MolaKule
Staff member
For a suggested starting point, 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
redline and easy driven cars
- Thread starter JHZR2
- Start date
- Status
I'm waiting for the tests verifying or denying any theories.
Passing the API sequence tests would be a start.
MolaKule
Staff member
I think quoting something from Journals such as Tribology Letters, Lubrication Engineering, Wear, etc would be more meaningful and scientific.
"While it is true that certain ester types can swell seal materials, polyolesters have the definite advantage that they can be used with nitrile rubbers, the type most commonly used in mineral oil applications. They are generally compatible with all mineral oils."
http://www.wearcheck.ca/literature/techdoc/WZA012.htm
http://www.wearcheck.ca/literature/techdoc/WZA012.htm
Nice abstract answer.
API is funded by whom?
I believe the following to be true of the API:
Licensing is voluntary.
Application for licensing requires a fee be paid by the oil manufacture.
On a macro scale the API is concerned with much more than purely "ultimate oil performance".
There are no hallmark performance tests involved with cert.
The world views API cert. as a MINIMUM standard.
So to infer that any well built oil would not be approved for API licensing is baffling.
And to imply a well bulit oil is lacking simply based on the fact that it doesn't contain API licensing,--- is frankly, ignorant IMO.
Doesn't GC have high ester content (Though I wouldn't be the authority on that) and pass everything including euro A3 extended drain. It sure seems Marty and Brian were seperated at birth, or maybe not.
I don't think the problem is with Esters, I think the problem is with REDLINE . We have data on this website that shows RL isn't that good of an oil. You can spin it however you want but the facts are that RL has been not that impressive at all. RL is using a different Ester then Delvac 1 and GC so who knows....500ppm of Moly???
Terry has always said forget about brand and let the UOA speak for itself. We have maybe 2 or 3 stellar UOAs with RL, thats it.
Now what ever esters are found in GC, they are doing a nice job.
[ August 05, 2004, 07:29 PM: Message edited by: buster ]
Terry has always said forget about brand and let the UOA speak for itself. We have maybe 2 or 3 stellar UOAs with RL, thats it.
Now what ever esters are found in GC, they are doing a nice job.
[ August 05, 2004, 07:29 PM: Message edited by: buster ]
We have UOAs which don't correlate to actual engine wear(at least with Red Line).
The real and only proof comes from parts inspection, which in Red Lines case showed no perceivable wear.
Talk about SPIN
I think you're the one that posted Dave's response to the low TBN question.
And Terry has explanations for the lead readings.
You don't have to like the product. But, allow others to draw their own conclusions based on ALL the objective facts.
And Terry has explanations for the lead readings.
You don't have to like the product. But, allow others to draw their own conclusions based on ALL the objective facts.
MolaKule did, that's how we know wear was nil.
Is that the Exclusive motorsports test? As I recall someone conducting the test is related to a person of power at a major oil company.
Too bad they didn't document their test methods; I find it hard to draw much out of a haphazard test as this appears to be.
[ August 05, 2004, 07:52 PM: Message edited by: 69 Riv GS ]
Buster, your correct in redirecting this to the original question but I was just trying to point at the use of esters as perhaps not being a good arguement against Redline since it's in other oils that will meet the most stringent government standards and give us good UOAs. I would probably use something else in a seldomly driven car but because of price reasons more than any other. Maybe mix a quart of RL into some good dino for the moly and to keep bits coated with oil when not in use. I can't see how this wouldn't help with corrosion resistance. Perhaps the type of esters chosen by RL aren't the best for seldom used vehicles, maybe they are, but to say it's bad because it's ester based can probably be disproven by experience with other ester based oils and just seems like a huge leap. If all A's are C's and all B's are C's than all A's are B's. NOT
[ August 05, 2004, 07:57 PM: Message edited by: goodvibes ]
[ August 05, 2004, 07:57 PM: Message edited by: goodvibes ]
I agree with both of you. Didn't mean to take it off track. RL doesn't believe in UOAs. MK did do a test and your right it should no wear or increased wear over Ams or M1. Esters are good and used in oils. Why RL shows higher wear #'s is theory at this point.....It has a great reputation in drag racing.
To a research chemist.
Research chemists brought us DexCool and Mobil 1 Aviation oil.
What we're interested in is getting it out of lab and into the field.
More meaningful would be SAE papers, statistically significant field trials, fleet results, and other real world facts - facts being more relevant to what most people want to do, which is use the product. That's how DexCool and Mobil 1 Aviation oil got found out.
To this point in either thread you haven't posted SAE papers, statistically significant field trials, fleet results, and other real world facts - nor Tribology Letters, Lubrication Engineering - so it's sort of moot.
[/QUOTE]
An API starburst seal doesn't look too abstract.
The oil either has one or it doesn't.
A guy driving an easy driven car isn't abstract.
[/QUOTE]
The licensees and supporting members appear on its website.
[QB]
[/QUOTE]
That would imply Red Line does not meet a MINIMUM standard.
[QB]
Are you calling me ignorant?
Are are you suggesting that the various manufacturers of automobiles that specify that oils that meet the API standards are ignorant?
Or are you suggesting that drawing your erroneous implication is ignorant?
quote:
Originally posted by 69 Riv GS:
I think you're the one that posted Dave's response to the low TBN question.
And Terry has explanations for the lead readings.
You don't have to like the product. But, allow others to draw their own conclusions based on ALL the objective facts.
Which are?quote:
69 Riv GS:
I think you're the one that posted Dave's response to the low TBN question.
And Terry has explanations for the lead readings.
You don't have to like the product. But, allow others to draw their own conclusions based on ALL the objective facts.
A statistically significant number of automotive engines operated under realistic conditions, such as the API sequence tests?
- Status
Similar threads
