Originally Posted by aerohead
So, let's turn things right side up, and look at the fundamentals:
1) Carbon dioxide emissions are driving ( global warming ) climate change.
2) Increasing fuel economy reduces carbon emissions, and by default lowers carbon dioxide emissions .
3) More stringent fuel economy regulations are 'forcing' higher fuel economy requirements, otherwise, automobiles which fail to meet the more stringent standards will not be certified for sale in certain, perhaps, ALL markets.
4) Reducing 'engine friction' is one means of increasing fuel economy without affecting the 'rule of the Paris Dressmakers'.
5) Since 'engine friction' is dominated by engine oil 'VISCOSITY', tribologists have, since 1973's global energy crisis, been working to reduce all lubricant viscosities, without jeopardizing all the other protections lubricants incorporate ( THIS IS WHERE YOU APPEAR TO FAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHAT AUTOMOTIVE LUBRICATION ACTUALLY ENTAILS ).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6) You don't seem to understand :
* Temperature
* Pressure
* Surface distance per unit time domain
* Engineered lubricants that 'ALREADY' satisfy all the 'NEEDS' of extant, mass-produced engine designs which can be 'RUINED' if 'additives' are randomly introduced to an existing motor oil without first investigating the ramifications to all the other chemicals already 'IN' the motor oil
* Nomenclature used by tribologists, which when read by peers would inform them that, they are not reading about 'science' which 'could EVER be' germane to automotive lubrication ( which includes most of your 'supporting scientific evidence )
* Engineered surface finishes and materials technology
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7) It is 'BECAUSE' tribologists want to 'LOWER' viscosity of engine oil, transmission oil, and differential lube, that they 'NEED' to investigate protection 'AGAINST' surface contact ( which does 'NOT' occur inside engines if the viscosity is kept above known thresholds derived under the most extreme SAE, API, ASME, testing protocols which go 'lightyears' beyond the 'pin-on-disc' testing you appear so enamored of.
8) I get that 'something' rudimentary can be experienced with 'pin-on-disc' investigations, but for you to imply that we can accept that data as some sort of analogue to what would be experienced in a 100-hour SAE dynamometer engine test cell under 'road load' conditions constitutes intellectual dishonesty, and a complete disservice to members and guests.
9) Physicist Richard Feynman used to admonish graduate students at CALTECH to hold their tongues ( and pens ) about any ' conclusions or attributions ' about phenomena they experienced, until after they'd made every effort beforehand to find out where they could be wrong about their conclusions.
10)- 'Oiliness' is not important when lubrication is 'perfect', since film lubrication arises mainly from hydrodynamic forces.' PhD Edward F. Obert, Professor of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Wisconsin, author, 'INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES', 44-pages on automotive tribology.
- ' chemically balanced motor oil products receive no benefit from aftermarket additives ', General Motors Research Laboratories
- boric acid suspended in the lubricants,' which do not react with boric acid.' PhD Ari Erdemir, Arch Development Corporation.
11) ' 10 pages', ' 7 pages', ' 15 pages ' :
As I've said, this page fetish is just a more sophisticated version of the same falsehood.
12) Zinc dialkylphosphorodithioate was one of six motor oil additives used in commercial motor oils since at least 1973, along with Boron Nitrogen compounds.
13) If one is going to 'test' an oil additive, they should satisfy all the methodologies and conditions already established in the industry, with all scientific rigor spelled out in the test methodologies, including a pre-test engine teardown with micrometer/Plastigauge measurements, and post-test engine teardown measurements. Otherwise we're just looking at subjective, anecdotal, non-quantitative information which offers no 'proof' ( If you can't measure it you can't improve it ', Lake Speed Jr., Joe Gibbs Racing ( NASCAR )/ LUBRISOL )
14) As to 'old smoky engine' testing, George Soros says he's not interested in underwriting the costs of the investigation on the grounds that internal combustion engines are on the way out, so we'd be addressing a problem that nobody would have in the near future, so it would be 'folly'. Living on Social Security in a county that practices economic rape/sodomy/and cannibalism precludes me as a candidate for 'validating' or 'invalidating' your hypothesis. Nice try!
15) What was is that I didn't comprehend? That you continue to throw stuff at a wall hoping that some of it might stick? I 'know' what automotive tribologists 'do.' When I 'see' something that's 'actionable' to the EcoModder community in what you've shared I'll let you know. You've given us nothing that I can see. If people run the recommended grade of oil in their engine, then, they can expect the vehicle to perform beyond its engineered life expectancy ( I have 719,378-km on my Toyota, and it runs like new ).
|