OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Who cares? Strawman much? Straighter based oils will pass those deposit tests better. Prove that wrong? Prove that VIIs increase oil stability and cleanliness. Go ahead and try and prove something so stupid.
Stupid? You are approaching this angry, so I'm not going to expect this to go well, but I'll give the replies the "old College try".
Obviously Porsche cares, or they wouldn't have created the standard. It's not a strawman, it's a direct qualification of a lubricant to handle the conditions I've described, VALIDATED via an extensive tear-down and analysis with measurements to qualify the points you've raised concern about. It's a heck of a lot better than ASSUMING (which is what you are doing here) that using an oil with a closer spread is going to have less polymer in it an SHOULD pass this test, despite not having actually passed it. Basically, you are assuming performance based on a single metric and grossly over-simplifying how lubricants are blended so you can hang your hat on your "sound reasoning".
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Yes, like cold temp performance is more of a fuction of base oil viscosity. Yes, like that's why a 40 grade oil bearing 0W is going to blend with lower viscosity bases than even a 5W20. Prove that this is the exception and not the rule. Go ahead, tough guy.
Tough guy? LOL! Nothing like being emotionally motivated to really ensure that this exchange is going to end up in the toilet
Cold temp performance is not simply a function of base oil viscosity. PAO has massively better cold temperature performance than Group III or lower because it lacks wax. So your Group II or III is going to be dosed with PPD's, whilst the PAO blend won't. Light bases dosed with PPD's and VII's versus a blend of light bases dosed with a similar blend of VII's, yeah.... I actually provided you with some blending examples and showed that VII dosing for a 5w-30 as well as base oil viscosity can be remarkably similar to a 0w-40. You've provided, well, nothing really
Just insults and opinion
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Oh, the oil failures had nothing to do with oil. Oh it's the dealers using subpar oil!!
Yes, the dealers were using the wrong oil (not extended drain capable or designed) for applications that were extended drains. When the proper lubricant was used, which had been the case in Europe, and they had not been having any issues, this problem didn't present. Remember, this was at a time when OEM extended drain intervals were relatively new and you certainly weren't seeing them with domestic or Japanese vehicles. Why are you having a hard time with this? It isn't a difficult concept
*insult removed*
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
EVEN IF THAT WAS TRUE , that all failures are becasue of dealers and the wrong oil, you're only corroborating the neediness of German engines.
No, we are qualifying the inadequacy of basic API lubricants during that time period for use in extended drain interval applications. It has nothing to do with neediness but rather the use of the appropriate product.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Is that the point you intended to make? "It's not the oil" lol It's the sludge fairies. They prefer german vehicles. Seriously, get outta here with that weak sh- opinion piece. I thought you were here to lay down the hard proof for your fanbase, but all I'm getting is less comprehensive imagination and opinion. Good job.
Long on hyperbole and insult, a little short on facts and comprehension I see.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
What narrative, though? I've been trying to figure out what narrative you're getting from my post
That oils with a wide viscosity spread are blended in the same manner as oils with a narrow viscosity spread and thus oils with a narrower spread will inherently use less VII universally and heavier base oils. I literally provided you with examples earlier in the text you quoted, but chose to omit it because, well: agenda.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
has you arguing 5W and 15W performance oils.
I brought up performance oils with a wide spread, spec'd for high performance applications because it doesn't fit the message you are pushing for narrow-spread superiority.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
What are you doing? You're supposed to be telling me why VII's make an oil better outside of the realm of cold starts, and everyone has failed at it; You, kschanch (who can't even try), 53stooge and whoever else is riding your sack. Put up (an argument) or shut up.
Ooooh the "put up or shut up" threat! And from the guy that hasn't actually put up anything other than opinion! Bravo! You gonna drive down here and throw a tantrum in my driveway? I'm only an hour away, you are more than welcome to. Maybe we can record it and put it on Youtube?
I've got a lot of 0w-40, we could have some real fun with this!
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Why is that worth noting? Who cares? What does this do to prove that VII-reliant viscosity is more stable, cleaner or at least on par with base oil reliant viscosity? Most of your reply isn't worth noting at all, because it's so irrelevant..
It's the performance tests, including deposit control, you know, that actual tear down and analyze thing that they are doing and you aren't doing that makes it worth noting. Because what they are doing doesn't align with what you are peddling.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Describe the 'best fit' and tell me what your proxy-engineering has to do with proving that:
-more VII reliant finished oil = a better, cleaner, more stable lubricant
-oils with high VII content and viscosity reliance demonstrate no different effect on film strength, lubricity, deposit control, oxidative stability than straighter blends
or even Level 10:
-that less VIIs = a dirtier, less stable, weaker film, all else equal
1. You are assuming these oils are more VII reliant. The information from the Mobil blending guide shows that's not the case yet you continue to peddle it.
2. This ties into #1, because it opens with the assumption that we are comparing oils with markedly different VII treatments. All of those parameters are tested for, you are building yourself a strawman to attack at this juncture.
3. Again, you are building a strawman to attack by trying to put this all into a single box with the "all else equal" qualifier. All else is never equal, that's not how they are blended, but I expect you know that. What PCMO oils, besides "evil PAO-based ones" like AMSOIL's 10w-30 or the insanely thin Japanese oils that have stratospheric Noack, can we even compare here? You have absolutely no idea how any of the oils you might be cheerleading are even blended.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Go right ahead, big shot. Still waiting for you to win.
Oh, big shot! Don't give yourself a heart attack Peter getting all worked up over there. Maybe go take a walk and cool off? It's pleasant out right now.
BTW, you took a shot at Noack earlier on but then didn't touch it in your "scathing rebuttal". This was after you praised the Japanese lubricants, which I pointed out, had much, MUCH higher Noack figures than the 0w-40's your were slamming. Here's a little excerpt from one of the blending guides:
Who cares? Strawman much? Straighter based oils will pass those deposit tests better. Prove that wrong? Prove that VIIs increase oil stability and cleanliness. Go ahead and try and prove something so stupid.
Stupid? You are approaching this angry, so I'm not going to expect this to go well, but I'll give the replies the "old College try".
Obviously Porsche cares, or they wouldn't have created the standard. It's not a strawman, it's a direct qualification of a lubricant to handle the conditions I've described, VALIDATED via an extensive tear-down and analysis with measurements to qualify the points you've raised concern about. It's a heck of a lot better than ASSUMING (which is what you are doing here) that using an oil with a closer spread is going to have less polymer in it an SHOULD pass this test, despite not having actually passed it. Basically, you are assuming performance based on a single metric and grossly over-simplifying how lubricants are blended so you can hang your hat on your "sound reasoning".
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Yes, like cold temp performance is more of a fuction of base oil viscosity. Yes, like that's why a 40 grade oil bearing 0W is going to blend with lower viscosity bases than even a 5W20. Prove that this is the exception and not the rule. Go ahead, tough guy.
Tough guy? LOL! Nothing like being emotionally motivated to really ensure that this exchange is going to end up in the toilet
Cold temp performance is not simply a function of base oil viscosity. PAO has massively better cold temperature performance than Group III or lower because it lacks wax. So your Group II or III is going to be dosed with PPD's, whilst the PAO blend won't. Light bases dosed with PPD's and VII's versus a blend of light bases dosed with a similar blend of VII's, yeah.... I actually provided you with some blending examples and showed that VII dosing for a 5w-30 as well as base oil viscosity can be remarkably similar to a 0w-40. You've provided, well, nothing really
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Oh, the oil failures had nothing to do with oil. Oh it's the dealers using subpar oil!!
Yes, the dealers were using the wrong oil (not extended drain capable or designed) for applications that were extended drains. When the proper lubricant was used, which had been the case in Europe, and they had not been having any issues, this problem didn't present. Remember, this was at a time when OEM extended drain intervals were relatively new and you certainly weren't seeing them with domestic or Japanese vehicles. Why are you having a hard time with this? It isn't a difficult concept
*insult removed*
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
EVEN IF THAT WAS TRUE , that all failures are becasue of dealers and the wrong oil, you're only corroborating the neediness of German engines.
No, we are qualifying the inadequacy of basic API lubricants during that time period for use in extended drain interval applications. It has nothing to do with neediness but rather the use of the appropriate product.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Is that the point you intended to make? "It's not the oil" lol It's the sludge fairies. They prefer german vehicles. Seriously, get outta here with that weak sh- opinion piece. I thought you were here to lay down the hard proof for your fanbase, but all I'm getting is less comprehensive imagination and opinion. Good job.
Long on hyperbole and insult, a little short on facts and comprehension I see.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
What narrative, though? I've been trying to figure out what narrative you're getting from my post
That oils with a wide viscosity spread are blended in the same manner as oils with a narrow viscosity spread and thus oils with a narrower spread will inherently use less VII universally and heavier base oils. I literally provided you with examples earlier in the text you quoted, but chose to omit it because, well: agenda.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
has you arguing 5W and 15W performance oils.
I brought up performance oils with a wide spread, spec'd for high performance applications because it doesn't fit the message you are pushing for narrow-spread superiority.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
What are you doing? You're supposed to be telling me why VII's make an oil better outside of the realm of cold starts, and everyone has failed at it; You, kschanch (who can't even try), 53stooge and whoever else is riding your sack. Put up (an argument) or shut up.
Ooooh the "put up or shut up" threat! And from the guy that hasn't actually put up anything other than opinion! Bravo! You gonna drive down here and throw a tantrum in my driveway? I'm only an hour away, you are more than welcome to. Maybe we can record it and put it on Youtube?
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Why is that worth noting? Who cares? What does this do to prove that VII-reliant viscosity is more stable, cleaner or at least on par with base oil reliant viscosity? Most of your reply isn't worth noting at all, because it's so irrelevant..
It's the performance tests, including deposit control, you know, that actual tear down and analyze thing that they are doing and you aren't doing that makes it worth noting. Because what they are doing doesn't align with what you are peddling.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Describe the 'best fit' and tell me what your proxy-engineering has to do with proving that:
-more VII reliant finished oil = a better, cleaner, more stable lubricant
-oils with high VII content and viscosity reliance demonstrate no different effect on film strength, lubricity, deposit control, oxidative stability than straighter blends
or even Level 10:
-that less VIIs = a dirtier, less stable, weaker film, all else equal
1. You are assuming these oils are more VII reliant. The information from the Mobil blending guide shows that's not the case yet you continue to peddle it.
2. This ties into #1, because it opens with the assumption that we are comparing oils with markedly different VII treatments. All of those parameters are tested for, you are building yourself a strawman to attack at this juncture.
3. Again, you are building a strawman to attack by trying to put this all into a single box with the "all else equal" qualifier. All else is never equal, that's not how they are blended, but I expect you know that. What PCMO oils, besides "evil PAO-based ones" like AMSOIL's 10w-30 or the insanely thin Japanese oils that have stratospheric Noack, can we even compare here? You have absolutely no idea how any of the oils you might be cheerleading are even blended.
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Go right ahead, big shot. Still waiting for you to win.
Oh, big shot! Don't give yourself a heart attack Peter getting all worked up over there. Maybe go take a walk and cool off? It's pleasant out right now.
BTW, you took a shot at Noack earlier on but then didn't touch it in your "scathing rebuttal". This was after you praised the Japanese lubricants, which I pointed out, had much, MUCH higher Noack figures than the 0w-40's your were slamming. Here's a little excerpt from one of the blending guides:
