire the fun of sludge building elements.
Now, i've also suggested that we worry a bit too much, if the car sees normal street service. But i dont go avigorously defend saying "the basic principles I've laid out. I get no benefit out of this - no commercial benefit, association etc.
But i do think we should have accurate info presented. Yes, if you see -25F by all means use thin oils . And don't worry too much about how it holds up at 250 deg F. Just don't try to tell me they are really thick" or "nothing shears" - which is one in the logical extension ofsame, at least not over those claims.
e long haul.
All the best.
Grant
Original Message
Author: grantDate: May 18, 2011 03:16PM
mis information
Marc, its just not so.
Those people [apparently] don't recognize the long-established trade offs laid down by chemistry. I'm not a CE, but several friends are, and formulate lubricants. The base oil determines the range that it will flow within the APIs bounds. Therefore, wide ranges, *as a proportion, not as a delta* are difficult to achieve. Enter Viscosity index improvers. VIIs result in temporary extension of the range via molecules that are temperature sensitive. But they also shear down. Its a well known fact. And i know various test results at both API and ACEA that bear this out.
Note that 20w50 as a proportion is vastly less than 10w40, although both represent a 30 delta. Actual ratios use neither measure. They use kinematic viscosity figures, typically at several different temperatures ( spec sheets often show 40 and 100 deg C).
therefore the only argument is "how severe the degradation is". The factual point is that there is no free lunch. perpetuating wishful thinking is simply wrong.
Democracy ends where science begins.
If you want DC-light, you give up durability, and likely acquire the fun of sludge building elements.
Now, i've also suggested that we worry a bit too much, if the car sees normal street service. But i dont go around saying "thin oils are really thick" or "nothing shears" - which is the logical extension of those claims.
All the best.
Grant
Those people [apparently] don't recognize the long-established trade offs laid down by chemistry. I'm not a CE, but several friends are, and formulate lubricants. The base oil determines the range that it will flow within the APIs bounds. Therefore, wide ranges, *as a proportion, not as a delta* are difficult to achieve. Enter Viscosity index improvers. VIIs result in temporary extension of the range via molecules that are temperature sensitive. But they also shear down. Its a well known fact. And i know various test results at both API and ACEA that bear this out.
Note that 20w50 as a proportion is vastly less than 10w40, although both represent a 30 delta. Actual ratios use neither measure. They use kinematic viscosity figures, typically at several different temperatures ( spec sheets often show 40 and 100 deg C).
therefore the only argument is "how severe the degradation is". The factual point is that there is no free lunch. perpetuating wishful thinking is simply wrong.
Democracy ends where science begins.
If you want DC-light, you give up durability, and likely acquire the fun of sludge building elements.
Now, i've also suggested that we worry a bit too much, if the car sees normal street service. But i dont go around saying "thin oils are really thick" or "nothing shears" - which is the logical extension of those claims.
All the best.
Grant