Feast your mind on this.
- Thread starter JGW
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: mechtech2
Originally Posted By: addyguy
I love the way people get on here and start questioning the accuracy and correctness of the proven research of a doctor who has studied the very basic fundamentals of fluid flow.
He didn't get this knowledge through armchair research on BITOG, he has done 'real' research on blood flow dynamics in the human body while being a medical doctor.
Mr. Haas has more education, knowledge, and general smarts than 9/10's of the people on the board. I can't believe people on here call him out when he knows more than they ever will - it's really quite comical!
There is very little correlation to oil viscosities at different temps and the human circulatory system. You attribute too much to him on oil subjects.
Dr. HAAS is just plain wrong on a number of points.
It's not very helpful to the OP to claim the good Dr. is "just plain wrong on a number of points" without pointing out what some of those points are.
As I pointed out earlier, the jist of what Ali Haas has to say is correct. Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Originally Posted By: addyguy
I love the way people get on here and start questioning the accuracy and correctness of the proven research of a doctor who has studied the very basic fundamentals of fluid flow.
He didn't get this knowledge through armchair research on BITOG, he has done 'real' research on blood flow dynamics in the human body while being a medical doctor.
Mr. Haas has more education, knowledge, and general smarts than 9/10's of the people on the board. I can't believe people on here call him out when he knows more than they ever will - it's really quite comical!
There is very little correlation to oil viscosities at different temps and the human circulatory system. You attribute too much to him on oil subjects.
Dr. HAAS is just plain wrong on a number of points.
It's not very helpful to the OP to claim the good Dr. is "just plain wrong on a number of points" without pointing out what some of those points are.
As I pointed out earlier, the jist of what Ali Haas has to say is correct. Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
the jist of what Ali Haas has to say is correct. Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Bingo. "As thin as possible, as thick as necessary."
While some of it may be off the mark, a lot of it is spot-on as well. And I give the man a lot of credit for taking the time to write up what he has and in the detail he has used. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I can certainly appreciate the effort he has taken.
the jist of what Ali Haas has to say is correct. Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Bingo. "As thin as possible, as thick as necessary."
While some of it may be off the mark, a lot of it is spot-on as well. And I give the man a lot of credit for taking the time to write up what he has and in the detail he has used. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I can certainly appreciate the effort he has taken.
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
the jist of what Ali Haas has to say is correct. Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Bingo. "As thin as possible, as thick as necessary."
While some of it may be off the mark, a lot of it is spot-on as well. And I give the man a lot of credit for taking the time to write up what he has and in the detail he has used. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I can certainly appreciate the effort he has taken.
Unfortunately, Ali never actually used that fundamental lubrication axiom,
"As thin as possible, as thick as necessary".
Perhaps if he did, there would be less criticism of what he wrote.
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
the jist of what Ali Haas has to say is correct. Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Bingo. "As thin as possible, as thick as necessary."
While some of it may be off the mark, a lot of it is spot-on as well. And I give the man a lot of credit for taking the time to write up what he has and in the detail he has used. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I can certainly appreciate the effort he has taken.
Unfortunately, Ali never actually used that fundamental lubrication axiom,
"As thin as possible, as thick as necessary".
Perhaps if he did, there would be less criticism of what he wrote.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
the jist of what Ali Haas has to say is correct. Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Bingo. "As thin as possible, as thick as necessary."
While some of it may be off the mark, a lot of it is spot-on as well. And I give the man a lot of credit for taking the time to write up what he has and in the detail he has used. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I can certainly appreciate the effort he has taken.
Unfortunately, Ali never actually used that fundamental lubrication axiom,
"As thin as possible, as thick as necessary".
Perhaps if he did, there would be less criticism of what he wrote.
Agreed, but it is the most logical mantra regarding this heavily debated topic, and one that I know you yourself support and what I think people should take away from Dr. Haas's articles.
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
the jist of what Ali Haas has to say is correct. Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Bingo. "As thin as possible, as thick as necessary."
While some of it may be off the mark, a lot of it is spot-on as well. And I give the man a lot of credit for taking the time to write up what he has and in the detail he has used. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I can certainly appreciate the effort he has taken.
Unfortunately, Ali never actually used that fundamental lubrication axiom,
"As thin as possible, as thick as necessary".
Perhaps if he did, there would be less criticism of what he wrote.
Agreed, but it is the most logical mantra regarding this heavily debated topic, and one that I know you yourself support and what I think people should take away from Dr. Haas's articles.
Yes, it's what people should take away, but post after post from newbies who read that article come away thinking they should run the thinnest oil possible in all engines under all circumstances.
As CATERHAM points out, they don't understand the oiling systems of the particular cars, the use, and the fact that the particular oils that Dr. Haas uses are not representative of off the shelf PCMO's of equivalent SAE viscosity.
Ed
As CATERHAM points out, they don't understand the oiling systems of the particular cars, the use, and the fact that the particular oils that Dr. Haas uses are not representative of off the shelf PCMO's of equivalent SAE viscosity.
Ed
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: edhackett
Yes, it's what people should take away, but post after post from newbies who read that article come away thinking they should run the thinnest oil possible in all engines under all circumstances.
As CATERHAM points out, they don't understand the oiling systems of the particular cars, the use, and the fact that the particular oils that Dr. Haas uses are not representative of off the shelf PCMO's of equivalent SAE viscosity.
Ed
Nor are the oils he runs representative of the grade on the bottle so to speak, because as CATERHAM likes to point out.... They have very high HTHS spec's as well.
Yes, it's what people should take away, but post after post from newbies who read that article come away thinking they should run the thinnest oil possible in all engines under all circumstances.
As CATERHAM points out, they don't understand the oiling systems of the particular cars, the use, and the fact that the particular oils that Dr. Haas uses are not representative of off the shelf PCMO's of equivalent SAE viscosity.
Ed
Nor are the oils he runs representative of the grade on the bottle so to speak, because as CATERHAM likes to point out.... They have very high HTHS spec's as well.
I don't believe oil is by-passing the oiling system.
"The oil thickness is now around 150. It is too thick to lubricate an engine designed to run with an oil having a thickness of 10."
There has to be a tolerance. Say thickness 10 plus/minus 4(5w-20 can be 6)
This was helpful:
"flow must go down in order for the pressure to go up. They are inversely related. Conversely if you choose a thinner oil then the pressure will go down. This can only occur if the flow has increased."
When bearing clearances open up in old vehicles pressure decreases and flow increases. Need to slow down flow with a thickness 14.
"The oil thickness is now around 150. It is too thick to lubricate an engine designed to run with an oil having a thickness of 10."
There has to be a tolerance. Say thickness 10 plus/minus 4(5w-20 can be 6)
This was helpful:
"flow must go down in order for the pressure to go up. They are inversely related. Conversely if you choose a thinner oil then the pressure will go down. This can only occur if the flow has increased."
When bearing clearances open up in old vehicles pressure decreases and flow increases. Need to slow down flow with a thickness 14.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked