Including myself !Of course, as is 99% of this site.
Including myself !Of course, as is 99% of this site.
The suite of tests in SAE J300 which characterize cranking and pumpability.What would be an adequate representation of a motor oils behavior running in very cold temps? From what I saw, PF video wasn't over how motor oil behaves in cold temps, but rather testing the oil's cold flow characteristics.
Yes and the reason is because there isn't an existing problem that his tests are discriminating. Like that other useless website where oils are ranked, the saving grace is that his useless data isn't actually determining anything.Every time a post about him comes up, the exasperation is there, so let's not act like it isn't. For the eleventy billionth time, I think we know this about his tests already. Show me whose stuff got ruined because of Project Farm...that's probably a better barometer.
Pour point is a pretty good representation of that but PPD also influence the test.Maybe pour point has some relevance when you want the thinnest 0W oil for use in the artic.... I use pour point (among other things) to help me determine how much grp III the synthetic is using. I'd rather spend on PAO if the specs I need are met.
What's wrong with the lubricity test?Yes but that flow is largely irrelevant in an ICE. It has to pump, not flow. The M1 flow test is a bit odd because it isn't representative of what is required. However, it goes right along with the even more stupid "lubricity test".
Since you stated "go at it boys" then that tells me you already know this.
exactly; so can't use it as a sole determinant.Pour point is a pretty good representation of that but PPD also influence the test.
Nothing if you're characterizing gear oils and the test is being performed using standardized test equipment being operated in a controlled manner with a proper sample size and then reduced, analyzed and presented using a statistically significant method. These YouTube tests have none of that, they are not representative of any process in an ICE and they have none of the rest I mentioned.What's wrong with the lubricity test?
In terms of this "test" that characterizes motor oils, what does he do that is useful and presents information not otherwise available?The guy does a good job testing stuff out. There's a lot more thought and actual testing done by him than the majority of the blowhards on this forum.
Show me your test then, if it's better I'll listen to youIn terms of this "test" that characterizes motor oils, what does he do that is useful and presents information not otherwise available?
Sure. It is called SAE J300 which actually tests relevant properties of motor oils that have real-world meaning. If you don't like that then perhaps some of the additional specifications or approvals that various manufacturers provide.Show me your test then, if it's better I'll listen to you
What about the splash lubrication of cylinder walls? It doesn't at all represent that, seeing as how there's no oil pressure involved?Nothing if you're characterizing gear oils and the test is being performed using standardized test equipment being operated in a controlled manner with a proper sample size and then reduced, analyzed and presented using a statistically significant method. These YouTube tests have none of that, they are not representative of any process in an ICE and they have none of the rest I mentioned.
What about it?What about the splash lubrication of cylinder walls? It doesn't at all represent that, seeing as how there's no oil pressure involved?
Ain't it the truth? Posting memes and anything other than actual information.I don’t know what it is but it’s always the same people that get triggered when someone posts a Project Farm video. I think his videos are fun and entertaining. No need to take it so seriously.
View attachment 128219
I said, it doesn't at all represent that?What about it?