I didn't see a single citation by you or anyone else but him.
The SAE papers all seemed relevant.
Just for the record.
redline and easy driven cars
- Thread starter JHZR2
- Start date
- Status
The SAE papers all seemed relevant.
Just for the record.
Wow, that was a little heated. I have no idea what was going on behind the scenes with PM's, but Marty seemed to be the only one providing factual back-up for his assertions there.
There were some good points made on both sides. PM's aside, I hope he will be allowed back in the forum.
Everyone can take it easy and keep learning and teaching us n00bs...
Nate
P.S. I had considered using Redline. I think I'll wait until I get more info on that...
There were some good points made on both sides. PM's aside, I hope he will be allowed back in the forum.
Everyone can take it easy and keep learning and teaching us n00bs...
Nate
P.S. I had considered using Redline. I think I'll wait until I get more info on that...
Busted!
I took the liberty of summarizing his position, as I understand it.
The point I’m trying to make is that there is big difference between evidence and facts.
For example:
Our guest poster presented facts regarding esters in refrigeration compressors and used this as evidence that ester based motor oil had problems in automotive engines.
Is this evidence compelling enough, combined with the other evidence presented that Redline has problems with water and seals? For some I guess so. I would hope that those with a scientific background would require direct evidence to draw that conclusion. So far I have not seen any but would be very interested in it if it exists.
Or maybe not...
MolaKule
Staff member
Let's see, Marty (CPA) was from Washington DC, Brian Ried (Engineer) is from Silver Springs Maryland, but both patterns of sentence construction and argumentation smacks of QuadDriver from Pennsylvania, a construction guy.
It's "Reid". If you have an SAE roster, you should be able to find me with no problem.quote:
MolaKule:
Let's see, Marty (CPA) was from Washington DC, Brian Ried (Engineer) is from Silver Springs Maryland, but both patterns of sentence construction and argumentation smacks of QuadDriver from Pennsylvania, a construction guy.
I take it that you really don't want to discuss facts.
MolaKule
Staff member
You can debate Redline at will, but if you want to debate specifics, please see:
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=007563
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=007563
MolaKule
Staff member
Satterfi,
You hit the proverbial nail on the head.
Inference in an argument does not make it so. Testing data from a number of repeatable sources is the only way to prove this.
Now if Mr. Reid or any one else wants to further discuss the tribological and chemical aspects of esters, I have made a new post and we can do it there, so others can express their opinions about Redline or whatever here.
What specifics?
Chemical and tribological theories are all well and good, but chemical and tribological theories have brought us things like DexCool, Dowgard, a half-dozen rustproofings that caused rust, dashboards that split open, and Mobil 1 aviation oil.
How about SAE papers, certifications, field tests, and other real world data?
For example, two brands mentioned - Red Line and Silkolene - aren't API licensees:
http://api-ep.api.org/industry/index.cfm?bitmask=002007007003000000#
(Fuchs, parent of Silkolene, is a licensee but only for CHALLENGER SPEED, FUCHS TITAN, and LABO brands).
which means they haven't even met an API sequence test.
I agree that the cited information had NOTHING to do with the topic.
And an objective look at the seal compatibility chart shows PAO to be as "reactive" as POE.
And an objective look at the seal compatibility chart shows PAO to be as "reactive" as POE.
MolaKule
Staff member
Yes thanks, Marty made a statement very similar to your's.
Any enginer or scientist knows that you create a theory or mathematical model about how they "think" a phenomena occurs, and the tests then verify or deny that theory.
So there is nothing wrong with theories as long as they are tested or verified to be true. Wilbur and Orville Wright had a lot of failures, we have had a lot of aviation crashes, but we still fly.
Just wanted to clarify the scientific method because I wasn't sure you were clear on that.
Yes, I too would like to see data that show modern esters and modern ester formulations cause rust and seal failures.
Neither has Amosil, but it can be safely said that Amsoil products perform above minimum standards set by the API. The same with Warren Performance Products, the same with Neo, the same with Synergyn...
And as an informed consumer, I should be concerned with an API license or lack there of because--?
I believe the similarity between your comments and the Red Line sales literature was already pointed out.
I was under the impression just based on what you've posted previously, you were asking for facts, not theories or mathematical models.
Unless we have an actual "modern" ester formulation that passes, say, the current API sequence tests the burden of proof for this thread would seem to be for data showing that modern esters and modern ester formulations don't cause failures, don't jeopardize new car warranties, and then offer some advantage over less expensive alternatives for easy driven cars.
If it could be safely said, Amsoil would be API certified. Amsoil is an API licensee.
At least one Amsoil product is API certified, and the ones that aren't don't perform above minimum standards set by the API. Specifically, they fail to meet the maximum limit API has set on certain metallic additives.
Sticking to facts, those are the facts.
- Status
Similar threads
