delete-
two goofy posts in a row
two goofy posts in a row
Last edited:
New Ravenol Ultra Fuel Economy 0W-8
- Thread starter Shel_B
- Start date
- Status
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yup, Ford introduced the Modular in what, 1990? It's been a hot minute, lol.
More recent… Since thin oils are the thing now.
https://www.substech.com/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=effect_of_low_viscosity_oils_on_engine_bearings
The last sentence of this link. There is a lot of good info to select below this link by the same author.
https://www.substech.com/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=effect_of_low_viscosity_oils_on_engine_bearings
The last sentence of this link. There is a lot of good info to select below this link by the same author.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yup, though interestingly, clearances haven't really changed. Honda however, has gone with wider bearings once then went below 0W-20.
Yup, they pretty much have to because of the physics of Tribology say that's one major way to make engines last better on thinner and thinner MOFT.
Last edited:
I've read pretty much every article on that website years ago (and many other sources), and the conclusion is MOFT decreases and other negative things can happen as the oil viscosity gets lower and lower unless design features are employed in the oil and also the machine to mitigate the effects of small MOFT between moving parts. Again, the physics of Tribology are always in play, and always will be.
And oils will always get thinner. Engines last longer. Engineering and Science hard to beat.
Not much (if at all) thinner than 0W-8 IMO. There really is a limit before things really unravel and ICE start noticeably suffering.
All of this was knowledge,
before GF-6 tests were created.
before GF-6 tests were created.
What's that mean? GF-6 isn't some new alien technology that blows up the physics of Tribology.
So GF-6B motor oil is required to have an ability to provide protection and fuel efficiency both.
Re bearings, Dmitri says there are both pluses and minuses in using low viscosity oils.
It is self evident that the Laws of Physics had to be juggled.
Engine temperature control and DLC are two examples of methods to seemingly defy the principles of Tribology.
What on earth? Juggled?
You’re obviously in way over your head in this thread.
GF-6B is only 0W-16 and lower oils, and it got a separate designation (6B) for a reason ... because it's only specified for engines that have been designed to use that thin of oil, as has been mentioned many times throughout this thread. API doesn't want people pouring 0W-16 oils into engines not specified for it - the oil bottles even have a unique API logo on them. Laws of Physics don't change, but engineering does based on those Laws of Physics.
https://360.lubrizol.com/Specifications/ILSAC/ILSAC-GF-6/ILSAC-GF-6A-and-GF-6B
Those don't "defy the principles of Tribology". They are ways to make the Tribology work.
Last edited:
We all do things that aren't in the owner's manual. My body wasn't designed to process alcohol yet down the hatch it goes.
Respected BITOG posters are resorting to word usage arguments.
I will not dance on the head of a pin for you.
Here, I am quoted, with THE key word left out.
"seemingly defy the principles of Tribology."
Elsewhere, the term "Laws of Physics had to be juggled" was used.
Peculiar language was obviously used to convey a particular message.
It was in no way literal, and in fact is a good term in this context
for pointing out the inherent conflict between efficiency and protection.
As thin as possible; as thick as necessary.
Earlier, the word posit was not well received.
Per Oxford Dictionary 'posit' ... "to suggest OR accept that something is true
so it can be used as the basis for an argument or discussion.
Back to real motor oil discussion please.
So what we have here is the unproven HPL PP 0W8 motor oil.
Bearing issues would not be apparent until it is too late.
I have done my research, methodically applied to real world application.
As a delivery driver subcontractor, I stake my livelihood on the efficacy of this decision.
Subject to further review at a later time.
Bearing issues would not be apparent until it is too late.
I have done my research, methodically applied to real world application.
As a delivery driver subcontractor, I stake my livelihood on the efficacy of this decision.
Subject to further review at a later time.
Albert Einstein famously gave students the same final exam question two years in a row.
The correct answer had changed.
The correct answer had changed.
Which question? So you think the relationship between oil viscosity and the resulting MOFT between moving parts is going to change ... why would that be? It hasn't for decades.
- Status
Similar threads
