Outboard Lower Unit gear oil 80w-90

[Andy H]

Bob and blano: Sorry, gents. We're not communicating here. That's ok.

I agree with you both on the water thing - if it's leaking lube, it'll take-on water. No trouble here. And the water will settle out eventually, and the stuff below the water line will be, well, below the water line. Gravity works.

I go back to my earlier posts where I said that a 50/50 mix should not be the norm for a lower unit. It should be water tight, or fairly close, if it's in good repair. If you recall, my primary criticism was on the validity of the test. If 50/50 mixes of oil and water should NOT be common in lower units, why should one put any stock in a test that demonstrates these conditions?

I ask again for a test with lube greater than 90% and water less than 10%. I think the test results would change.

I've been amazed by the coating ability of the products from Superior - especially when the engine has been stored for a while. Some of their lubes remained on the metal surfaces a year after the engine was shut down.

On this test and others - including the hand-done Timken tests - I have this comment: Physicists, parapsychologists, and kinesiologists agree that the beliefs of the person conducting the experiment will change the outcome of the experiment. Physicists find that people searching for subatomic particles find more of them when they believe they’ll find them, those that don’t believe don’t see them. Same as when our spouses ask us to get the mustard from the fridge and we don’t want to. It’s on the door in front of us but we don’t see it. That’s also why these and other disciplines use double and triple blind tests.

I wouldn’t trust someone to use the same manual force on the Timken machine when he or she knew the oils in each test, and had a favorite. Even if consciously wanting to keep things as even as possible, you can’t outrun your beliefs.

We see this when someone chooses a test they know will make their product look good. We also see this when, even when given volumes of test data that proves that one product is better than another, the person still can’t see the results for what they’re worth.

There’s a story about early Australian natives that came to the city for the first time. They had never been, but knew about the existence of cars and horse-drawn buggies. They looked both ways, started across the street, and were run down by bicycles. They had no idea what a bicycle was - AND COULDN'T SEE IT - until they had tire marks across their foreheads. (True story, BTW.)

Run it again with less than 5% water and let’s see the nails. If the AMSOIL nail is still rusty, I'll drop the subject.

Andy

EDIT: Bob, I looked again at the pictures of the nails you posted. Kinda blury, but they don't look like plain steel nails. They look coated - cement or zinc? And what are the smear trails around the Schaeffers nail?

[ January 23, 2003, 10:03 PM: Message edited by: Andy H ]

 

[blano]

Andy, your right a lower unit in good shape will have a very slight to no amount of eater in it.I misunderstood your post.

 

[BOBISTHEOILGUY]

Andy,

I have had several people who are current posters on the board come over and use the timken machine. One was an amsoil dealer, another was a real nice guy who goes by krholm (Member # 11). Both did the tests and I can assure you, they too walked away with a different awareness of how this machine works.. Oh, forgot to mention Terry Dyson has as well when I visited him last year. It is true that someone can manipulate this type of equipment, but... It also can tell you a story on the difference between barrier additives in different oils. Kinda like you walking up to a door and opening it. You might be able to tell that one door is harder to open than another. It doesn't take an engineer to feel the difference if one is heavier and takes more effort to close/open. I expect doubters and thats fine. It wasn't a test to beat up on different oils so much it was there to demonstrate barrier additives.

Just as you appear to think I'm beating up on the amsoil full synth gear oil which is not the point, it is to take the best oil touted(amsoil in this case) and use it as a yard stick to measure how well others do. I'm not going to take the time to re run this test..It will make no difference of the outcome as to 5% or 50%, the water will settle down to the bottom, and in this case, where the nail will be and it still will have water around and on that nail and it will still rust where water is exposed to it. No matter how you cut it, when water is exposed to metal surface, depending on the type of alloy, some gear oils will not help keep that surface from being damaged due to water intrusion. The point again, Look at how the ONE NAIL SUFFERED NO RUST EVEN THOUGH IT SUFFERED THE SAME EXACT ABUSE LAYING IN WATER THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME, WHERE THE OTHER, UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS FAILED TO DO AS WELL.. Thats the point of this issue. If it's in a lower gear unit or in an industrial gear box or in a pumpkin in a rear end, this same thing can happen. Look in a junk yard and look at some of the pumpkins ring and pinion and see how many have rusted pit marks where water and air had entrained into the gear oil.

I DO encourage you to find some finishing nails, and take the oils of your choice and try it for yourself as you can see it isn't very difficult to do. This should remove all doubt in YOUR mind as it will be you doing it then all the psycho stuff wont apply to your tests. Tim will sell one bottle of the 267 gear oil. Or if you or someone in the area wants to stop by, more than happy to donate some for their testing.

As for the trails on the paper, Those nails were submerged in the fluids until I pulled them out of their test tube which had the oil in them and that is the residue that was laying on the nails as they were put directly on the paper from the oil. On the second shot they had been moved around so there is more evidence absorbed on the paper. Also, since these are small nails, I used a magnifying glass with the cameras zoom to get a close shot so you could see the nails at almost 3 times the actual size on the second picture, so sorry if not focused real well. I actually thought it came out pretty good IMO.

 

[Andy H]

Bob,

I'll have to look at the results of the Timken test videos and remind myself who came out on top. The results of the test wasn't at issue because I only perceive a manual, uncontrolled test to have entertainment value.

On the gear lube: I really do get what you're saying. IF a lower unit is half full of water, AND your gearset has the same metalurgy as a nail, the gears may not be as well protected by some gear lubes as others. Severe abuse.

I won't select a gear lube based upon that test, tho. There are many other qualities a lube must have. Water control isn't an issue to me for the reasons I've already stated. The gearbox should be dry. Which of the lubes will last the longest, which will run cooler, which will protect the gears and bearings from the types of wear they see?

I'm not suggesting this is a lube vs. lube discussion.

I've used close-up lenses before and they can be rough to use. Thanks for helping me understand the sizes of the nails. I agree - they came out well.

 

[BOBISTHEOILGUY]

Can't agree with ya more Andy. There is much more to look at in choosing a lube other than this one little severe test. I too, look at wear and temp reduction, this is where the timken comes in. It helps establish for me, as to how much it can withstand before breaking through a barrier additive. Is it scientific, course not, but who am I fooling if I am the one going to choose the oil for myself? So am I going to not give it as fair of a test as possible so to decide for myself which I think is going to work best for me? I'd be an idiot to control the test just to fool myself into thinking that one is better than the other. Trust me, it serves no purpose. Again, those tests where not to do anything more than show how barrier lubes actually do effect the surfaces and help protect given the last line of defense when hydrodynamic properties are sheared. Not a mine is better than yours thing. Since this test, M1 SS has since done much better in reformulating their new version with better than normal barrier additives. I didn't provide any actual sizes of wear scar or any real way to establish each outcome other than a basic picture with a no oil reference bearing.

Anyway, The water test, you can never be 100% sure you don't have water in your gear oil with out constant inspection before and after use. Not a practical idea for obvious reasons.

As for reduce wear, well, IMO, the Mo has shown better wear resistant properties than that of just z and ph which is the predominant barrier additives in most oil and gear oils and I think is also the same in respect to the marine oils used in these examples. Gl-4's are mainly a lower barrier additive level version of a gl-5 gear oil.
So, now add in a climbing agent and a surfactant additive to release the ionic molecular structure so it disperses better coverage and bonds to the metal surface easier, ontop of a good base oil that can handle longer drains, then you have a good gear lube IMO. Actually, better than most, but... That's not to say the others are bad.. by no means, I also see gear oils needing to cling and climb in a situation where oil pumps are not used. In gears, shearing is extreme where the gears are meshing together, there fore it must have a better than average barrier additive, along with a way to reduce surface tension and by reducing friction with a good barrier additive, it will reduce temp's and provide slightly higher performance as it isn't fighting the drag of the gears against each other as much.

The other thing to keep in mind with all of this is to ensure the area in which this oil is going to be used in, such as down here in florida, it'd be perfect(talking about the 267) but up in ny or canada, it may not fair that well during winter months so maybe not the better choice during that time of the year, but IMO, anyone going out fishing in those kinds of temps, has either got to be nuts or has to make a living at it.

So, in all, I have given you the nail test on different gear oils in a severe situation, proving how it can help protect in case of exposure to water as well as showing you how water in the oil is not a good thing. I have provided you with info on how barrier additives work where the base oil is caused to shear in gear meshing situations and, have also provided the info on base oils, also how surfactant ionic tension is dispersed allowing for better coverage, among many other little tid bits throughout this site. You now have the ability to decide what you want with a more open and hopefully less product bias mind, and able to establish what is going to work best for you. Many know me on this site, and I try my dangest not to bias my little experiments. Now, if I was not to use the best oils out there for these little demos, how would you feel about your oil in comparison, say, I used yamalube in this case, you'd then say but it isn't as good as amsoil. So in efforts to demonstrate, why not include the best oils I can get and use them? This is what this site is about, to learn more about how these oils react in severe situations. Most will never have a severe situation and never have an oil failure, but... why do you spend the money on amsoil in the first place? Same reason I spend mine on schaeffers, Because you want the best for your equipment! So, why not take these tests and see what I am doing, then if you feel there is some bias, try it yourself, I understand how one may think this. This little test actually was interesting to me because I really didn't know just how this would have come out but does prove to me personally that it is possible to have protection on metal surfaces even though it is completely submerged in water. Imagine if no it had no water just how much better it will work..

BTW, just a thought, when buying a car, do you base the car solely on the technical data specs? Or maybe, do you look around, get general info from others experience with the car, drive the car and make sure it "feels" good? Same with the oil, The timken, That is the "feel" of the oil, which is just one aspect of the process of looking at a good oil for me.