- Joined
- Sep 23, 2017
- Messages
- 433
my real question is that why do we take the cold flow test with a grain of salt? is it not an important factor?
Amsoil vs Redline Projectfarm video
- Thread starter jalikaria24
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by apollo18
my real question is that why do we take the cold flow test with a grain of salt? is it not an important factor?
I believe it's because the cold flow test manufacturers use is more concerned with cold pumpability, not just how quick it flows or pours. The cold oil behaves differently in an oil pump than it does running down a slight slope under gravity alone.
my real question is that why do we take the cold flow test with a grain of salt? is it not an important factor?
I believe it's because the cold flow test manufacturers use is more concerned with cold pumpability, not just how quick it flows or pours. The cold oil behaves differently in an oil pump than it does running down a slight slope under gravity alone.
MolaKule
Staff member
Originally Posted by apollo18
my real question is that why do we take the cold flow test with a grain of salt? is it not an important factor?
i know of no one doing such a thing, but here is some background info on three cold temp tests:
Cold Cranking Simulator Apparent Viscosity (ASTM- D-2602)
Viscosities that are reported using the kinematic viscosity glass capillary test method do not adequately represent how a motor oils performs under cold cranking conditions. Therefore the Cold Cranking Simulator (CCS) test was developed in order to predict the cold cranking properties of oils used in automotive and truck crankcases. A 5 ml sample of oil is placed in the shear zone of the CCS test machine at room temperature. The shear zone consists of a rotor and stator. Coolant then begins to flow in order to drop the temperature of the oil. After three minutes, the engine is run for one minute before the machines rotor speed is read.
The CCS viscosity is determined in centipoises (cP) by referencing the speed-readings obtained with a special calibration curve determined by standard reference oils. The resultant viscosity is called the apparent viscosity at low temperature. This test is extremely useful in predicting engine-cranking viscosities at specified low temperature resistance and how easily an engine will start in cold temperatures.
Borderline Pumping Temperature (ASTM D-3829)
The borderline pumping temperature is the lowest temperature at which motor oil can be continuously and adequately supplied to the critical components of an internal combustion engine. In order to start an engine in cold temperatures, certain minimum cranking speeds are required. If a motor oil exists with a viscosity that is so high that the engine is not capable of turning over fast enough, it will not start. This is the primary reason oil and automotive manufacturers specify specific oil grades in specific ambient temperatures and batteries with adequate Cold Cranking Amperage (CCA).
and
Quote
"...To evaluate the ability of lubricants to flow under lowâ€temperature conditions, a number of test methods have been developed, from the simple pourâ€point test (ASTM Dâ€97), to very sophisticated tests such as the MRV TPâ€1 (ASTM Dâ€4864). In the early 1980s, a new technique, using the scanning Brookfield viscometer (ASTM Dâ€5133), was developed. This method has progressively gained acceptance by industry and is now part of the ILSAC GFâ€2 specification. The scanning Brookfield technique provides a new approach to continuous measurement of the viscosity of engine lubricants at very low shear rates, with decreasing temperature. It is said to be unique in its ability to identify oils which develop gel structures at low temperature..."
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/tt.3020060105
my real question is that why do we take the cold flow test with a grain of salt? is it not an important factor?
i know of no one doing such a thing, but here is some background info on three cold temp tests:
Cold Cranking Simulator Apparent Viscosity (ASTM- D-2602)
Viscosities that are reported using the kinematic viscosity glass capillary test method do not adequately represent how a motor oils performs under cold cranking conditions. Therefore the Cold Cranking Simulator (CCS) test was developed in order to predict the cold cranking properties of oils used in automotive and truck crankcases. A 5 ml sample of oil is placed in the shear zone of the CCS test machine at room temperature. The shear zone consists of a rotor and stator. Coolant then begins to flow in order to drop the temperature of the oil. After three minutes, the engine is run for one minute before the machines rotor speed is read.
The CCS viscosity is determined in centipoises (cP) by referencing the speed-readings obtained with a special calibration curve determined by standard reference oils. The resultant viscosity is called the apparent viscosity at low temperature. This test is extremely useful in predicting engine-cranking viscosities at specified low temperature resistance and how easily an engine will start in cold temperatures.
Borderline Pumping Temperature (ASTM D-3829)
The borderline pumping temperature is the lowest temperature at which motor oil can be continuously and adequately supplied to the critical components of an internal combustion engine. In order to start an engine in cold temperatures, certain minimum cranking speeds are required. If a motor oil exists with a viscosity that is so high that the engine is not capable of turning over fast enough, it will not start. This is the primary reason oil and automotive manufacturers specify specific oil grades in specific ambient temperatures and batteries with adequate Cold Cranking Amperage (CCA).
and
Quote
"...To evaluate the ability of lubricants to flow under lowâ€temperature conditions, a number of test methods have been developed, from the simple pourâ€point test (ASTM Dâ€97), to very sophisticated tests such as the MRV TPâ€1 (ASTM Dâ€4864). In the early 1980s, a new technique, using the scanning Brookfield viscometer (ASTM Dâ€5133), was developed. This method has progressively gained acceptance by industry and is now part of the ILSAC GFâ€2 specification. The scanning Brookfield technique provides a new approach to continuous measurement of the viscosity of engine lubricants at very low shear rates, with decreasing temperature. It is said to be unique in its ability to identify oils which develop gel structures at low temperature..."
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/tt.3020060105
Last edited:
Can we please stop validating this guy by sharing his videos?
If the OP is serious there are some data sheets circulating around that state Red Line's specifications, try their website. Amsoil I'm not as familiar with but I'm sure that info is available from them also. These would be real ASTM or otherwise scientific lab testing. There is also some info to be gleaned from SDS sheets and interested consumer lab testing, this will give some idea of ingredients and possible ratios. Most people that use the expensive boutique oils have or perceive the need for their use. Extended OCI, track days, hemi tick etc etc. In your case it doesn't seem a boutique would be required for your short OCI unless there is info you are omitting. I use Red Line/Ravenol on all of my vehicles specifically for their cold flow characteristics as these vehicles are sometimes subjected to extreme cold soak conditions. I also don't trust the factory fill for the 10k mile factory OCI. The classic Plymouth I use the Red Line for it's add pack.That being said, I could use a class III synthetic like most are nowadays and achieve nearly the same results but I would lose my fanboi status.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by demarpaint
Originally Posted by kschachn
I think this post wins as the biggest troll of the month.
It's high up on the list.
Absolutely... Top 3 material...
OP
..
This "testing" is horse [censored]...
And of no value.
Originally Posted by kschachn
I think this post wins as the biggest troll of the month.
Absolutely... Top 3 material...
OP
..
This "testing" is horse [censored]...
And of no value.
Originally Posted by sloinker
If the OP is serious...
If the OP is serious...
I recently had to deny the warranty on one of my engines over this mess. I spec'd and provided (at cost) the oil for it to be run with. It was a 383ci SBC with a hydraulic flat cam a little on the radical side. He brought it to me with a wiped cam lobe and 5 others failing mic. It still had enough oil sitting in the heads and lifter valley to get a sample. It came back a very generic SN+ additive package. When I questioned him about it, he admitted to running Super Tech synthetic because he saw some tests (Project Farm) where it performed just as good as Red Line. Apparently me providing him with a PAO/POE high ZDDP oil at just $6/qt was still too expensive for him. I sent him an email stating about $1,600 to repair the engine. He got mad that I wouldn't honor the warranty. I told him he changed the oil, he voided the warranty, and he could take his engine to Project Farm since he trusts him more than his engine builder. I lost him as a customer, and I'm sure he's bad mouthing me to all his buddies. Oh well.
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I recently had to deny the warranty on one of my engines over this mess. I spec'd and provided (at cost) the oil for it to be run with. It was a 383ci SBC with a hydraulic flat cam a little on the radical side. He brought it to me with a wiped cam lobe and 5 others failing mic. It still had enough oil sitting in the heads and lifter valley to get a sample. It came back a very generic SN+ additive package. When I questioned him about it, he admitted to running Super Tech synthetic because he saw some tests (Project Farm) where it performed just as good as Red Line. Apparently me providing him with a PAO/POE high ZDDP oil at just $6/qt was still too expensive for him. I sent him an email stating about $1,600 to repair the engine. He got mad that I wouldn't honor the warranty. I told him he changed the oil, he voided the warranty, and he could take his engine to Project Farm since he trusts him more than his engine builder. I lost him as a customer, and I'm sure he's bad mouthing me to all his buddies. Oh well.
OUCH !!!!
Hard lesson learn for him !
I recently had to deny the warranty on one of my engines over this mess. I spec'd and provided (at cost) the oil for it to be run with. It was a 383ci SBC with a hydraulic flat cam a little on the radical side. He brought it to me with a wiped cam lobe and 5 others failing mic. It still had enough oil sitting in the heads and lifter valley to get a sample. It came back a very generic SN+ additive package. When I questioned him about it, he admitted to running Super Tech synthetic because he saw some tests (Project Farm) where it performed just as good as Red Line. Apparently me providing him with a PAO/POE high ZDDP oil at just $6/qt was still too expensive for him. I sent him an email stating about $1,600 to repair the engine. He got mad that I wouldn't honor the warranty. I told him he changed the oil, he voided the warranty, and he could take his engine to Project Farm since he trusts him more than his engine builder. I lost him as a customer, and I'm sure he's bad mouthing me to all his buddies. Oh well.
OUCH !!!!
Hard lesson learn for him !
Hmmm. apollo18...after apollo17, the last US sponsored lunar voyage,
there was yet another, recently declassified mission, one that ended very badly...
Project Farm will investigate.
there was yet another, recently declassified mission, one that ended very badly...
Project Farm will investigate.
Hmmmm this all escalated rather quickly
🤣🤣...‚ðŸ‘ðŸ»ðŸ‘ðŸ»
🤣🤣...‚ðŸ‘ðŸ»ðŸ‘ðŸ»
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I recently had to deny the warranty on one of my engines over this mess. I spec'd and provided (at cost) the oil for it to be run with. It was a 383ci SBC with a hydraulic flat cam a little on the radical side. He brought it to me with a wiped cam lobe and 5 others failing mic. It still had enough oil sitting in the heads and lifter valley to get a sample. It came back a very generic SN+ additive package. When I questioned him about it, he admitted to running Super Tech synthetic because he saw some tests (Project Farm) where it performed just as good as Red Line. Apparently me providing him with a PAO/POE high ZDDP oil at just $6/qt was still too expensive for him. I sent him an email stating about $1,600 to repair the engine. He got mad that I wouldn't honor the warranty. I told him he changed the oil, he voided the warranty, and he could take his engine to Project Farm since he trusts him more than his engine builder. I lost him as a customer, and I'm sure he's bad mouthing me to all his buddies. Oh well.
Post of the month right there
Bravo.
I recently had to deny the warranty on one of my engines over this mess. I spec'd and provided (at cost) the oil for it to be run with. It was a 383ci SBC with a hydraulic flat cam a little on the radical side. He brought it to me with a wiped cam lobe and 5 others failing mic. It still had enough oil sitting in the heads and lifter valley to get a sample. It came back a very generic SN+ additive package. When I questioned him about it, he admitted to running Super Tech synthetic because he saw some tests (Project Farm) where it performed just as good as Red Line. Apparently me providing him with a PAO/POE high ZDDP oil at just $6/qt was still too expensive for him. I sent him an email stating about $1,600 to repair the engine. He got mad that I wouldn't honor the warranty. I told him he changed the oil, he voided the warranty, and he could take his engine to Project Farm since he trusts him more than his engine builder. I lost him as a customer, and I'm sure he's bad mouthing me to all his buddies. Oh well.
Post of the month right there
Originally Posted by Rand
project farm is more like project dumb.
Its for entertainment, and makes the guy a ton of money.
You have to admit some of the tests do provide a little helpful information.
I think some of the more practical tests like which is the best duct tape, ect are useful and entertaining.
project farm is more like project dumb.
Its for entertainment, and makes the guy a ton of money.
You have to admit some of the tests do provide a little helpful information.
I think some of the more practical tests like which is the best duct tape, ect are useful and entertaining.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked