No ..non...no, pal
I hope that I didn't have a arguementitive tone there ..with you anyway...
You are perhaps correct. I cannot simulate those conditions in my 3.0. I cannot achieve the rpms and, even if I did, I don't know the volume of the other engines in comparison
I would think that, in the case of the aforementioned dragons (whether fire breathing or of the "puff the magic" variety
) that the instances of bypass operation will be "transitional". That is, this is my opinion. Again, one can assume that the oil is somewhat near operating temp and that it presents, at least within its viscosity range, as little (or near as little) resistance to motion as it can. This should (or at least I reason) be equivalent to lower flow rates with higher viscosities (if you see what I'm saying here).
I can surely be wrong ...I've been wrong at least once in my life (if I can only remember when that was
= Alzheimer's to the rescue
) ..but I would think that everything in regards to bypass operation would have some conversion factor for a constant or continuous flow situtation. In the transitional state is where you could see issues that I observed ...which I can only describe as "inertia" ...where the change in status (either from totally still or changing from one flow state to another in an abrupt manner timewise) creates a temporary "surge" or para-"bellows" effect. (again - if you can tune into my oddball view here
).
I'm surely open to the "duality" of a bypass valve. We can surely see that it may work in high visc/low temp settings (I almost reached it) ..and we can see that PSID does indeed increase as a filter is used ...but that it would take many miles to make bypass valve use routine (this may not be the case for all cars in typical usage - no one here is typical). So ..why not say that it also functions as a safety in these transitional states in high rpm situations?
[ April 10, 2006, 04:28 PM: Message edited by: Gary Allan ]