Apparently those you consider boutique oils.
So Many Bearing Tests Trying To Prove Best Oil ?
- Thread starter JSRT4
- Start date
- Status
Feel free to look at the oil in my description. My truck has high mileage and does not require the most superior oil, but the newest vehicle in my fleet gets Royal Purple exclusively. RP is the top of the mark in synthetic lubricants. And you guessed it, the toughest film strength in the market and rest assured, it passes any lubricity test "head and shoulders" (pun intended) above the rest.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: jk_636
What do I do? I am a professional mechanic of the human body and an enthusiast mechanic of automobiles. You really should stop, you could hurt someones feelings. I wish I could "garner" that much respect. But as is life. As they say, in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
I'm not the one working on trying to discredit long time members, particularly ones with credentials relevant to the discussion.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
First off, the term "boutique oils" is largely inaccurate. They could be more correctly classified as "high performance oils" or "superior performance oils." These oils are for the people that value superior performance, protection and detergency rather than running lower grade oils way to long just to "save money". My engine deserves the best, so it is fed the best.
That's such a load of malarkey I don't even know where to begin, but I'll certainly try:
1. Even these boutique blenders make "regular" lubricants. AMSOIL's OEM and XL oils, Royal Purple's SN oils....etc. About the only one I can think of that doesn't is Redline. They are boutique because their presence is smaller than the majors, not because their products are superior.
2. The rest of the above is hyperbole and opinion and isn't worth addressing.
3. Mobil's 0w-40 can be demonstrated as being one of the, if not THE best readily available oil on the market. Not only is it approved using the toughest OEM testing regiments but it is also the oil of choice for companies like GM, Nissan, Mercedes, Porsche and Audi in their factory race programs. It is used by a huge list of teams at LeMans and Daytona. It really IS that good. And it is also not a boutique oil because it is manufactured by a major.
A lubricant doesn't need to be manufactured by a small blender to be exceptional. And a large oil corporation doesn't produce inferior products just because they are large. What is undeniable is that the majors have more resources for extensive testing and access to more materials for blending than the small guys do. XOM is the world's largest producer of PAO base stocks. Of AN's, and a large producer of esters. They can formulate whatever lubricant anybody wants in-house using materials they simply source from themselves. This mostly applies to SOPUS, BP and the others as well.
This is not a luxury Royal Purple, AMSOIL, Redline or the other small blenders has. Redline's approach is at least relatively straight-forward: Use minimum amounts of VII's with a relatively simple blend of top-notch base oils and a very healthy additive package. They publish their product's performance specs (as does AMSOIL). Royal Purple does not do this and you are just supposed to "believe". This feels a bit like an episode of the X-files.
Without testing, all you have are claims and anecdotes. Which, conveniently, is all you've posted in this thread.
And regarding your statement that your engine deserves the best, is that what you tried to demonstrate here:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3630565/Mobil_5000_5w30_5,585_miles_UO#Post3630565
Where you ran Mobil 5K with MMO? Or where you state in that same thread you'll be trying PYB, Pennzoil High Mileage and Mobil 1? Why aren't you running or intending to run Royal Purple or another "superior" boutique product? Or was that statement just meant to fit with the agenda you are currently peddling?
What do I do? I am a professional mechanic of the human body and an enthusiast mechanic of automobiles. You really should stop, you could hurt someones feelings. I wish I could "garner" that much respect. But as is life. As they say, in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
I'm not the one working on trying to discredit long time members, particularly ones with credentials relevant to the discussion.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
First off, the term "boutique oils" is largely inaccurate. They could be more correctly classified as "high performance oils" or "superior performance oils." These oils are for the people that value superior performance, protection and detergency rather than running lower grade oils way to long just to "save money". My engine deserves the best, so it is fed the best.
That's such a load of malarkey I don't even know where to begin, but I'll certainly try:
1. Even these boutique blenders make "regular" lubricants. AMSOIL's OEM and XL oils, Royal Purple's SN oils....etc. About the only one I can think of that doesn't is Redline. They are boutique because their presence is smaller than the majors, not because their products are superior.
2. The rest of the above is hyperbole and opinion and isn't worth addressing.
3. Mobil's 0w-40 can be demonstrated as being one of the, if not THE best readily available oil on the market. Not only is it approved using the toughest OEM testing regiments but it is also the oil of choice for companies like GM, Nissan, Mercedes, Porsche and Audi in their factory race programs. It is used by a huge list of teams at LeMans and Daytona. It really IS that good. And it is also not a boutique oil because it is manufactured by a major.
A lubricant doesn't need to be manufactured by a small blender to be exceptional. And a large oil corporation doesn't produce inferior products just because they are large. What is undeniable is that the majors have more resources for extensive testing and access to more materials for blending than the small guys do. XOM is the world's largest producer of PAO base stocks. Of AN's, and a large producer of esters. They can formulate whatever lubricant anybody wants in-house using materials they simply source from themselves. This mostly applies to SOPUS, BP and the others as well.
This is not a luxury Royal Purple, AMSOIL, Redline or the other small blenders has. Redline's approach is at least relatively straight-forward: Use minimum amounts of VII's with a relatively simple blend of top-notch base oils and a very healthy additive package. They publish their product's performance specs (as does AMSOIL). Royal Purple does not do this and you are just supposed to "believe". This feels a bit like an episode of the X-files.
Without testing, all you have are claims and anecdotes. Which, conveniently, is all you've posted in this thread.
And regarding your statement that your engine deserves the best, is that what you tried to demonstrate here:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3630565/Mobil_5000_5w30_5,585_miles_UO#Post3630565
Where you ran Mobil 5K with MMO? Or where you state in that same thread you'll be trying PYB, Pennzoil High Mileage and Mobil 1? Why aren't you running or intending to run Royal Purple or another "superior" boutique product? Or was that statement just meant to fit with the agenda you are currently peddling?
How dare I disagree with you. Imagine how terrible this world would be if everyone didn't agree on everything. See above post. My truck has higher mileage, runs like a top and is where I test different "every day" oils. And it will always get MMO. The tolerances are nowhere near as tight as the ford, and it can get by on lesser quality oils. Lookup my UOAs on the ford and then call me a liar. You accuse me of attempting to discredit the "long standing" here while you consistently attempt to strong arm newer members in multiple threads in every section of this forum. Hypocrisy is unbecoming in someone of your well established position isn't it?
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: jk_636
How dare I disagree with you. Imagine how terrible this world would be if everyone didn't agree on everything. See above post. My truck has higher mileage, runs like a top and is where I test different "every day" oils. And it will always get MMO. The tolerances are nowhere near as tight as the ford, and it can get by on lesser quality oils.
But you didn't say that in your earlier statement when you ripped on the "non boutique" oils now did you? Also, I think you mean clearances, not tolerances. Ultimately your unwillingness to consider views that don't align with your own dooms this thread to end up exactly like your MMO one. You don't want discussion, you want to make a statement and everybody just swallow it. That doesn't happen on BITOG.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Lookup my UOAs on the ford and then call me a liar.
I didn't call you a liar, I questioned your motives as you seem to be willing to change your position to suit the thread.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
You accuse me of attempting to discredit the "long standing" here while you consistently attempt to strong arm newer members in multiple threads in every section of this forum. Hypocrisy is unbecoming in someone of your well established position isn't it?
Strong-arm? Hardly.
Note the discussion in progress with turtlevette. Note how well it is going. Then look at the discussion with yourself. Do you see the key differences? One is an exchange of ideas and data with consideration on both sides, the other is nothing more than somebody parroting marketing material and the responses are as one would expect them to be.
How dare I disagree with you. Imagine how terrible this world would be if everyone didn't agree on everything. See above post. My truck has higher mileage, runs like a top and is where I test different "every day" oils. And it will always get MMO. The tolerances are nowhere near as tight as the ford, and it can get by on lesser quality oils.
But you didn't say that in your earlier statement when you ripped on the "non boutique" oils now did you? Also, I think you mean clearances, not tolerances. Ultimately your unwillingness to consider views that don't align with your own dooms this thread to end up exactly like your MMO one. You don't want discussion, you want to make a statement and everybody just swallow it. That doesn't happen on BITOG.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Lookup my UOAs on the ford and then call me a liar.
I didn't call you a liar, I questioned your motives as you seem to be willing to change your position to suit the thread.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
You accuse me of attempting to discredit the "long standing" here while you consistently attempt to strong arm newer members in multiple threads in every section of this forum. Hypocrisy is unbecoming in someone of your well established position isn't it?
Strong-arm? Hardly.
Note the discussion in progress with turtlevette. Note how well it is going. Then look at the discussion with yourself. Do you see the key differences? One is an exchange of ideas and data with consideration on both sides, the other is nothing more than somebody parroting marketing material and the responses are as one would expect them to be.
Is that you, Dave5358?
*laughs*
Q.
*laughs*
Q.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: GaleHawkins
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
The only "bearing test" I care about is the one inside my engine. From what I can tell - any oil meeting certifications for your car is just FINE. Me, personally, I use Mobil 1 and Redline products and sleep well at night
So true. The friction it takes to stop the motor on these Youtube videos are apples and oranges to a vehicle engine. If one's engine has friction that Mobil 1 can not handle then one has an engine that is beyond being of value any longer.
I have even backed away from synthetic motor oil based on PAO's but lean towards motor oils that is based on hydrotreated/hydrocracked hydrocarbons because Group V esters can fight cleaners like Auto Rx and additives like Archoil AR 2300 series of crankcase cleaners as well as Archoil AR9100 additive used by many especially with the Ford injectors with the Stiction issue.
Groups I-V motor oil info.
I do not use Auto RX crankcase cleaner because I prefer the Archoil AR9100 option because it is easier to use, has added nano technology antifriction properties PLUS it cost less but the below from Auto RX web site explains how PAO based motor oils can fight with Group V type engine oils.
http://www.auto-rx.com/sludge-oil-burning.shtml
Archoil states "NOTE: If using a synthetic PAO leave in a minimum of for 4-5000 miles" where the min is 3K miles in the non Group IV motor oils concerning their AR2300 cleaner that is part of the AR 9100 additive it seems.
In the engines we change we typically use Rotella T6 5W-40 gas/diesel non Group IV synthetic motor oil or we use MotorCraft 5W-20/30 Semi Synthetic Blend (SM specs) if using our Quick Lube service center. Our engine age range is 1976-2007.
Late 2014 we moved to using the Group V Archoil AR 9100 for both the gentle cleaning and nano antifriction features at each oil change. The added cost is $12 on a 5 quart motor oil capacity engine. I reached this decision after first studying the subject back in 2013 and due to our mix of old gas and diesel engines. I bought enough to treat 28 gallons of new motor oil so when it is all used up in a few years I will rethink the use of AR9100.
If you use a quality synthetic oil for the life of the vehicle you won't need "gentle cleaning and nano anti friction features". This sounds like another snake oil deal to me. No offense, but stuff like this is ranked along side with teflon additives.IMO
This couldn't be farther from the truth. You can take mediocre oils and increase their lubricant, protection and cleaning properties through the use of additives. I'm not familiar with arch oil but MMO, Riselone, Tufoil, Mos2 etc would definetely fall into this category.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Nice, bring the additive Archoil into the discussion.
But hey why not. Maybe Archoil shows excellent lubricity. Whatever that is.
As if you didn't know what lubricity is. Gale if these additives work for you, then keep on using them. There are many here and on other forums (myself included) who utilize aftermarket additives with great success. You will meet a lot
Of resistance when discussing them here, but who cares. It's not their motor right?
This study of Archoil AR6200 that got my attention.
http://issuu.com/archoilportugal/docs/carbon_mass_balance_test_summaries
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: GaleHawkins
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
The only "bearing test" I care about is the one inside my engine. From what I can tell - any oil meeting certifications for your car is just FINE. Me, personally, I use Mobil 1 and Redline products and sleep well at night
So true. The friction it takes to stop the motor on these Youtube videos are apples and oranges to a vehicle engine. If one's engine has friction that Mobil 1 can not handle then one has an engine that is beyond being of value any longer.
I have even backed away from synthetic motor oil based on PAO's but lean towards motor oils that is based on hydrotreated/hydrocracked hydrocarbons because Group V esters can fight cleaners like Auto Rx and additives like Archoil AR 2300 series of crankcase cleaners as well as Archoil AR9100 additive used by many especially with the Ford injectors with the Stiction issue.
Groups I-V motor oil info.
I do not use Auto RX crankcase cleaner because I prefer the Archoil AR9100 option because it is easier to use, has added nano technology antifriction properties PLUS it cost less but the below from Auto RX web site explains how PAO based motor oils can fight with Group V type engine oils.
http://www.auto-rx.com/sludge-oil-burning.shtml
Archoil states "NOTE: If using a synthetic PAO leave in a minimum of for 4-5000 miles" where the min is 3K miles in the non Group IV motor oils concerning their AR2300 cleaner that is part of the AR 9100 additive it seems.
In the engines we change we typically use Rotella T6 5W-40 gas/diesel non Group IV synthetic motor oil or we use MotorCraft 5W-20/30 Semi Synthetic Blend (SM specs) if using our Quick Lube service center. Our engine age range is 1976-2007.
Late 2014 we moved to using the Group V Archoil AR 9100 for both the gentle cleaning and nano antifriction features at each oil change. The added cost is $12 on a 5 quart motor oil capacity engine. I reached this decision after first studying the subject back in 2013 and due to our mix of old gas and diesel engines. I bought enough to treat 28 gallons of new motor oil so when it is all used up in a few years I will rethink the use of AR9100.
If you use a quality synthetic oil for the life of the vehicle you won't need "gentle cleaning and nano anti friction features". This sounds like another snake oil deal to me. No offense, but stuff like this is ranked along side with teflon additives.IMO
This couldn't be farther from the truth. You can take mediocre oils and increase their lubricant, protection and cleaning properties through the use of additives. I'm not familiar with arch oil but MMO, Riselone, Tufoil, Mos2 etc would definetely fall into this category.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Nice, bring the additive Archoil into the discussion.
But hey why not. Maybe Archoil shows excellent lubricity. Whatever that is.
As if you didn't know what lubricity is. Gale if these additives work for you, then keep on using them. There are many here and on other forums (myself included) who utilize aftermarket additives with great success. You will meet a lot
Of resistance when discussing them here, but who cares. It's not their motor right?
This study of Archoil AR6200 that got my attention.
http://issuu.com/archoilportugal/docs/carbon_mass_balance_test_summaries
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
The boutique oils that have this extra AW or EP or whatever you want to call it are targeting a small group who are worried about cam failures. People building their own engines pushing the envelope with extremely high cam pressures.
I'll agree with Shannow and Overkill that everyone else probably doesn't need it. I think that's where the disagreement lies. You guys don't want the average joe thinking he needs Redline for his minivan. Or any stock factory vehicle for that matter. Even the exotics recommend Mobil or Castrol.
Got your point, and agree that there's a market for that, and for the reasons.
I feel (note feel, from the small number of failures that I've seen) that there's something wrong with engines that waste cams...misaligned lifter bores (seen one of them), poor metallurgy, or overly aggressive profiles for the area under the curve...
The EP oils may help in a marginal case, but agree that they may.
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
The next thing we need to talk about are the polar molecules in oil. You guys think that's baloney too?
Nope, I've used over 20 gallons of Magnatec, and a few of Redline.
Had a Dinner and sat with an engineer from the Magnatec programme...he was ex Castrol at that point, working for an independent (re) refinery.
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Things are more civil because I'm mellowing out. I've been out of a high stress job for a while now.
Would LOVE one of those...congrats.
The boutique oils that have this extra AW or EP or whatever you want to call it are targeting a small group who are worried about cam failures. People building their own engines pushing the envelope with extremely high cam pressures.
I'll agree with Shannow and Overkill that everyone else probably doesn't need it. I think that's where the disagreement lies. You guys don't want the average joe thinking he needs Redline for his minivan. Or any stock factory vehicle for that matter. Even the exotics recommend Mobil or Castrol.
Got your point, and agree that there's a market for that, and for the reasons.
I feel (note feel, from the small number of failures that I've seen) that there's something wrong with engines that waste cams...misaligned lifter bores (seen one of them), poor metallurgy, or overly aggressive profiles for the area under the curve...
The EP oils may help in a marginal case, but agree that they may.
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
The next thing we need to talk about are the polar molecules in oil. You guys think that's baloney too?
Nope, I've used over 20 gallons of Magnatec, and a few of Redline.
Had a Dinner and sat with an engineer from the Magnatec programme...he was ex Castrol at that point, working for an independent (re) refinery.
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Things are more civil because I'm mellowing out. I've been out of a high stress job for a while now.
Would LOVE one of those...congrats.
This is an interesting document from Afton Chemical. Detailed specs from API DEXOS ILSAC ACEA, all kinds of fluids and greases.
A search of D4172 finds the 4 ball wear test is rarely used. Two examples of it's use as a standard is MERCON V ATF, and some GM compressor oils. Not found as a part of any PCMO spec.
a good reference tool: http://www.aftonchemical.com/Lists/Brochure/Attachments/40/Specification_Handbook.pdf
A search of D4172 finds the 4 ball wear test is rarely used. Two examples of it's use as a standard is MERCON V ATF, and some GM compressor oils. Not found as a part of any PCMO spec.
a good reference tool: http://www.aftonchemical.com/Lists/Brochure/Attachments/40/Specification_Handbook.pdf
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Feel free to look at the oil in my description. My truck has high mileage and does not require the most superior oil, but the newest vehicle in my fleet gets Royal Purple exclusively. RP is the top of the mark in synthetic lubricants. And you guessed it, the toughest film strength in the market and rest assured, it passes any lubricity test "head and shoulders" (pun intended) above the rest.
But you just started using RP last month. How do you know RP"is the top of the mark in synthetic oil"? Correct me if I'm wrong.
Feel free to look at the oil in my description. My truck has high mileage and does not require the most superior oil, but the newest vehicle in my fleet gets Royal Purple exclusively. RP is the top of the mark in synthetic lubricants. And you guessed it, the toughest film strength in the market and rest assured, it passes any lubricity test "head and shoulders" (pun intended) above the rest.
But you just started using RP last month. How do you know RP"is the top of the mark in synthetic oil"? Correct me if I'm wrong.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2010
- Messages
- 9,807
Originally Posted By: jk_636
RP is the top of the mark in synthetic lubricants.
Not beating on RP (or you), but there are half a dozen synthetics that also claim to be "top of the mark" and most, if not all, of those claims are subjective at best depending upon application and environment i.e. any of them can be "top of the mark" under the right conditions, but rarely if ever are they across all conditions. What objective demonstrable materials are you using to justify such a statement?
RP is the top of the mark in synthetic lubricants.
Not beating on RP (or you), but there are half a dozen synthetics that also claim to be "top of the mark" and most, if not all, of those claims are subjective at best depending upon application and environment i.e. any of them can be "top of the mark" under the right conditions, but rarely if ever are they across all conditions. What objective demonstrable materials are you using to justify such a statement?
Originally Posted By: jk_636
RP is the top of the mark in synthetic lubricants.
Let me fix it for you.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
RP is the top of the mark in synthetic lubricants. IMO
No problems with that.
RP is the top of the mark in synthetic lubricants.
Let me fix it for you.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
RP is the top of the mark in synthetic lubricants. IMO
No problems with that.
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Feel free to look at the oil in my description. My truck has high mileage and does not require the most superior oil, but the newest vehicle in my fleet gets Royal Purple exclusively. RP is the top of the mark in synthetic lubricants. And you guessed it, the toughest film strength in the market and rest assured, it passes any lubricity test "head and shoulders" (pun intended) above the rest.
But you just started using RP last month. How do you know RP"is the top of the mark in synthetic oil"? Correct me if I'm wrong.
Been using RP since my ford was finished with its "break in period". You may be confusing this with the shoot ton of RP I bought on sale last month. And as a disclaimer, everything on here is IMO just as all these posts made by others are in the own opinions. Fx4 I will start another thread if you want to talk about why I think it is the top contender in synthetic oils, but it would be off topic here.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Feel free to look at the oil in my description. My truck has high mileage and does not require the most superior oil, but the newest vehicle in my fleet gets Royal Purple exclusively. RP is the top of the mark in synthetic lubricants. And you guessed it, the toughest film strength in the market and rest assured, it passes any lubricity test "head and shoulders" (pun intended) above the rest.
But you just started using RP last month. How do you know RP"is the top of the mark in synthetic oil"? Correct me if I'm wrong.
Been using RP since my ford was finished with its "break in period". You may be confusing this with the shoot ton of RP I bought on sale last month. And as a disclaimer, everything on here is IMO just as all these posts made by others are in the own opinions. Fx4 I will start another thread if you want to talk about why I think it is the top contender in synthetic oils, but it would be off topic here.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2010
- Messages
- 9,807
Originally Posted By: jk_636
And as a disclaimer, everything on here is IMO just as all these posts made by others are in the own opinions. Fx4 I will start another thread if you want to talk about why I think it is the top contender in synthetic oils, but it would be off topic here.
Not a problem--opinions are all part of the conversations that happen here and thanks for clarifying.
And as a disclaimer, everything on here is IMO just as all these posts made by others are in the own opinions. Fx4 I will start another thread if you want to talk about why I think it is the top contender in synthetic oils, but it would be off topic here.
Not a problem--opinions are all part of the conversations that happen here and thanks for clarifying.
Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Originally Posted By: jk_636
And as a disclaimer, everything on here is IMO just as all these posts made by others are in the own opinions. Fx4 I will start another thread if you want to talk about why I think it is the top contender in synthetic oils, but it would be off topic here.
Not a problem--opinions are all part of the conversations that happen here and thanks for clarifying.
I thought that the matter of opinion was just understood around here. Apparently it isn't. Perhaps that is why so many here like to argue when someone makes a statement without clarification
Originally Posted By: jk_636
And as a disclaimer, everything on here is IMO just as all these posts made by others are in the own opinions. Fx4 I will start another thread if you want to talk about why I think it is the top contender in synthetic oils, but it would be off topic here.
Not a problem--opinions are all part of the conversations that happen here and thanks for clarifying.
I thought that the matter of opinion was just understood around here. Apparently it isn't. Perhaps that is why so many here like to argue when someone makes a statement without clarification
I have tried to engage you in substantive technical discussion (as have others in this thread), yet you either evade or ignore the questions and post more unsubstantiated opinion.
So when you stated "These tests are very legitimate. They measure lubricity", that's just an opinion?
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Perhaps that is why so many here like to argue when someone makes a statement without clarification
So when you stated "These tests are very legitimate. They measure lubricity", that's just an opinion?
Originally Posted By: jk_636
Perhaps that is why so many here like to argue when someone makes a statement without clarification
No, you have fervently attempted to discredit both myself and the test we have been discussing. I attempted to engage all here in useful discourse, then abandoned it once I lost interest in trying to convince you of otherwise. I don't particularly care what you believe. If you like the test, great. If not, that's fine to. I am not here to uselessly argue with strangers (or "experts") on a forum. There are more productive conversations here to take part in.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
I thought that the matter of opinion was just understood around here. Apparently it isn't. Perhaps that is why so many here like to argue when someone makes a statement without clarification
I have presented evidence that this particular test holds no relevance to engine oils in engines.
You have stated that it is, then cried conspiracy with nothing to back your statements.
You attacked my credibility, then ignored my response, while providing nothing credible to back your own statements of fact. (people see through that you know
)
Wheel out the facts...we'll listen and comment.
I thought that the matter of opinion was just understood around here. Apparently it isn't. Perhaps that is why so many here like to argue when someone makes a statement without clarification
I have presented evidence that this particular test holds no relevance to engine oils in engines.
You have stated that it is, then cried conspiracy with nothing to back your statements.
You attacked my credibility, then ignored my response, while providing nothing credible to back your own statements of fact. (people see through that you know
Wheel out the facts...we'll listen and comment.
So when you stated "These tests are very legitimate. They measure lubricity", that's just an opinion?
Originally Posted By: jk_636
No, you have fervently attempted to discredit both myself and the test we have been discussing. I attempted to engage all here in useful discourse, then abandoned it once I lost interest in trying to convince you of otherwise. I don't particularly care what you believe. If you like the test, great. If not, that's fine to. I am not here to uselessly argue with strangers (or "experts") on a forum. There are more productive conversations here to take part in.
Originally Posted By: jk_636
No, you have fervently attempted to discredit both myself and the test we have been discussing. I attempted to engage all here in useful discourse, then abandoned it once I lost interest in trying to convince you of otherwise. I don't particularly care what you believe. If you like the test, great. If not, that's fine to. I am not here to uselessly argue with strangers (or "experts") on a forum. There are more productive conversations here to take part in.
- Status
