for the guys that are into recreational oil changing...

Page 10 of 13  
On 04/05/2010 05:53 AM, jim wrote:


sorry buddy, is is fact - i personally did the work that caused that marking, witnessed the condition of the cam before the work, witnessed the grit that was stuck on the cam lobes by oil film, and the condition immediately after start-up - which is just like you see now. i assembled the motor in spite of the fact that it was going to be damaged by the grit because i was in a hurry and was thinking i'd get rid of this motor anyway. all it had to do was last one weekend.
whoops, does that expose your denial and ignorance? [rhetorical]

more bullshit. cam lobes do wear and score, but you can't see this cam up close like i can, and the fine surface detail is completely different from simple wear and lubrication failure.

bullshit. the reality is that if you have antifreeze in the coolant, [which mine never had btw, quite apart from the fact that the cam was not scored before i gritted it] you interrupt the oil film continuity and thus the hydrodynamic separation. particularly on cams at low speeds. but the surface features of such damage are that of scuffing and surface tearing - classic lube failure. mine is that of hard particle abrasion - very obvious difference. i'd invite you over to inspect personally, but i don't think your objective is that of discovery

you really have to learn not to bullshit about stuff you don't know. or not to deny reality when it's presented to you with history and photo evidence.

--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jim beam wrote:

<start sarcasm>
You never put antifreeze in the coolant? That's odd. Where do you put antifreeze?
How does antifreeze in the coolant interrupt the oil film? I could see that if antifreeze were in the oil, but in the coolant?
</end sarcasm>
Sorry, couldn't resist?
How does antifreeze interrupt the oil film? Does it act like a soap, dissolving it? I imagine alcohol or hand sanitizer (which 60% ethanol) does the same thing. Just like soap disrupts the oil film or whatever on my hands when I wash after checking the oil?
Jeff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/05/2010 07:48 AM, dr_jeff wrote:

well spotted.

it physically breaks it up.

this is how soaps work. http://chemistry.about.com/od/cleanerchemistry/a/how-soap-cleans.htm

--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dr_jeff wrote:

Actually the detergents and dispersants "act like soap" and have the effect of keeping all sorts of stuff in solution in the oil - including antifreeze. This works as long as the additives aren't overwhelmed with too much "stuff".     Acts like soap means its similar but a bit different. In the case of washing your hands the solvent is the water. Oil is a different type of solvent, different soap, but the same general idea.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jim wrote:

Apparently, glycol is even nastier for oil than I suspected: http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/193/oil-glycol .
It chemically reacts with different things, doesn't dissolve well in oil and makes acid.
Jeff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/05/2010 09:13 AM, dr_jeff wrote:

yeah, it agglomerates soot particles to Hrc >50 too. not.

--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jim beam wrote:

    Mr. Bean has a wealth of ignorance about motor oil. It is well known that coolant contamination can impair dispersancy which leads to drop out of dirt suspended in the oil.
Here is a quote from the same www.machinerylubrication.com site quoted above.
[quote] Detecting glycol using the blotter spot test can be difficult because of the coolants effects on a lubricants dispersancy. Coolant contamination forms acids in crankcase oil affecting soot dispersancy, even at low soot loading. Glycol contamination can also form destructive oil balls and additive precipitation when thermally aged in crankcase lubricants. When a drop of lubricant contaminated with glycol is placed on the chromatographic paper, the soot particles can be agglomerated due to dispersant depletion and will not travel. A dark or brownish stain in the center of the spot could be due to disrupted dispersancy and soot coagulation, a common consequence of glycol contamination. A black sticky paste with a well-defined (sharp edge) periphery is cause for serious concern. When glycol is present, a soot ring often develops around a yellow/brown center (Figure 3). [end quote]
    Now we will hear from Mr. Bean. The guy who is always whining about cites, when given an actual cite, will insist they don't know what they are talking about.
-jim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jim beam wrote:

    So?
    So what?     I mean, it makes you look like an idiot, but other than that it doesn't contradict what I said.

    In your world everything is simple - simple to the point of being ridiculous.

    Clean and fresh oil will absorb more antifreeze without causing damage than dirty oil will.

    As I said whether or not your story about that particular engine and that particular cam is factual is quite irrelevant. That picture shows exactly what damage from mixing a small amount of antifreeze with dirty engine oil can look like. The particles of dirt that form in the oil can cause scratch marks that look just exactly like that. Won't happen if the oil is clean.

    You seem to be of the impression that nobody has noticed all the lies that you have been caught telling. You seem to be laboring under the impression that you are like the Pope and just because you say it there will be others who will automatically accept it is true.

    A scratched cam lobe is testimony to superior lubrication in a world where the flying pigs and pink elephants have taken over.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/05/2010 07:59 AM, jim wrote:

eh? can't you just admit the facts? [rhetorical]

yes it does contradict what you said. you were supposing this was typical lube failure and wear. it's not.

yeah, right - something that contradicts your bullshit supposition and ignorance is ridiculous...

eh? are you trying to deny your mistake in assuming the wrong wear mechanism???

it absolutely is relevant. you presumed an entirely different mechanism than reality. just like your "particle agglomeration" bullshit.

no it doesn't. and to say it does is absolutely ridiculous when you're working from an out-of-focus photo. it's even more ridiculous when you've been told the history of how it arose!

bullshit. hard particles don't make it past the filter [ignoring of course that your "antifreeze agglomeration" doesn't exist]. water particles however interrupt the oil film and thus the hydrodynamic layer and allow direct metal-to-metal contact. real freakin' simple.

wow dude, you really have a reality/ignorance problem. and it's sad to see an individual that can't tell the difference between fact and bullshit so pathetically cling to their mistakes, fabrications and delusions.

idiot. the fact that hard particle scratching /has not been worn off/ is testimony. but you're too ignorant of the facts and too closed-minded to reality to understand that.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jim beam wrote:

Incorrect. The only thing I supposed is that you are an idiot. And everything you say only strengthens that supposition. I specifically stated i was not supposing anything about the engine. The cause of your damage is undefined. I was just pointing out that other engines can get damage that looks just like that. It may surprise you, but scratches like this on the cam lobes don't only happen when some idiot takes the head off and pours dirt on it and puts it back together.

    Even according to your story. There were hard particles that did damage before the filter could remove them.
    And I didn't say the antifreeze agglomerates. I said the dirt that is being held in suspension agglomerates as a result of the introduction of antifreeze into dirty oil.     This isn't that hard a concept to test. just pour a small amount of antifreeze into our oil about 10 miles before your next oil change.

Yeah well your not the first person ever to call not believing in the infallibility of the pope a "reality/ignorance problem".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 31/03/10 5:33 PM, Bob Jones wrote:
<snip>

The 5 or 10 miles per trip is if you _exclusively_ do short trips. Ditto for idling and stop and go driving. What they're worried about is that the water that accumulates in the oil will not be vaporized. A freeway drive of 30 minutes or so will take care of the problem with water condensing into the oil.
That's why an interval of 7500 miles or six months, whichever occurs first, is a better spec. It takes into account drivers that are doing short trips only by default.
Jiffy Lube tries to convince everyone that they qualify for "severe service" but don't fall for it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

How often should this freeway trip be made in order to minimize damage to the engine by water-laden oil?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/01/2010 03:41 PM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

he doesn't know because he's just guessing - he has no data.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I am saying "no," though it is conjecture like everyone else's. Honda itself says the normal schedule "is fine for most drivers." From my 2003 Civic's manual:
--
The "normal" schedule is fine for most drivers, even if they
occasionally drive in severe conditions.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I do not see this phrase in Honda's manual.

That's a big difference from just saying "is fine for most drivers."

Which one is it? "Occasionally" or "most of the time"?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Pardon? The manual is pointing out that one must drive "most of the time" in the severe conditions listed to warrant following the severe schedule. Only occasionally driving in severe conditions warrants the normal schedule.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Pardon? The manual is pointing out that one must drive "most of the time" in the severe conditions listed to warrant following the severe schedule. Only occasionally driving in severe conditions warrants the normal schedule. ---------------------------------------------------------------------
What about somewhere in between? Mine only use the word "occasionally".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Elle wrote:

snip
Heh... Probably a product of the public school system!
JT
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Grumpy AuContraire wrote:

I am a product of the public school system, and quite proud of it. So are my students.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dr_jeff wrote:

Keepin' the chain going, eh?
JT
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.