doodfood, I just think you are asking for too much given that this is an oil forum. If we were at work doing engineering or serious science, then sure, I'd say I want more, for the same reasons you mentioned. It can be very discouraging to people to post things they've done or observed when they think their findings or doings will be criticized for lack of very high scientific vigor. I think that when there is good in someone's efforts, shortcomings can be pointed out but care must be taken to not make the person's effort seem weak.
Royal Purple Oil Experience - 2005 Mustang GT
- Thread starter 2k05gt
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: JAG
doodfood, I just think you are asking for too much given that this is an oil forum. If we were at work doing engineering or serious science, then sure, I'd say I want more, for the same reasons you mentioned. It can be very discouraging to people to post things they've done or observed when they think their findings or doings will be criticized for lack of very high scientific vigor. I think that when there is good in someone's efforts, shortcomings can be pointed out but care must be taken to not make the person's effort seem weak.
x2
doodfood, I just think you are asking for too much given that this is an oil forum. If we were at work doing engineering or serious science, then sure, I'd say I want more, for the same reasons you mentioned. It can be very discouraging to people to post things they've done or observed when they think their findings or doings will be criticized for lack of very high scientific vigor. I think that when there is good in someone's efforts, shortcomings can be pointed out but care must be taken to not make the person's effort seem weak.
x2
Hard to type full reply on my phone, but...
"...should know these things"
I am fully aware of all of the things you mentioned, it's Research Theory 101. Where I disagree is the approach and even necessity for constant proof. A person who only adheres to a strict set of rules is unlikely to ever make any revolutionary discoveries. Adhere to the spirit but never always to the rules, bc rules are written by humans and humans are the most fallible things of all. I find it best to ignore the rules and think outside the box, and then go through and vigorously test the theory to ensure it holds water. In my industry, we have between 5-8 thousand failures for every one success, so fresh approaches are welcomed. I think we would all be better off if we were able to realize the value in everything, rather than constantly criticizing things for the.values that they lack. There is such a thing as constructive criticism, and I have seen it in this thread, but I have also seen criticism simply for its own sake.
I hope this clarifies what my prior post intended to convey.
I will more thoroughly respond when I can do so with an actual keyboard
"...should know these things"
I am fully aware of all of the things you mentioned, it's Research Theory 101. Where I disagree is the approach and even necessity for constant proof. A person who only adheres to a strict set of rules is unlikely to ever make any revolutionary discoveries. Adhere to the spirit but never always to the rules, bc rules are written by humans and humans are the most fallible things of all. I find it best to ignore the rules and think outside the box, and then go through and vigorously test the theory to ensure it holds water. In my industry, we have between 5-8 thousand failures for every one success, so fresh approaches are welcomed. I think we would all be better off if we were able to realize the value in everything, rather than constantly criticizing things for the.values that they lack. There is such a thing as constructive criticism, and I have seen it in this thread, but I have also seen criticism simply for its own sake.
I hope this clarifies what my prior post intended to convey.
I will more thoroughly respond when I can do so with an actual keyboard
Originally Posted By: JAG
doodfood, I just think you are asking for too much given that this is an oil forum. If we were at work doing engineering or serious science, then sure, I'd say I want more, for the same reasons you mentioned. It can be very discouraging to people to post things they've done or observed when they think their findings or doings will be criticized for lack of very high scientific vigor. I think that when there is good in someone's efforts, shortcomings can be pointed out but care must be taken to not make the person's effort seem weak.
Fair points, JAG.
I agree that at this point, it seems as though the criticism has been harsh. From where I'm standing, that's because it has had to be repeated and elaborated so many times, and because the critics have had to defend themselves so much from being called fanboys, naysayers, etc. If you look at the whole thread, I'm sure you'll see that most of the reason this all has been blown out of proportion is that people either aren't reading fully or are grossly mischaracterizing what has been said.
doodfood, I just think you are asking for too much given that this is an oil forum. If we were at work doing engineering or serious science, then sure, I'd say I want more, for the same reasons you mentioned. It can be very discouraging to people to post things they've done or observed when they think their findings or doings will be criticized for lack of very high scientific vigor. I think that when there is good in someone's efforts, shortcomings can be pointed out but care must be taken to not make the person's effort seem weak.
Fair points, JAG.
I agree that at this point, it seems as though the criticism has been harsh. From where I'm standing, that's because it has had to be repeated and elaborated so many times, and because the critics have had to defend themselves so much from being called fanboys, naysayers, etc. If you look at the whole thread, I'm sure you'll see that most of the reason this all has been blown out of proportion is that people either aren't reading fully or are grossly mischaracterizing what has been said.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Where I disagree is the approach and even necessity for constant proof.
If you disagree with the necessity for people to prove that what they're saying has merit, I have a hard time imagining how a constructive conversation is possible.
If that's not what you meant, I look forward to reading your further clarification.
Where I disagree is the approach and even necessity for constant proof.
If you disagree with the necessity for people to prove that what they're saying has merit, I have a hard time imagining how a constructive conversation is possible.
If that's not what you meant, I look forward to reading your further clarification.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Where I disagree is the approach and even necessity for constant proof.
If you disagree with the necessity for people to prove that what they're saying has merit, I have a hard time imagining how a constructive conversation is possible.
If that's not what you meant, I look forward to reading your further clarification.
I said CONSTANT proof. It is things like this that are frustrating. This is what, the third time you have quoted me and twisted my words around enough that I have to post a rebuttal, even though I would be willing to bet that most people would have understood the point I was trying to make? English is not a very literal language, which is why people still spend lifetimes trying to understand Shakespeare, but it seems like every word is taken at its literal meaning here.
And for the record, I read this entire thread, and here is what I saw... A guy joins here to post his results with an oil, brings pictures too. Multiple people tell him to do this, which he does, but then those people are not satisfied and have him running all over, buying new tools, and enduring significanf downtime with his car, all because people just cannot be satisfied. After all of that, he is more or less told: "A" for effort, but it doesnt mean anything... Come back after you get an electron scanning microscope and can prove that M1 did worse at the atomic level, bc thats what really matters.
If M1 is so good and you are so confident in it that you are asking other people to spend money and time proving otherwise, why dont you take the valve covers off of your M3 and show us how m1 has done? I wish.my car wasnt in storage or I would do just that, but then again I havent asked anyone to provide proof beyond what can be expected over the internet.
I really do believe your intentions are good, but you come across as "holier than thou" the way you nitpick things to death. I have taken what you have said to heart, honestly, so remember that, well, if you are going to dish it out...
Also, the only place where constant proof is required for a conversation is, well, everywhere BUT the internet... People come here to get away from that, not to be forced to pick every single word with the utmost care lest they be flogged in public... That is NOT constructive.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Where I disagree is the approach and even necessity for constant proof.
If you disagree with the necessity for people to prove that what they're saying has merit, I have a hard time imagining how a constructive conversation is possible.
If that's not what you meant, I look forward to reading your further clarification.
I said CONSTANT proof. It is things like this that are frustrating. This is what, the third time you have quoted me and twisted my words around enough that I have to post a rebuttal, even though I would be willing to bet that most people would have understood the point I was trying to make? English is not a very literal language, which is why people still spend lifetimes trying to understand Shakespeare, but it seems like every word is taken at its literal meaning here.
And for the record, I read this entire thread, and here is what I saw... A guy joins here to post his results with an oil, brings pictures too. Multiple people tell him to do this, which he does, but then those people are not satisfied and have him running all over, buying new tools, and enduring significanf downtime with his car, all because people just cannot be satisfied. After all of that, he is more or less told: "A" for effort, but it doesnt mean anything... Come back after you get an electron scanning microscope and can prove that M1 did worse at the atomic level, bc thats what really matters.
If M1 is so good and you are so confident in it that you are asking other people to spend money and time proving otherwise, why dont you take the valve covers off of your M3 and show us how m1 has done? I wish.my car wasnt in storage or I would do just that, but then again I havent asked anyone to provide proof beyond what can be expected over the internet.
I really do believe your intentions are good, but you come across as "holier than thou" the way you nitpick things to death. I have taken what you have said to heart, honestly, so remember that, well, if you are going to dish it out...
Also, the only place where constant proof is required for a conversation is, well, everywhere BUT the internet... People come here to get away from that, not to be forced to pick every single word with the utmost care lest they be flogged in public... That is NOT constructive.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Where I disagree is the approach and even necessity for constant proof.
If you disagree with the necessity for people to prove that what they're saying has merit, I have a hard time imagining how a constructive conversation is possible.
If that's not what you meant, I look forward to reading your further clarification.
I said CONSTANT proof. It is things like this that are frustrating. This is what, the third time you have quoted me and twisted my words around enough that I have to post a rebuttal, even though I would be willing to bet that most people would have understood the point I was trying to make? English is not a very literal language, which is why people still spend lifetimes trying to understand Shakespeare, but it seems like every word is taken at its literal meaning here.
And for the record, I read this entire thread, and here is what I saw... A guy joins here to post his results with an oil, brings pictures too. Multiple people tell him to do this, which he does, but then those people are not satisfied and have him running all over, buying new tools, and enduring significanf downtime with his car, all because people just cannot be satisfied. After all of that, he is more or less told: "A" for effort, but it doesnt mean anything... Come back after you get an electron scanning microscope and can prove that M1 did worse at the atomic level, bc thats what really matters.
If M1 is so good and you are so confident in it that you are asking other people to spend money and time proving otherwise, why dont you take the valve covers off of your M3 and show us how m1 has done? I wish.my car wasnt in storage or I would do just that, but then again I havent asked anyone to provide proof beyond what can be expected over the internet.
I really do believe your intentions are good, but you come across as "holier than thou" the way you nitpick things to death. I have taken what you have said to heart, honestly, so remember that, well, if you are going to dish it out...
Also, the only place where constant proof is required for a conversation is, well, everywhere BUT the internet... People come here to get away from that, not to be forced to pick every single word with the utmost care lest they be flogged in public... That is NOT constructive.
Again,agree!
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Where I disagree is the approach and even necessity for constant proof.
If you disagree with the necessity for people to prove that what they're saying has merit, I have a hard time imagining how a constructive conversation is possible.
If that's not what you meant, I look forward to reading your further clarification.
I said CONSTANT proof. It is things like this that are frustrating. This is what, the third time you have quoted me and twisted my words around enough that I have to post a rebuttal, even though I would be willing to bet that most people would have understood the point I was trying to make? English is not a very literal language, which is why people still spend lifetimes trying to understand Shakespeare, but it seems like every word is taken at its literal meaning here.
And for the record, I read this entire thread, and here is what I saw... A guy joins here to post his results with an oil, brings pictures too. Multiple people tell him to do this, which he does, but then those people are not satisfied and have him running all over, buying new tools, and enduring significanf downtime with his car, all because people just cannot be satisfied. After all of that, he is more or less told: "A" for effort, but it doesnt mean anything... Come back after you get an electron scanning microscope and can prove that M1 did worse at the atomic level, bc thats what really matters.
If M1 is so good and you are so confident in it that you are asking other people to spend money and time proving otherwise, why dont you take the valve covers off of your M3 and show us how m1 has done? I wish.my car wasnt in storage or I would do just that, but then again I havent asked anyone to provide proof beyond what can be expected over the internet.
I really do believe your intentions are good, but you come across as "holier than thou" the way you nitpick things to death. I have taken what you have said to heart, honestly, so remember that, well, if you are going to dish it out...
Also, the only place where constant proof is required for a conversation is, well, everywhere BUT the internet... People come here to get away from that, not to be forced to pick every single word with the utmost care lest they be flogged in public... That is NOT constructive.
Again,agree!
Originally Posted By: nleksan
If M1 is so good and you are so confident in it that you are asking other people to spend money and time proving otherwise, why dont you take the valve covers off of your M3 and show us how m1 has done? I wish.my car wasnt in storage or I would do just that, but then again I havent asked anyone to provide proof beyond what can be expected over the internet.
I think what's being missed here is why proof and evidence are so hard to come by. None of us, as individuals, have the resources or the time or the lifespan to properly test oils against each other while eliminating variables. Who among us can buy two brand new BMWs, for instance, and run one for hundreds of thousands of miles on RP 0w-40, and repeat the same with M1 0w-40, all the while ensuring that OCIs were the same, that filtration was the same, and keeping fuel quality and driving conditions the same?
That's why many of us are skeptical. You name any brand out there, and someone will claim a ringing success with the product, and someone else will claim a catastrophe. That's why we find it hard to believe when someone claims RP blew their engine or that RP reduced wear above and beyond what any other oil could do.
If someone's engine is sludged, the first thing they do is blame the oil, and ignore the fact that their PCV is plugged and has never seen the slightest bit of attention in the vehicle's lifespan. If someone's engine is clean, he may claim the oil did it all, regardless of the fact that he changed the oil every 3,000 miles or 3 months, or that he was meticulous with maintenance, and so forth.
That's why I do tend to rely on the various certification organizations and the oil companies' testing. All the big names and the top end boutiques make fine oil. I don't doubt that for a minute. Fanciful claims of any sort (eight times less wear, clean as factory) still have to be viewed with a critical eye.
If M1 is so good and you are so confident in it that you are asking other people to spend money and time proving otherwise, why dont you take the valve covers off of your M3 and show us how m1 has done? I wish.my car wasnt in storage or I would do just that, but then again I havent asked anyone to provide proof beyond what can be expected over the internet.
I think what's being missed here is why proof and evidence are so hard to come by. None of us, as individuals, have the resources or the time or the lifespan to properly test oils against each other while eliminating variables. Who among us can buy two brand new BMWs, for instance, and run one for hundreds of thousands of miles on RP 0w-40, and repeat the same with M1 0w-40, all the while ensuring that OCIs were the same, that filtration was the same, and keeping fuel quality and driving conditions the same?
That's why many of us are skeptical. You name any brand out there, and someone will claim a ringing success with the product, and someone else will claim a catastrophe. That's why we find it hard to believe when someone claims RP blew their engine or that RP reduced wear above and beyond what any other oil could do.
If someone's engine is sludged, the first thing they do is blame the oil, and ignore the fact that their PCV is plugged and has never seen the slightest bit of attention in the vehicle's lifespan. If someone's engine is clean, he may claim the oil did it all, regardless of the fact that he changed the oil every 3,000 miles or 3 months, or that he was meticulous with maintenance, and so forth.
That's why I do tend to rely on the various certification organizations and the oil companies' testing. All the big names and the top end boutiques make fine oil. I don't doubt that for a minute. Fanciful claims of any sort (eight times less wear, clean as factory) still have to be viewed with a critical eye.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
I said CONSTANT proof.
I know what you said. EVERYTHING needs to be subject to some kind of demand for evidence, in proportion to the claim. I can't fathom why anything should be exempted.
As always, I'm open to being convinced. So far, what I've understood from you is that if someone puts a lot of effort into something, we should just accept it regardless of its validity. I don't agree, because I think that's counterproductive and patronizing.
You make a good point that criticism can be discouraging. In my experience, that's only true if you value what you believe over your search for truth. I don't, nor do I think anyone should -- although I am morally certain that I don't speak for most people on that point.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
It is things like this that are frustrating. This is what, the third time you have quoted me and twisted my words around enough that I have to post a rebuttal, even though I would be willing to bet that most people would have understood the point I was trying to make?
Welcome to my world.
What have I misunderstood? Spell it out for me.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
it seems like every word is taken at its literal meaning here.
Welcome to the Internet. There's no body language or tone of voice, so if you don't literally mean what you say, you are at an elevated risk of being misunderstood. Believe me, you're not the only one on this forum who has been endlessly frustrated by people reading things into your post that you didn't intend. Cough, cough.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
And for the record, I read this entire thread, and here is what I saw... A guy joins here to post his results with an oil, brings pictures too. Multiple people tell him to do this, which he does, but then those people are not satisfied and have him running all over, buying new tools, and enduring significanf downtime with his car, all because people just cannot be satisfied. After all of that, he is more or less told: "A" for effort, but it doesnt mean anything... Come back after you get an electron scanning microscope and can prove that M1 did worse at the atomic level, bc thats what really matters.
Factually incorrect.
The cams were out of the cars they came from, and sitting around. He took the pics and measured them when he got around to it. Zero downtime involved, and he barely even went out of his way.
The frustration was not with the OP, or with what he presented. The frustration was with people who took this thread as proof positive that Royal Purple had decisively outperformed Mobil 1, and either ignored or ridiculed any statement that disagreed.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
If M1 is so good and you are so confident in it that you are asking other people to spend money and time proving otherwise, why dont you take the valve covers off of your M3 and show us how m1 has done?
Because that's not what I think, and my engine has never seen Mobil 1 except for one quart of emergency top-off.
But if it makes you happy, here's a pic of my valvetrain: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...116#Post1621116
Originally Posted By: nleksan
I really do believe your intentions are good, but you come across as "holier than thou" the way you nitpick things to death.
You know, I get this a lot. But only ever from people who apparently see the demand for evidence as a luxury, a mystical aspect of science, or a weapon to be used against people you don't like...
Originally Posted By: nleksan
I have taken what you have said to heart, honestly, so remember that, well, if you are going to dish it out...
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Also, the only place where constant proof is required for a conversation is, well, everywhere BUT the internet... People come here to get away from that
Everything I have learned in life has taught me to be very, very leery of people who think that the demand for evidence is ever something to be gotten away from.
Then again, maybe that says something about why people use this website. You mentioned being constructive; what exactly are we trying to construct? Ostensibly, people participate on BITOG because they want in some way to figure out fact from fiction. If that's the case, the demand for evidence needs to be strong and pervasive, as does the spirit of debate. But if the real reason they participate is to shoot the breeze and agree with each other, then yes, debate and criticism would be very counterproductive indeed...
I said CONSTANT proof.
I know what you said. EVERYTHING needs to be subject to some kind of demand for evidence, in proportion to the claim. I can't fathom why anything should be exempted.
As always, I'm open to being convinced. So far, what I've understood from you is that if someone puts a lot of effort into something, we should just accept it regardless of its validity. I don't agree, because I think that's counterproductive and patronizing.
You make a good point that criticism can be discouraging. In my experience, that's only true if you value what you believe over your search for truth. I don't, nor do I think anyone should -- although I am morally certain that I don't speak for most people on that point.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
It is things like this that are frustrating. This is what, the third time you have quoted me and twisted my words around enough that I have to post a rebuttal, even though I would be willing to bet that most people would have understood the point I was trying to make?
Welcome to my world.
What have I misunderstood? Spell it out for me.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
it seems like every word is taken at its literal meaning here.
Welcome to the Internet. There's no body language or tone of voice, so if you don't literally mean what you say, you are at an elevated risk of being misunderstood. Believe me, you're not the only one on this forum who has been endlessly frustrated by people reading things into your post that you didn't intend. Cough, cough.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
And for the record, I read this entire thread, and here is what I saw... A guy joins here to post his results with an oil, brings pictures too. Multiple people tell him to do this, which he does, but then those people are not satisfied and have him running all over, buying new tools, and enduring significanf downtime with his car, all because people just cannot be satisfied. After all of that, he is more or less told: "A" for effort, but it doesnt mean anything... Come back after you get an electron scanning microscope and can prove that M1 did worse at the atomic level, bc thats what really matters.
Factually incorrect.
The cams were out of the cars they came from, and sitting around. He took the pics and measured them when he got around to it. Zero downtime involved, and he barely even went out of his way.
The frustration was not with the OP, or with what he presented. The frustration was with people who took this thread as proof positive that Royal Purple had decisively outperformed Mobil 1, and either ignored or ridiculed any statement that disagreed.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
If M1 is so good and you are so confident in it that you are asking other people to spend money and time proving otherwise, why dont you take the valve covers off of your M3 and show us how m1 has done?
Because that's not what I think, and my engine has never seen Mobil 1 except for one quart of emergency top-off.
But if it makes you happy, here's a pic of my valvetrain: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...116#Post1621116
Originally Posted By: nleksan
I really do believe your intentions are good, but you come across as "holier than thou" the way you nitpick things to death.
You know, I get this a lot. But only ever from people who apparently see the demand for evidence as a luxury, a mystical aspect of science, or a weapon to be used against people you don't like...
Originally Posted By: nleksan
I have taken what you have said to heart, honestly, so remember that, well, if you are going to dish it out...
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Also, the only place where constant proof is required for a conversation is, well, everywhere BUT the internet... People come here to get away from that
Everything I have learned in life has taught me to be very, very leery of people who think that the demand for evidence is ever something to be gotten away from.
Then again, maybe that says something about why people use this website. You mentioned being constructive; what exactly are we trying to construct? Ostensibly, people participate on BITOG because they want in some way to figure out fact from fiction. If that's the case, the demand for evidence needs to be strong and pervasive, as does the spirit of debate. But if the real reason they participate is to shoot the breeze and agree with each other, then yes, debate and criticism would be very counterproductive indeed...
d00df00d
You have helped takes this thread to 45 pages.
Are you the evangelist that won every argument but lost every soul?
You have helped takes this thread to 45 pages.
Are you the evangelist that won every argument but lost every soul?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
The guy who had the engine failure,I wonder if the outcome would`ve been different if he`d used M1`s 0W40,10W40HM,5W50,or 15W50? Was the cam and bearing failure due to too thin a lubricant? Or a lacking add pack? Was the cam wear caused by a breach of the oil film (being too thin) or an additive that was not present that if was,would`ve prevented the cam wear?
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: JAG
doodfood, I just think you are asking for too much given that this is an oil forum. If we were at work doing engineering or serious science, then sure, I'd say I want more, for the same reasons you mentioned. It can be very discouraging to people to post things they've done or observed when they think their findings or doings will be criticized for lack of very high scientific vigor. I think that when there is good in someone's efforts, shortcomings can be pointed out but care must be taken to not make the person's effort seem weak.
I don't. This forum is FULL of engineers of all different types, why should we hold ourselves to a lower set of standards here than if were conversing among ourselves?
I'm sure those reading and not replying appreciate the extra effort put forth to ensure things are factual or at least in that vein.
I think d00df00d's point is that we are having constructive criticism being regarded as bashing. Questioning one's methods or making observations as to what could have been "done better" in a "study" that started out initially as nothing more than a casual observation and then snowballed is NOT bashing! And it does not mean the product in question isn't excellent; nobody in this thread who has posted anything of value has stated that Royal Purple is a bad oil.
The hang-up is on the fact that we are dealing with different cars of different years with different drivers and different driving styles. There is no "control" here. Had the OP run the Royal Purple for x number of miles, taken the pictures, then run Mobil 1 in the same car, in the same manner for the same amount of miles and then posted the results, then I think we'd have a much better picture of the goings on. That, and the lack of before measurements, and I'm sure the difference in maintenance between the OP and the driver of the other car are all valid concern items that both d00df00d and myself have mentioned.
Nobody is questioning his results in HIS car. What we are questioning is the validity of the COMPARISON between his results and those of the other car owner.
doodfood, I just think you are asking for too much given that this is an oil forum. If we were at work doing engineering or serious science, then sure, I'd say I want more, for the same reasons you mentioned. It can be very discouraging to people to post things they've done or observed when they think their findings or doings will be criticized for lack of very high scientific vigor. I think that when there is good in someone's efforts, shortcomings can be pointed out but care must be taken to not make the person's effort seem weak.
I don't. This forum is FULL of engineers of all different types, why should we hold ourselves to a lower set of standards here than if were conversing among ourselves?
I'm sure those reading and not replying appreciate the extra effort put forth to ensure things are factual or at least in that vein.
I think d00df00d's point is that we are having constructive criticism being regarded as bashing. Questioning one's methods or making observations as to what could have been "done better" in a "study" that started out initially as nothing more than a casual observation and then snowballed is NOT bashing! And it does not mean the product in question isn't excellent; nobody in this thread who has posted anything of value has stated that Royal Purple is a bad oil.
The hang-up is on the fact that we are dealing with different cars of different years with different drivers and different driving styles. There is no "control" here. Had the OP run the Royal Purple for x number of miles, taken the pictures, then run Mobil 1 in the same car, in the same manner for the same amount of miles and then posted the results, then I think we'd have a much better picture of the goings on. That, and the lack of before measurements, and I'm sure the difference in maintenance between the OP and the driver of the other car are all valid concern items that both d00df00d and myself have mentioned.
Nobody is questioning his results in HIS car. What we are questioning is the validity of the COMPARISON between his results and those of the other car owner.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
The guy who had the engine failure,I wonder if the outcome would`ve been different if he`d used M1`s 0W40,10W40HM,5W50,or 15W50? Was the cam and bearing failure due to too thin a lubricant? Or a lacking add pack? Was the cam wear caused by a breach of the oil film (being too thin) or an additive that was not present that if was,would`ve prevented the cam wear?
He had a rod bearing failure, not a cam failure AFAIK. And it could have been from dirt ingestion, a poor tune.....etc. We are dealing with modified cars here, not stockers.
The guy who had the engine failure,I wonder if the outcome would`ve been different if he`d used M1`s 0W40,10W40HM,5W50,or 15W50? Was the cam and bearing failure due to too thin a lubricant? Or a lacking add pack? Was the cam wear caused by a breach of the oil film (being too thin) or an additive that was not present that if was,would`ve prevented the cam wear?
He had a rod bearing failure, not a cam failure AFAIK. And it could have been from dirt ingestion, a poor tune.....etc. We are dealing with modified cars here, not stockers.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: nleksan
I said CONSTANT proof.
I know what you said. EVERYTHING needs to be subject to some kind of demand for evidence, in proportion to the claim. I can't fathom why anything should be exempted.
As always, I'm open to being convinced. So far, what I've understood from you is that if someone puts a lot of effort into something, we should just accept it regardless of its validity. I don't agree, because I think that's counterproductive and patronizing.
You make a good point that criticism can be discouraging. In my experience, that's only true if you value what you believe over your search for truth. I don't, nor do I think anyone should -- although I am morally certain that I don't speak for most people on that point.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
It is things like this that are frustrating. This is what, the third time you have quoted me and twisted my words around enough that I have to post a rebuttal, even though I would be willing to bet that most people would have understood the point I was trying to make?
Welcome to my world.
What have I misunderstood? Spell it out for me.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
it seems like every word is taken at its literal meaning here.
Welcome to the Internet. There's no body language or tone of voice, so if you don't literally mean what you say, you are at an elevated risk of being misunderstood. Believe me, you're not the only one on this forum who has been endlessly frustrated by people reading things into your post that you didn't intend. Cough, cough.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
And for the record, I read this entire thread, and here is what I saw... A guy joins here to post his results with an oil, brings pictures too. Multiple people tell him to do this, which he does, but then those people are not satisfied and have him running all over, buying new tools, and enduring significanf downtime with his car, all because people just cannot be satisfied. After all of that, he is more or less told: "A" for effort, but it doesnt mean anything... Come back after you get an electron scanning microscope and can prove that M1 did worse at the atomic level, bc thats what really matters.
Factually incorrect.
The cams were out of the cars they came from, and sitting around. He took the pics and measured them when he got around to it. Zero downtime involved, and he barely even went out of his way.
The frustration was not with the OP, or with what he presented. The frustration was with people who took this thread as proof positive that Royal Purple had decisively outperformed Mobil 1, and either ignored or ridiculed any statement that disagreed.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
If M1 is so good and you are so confident in it that you are asking other people to spend money and time proving otherwise, why dont you take the valve covers off of your M3 and show us how m1 has done?
Because that's not what I think, and my engine has never seen Mobil 1 except for one quart of emergency top-off.
But if it makes you happy, here's a pic of my valvetrain: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...116#Post1621116
Originally Posted By: nleksan
I really do believe your intentions are good, but you come across as "holier than thou" the way you nitpick things to death.
You know, I get this a lot. But only ever from people who apparently see the demand for evidence as a luxury, a mystical aspect of science, or a weapon to be used against people you don't like...
Originally Posted By: nleksan
I have taken what you have said to heart, honestly, so remember that, well, if you are going to dish it out...
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Also, the only place where constant proof is required for a conversation is, well, everywhere BUT the internet... People come here to get away from that
Everything I have learned in life has taught me to be very, very leery of people who think that the demand for evidence is ever something to be gotten away from.
Then again, maybe that says something about why people use this website. You mentioned being constructive; what exactly are we trying to construct? Ostensibly, people participate on BITOG because they want in some way to figure out fact from fiction. If that's the case, the demand for evidence needs to be strong and pervasive, as does the spirit of debate. But if the real reason they participate is to shoot the breeze and agree with each other, then yes, debate and criticism would be very counterproductive indeed...
Let me just start by saying: I do not disagree with everything you've said, or even most of what you've said, I just disagree with HOW you've said it, if that clarifies...
For the most part, I think you have an extremely valid point in regards to evidence vs anecdotes, because I share the same deep desire for proof; I want numbers and statistics to back-up any HUGE claims, because (going back to Research Theory 101) "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".
I do not feel that "some things should be held to different standards than others", but rather that different mediums are self-limiting in what they can and cannot provide in terms of "proof".
BTW, before I forget, you "called my bluff" (not the right term, but I can't think of the right one...), and I applaud you for actually posting pictures of your car's valvetrain. Touche! Not many people would have that available or would have done that, so props to you!
Also, I spoke incorrectly: it was not the OP who had to suffer downtime with his car, it was his friend's car that was out of commission already, so I apologize for my mistake there.
I do still stand behind my belief that the standards for "proof" in this area, an oil forum on the internet, are lower than in, say, a research laboratory. The reasons for this are many, but boil down to this: claims made here are almost exclusively NOT falsifiable, so they can thus NEVER be proven nor disproven. All we can go on is our own judgement, which may be enhanced by our perceptions derived from others' perceptions and experiences. Kind of like the whole "feels smoother" or "feels quicker"; subjective data is what should be expected, because very few people on here are engineers (relative to the entire BITOG population). In such cases, it is better to take what you can than to ignore everything, IMO. If we disagree there, so be it, but I for one do my best to try and find value in every experience, anecdote, etc.
My brain is a bit scattered right now, so I realize I didn't address everything you mentioned, but I will delve further if you would like.
Take care,
nleksan
Originally Posted By: nleksan
I said CONSTANT proof.
I know what you said. EVERYTHING needs to be subject to some kind of demand for evidence, in proportion to the claim. I can't fathom why anything should be exempted.
As always, I'm open to being convinced. So far, what I've understood from you is that if someone puts a lot of effort into something, we should just accept it regardless of its validity. I don't agree, because I think that's counterproductive and patronizing.
You make a good point that criticism can be discouraging. In my experience, that's only true if you value what you believe over your search for truth. I don't, nor do I think anyone should -- although I am morally certain that I don't speak for most people on that point.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
It is things like this that are frustrating. This is what, the third time you have quoted me and twisted my words around enough that I have to post a rebuttal, even though I would be willing to bet that most people would have understood the point I was trying to make?
Welcome to my world.
What have I misunderstood? Spell it out for me.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
it seems like every word is taken at its literal meaning here.
Welcome to the Internet. There's no body language or tone of voice, so if you don't literally mean what you say, you are at an elevated risk of being misunderstood. Believe me, you're not the only one on this forum who has been endlessly frustrated by people reading things into your post that you didn't intend. Cough, cough.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
And for the record, I read this entire thread, and here is what I saw... A guy joins here to post his results with an oil, brings pictures too. Multiple people tell him to do this, which he does, but then those people are not satisfied and have him running all over, buying new tools, and enduring significanf downtime with his car, all because people just cannot be satisfied. After all of that, he is more or less told: "A" for effort, but it doesnt mean anything... Come back after you get an electron scanning microscope and can prove that M1 did worse at the atomic level, bc thats what really matters.
Factually incorrect.
The cams were out of the cars they came from, and sitting around. He took the pics and measured them when he got around to it. Zero downtime involved, and he barely even went out of his way.
The frustration was not with the OP, or with what he presented. The frustration was with people who took this thread as proof positive that Royal Purple had decisively outperformed Mobil 1, and either ignored or ridiculed any statement that disagreed.
Originally Posted By: nleksan
If M1 is so good and you are so confident in it that you are asking other people to spend money and time proving otherwise, why dont you take the valve covers off of your M3 and show us how m1 has done?
Because that's not what I think, and my engine has never seen Mobil 1 except for one quart of emergency top-off.
But if it makes you happy, here's a pic of my valvetrain: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...116#Post1621116
Originally Posted By: nleksan
I really do believe your intentions are good, but you come across as "holier than thou" the way you nitpick things to death.
You know, I get this a lot. But only ever from people who apparently see the demand for evidence as a luxury, a mystical aspect of science, or a weapon to be used against people you don't like...
Originally Posted By: nleksan
I have taken what you have said to heart, honestly, so remember that, well, if you are going to dish it out...
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Also, the only place where constant proof is required for a conversation is, well, everywhere BUT the internet... People come here to get away from that
Everything I have learned in life has taught me to be very, very leery of people who think that the demand for evidence is ever something to be gotten away from.
Then again, maybe that says something about why people use this website. You mentioned being constructive; what exactly are we trying to construct? Ostensibly, people participate on BITOG because they want in some way to figure out fact from fiction. If that's the case, the demand for evidence needs to be strong and pervasive, as does the spirit of debate. But if the real reason they participate is to shoot the breeze and agree with each other, then yes, debate and criticism would be very counterproductive indeed...
Let me just start by saying: I do not disagree with everything you've said, or even most of what you've said, I just disagree with HOW you've said it, if that clarifies...
For the most part, I think you have an extremely valid point in regards to evidence vs anecdotes, because I share the same deep desire for proof; I want numbers and statistics to back-up any HUGE claims, because (going back to Research Theory 101) "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".
I do not feel that "some things should be held to different standards than others", but rather that different mediums are self-limiting in what they can and cannot provide in terms of "proof".
BTW, before I forget, you "called my bluff" (not the right term, but I can't think of the right one...), and I applaud you for actually posting pictures of your car's valvetrain. Touche! Not many people would have that available or would have done that, so props to you!
Also, I spoke incorrectly: it was not the OP who had to suffer downtime with his car, it was his friend's car that was out of commission already, so I apologize for my mistake there.
I do still stand behind my belief that the standards for "proof" in this area, an oil forum on the internet, are lower than in, say, a research laboratory. The reasons for this are many, but boil down to this: claims made here are almost exclusively NOT falsifiable, so they can thus NEVER be proven nor disproven. All we can go on is our own judgement, which may be enhanced by our perceptions derived from others' perceptions and experiences. Kind of like the whole "feels smoother" or "feels quicker"; subjective data is what should be expected, because very few people on here are engineers (relative to the entire BITOG population). In such cases, it is better to take what you can than to ignore everything, IMO. If we disagree there, so be it, but I for one do my best to try and find value in every experience, anecdote, etc.
My brain is a bit scattered right now, so I realize I didn't address everything you mentioned, but I will delve further if you would like.
Take care,
nleksan
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
nleksan:
Great post
BTW, just because our standards of proof are lower here, doesn't mean we shouldn't at least aspire to do the best we can
Some "evil" valvetrain pics from my stash:
1987 Ford 302 w/332,000Km, run on almost every grade of Mobil 1 from 0w30 to 5w50 @ ~325HP:
2001 BMW M5, only had it since August, maintenance was done by BMW, so I assume BMW 5w30, now has Mobil 1 0w40 in it:
Not a great pic of the latter I know, but the engine looks pretty clean from what you can see.
Great post
BTW, just because our standards of proof are lower here, doesn't mean we shouldn't at least aspire to do the best we can
Some "evil" valvetrain pics from my stash:
1987 Ford 302 w/332,000Km, run on almost every grade of Mobil 1 from 0w30 to 5w50 @ ~325HP:
2001 BMW M5, only had it since August, maintenance was done by BMW, so I assume BMW 5w30, now has Mobil 1 0w40 in it:
Not a great pic of the latter I know, but the engine looks pretty clean from what you can see.
Thank you, and btw you have a truly awesome car in that M5, imo one of the all time greatest cars, not only from BMW but from all manufacturers. You are a lucky guy!
Btw, I was lucky enough to have driven a twin supercharged E39 M5 (one centrifugal SC per cylinder bank) making over 650rwhp... WOW! Idk if it was a one off or if there are kits available, but if you ever get bored of 400bhp, it is worth looking into I think. Power delivery was unchanged from stock, very linear, there was just a heckuva lot more power! Spinning the rear 285 width tires during a redline shift into fourth on the highway, just about wet myself lol.
Anyways, I applaud your excellent taste in automobiles!
I agree 100% that proof, or as close to it, should be something we constantly strive for. However, I also think that we should appreciate the value in what we are given, which often lacks the thorough review of truly scientific research, but is valuable nevertheless.
Also, in your pic from.the M5, if you look at the brown varnish formed above the valvetrain, you will get a good idea of what the BEST parts of my engine looked like with most looking worse, much worse. I am glad that your engine has remained in such good shape over the years. Hopefully you are giving it the ol' Italian tune-up now and then
I hope you continue to enjoy your car for many years to come, and that you do so in good health!
Sincerely,
nleksan
Btw, I was lucky enough to have driven a twin supercharged E39 M5 (one centrifugal SC per cylinder bank) making over 650rwhp... WOW! Idk if it was a one off or if there are kits available, but if you ever get bored of 400bhp, it is worth looking into I think. Power delivery was unchanged from stock, very linear, there was just a heckuva lot more power! Spinning the rear 285 width tires during a redline shift into fourth on the highway, just about wet myself lol.
Anyways, I applaud your excellent taste in automobiles!
I agree 100% that proof, or as close to it, should be something we constantly strive for. However, I also think that we should appreciate the value in what we are given, which often lacks the thorough review of truly scientific research, but is valuable nevertheless.
Also, in your pic from.the M5, if you look at the brown varnish formed above the valvetrain, you will get a good idea of what the BEST parts of my engine looked like with most looking worse, much worse. I am glad that your engine has remained in such good shape over the years. Hopefully you are giving it the ol' Italian tune-up now and then
I hope you continue to enjoy your car for many years to come, and that you do so in good health!
Sincerely,
nleksan
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Thank you, and btw you have a truly awesome car in that M5, imo one of the all time greatest cars, not only from BMW but from all manufacturers. You are a lucky guy!
Btw, I was lucky enough to have driven a twin supercharged E39 M5 (one centrifugal SC per cylinder bank) making over 650rwhp... WOW! Idk if it was a one off or if there are kits available, but if you ever get bored of 400bhp, it is worth looking into I think. Power delivery was unchanged from stock, very linear, there was just a heckuva lot more power! Spinning the rear 285 width tires during a redline shift into fourth on the highway, just about wet myself lol.
Anyways, I applaud your excellent taste in automobiles!
I agree 100% that proof, or as close to it, should be something we constantly strive for. However, I also think that we should appreciate the value in what we are given, which often lacks the thorough review of truly scientific research, but is valuable nevertheless.
Also, in your pic from.the M5, if you look at the brown varnish formed above the valvetrain, you will get a good idea of what the BEST parts of my engine looked like with most looking worse, much worse. I am glad that your engine has remained in such good shape over the years. Hopefully you are giving it the ol' Italian tune-up now and then
I hope you continue to enjoy your car for many years to come, and that you do so in good health!
Sincerely,
nleksan
Thanks! Yes, I love the car, it is fantastic, best car I've ever owned and best all-around car I've driven.
I believe that kit is aftermarket (the blower one), and I've heard of a twin-turbo setup too.
About the valve cover (which is what I assume you mean with your varnish comment) I wasn't sure as to whether the inside of the valve cover was coated or if that was indeed some sort of build-up. That area gets heavily nailed with oil from the timing chains, so if it IS varnish, I'm hoping to see some clean-up in that area with the M1 0w40. I'll see if I can get any of it off with my finger the next time I change the oil!
Thank you, and btw you have a truly awesome car in that M5, imo one of the all time greatest cars, not only from BMW but from all manufacturers. You are a lucky guy!
Btw, I was lucky enough to have driven a twin supercharged E39 M5 (one centrifugal SC per cylinder bank) making over 650rwhp... WOW! Idk if it was a one off or if there are kits available, but if you ever get bored of 400bhp, it is worth looking into I think. Power delivery was unchanged from stock, very linear, there was just a heckuva lot more power! Spinning the rear 285 width tires during a redline shift into fourth on the highway, just about wet myself lol.
Anyways, I applaud your excellent taste in automobiles!
I agree 100% that proof, or as close to it, should be something we constantly strive for. However, I also think that we should appreciate the value in what we are given, which often lacks the thorough review of truly scientific research, but is valuable nevertheless.
Also, in your pic from.the M5, if you look at the brown varnish formed above the valvetrain, you will get a good idea of what the BEST parts of my engine looked like with most looking worse, much worse. I am glad that your engine has remained in such good shape over the years. Hopefully you are giving it the ol' Italian tune-up now and then
I hope you continue to enjoy your car for many years to come, and that you do so in good health!
Sincerely,
nleksan
Thanks! Yes, I love the car, it is fantastic, best car I've ever owned and best all-around car I've driven.
I believe that kit is aftermarket (the blower one), and I've heard of a twin-turbo setup too.
About the valve cover (which is what I assume you mean with your varnish comment) I wasn't sure as to whether the inside of the valve cover was coated or if that was indeed some sort of build-up. That area gets heavily nailed with oil from the timing chains, so if it IS varnish, I'm hoping to see some clean-up in that area with the M1 0w40. I'll see if I can get any of it off with my finger the next time I change the oil!
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Thank you, and btw you have a truly awesome car in that M5, imo one of the all time greatest cars, not only from BMW but from all manufacturers. You are a lucky guy!
Btw, I was lucky enough to have driven a twin supercharged E39 M5 (one centrifugal SC per cylinder bank) making over 650rwhp... WOW! Idk if it was a one off or if there are kits available, but if you ever get bored of 400bhp, it is worth looking into I think. Power delivery was unchanged from stock, very linear, there was just a heckuva lot more power! Spinning the rear 285 width tires during a redline shift into fourth on the highway, just about wet myself lol.
Anyways, I applaud your excellent taste in automobiles!
I agree 100% that proof, or as close to it, should be something we constantly strive for. However, I also think that we should appreciate the value in what we are given, which often lacks the thorough review of truly scientific research, but is valuable nevertheless.
Also, in your pic from.the M5, if you look at the brown varnish formed above the valvetrain, you will get a good idea of what the BEST parts of my engine looked like with most looking worse, much worse. I am glad that your engine has remained in such good shape over the years. Hopefully you are giving it the ol' Italian tune-up now and then
I hope you continue to enjoy your car for many years to come, and that you do so in good health!
Sincerely,
nleksan
Thanks! Yes, I love the car, it is fantastic, best car I've ever owned and best all-around car I've driven.
I believe that kit is aftermarket (the blower one), and I've heard of a twin-turbo setup too.
About the valve cover (which is what I assume you mean with your varnish comment) I wasn't sure as to whether the inside of the valve cover was coated or if that was indeed some sort of build-up. That area gets heavily nailed with oil from the timing chains, so if it IS varnish, I'm hoping to see some clean-up in that area with the M1 0w40. I'll see if I can get any of it off with my finger the next time I change the oil!
Glad you're enjoying it! I've seen far too many that are used as simply "status symbols", same goes for M3's, and the car gets "abused by not being abused", if you know what I mean... The owners would be better off in a 550 or 335, but they want the "most expensive". It's an absolute shame! Glad to hear that you are a real enthusiast!!
Yeah, it was an aftermarket kit for sure, I just don't recall who did it... The car had so much work done to it that while it had a Dinan badge on the trunk (it was a Dinan Stg3 car), I don't know if the setup was a modified Dinan one or if it was carried out by Active Autowerke, as the superchargers used were the same type used by both of those companies. Interestingly, it was also twin-intercooled, with each S/C getting its own; in fact, the whole thing was set up as if it was essentially two I4's in the engine bay, rather than a V8, so duplicates abound. That was the reason for the incredibly smooth throttle and power delivery, and it also provided a great number of fail-safes in case anything (such as the Methanol injection) stopped working, the very-very-custom tune (it had a car-puter and could be tuned while driving, ideally by the passenger) allowed for diversion of methanol from one tank to the other. It was masterful, this engine, and I WISH I still had pictures
Not one square inch was wasted.
Also, I hope for your sake that it isn't varnish, but even if it is, that's just about the best place to have it, because the oil isn't really needed up there, so it's likely just residual "gunk" from oil flung by the chains (as you said).
(I bet two OCI's with RP and then one with RL would clean 'er right up... hehehe
)
Originally Posted By: nleksan
Thank you, and btw you have a truly awesome car in that M5, imo one of the all time greatest cars, not only from BMW but from all manufacturers. You are a lucky guy!
Btw, I was lucky enough to have driven a twin supercharged E39 M5 (one centrifugal SC per cylinder bank) making over 650rwhp... WOW! Idk if it was a one off or if there are kits available, but if you ever get bored of 400bhp, it is worth looking into I think. Power delivery was unchanged from stock, very linear, there was just a heckuva lot more power! Spinning the rear 285 width tires during a redline shift into fourth on the highway, just about wet myself lol.
Anyways, I applaud your excellent taste in automobiles!
I agree 100% that proof, or as close to it, should be something we constantly strive for. However, I also think that we should appreciate the value in what we are given, which often lacks the thorough review of truly scientific research, but is valuable nevertheless.
Also, in your pic from.the M5, if you look at the brown varnish formed above the valvetrain, you will get a good idea of what the BEST parts of my engine looked like with most looking worse, much worse. I am glad that your engine has remained in such good shape over the years. Hopefully you are giving it the ol' Italian tune-up now and then
I hope you continue to enjoy your car for many years to come, and that you do so in good health!
Sincerely,
nleksan
Thanks! Yes, I love the car, it is fantastic, best car I've ever owned and best all-around car I've driven.
I believe that kit is aftermarket (the blower one), and I've heard of a twin-turbo setup too.
About the valve cover (which is what I assume you mean with your varnish comment) I wasn't sure as to whether the inside of the valve cover was coated or if that was indeed some sort of build-up. That area gets heavily nailed with oil from the timing chains, so if it IS varnish, I'm hoping to see some clean-up in that area with the M1 0w40. I'll see if I can get any of it off with my finger the next time I change the oil!
Glad you're enjoying it! I've seen far too many that are used as simply "status symbols", same goes for M3's, and the car gets "abused by not being abused", if you know what I mean... The owners would be better off in a 550 or 335, but they want the "most expensive". It's an absolute shame! Glad to hear that you are a real enthusiast!!
Yeah, it was an aftermarket kit for sure, I just don't recall who did it... The car had so much work done to it that while it had a Dinan badge on the trunk (it was a Dinan Stg3 car), I don't know if the setup was a modified Dinan one or if it was carried out by Active Autowerke, as the superchargers used were the same type used by both of those companies. Interestingly, it was also twin-intercooled, with each S/C getting its own; in fact, the whole thing was set up as if it was essentially two I4's in the engine bay, rather than a V8, so duplicates abound. That was the reason for the incredibly smooth throttle and power delivery, and it also provided a great number of fail-safes in case anything (such as the Methanol injection) stopped working, the very-very-custom tune (it had a car-puter and could be tuned while driving, ideally by the passenger) allowed for diversion of methanol from one tank to the other. It was masterful, this engine, and I WISH I still had pictures
Also, I hope for your sake that it isn't varnish, but even if it is, that's just about the best place to have it, because the oil isn't really needed up there, so it's likely just residual "gunk" from oil flung by the chains (as you said).
(I bet two OCI's with RP and then one with RL would clean 'er right up... hehehe
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
hahahah, well, I DID have a Redline oil clean-up thread with two of my vehicles actually.
One was with my Expedition, the other was with a Focus that we've since sold.
The results on the Expedition were very good!
The results on the Focus, just due to how heavy the build-up was, were not.
If you want, I can dig up the threads?
And yes, I drive this car like it is meant to be driven
My boss has agreed to go to Mosport with me next year (he has a DB9) so that will be a lot of fun for both of us I think
I would like to put some new Pilot Super Sport tires on it first however, since I don't think I'd trust these Toyo's on a track (they came on the car).
In the picture I posted, if you look at the texture on the TOP of the valve cover, then at what you see INSIDE the valve cover, they look the same. That was why I was thinking that perhaps they've just coated that part of the inside of the cover too?
When I say that part gets nailed with oil, I'm not exaggerating. I made the mistake of taking the oil cap off another M5 owner's engine when it was running (he has a VANOS noise we were trying to pinpoint) something I've always been able to do on my Ford's without issue. I learned very quick you can't do that on the M5. It slung out out several feet in every direction!
One was with my Expedition, the other was with a Focus that we've since sold.
The results on the Expedition were very good!
The results on the Focus, just due to how heavy the build-up was, were not.
If you want, I can dig up the threads?
And yes, I drive this car like it is meant to be driven
I would like to put some new Pilot Super Sport tires on it first however, since I don't think I'd trust these Toyo's on a track (they came on the car).
In the picture I posted, if you look at the texture on the TOP of the valve cover, then at what you see INSIDE the valve cover, they look the same. That was why I was thinking that perhaps they've just coated that part of the inside of the cover too?
When I say that part gets nailed with oil, I'm not exaggerating. I made the mistake of taking the oil cap off another M5 owner's engine when it was running (he has a VANOS noise we were trying to pinpoint) something I've always been able to do on my Ford's without issue. I learned very quick you can't do that on the M5. It slung out out several feet in every direction!
Oh wow, thats some serious oil slinging! I did the same thing on my dad's Focus and luckily it only sprayed a little bit and I caught it quickly, but it could have been bad.
Sounds like Redline has worked well for you in the past (man I do love me a great GrpV oil), I would bet your M5 would enjoy it as well
the folks over at m5board seem to like it, and I do know that people (apart from just myself) consider them to be the best driveline fluids available for our brand of vehicles. By that, I mean transmission and differential; I personally use Motul RBF600/660 brake fluid exclusively. Oh, and the same D4 ATF that'd go in your tranny would be ideal for PS fluid.
A DB9??? Drool... I have always loved AMs, even though they aren't the fastest or best handling, they have a certain aura about them... And they can be daily driven, they are so comfy. I personally dream of a Charcoal Metallic DBS, red and charcoal Alcantara and leather interior... Yum!
I can tell you that the new Pilot Super Sports are, hands down, the best tire I have used on the street. Grip better than P Zero Nero or Toyo's best offerings, and even surpass their brother, the PS2, in both wet and dry traction by a good measure. They are also more communicative, are very good about easing you into their limits and give plenty of warning before you surpass those limits, have extremely crisp turn in response, and they look very nice! Best of all, they are the most comfortable UHP tire I have ever used. It is like turning my coilovers 3 clicks softer in how much more compliant they are compared to my usual go to.tires.
I use 245 width front and 285 width rear (custom widened fenders - cut, pulled, metal welded, sanded, painted. Similar to M3 but more aggressive IMO, without being "in your face"). Sounds similar to sizes you would need, and even with all that rear width, I have yet to hydroplane.
You will LOVE them!
Take care,
nleksan
Sounds like Redline has worked well for you in the past (man I do love me a great GrpV oil), I would bet your M5 would enjoy it as well
A DB9??? Drool... I have always loved AMs, even though they aren't the fastest or best handling, they have a certain aura about them... And they can be daily driven, they are so comfy. I personally dream of a Charcoal Metallic DBS, red and charcoal Alcantara and leather interior... Yum!
I can tell you that the new Pilot Super Sports are, hands down, the best tire I have used on the street. Grip better than P Zero Nero or Toyo's best offerings, and even surpass their brother, the PS2, in both wet and dry traction by a good measure. They are also more communicative, are very good about easing you into their limits and give plenty of warning before you surpass those limits, have extremely crisp turn in response, and they look very nice! Best of all, they are the most comfortable UHP tire I have ever used. It is like turning my coilovers 3 clicks softer in how much more compliant they are compared to my usual go to.tires.
I use 245 width front and 285 width rear (custom widened fenders - cut, pulled, metal welded, sanded, painted. Similar to M3 but more aggressive IMO, without being "in your face"). Sounds similar to sizes you would need, and even with all that rear width, I have yet to hydroplane.
You will LOVE them!
Take care,
nleksan
- Status
Similar threads
