|
I've gotten oil samples from my truck from purchase all the way to 30k miles. Blackstone continually says viscosity, fuel content, additive package and lubricity are all well within spec at manufacturer recommended 5k change intervals.
|
# ? Jul 20, 2011 19:35 |
|
|
# ? May 9, 2024 23:02 |
|
Lowclock posted:Not really. Oil isn't just a there-or-not thing. It breaks down and turns to poo poo even if it doesn't leak out or get burned no matter how well you filter it. I've heard that the base stock really doesn't break down at all. It's mainly that you've used up all the additives at some point (assuming you're filtering it better than with a standard oil filter).
|
# ? Jul 20, 2011 20:26 |
|
Nope, oil really does break down - look up Oil shear sometime - you can literally 'smash'/'chop' the long molecules into shorter useless poo poo.
|
# ? Jul 20, 2011 21:18 |
|
Cakefool posted:Nope, oil really does break down - look up Oil shear sometime - you can literally 'smash'/'chop' the long molecules into shorter useless poo poo. I did a quick search, but I probably don't know what to look for terminology wise: how do they recycle it then? Do they have to distill it again to get the molecule chains that are too small out or some other petrochemical wizardry?
|
# ? Jul 20, 2011 21:31 |
|
Motronic posted:I did a quick search, but I probably don't know what to look for terminology wise: how do they recycle it then? Do they have to distill it again to get the molecule chains that are too small out or some other petrochemical wizardry? I'm not sure, but I would think it would end up as fuel or plastics or something instead of trying to make it into fresh motor oil again. E: Automotive Insanity: What the gently caress, oil? Lowclock fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Jul 20, 2011 |
# ? Jul 20, 2011 21:36 |
|
Cakefool posted:Nope, oil really does break down - look up Oil shear sometime - you can literally 'smash'/'chop' the long molecules into shorter useless poo poo. I'm willing to be wrong, but I thought sheer was really only a problem with multi-viscosity oils. Basically, they get thinner (numerically lower) due to sheer. Straight-weight oils don't do this, and that is why as I understand it, that motorcycles with shared-sump gearboxes and International trucks with the SV-family engines (gear timing) recommend straight-weight oils.
|
# ? Jul 20, 2011 21:57 |
|
Shaocaholica posted:I wonder how long you can go without an oil change with an otherwise well maintained car running on synthetic under light driving? I ran 80000km without an oil change in my 98 civic. Only reason it died was the timing belt snapped. Ran perfectly until then. Of course I think that little 1.6 would run with sand as a lubricant.
|
# ? Jul 20, 2011 22:15 |
|
Crustashio posted:I ran 80000km without an oil change in my 98 civic. Only reason it died was the timing belt snapped. Ran perfectly until then. Thats loving amazing. Were you even the owner for the previous oil change? Did you ever look at the dipstick during that 80k run?
|
# ? Jul 20, 2011 22:33 |
|
trouser chili posted:motorcycles with shared-sump gearboxes and International trucks with the SV-family engines (gear timing) recommend straight-weight oils. I don't think any motorcycles since the 1950s have called for straight-weight oil, shared-sump gearbox or not.
|
# ? Jul 20, 2011 22:46 |
|
Crustashio posted:I ran 80000km without an oil change in my 98 civic. Only reason it died was the timing belt snapped. Ran perfectly until then. Yeah, a guy I knew drained all the oil out of one, then drove it about a hundred hard miles, then did donuts and burnouts for a while until it FINALLY seized up and died. They are as close as you can get to "Oil Optional" engines.
|
# ? Jul 20, 2011 23:04 |
|
KozmoNaut posted:I don't think any motorcycles since the 1950s have called for straight-weight oil, shared-sump gearbox or not. This. Shared sump do call for Motorcycle specific oils though. Generally they have a higher zinc content and no friction modifiers, etc... Lawnmowers on the other hand... (here we go again) edit: holy massive picture batman! GnarlyCharlie4u fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Jul 20, 2011 |
# ? Jul 20, 2011 23:06 |
|
I didn't know ferrari made lawn tractors!
|
# ? Jul 20, 2011 23:29 |
|
Speaking of oil and failures, I caught my dad pouring non-detergent SAE 30 into his 5.4L F150 the other day
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 00:58 |
|
Shroomie posted:Speaking of oil and failures, I caught my dad pouring non-detergent SAE 30 into his 5.4L F150 the other day Wtf. You need to stage an intervention.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 01:14 |
|
GnarlyCharlie4u posted:This. Shared sump do call for Motorcycle specific oils though. Generally they have a higher zinc content and no friction modifiers, etc... A husqvarna? Ive been working for a lawn mower manufacturer reticently and have seen a few interesting failures. The biggest surprise to me is the cheap Briggs engines. They have plastic camshafts and plastic drive gears for the cam, also plastic starter motor gears. Yet they seam to out last the mowers them selves (we do change oil at recommended times on our stress tests [except some that are run 3x the recommended interval]). One thing I should add though is we dont put Briggs engines on our nicer pro mowers that we stress test for long amounts of time.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 01:31 |
|
Shaocaholica posted:Thats loving amazing. Were you even the owner for the previous oil change? Did you ever look at the dipstick during that 80k run? I might have checked it once or twice. I did top up the oil, but I never had it changed. Usually I knew to top it up when the oil pressure warning light started to flash on idle. It got all variety of oil, including some lawnmower oil I found in my mom's garage. I only did it because the body was already eaten away by the typical honda rust of that era.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 01:48 |
|
Crustashio posted:I ran 80000km without an oil change in my 98 civic. Only reason it died was the timing belt snapped. Ran perfectly until then. That doesn't surprise me. A friend's fiancee (at the time) asked me (shortly after they got married) if they should buy out the 65k mile Acura she had on lease. It had 65k miles and all the records. ALL the records, no questions. The oil had been changed once at 15k miles. Sadly, the wife didn't last as long as the car did.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 04:05 |
|
So I pulled the head off of the Daewoo Nubira that my brother snapped the timing belt on finally (same engine as the Izuzu Rodeo, X22SE). I flipped the head over and thought to myself "Self, where is that exhaust valve?" And then my eyes got big and I though well gently caress, time for a new piston! But to my surprise, the valve head was just laying in the cylinder chamber, like this: and I knew it had been ran like that, because it had carbon on the end, like this: And one of the other valves was S shaped and snapped as soon as I touched it. They all look like this: I don't know how the gently caress the engine survived.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 04:08 |
|
Motronic posted:I did a quick search, but I probably don't know what to look for terminology wise: how do they recycle it then? Do they have to distill it again to get the molecule chains that are too small out or some other petrochemical wizardry? You're on the right track. Basically with modern oil the problem of reaching it's shelf life is more likely because it is no longer capable of capturing coke. Basically, like sugar in water there's a saturation point of oil where it can no longer absorb the coke and fine ash and that's when it needs recycling. Also, the acidity of the oil slowly increases as the carbon ash converts to carbonic acid. So the recycling process involves separating the absorbed carbon from the oil.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 04:25 |
|
trouser chili posted:He did eventually get it to behave. Keeping along with the hot-bulb engine theme, I found this in the youtube thread. Not a horrible mechanical failure, but its totally AI and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCSMOXcTMYQ
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 05:30 |
|
KozmoNaut posted:I don't think any motorcycles since the 1950s have called for straight-weight oil, shared-sump gearbox or not. And my understanding on why they use straight weight oils is that they lack rubber seals on their valve guides, so multiweight (lighter when cold) oil would leak past the guides.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 14:12 |
|
Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester posted:And my understanding on why they use straight weight oils is that they lack rubber seals on their valve guides, so multiweight (lighter when cold) oil would leak past the guides. Even a hypothetical 0w60 oil is much lighter at operating temperature than it is when cold, so there would be no significant leakage unless the tolerances are gigantic.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 15:32 |
|
Sponge! posted:Keeping along with the hot-bulb engine theme, I found this in the youtube thread. Not a horrible mechanical failure, but its totally AI and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7JQ7Kc--qM&feature=related This is part 2, I love how the boy is just fine with doing this right next to a fighter jet. That should be an awesome backyard to have friends over.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 15:32 |
|
Keep in mind that to make 130HP at 250RPM it needs to generate 2,700 ft*lbs of torque.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 16:28 |
|
FatCow posted:Keep in mind that to make 130HP at 250RPM it needs to generate 2,700 ft*lbs of torque. Not hard to do with 150,000 cc of displacement. I still get for big fuckoff dystopian smoke-belching and exposed workings though, so you're not alone. (Yes, that's less than 1hp/litre, but they're surprisingly fuel efficient for the simplicity.)
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 16:52 |
|
Intoxication posted:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7JQ7Kc--qM&feature=related Not to mention what appears to be the hub assembly from a helicopter attached to a giant box.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 19:48 |
|
Ford has responded to the broken Raptor issue.quote:Over the last several weeks, there have been a number of reports on web forums of frame damage incidents involving the Ford F-150 SVT Raptor. Thanks to a number of reader tips, Autoblog was the first news outlet to inquire with Ford about the matter. After launching its own investigation into the claims centering around one particular organized Raptor Run in Nevada with 14 participating vehicles and 10 bent frames, Jamal Hameedi, a 20-year Ford veteran and SVT's Chief Nameplate Engineer, agreed to talk exclusively with Autoblog.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 19:57 |
|
Intoxication posted:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7JQ7Kc--qM&feature=related If that boy survives to adulthood, he will become a likely contender for . . . the most interesting man alive. . . (or whatever the hook is for that beer commercial)
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 19:59 |
|
Throatwarbler posted:Ford has responded to the broken Raptor issue. Ford: "You abused the vehicle because you are an off-road newb. Tough luck." I particularly like the straw man argument about if the frame was stiffer it would donkey kick and cause handling issues, and how at least the spring purchases didn't fail, as well as the implication that this area was designed to fail this way in order to save you from killing yourself or having to walk home. Once again, for shame Ford. You treat your SVO/SVT customers like poo poo time and time again.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 20:10 |
|
Motronic posted:Ford: "You abused the vehicle because you are an off-road newb. Tough luck." So how many factory vehicles could you drive down that trail at that speed and not rip the axles right off? There was a quote of $500-800 for a repair to that, which isn't really that much. I'd have to spend far more than that fixing (or replacing) just about anything else I drove at 80+ mph over that obstacle.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 20:46 |
|
Motronic posted:Ford: "You abused the vehicle because you are an off-road newb. Tough luck." Did you watch the video in the article? http://youtu.be/6eK-1Ld7sJY The "frame bending kicker" is at about 1:30 with a cattle gaurd slightly before that. You can hear how hard they hit, and see how the back end bucked up.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 20:46 |
|
Powershift posted:Did you watch the video in the article? I did. I have also been underneath a Raptor and have seen with my own eyes where these frames are bending, and it's quite obvious it is a structurally poo poo area. It is literally the only part of the frame that is not fully boxed (even though they claim a fully boxed frame), and it's obvious why it's like that: it was a difficult spot to do that would have taken a lot more effort. Have you been under a Raptor, or are you speaking about this solely based on Internet reports?
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 20:55 |
|
Farside posted:Now it might be because I work around these drat things day in and day out but a dewar with a properly working safety venting off isn't going to fill an elevator car with enough gas to make an elevator car oxygen deficient. 5psi (max) vent at 1-2 seconds (max) from a 1/2" safety isn't going to kill you. Especially since most elevator cars aren't exactly air tight or with out their own ventilation systems. MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Jul 21, 2011 |
# ? Jul 21, 2011 21:03 |
|
If you hit something going fast and hard enough that it bucks the back end of a 6000lb truck a few feet in the air and expect nothing to break on a stock or close truck then you're just an idiot. I've seen owners of those things say "Oh but the guy on the commercial was doing it!". I think I've also seen a loving Buick drive on the moon in a commercial, but I don't think anyone ever tried to return one when it couldn't.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 21:07 |
|
Motronic posted:I did. I have also been underneath a Raptor and have seen with my own eyes where these frames are bending, and it's quite obvious it is a structurally poo poo area. It is literally the only part of the frame that is not fully boxed (even though they claim a fully boxed frame), and it's obvious why it's like that: it was a difficult spot to do that would have taken a lot more effort. Never been under one but i've driven one fairly hard without bending it, but does anything you said there have anything to do with what i said. You're suggesting ford placing blame on the owners is a cop out. I posted a video of one of the owners in question doing multiple things wrong, and doing something to the truck that almost no vehicle could handle. You go on about the frame. Something would have broken with that hit. If they strengthened the frame, the shock mounts would have snapped off and you'd be bitching about that.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 21:13 |
|
"You did things we pretended in our advertisements that you could do. Tough titty." To be fair, I would say that is a large amount of abuse for a factory truck.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 21:30 |
|
anonumos posted:"You did things we pretended in our advertisements that you could do. Tough titty." Do the advertisements show factory stock trucks hitting 18" speedbumps at 60mph over and over all day for hundreds of miles until the shocks have overheated? Because that's what the guy was doing. I think you're going to have a tough time convincing anyone that you were misled by the advertising. Also, with respect to the frame vs shocks tearing off, I think what he's saying is that the shocks tearing off would be better, since that would be more reasonably expected than the frame bending. Ford is also saying that at least some of the trucks had improperly modified springs too.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 21:37 |
|
Throatwarbler posted:Also, with respect to the frame vs shocks tearing off, I think what he's saying is that the shocks tearing off would be better, since that would be more reasonably expected than the frame bending. That is exactly what I'm saying. Especially since I personally have seen the strength deficiency in that portion of the frame. It makes me suspect that the truck (all of the rest of it) could take a whole lot more than what these did because it's such a glaringly obvious issue. The trucks that had modified suspension are rightfully SOL. No one could expect Ford to cover that anymore, even if it is a known issue with the stock suspension. If you void your warranty, it's your own problem and you should know that on your way in.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 21:43 |
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the frame bending actually be preferential to blowing a shock? Not only for the rationale that you can still drive with it but the cost of replacing one or more of those racing shocks is probably more than the $500 quoted to straighten the frame.
|
# ? Jul 21, 2011 21:46 |
|
|
# ? May 9, 2024 23:02 |
|
SwashedBuckles posted:Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the frame bending actually be preferential to blowing a shock? Not only for the rationale that you can still drive with it but the cost of replacing one or more of those racing shocks is probably more than the $500 quoted to straighten the frame. My point is that I believe there is a significant amount of force between the frame bending and anything else breaking. The frame really is ridiculously weak in the problem aream and if it weren't you could do a lot more before you ran into problems. I'll just leave it at that. If you don't think you can spot the factory-created structural problem in this photo, nothing else could possibly convince you. They are literally placing the highest compressive force that can be generate on the truck on the weakest (only non-fully boxed) portion of the frame. It makes no sense at all to me. Motronic fucked around with this message at 21:53 on Jul 21, 2011 |
# ? Jul 21, 2011 21:50 |