Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:14 AM - Re: Re: OIL (flyv35b)
2. 07:17 AM - Re: Re: OIL (James R. Cunningham)
3. 07:32 AM - Re: Re: OIL (Hans Teijgeler)
4. 07:46 AM - Re: Re: OIL (flyv35b)
5. 09:07 AM - Re: Re: OIL (Konrad L. Werner)
6. 09:08 AM - Re: Re: OIL (Scott Bilinski)
7. 09:20 AM - Re: Re: OIL (CFrank@edony.com)
8. 10:32 AM - Re: Re: OIL (William Shaffer)
9. 10:51 AM - Re: Re: OIL (Joe Healy)
10. 10:51 AM - Re: Re: OIL (Konrad L. Werner)
11. 11:03 AM - Re: Re: OIL (steve korney)
12. 11:32 AM - Re: Re: OIL (Scott Bilinski)
13. 12:50 PM - Re: Re: OIL (Konrad L. Werner)
14. 06:15 PM - Re: Re: OIL (Richard Sipp)
15. 06:27 PM - Re: Re: OIL (Edward Chmielewski)
16. 07:42 PM - Re: Re: OIL (Larry Martin)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "flyv35b" <flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
I'm going to jump in here and take James' side on this one. I think this
kind of a response is uncalled for. But besides that, if you didn't want
any opinions or factual information then why did you (or whoever it was) ask
the question in the first place?? If you want to believe that your snake
oil makes your plane go super fast go ahead and believe it. I don't think
any reasonable person cares. Just don't put someone down who was just
trying to present some factual information that contradicts your claims.
The CAFE foundation did do a lot of good and came up with quite a bit of
very useful information about aircraft efficiency that hadn't been
documented before and probably put to rest some unfounded rumors in the
process.
Cliff A&P/IA
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> --> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
>
> Larry -
> Sorry, I thought maybe dispelling rumor info like this would help those
> less technically informed make better decisions for product choice. I
> never assumed it was your info. I'm not a CAFE member or anything but
> they have done some good work. JBB
>
>
> Larry Martin wrote:
>
>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
>>
>>Wow, I should leave this alone, but I just wish I was that smart. Do you
>>really think anyone gives a rats rear end about CAFE foundation or
>>whatever?
>>If we want to think good oil makes us go faster, then let us believe it
>>and
>>quit trying to confuse us with facts that we don't care about. The fact
>>is
>>that reducing fiction by using a better quality oil will improve
>>performance, how much may not be measurable, but have not doubt, it helps.
>>Go have another beer.
>>
>>Do not archive
>>.
>>Larry Martin, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
>>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
>>><jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
>>>
>>>Gentlemen -
>>>This type of ridiculous claim is usually the result of very imperfect
>>>control of the factors related to the comparison mentioned below.
>>>Theory, and physics, seldom err and in this case the speed increase
>>>of an aircraft is proportional to the cube root of the horsepower ratio
>>>of the comparison, ALL OTHER FACTORS REMAINING THE SAME. This is seldom
>>>achieved as has been proven by the CAFE Foundation in Santa Rosa,
>>>California. It got to the point where their comparisons of aircraft
>>>performance got down to atmospheric stability variables (air rising in a
>>>low pressure ambient or falling in a high pressure influence) which were
>>>not only hard to define, but impossible to control.
>>>A 5 knot speed increase from (Varieze 100 HP O-200) somewhere around 140
>>>knots to 145 knots would represent a 3.6% gain. This equates to an
>>>11.2% gain in horsepower. From a motor oil change? Highly doubtful
>>>and for sure unproven on a fleet basis. This sounds like the genesis
>>>of a conversation after too many beers.
>>>This theory was proven empirically to me when my friend replaced his 150
>>>HP O320 in his Grumman Cheetah with a 180 HP O360, turning it into a
>>>Grumman Tiger. We knew the performance of the Cheetah from experience
>>>and guess what? The 20% gain in horsepower resulted in about 5-6% gain
>>>in IAS (the approximate cube root of the HP ratio). I knew better than
>>>to nail it down any closer than that because of the previously mentioned
>>>variables that are almost impossible to control. If you have further
>>>interest go to their website and read up. By the way -- I won a beer
>>>on that one. JBB
>>>
>>>
>>>Joe Healy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy" <jhealy@socal.rr.com>
>>>>
>>>>I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what it
>>>>is
>>>>worth.
>>>>Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my
>>>>airport.
>>>>
>>>>
>>He
>>
>>
>>>>said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
>>>>What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He
>>>>asked,
>>>>"What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
>>>>So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat generated
>>>>and
>>>>more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or
>>>>
>>>>
>>longer
>>
>>
>>>>engine life remains to be seen.
>>>>
>>>>J. Healy
>>>>jhealy@socal.rr.com
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
>>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
>>>>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>For the most part it's just preference or opinion or because it's what
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I've
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>always used. Well here's my opinion and what I currently use in all my
>>>>>vehicles, including ATV, aircraft and Cummins diesel. Mobil One, 15000
>>>>>miles between oil changes, easy to find. A little more expensive, but
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>you
>>
>>
>>>>>get what you pay for. Using cheap oil is really false economy, you pay
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>for
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>it in the long run. Why be cheap with the least expensive and most
>>>>>important maintenance item on your engine?
>>>>>
>>>>>Larry, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
>>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>>From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey@adelphia.net>
>>>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
>>>>>Subject: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Gary Casey"
>>>>>><glcasey@adelphia.net>
>>>>>>
>>>>>><<I'm always open to any body's input, so If you care to comment on
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>which
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>oil
>>>>>>you feel is best, please do.>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I would also like to hear from experienced users. One thing I usually
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>do
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>is
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>evaluate the oil consumption of the engine. If it is "good" then I
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>would
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>consider semi-synthetic oil. If the consumption is on the high side I
>>>>>>usually use a "straight-weight" detergent oil. Reason? Cost. The
>>>>>>synthetic, because of the lower viscosity, will slightly reduce fuel
>>>>>>consumption, maybe by 1 or 2%. If the engine burns oil, why throw the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>extra
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>money away? Also, if the engine doesn't run very often the oil that's
>>>>>>thicker at ambient temp will take longer running off the cam lobes.
>>>>>>However, I saw an ad for some synthetic that bragged about preventing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>that,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>so it would be interesting to get more comments. Incidentally, I've
>>>>>>typically used Shell, mostly because it is easier to find, but I've
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>talked
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>to some that say that the Phillips oil has some advantages. There is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>also
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>folklore out there that says that engine rebuilders love Shell
>>>>>>semi-synthetic because of all the extra business they get from cam
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>wear.
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>I
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>don't think I buy that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Gary Casey
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>--
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>
James Baldwin wrote:
> A 5 knot speed increase from (Varieze 100 HP O-200) somewhere around 140
> knots to 145 knots would represent a 3.6% gain. This equates to an
> 11.2% gain in horsepower.
I got 11.11% when I ran the numbers. I don't think I'm going to argue about the
difference. An 11% increase in horsepower is sure more than I would expect from
an oil change though.JimC
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Hans Teijgeler" <hans@jodel.com>
Amen to that Cliff.
One more thing to keep in mind: Fully synthetic engine oil (like the
Mobil-one that was mentioned) does NOT like leaded fuel.
So run on mogas or use semi-synthetic oil at best. These are the options
that you have.
FWIW.
Hans
(Subaru EJ-25 on jodel airframe)
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-engines-list-
> server@matronics.com] Namens flyv35b
> Verzonden: maandag 9 mei 2005 15:16
> Aan: engines-list@matronics.com
> Onderwerp: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "flyv35b"
> <flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
>
> I'm going to jump in here and take James' side on this one. I think this
> kind of a response is uncalled for. But besides that, if you didn't want
> any opinions or factual information then why did you (or whoever it was)
> ask
> the question in the first place?? If you want to believe that your snake
> oil makes your plane go super fast go ahead and believe it. I don't think
> any reasonable person cares. Just don't put someone down who was just
> trying to present some factual information that contradicts your claims.
> The CAFE foundation did do a lot of good and came up with quite a bit of
> very useful information about aircraft efficiency that hadn't been
> documented before and probably put to rest some unfounded rumors in the
> process.
>
> Cliff A&P/IA
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>
>
> > --> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
> <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> >
> > Larry -
> > Sorry, I thought maybe dispelling rumor info like this would help those
> > less technically informed make better decisions for product choice. I
> > never assumed it was your info. I'm not a CAFE member or anything but
> > they have done some good work. JBB
> >
> >
> > Larry Martin wrote:
> >
> >>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> >>
> >>Wow, I should leave this alone, but I just wish I was that smart. Do
> you
> >>really think anyone gives a rats rear end about CAFE foundation or
> >>whatever?
> >>If we want to think good oil makes us go faster, then let us believe it
> >>and
> >>quit trying to confuse us with facts that we don't care about. The fact
> >>is
> >>that reducing fiction by using a better quality oil will improve
> >>performance, how much may not be measurable, but have not doubt, it
> helps.
> >>Go have another beer.
> >>
> >>Do not archive
> >>.
> >>Larry Martin, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
> >>
> >>
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> >>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> >>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>--> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
> >>><jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> >>>
> >>>Gentlemen -
> >>>This type of ridiculous claim is usually the result of very imperfect
> >>>control of the factors related to the comparison mentioned below.
> >>>Theory, and physics, seldom err and in this case the speed increase
> >>>of an aircraft is proportional to the cube root of the horsepower ratio
> >>>of the comparison, ALL OTHER FACTORS REMAINING THE SAME. This is
> seldom
> >>>achieved as has been proven by the CAFE Foundation in Santa Rosa,
> >>>California. It got to the point where their comparisons of aircraft
> >>>performance got down to atmospheric stability variables (air rising in
> a
> >>>low pressure ambient or falling in a high pressure influence) which
> were
> >>>not only hard to define, but impossible to control.
> >>>A 5 knot speed increase from (Varieze 100 HP O-200) somewhere around
> 140
> >>>knots to 145 knots would represent a 3.6% gain. This equates to an
> >>>11.2% gain in horsepower. From a motor oil change? Highly doubtful
> >>>and for sure unproven on a fleet basis. This sounds like the genesis
> >>>of a conversation after too many beers.
> >>>This theory was proven empirically to me when my friend replaced his
> 150
> >>>HP O320 in his Grumman Cheetah with a 180 HP O360, turning it into a
> >>>Grumman Tiger. We knew the performance of the Cheetah from experience
> >>>and guess what? The 20% gain in horsepower resulted in about 5-6% gain
> >>>in IAS (the approximate cube root of the HP ratio). I knew better than
> >>>to nail it down any closer than that because of the previously
> mentioned
> >>>variables that are almost impossible to control. If you have further
> >>>interest go to their website and read up. By the way -- I won a beer
> >>>on that one. JBB
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Joe Healy wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy" <jhealy@socal.rr.com>
> >>>>
> >>>>I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what it
> >>>>is
> >>>>worth.
> >>>>Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my
> >>>>airport.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>He
> >>
> >>
> >>>>said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
> >>>>What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He
> >>>>asked,
> >>>>"What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
> >>>>So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat generated
> >>>>and
> >>>>more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>longer
> >>
> >>
> >>>>engine life remains to be seen.
> >>>>
> >>>>J. Healy
> >>>>jhealy@socal.rr.com
> >>>>----- Original Message -----
> >>>>From: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> >>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> >>>>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>For the most part it's just preference or opinion or because it's
> what
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>I've
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>always used. Well here's my opinion and what I currently use in all
> my
> >>>>>vehicles, including ATV, aircraft and Cummins diesel. Mobil One,
> 15000
> >>>>>miles between oil changes, easy to find. A little more expensive,
> but
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>you
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>get what you pay for. Using cheap oil is really false economy, you
> pay
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>for
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>it in the long run. Why be cheap with the least expensive and most
> >>>>>important maintenance item on your engine?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Larry, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
> >>>>>----- Original Message -----
> >>>>>From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey@adelphia.net>
> >>>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> >>>>>Subject: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Gary Casey"
> >>>>>><glcasey@adelphia.net>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>><<I'm always open to any body's input, so If you care to comment on
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>which
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>oil
> >>>>>>you feel is best, please do.>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I would also like to hear from experienced users. One thing I
> usually
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>do
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>is
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>evaluate the oil consumption of the engine. If it is "good" then I
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>would
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>consider semi-synthetic oil. If the consumption is on the high side
> I
> >>>>>>usually use a "straight-weight" detergent oil. Reason? Cost. The
> >>>>>>synthetic, because of the lower viscosity, will slightly reduce fuel
> >>>>>>consumption, maybe by 1 or 2%. If the engine burns oil, why throw
> the
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>extra
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>money away? Also, if the engine doesn't run very often the oil
> that's
> >>>>>>thicker at ambient temp will take longer running off the cam lobes.
> >>>>>>However, I saw an ad for some synthetic that bragged about
> preventing
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>that,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>so it would be interesting to get more comments. Incidentally, I've
> >>>>>>typically used Shell, mostly because it is easier to find, but I've
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>talked
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>to some that say that the Phillips oil has some advantages. There
> is
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>also
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>folklore out there that says that engine rebuilders love Shell
> >>>>>>semi-synthetic because of all the extra business they get from cam
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>wear.
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>I
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>don't think I buy that.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Gary Casey
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>--
> >>>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>--
> >>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>--
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "flyv35b" <flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
Exactly. A full synthetic oil will not absorb or keep in suspension the
lead deposits that build up in an aircraft engine operating on leaded fuel.
The lead just settles out and cannot be removed by changing the oil like it
can in an AD or semisynthetic oil.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hans Teijgeler" <hans@jodel.com>
Subject: RE: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "Hans Teijgeler" <hans@jodel.com>
>
> Amen to that Cliff.
>
> One more thing to keep in mind: Fully synthetic engine oil (like the
> Mobil-one that was mentioned) does NOT like leaded fuel.
>
> So run on mogas or use semi-synthetic oil at best. These are the options
> that you have.
>
> FWIW.
>
> Hans
> (Subaru EJ-25 on jodel airframe)
>
>
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-engines-list-
>> server@matronics.com] Namens flyv35b
>> Verzonden: maandag 9 mei 2005 15:16
>> Aan: engines-list@matronics.com
>> Onderwerp: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>>
>> --> Engines-List message posted by: "flyv35b"
>> <flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
>>
>> I'm going to jump in here and take James' side on this one. I think this
>> kind of a response is uncalled for. But besides that, if you didn't want
>> any opinions or factual information then why did you (or whoever it was)
>> ask
>> the question in the first place?? If you want to believe that your snake
>> oil makes your plane go super fast go ahead and believe it. I don't
>> think
>> any reasonable person cares. Just don't put someone down who was just
>> trying to present some factual information that contradicts your claims.
>> The CAFE foundation did do a lot of good and came up with quite a bit of
>> very useful information about aircraft efficiency that hadn't been
>> documented before and probably put to rest some unfounded rumors in the
>> process.
>>
>> Cliff A&P/IA
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
>> To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>>
>>
>> > --> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
>> <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
>> >
>> > Larry -
>> > Sorry, I thought maybe dispelling rumor info like this would help those
>> > less technically informed make better decisions for product choice. I
>> > never assumed it was your info. I'm not a CAFE member or anything but
>> > they have done some good work. JBB
>> >
>> >
>> > Larry Martin wrote:
>> >
>> >>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
>> >>
>> >>Wow, I should leave this alone, but I just wish I was that smart. Do
>> you
>> >>really think anyone gives a rats rear end about CAFE foundation or
>> >>whatever?
>> >>If we want to think good oil makes us go faster, then let us believe it
>> >>and
>> >>quit trying to confuse us with facts that we don't care about. The
>> >>fact
>> >>is
>> >>that reducing fiction by using a better quality oil will improve
>> >>performance, how much may not be measurable, but have not doubt, it
>> helps.
>> >>Go have another beer.
>> >>
>> >>Do not archive
>> >>.
>> >>Larry Martin, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>----- Original Message -----
>> >>From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
>> >>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
>> >>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>--> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
>> >>><jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
>> >>>
>> >>>Gentlemen -
>> >>>This type of ridiculous claim is usually the result of very imperfect
>> >>>control of the factors related to the comparison mentioned below.
>> >>>Theory, and physics, seldom err and in this case the speed increase
>> >>>of an aircraft is proportional to the cube root of the horsepower
>> >>>ratio
>> >>>of the comparison, ALL OTHER FACTORS REMAINING THE SAME. This is
>> seldom
>> >>>achieved as has been proven by the CAFE Foundation in Santa Rosa,
>> >>>California. It got to the point where their comparisons of aircraft
>> >>>performance got down to atmospheric stability variables (air rising in
>> a
>> >>>low pressure ambient or falling in a high pressure influence) which
>> were
>> >>>not only hard to define, but impossible to control.
>> >>>A 5 knot speed increase from (Varieze 100 HP O-200) somewhere around
>> 140
>> >>>knots to 145 knots would represent a 3.6% gain. This equates to an
>> >>>11.2% gain in horsepower. From a motor oil change? Highly doubtful
>> >>>and for sure unproven on a fleet basis. This sounds like the genesis
>> >>>of a conversation after too many beers.
>> >>>This theory was proven empirically to me when my friend replaced his
>> 150
>> >>>HP O320 in his Grumman Cheetah with a 180 HP O360, turning it into a
>> >>>Grumman Tiger. We knew the performance of the Cheetah from experience
>> >>>and guess what? The 20% gain in horsepower resulted in about 5-6%
>> >>>gain
>> >>>in IAS (the approximate cube root of the HP ratio). I knew better
>> >>>than
>> >>>to nail it down any closer than that because of the previously
>> mentioned
>> >>>variables that are almost impossible to control. If you have further
>> >>>interest go to their website and read up. By the way -- I won a beer
>> >>>on that one. JBB
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>Joe Healy wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy" <jhealy@socal.rr.com>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what
>> >>>>it
>> >>>>is
>> >>>>worth.
>> >>>>Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my
>> >>>>airport.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>He
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>>said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
>> >>>>What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He
>> >>>>asked,
>> >>>>"What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
>> >>>>So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat generated
>> >>>>and
>> >>>>more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>longer
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>>engine life remains to be seen.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>J. Healy
>> >>>>jhealy@socal.rr.com
>> >>>>----- Original Message -----
>> >>>>From: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
>> >>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
>> >>>>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>For the most part it's just preference or opinion or because it's
>> what
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>I've
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>always used. Well here's my opinion and what I currently use in all
>> my
>> >>>>>vehicles, including ATV, aircraft and Cummins diesel. Mobil One,
>> 15000
>> >>>>>miles between oil changes, easy to find. A little more expensive,
>> but
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>you
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>>>get what you pay for. Using cheap oil is really false economy, you
>> pay
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>for
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>it in the long run. Why be cheap with the least expensive and most
>> >>>>>important maintenance item on your engine?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Larry, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
>> >>>>>----- Original Message -----
>> >>>>>From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey@adelphia.net>
>> >>>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
>> >>>>>Subject: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Gary Casey"
>> >>>>>><glcasey@adelphia.net>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>><<I'm always open to any body's input, so If you care to comment
>> >>>>>>on
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>which
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>>oil
>> >>>>>>you feel is best, please do.>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>I would also like to hear from experienced users. One thing I
>> usually
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>do
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>is
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>evaluate the oil consumption of the engine. If it is "good" then I
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>would
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>>consider semi-synthetic oil. If the consumption is on the high
>> >>>>>>side
>> I
>> >>>>>>usually use a "straight-weight" detergent oil. Reason? Cost. The
>> >>>>>>synthetic, because of the lower viscosity, will slightly reduce
>> >>>>>>fuel
>> >>>>>>consumption, maybe by 1 or 2%. If the engine burns oil, why throw
>> the
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>extra
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>money away? Also, if the engine doesn't run very often the oil
>> that's
>> >>>>>>thicker at ambient temp will take longer running off the cam lobes.
>> >>>>>>However, I saw an ad for some synthetic that bragged about
>> preventing
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>that,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>so it would be interesting to get more comments. Incidentally,
>> >>>>>>I've
>> >>>>>>typically used Shell, mostly because it is easier to find, but I've
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>talked
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>>to some that say that the Phillips oil has some advantages. There
>> is
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>also
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>>folklore out there that says that engine rebuilders love Shell
>> >>>>>>semi-synthetic because of all the extra business they get from cam
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>wear.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>I
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>don't think I buy that.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>Gary Casey
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>--
>> >>>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>--
>> >>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>--
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Konrad L. Werner" <klwerner@comcast.net>
For what its worth:
I talked to a Racer at Reno '03 about the oil(s) he used in his Engine. His answer
was "Redline Synthetic" for racing only, and Aeroshell while flying enroute
to Reno and going back home, ...and any other year round flying. He said that
Redline Racing Oil gave him a little extra oomph when competing, but that it
would not handle 100LL well at all. How much oomph exactly, I don't know. It
probably was not much, but then milliseconds count in racing and can mean life
or death for being # 1. Some sacrifices need to be made to get closer to the
competitive edge. That's why he uses of the shelf aviation oil in his engine
when not racing (which is most of the time), as it does its intended job best.
While I have extensively used Mobil-1 in all my gasoline engined cars over the
years, I would certainly not use it in an aircooled aircraft engine burning 100LL.
There are better oils out there made just for that specific environment.
But thats just my personal opinion worth around 1/50 of a Buck.
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Healy
To: engines-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy" <jhealy@socal.rr.com>
I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what it is
worth.
Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my airport. He
said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He asked,
"What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat generated and
more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or longer
engine life remains to be seen.
J. Healy
jhealy@socal.rr.com
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
So lets get back on track here, what is the best oil for air cooled
engines? I have found no information on this, so by default I use Aero
Shell 100W Plus. How is the Aero Shell Semi Synthetic? Is it worth the
extra costs?
At 04:31 PM 5/9/2005 +0200, you wrote:
>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Hans Teijgeler" <hans@jodel.com>
>
>Amen to that Cliff.
>
>One more thing to keep in mind: Fully synthetic engine oil (like the
>Mobil-one that was mentioned) does NOT like leaded fuel.
>
>So run on mogas or use semi-synthetic oil at best. These are the options
>that you have.
>
>FWIW.
>
>Hans
>(Subaru EJ-25 on jodel airframe)
>
>
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-engines-list-
> > server@matronics.com] Namens flyv35b
> > Verzonden: maandag 9 mei 2005 15:16
> > Aan: engines-list@matronics.com
> > Onderwerp: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >
> > --> Engines-List message posted by: "flyv35b"
> > <flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
> >
> > I'm going to jump in here and take James' side on this one. I think this
> > kind of a response is uncalled for. But besides that, if you didn't want
> > any opinions or factual information then why did you (or whoever it was)
> > ask
> > the question in the first place?? If you want to believe that your snake
> > oil makes your plane go super fast go ahead and believe it. I don't think
> > any reasonable person cares. Just don't put someone down who was just
> > trying to present some factual information that contradicts your claims.
> > The CAFE foundation did do a lot of good and came up with quite a bit of
> > very useful information about aircraft efficiency that hadn't been
> > documented before and probably put to rest some unfounded rumors in the
> > process.
> >
> > Cliff A&P/IA
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >
> >
> > > --> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
> > <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > >
> > > Larry -
> > > Sorry, I thought maybe dispelling rumor info like this would help those
> > > less technically informed make better decisions for product choice. I
> > > never assumed it was your info. I'm not a CAFE member or anything but
> > > they have done some good work. JBB
> > >
> > >
> > > Larry Martin wrote:
> > >
> > >>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> > >>
> > >>Wow, I should leave this alone, but I just wish I was that smart. Do
> > you
> > >>really think anyone gives a rats rear end about CAFE foundation or
> > >>whatever?
> > >>If we want to think good oil makes us go faster, then let us believe it
> > >>and
> > >>quit trying to confuse us with facts that we don't care about. The fact
> > >>is
> > >>that reducing fiction by using a better quality oil will improve
> > >>performance, how much may not be measurable, but have not doubt, it
> > helps.
> > >>Go have another beer.
> > >>
> > >>Do not archive
> > >>.
> > >>Larry Martin, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>----- Original Message -----
> > >>From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > >>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> > >>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>--> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
> > >>><jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > >>>
> > >>>Gentlemen -
> > >>>This type of ridiculous claim is usually the result of very imperfect
> > >>>control of the factors related to the comparison mentioned below.
> > >>>Theory, and physics, seldom err and in this case the speed increase
> > >>>of an aircraft is proportional to the cube root of the horsepower ratio
> > >>>of the comparison, ALL OTHER FACTORS REMAINING THE SAME. This is
> > seldom
> > >>>achieved as has been proven by the CAFE Foundation in Santa Rosa,
> > >>>California. It got to the point where their comparisons of aircraft
> > >>>performance got down to atmospheric stability variables (air rising in
> > a
> > >>>low pressure ambient or falling in a high pressure influence) which
> > were
> > >>>not only hard to define, but impossible to control.
> > >>>A 5 knot speed increase from (Varieze 100 HP O-200) somewhere around
> > 140
> > >>>knots to 145 knots would represent a 3.6% gain. This equates to an
> > >>>11.2% gain in horsepower. From a motor oil change? Highly doubtful
> > >>>and for sure unproven on a fleet basis. This sounds like the genesis
> > >>>of a conversation after too many beers.
> > >>>This theory was proven empirically to me when my friend replaced his
> > 150
> > >>>HP O320 in his Grumman Cheetah with a 180 HP O360, turning it into a
> > >>>Grumman Tiger. We knew the performance of the Cheetah from experience
> > >>>and guess what? The 20% gain in horsepower resulted in about 5-6% gain
> > >>>in IAS (the approximate cube root of the HP ratio). I knew better than
> > >>>to nail it down any closer than that because of the previously
> > mentioned
> > >>>variables that are almost impossible to control. If you have further
> > >>>interest go to their website and read up. By the way -- I won a beer
> > >>>on that one. JBB
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Joe Healy wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy" <jhealy@socal.rr.com>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what it
> > >>>>is
> > >>>>worth.
> > >>>>Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my
> > >>>>airport.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>He
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
> > >>>>What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He
> > >>>>asked,
> > >>>>"What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
> > >>>>So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat generated
> > >>>>and
> > >>>>more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>longer
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>engine life remains to be seen.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>J. Healy
> > >>>>jhealy@socal.rr.com
> > >>>>----- Original Message -----
> > >>>>From: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> > >>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> > >>>>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>For the most part it's just preference or opinion or because it's
> > what
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>I've
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>always used. Well here's my opinion and what I currently use in all
> > my
> > >>>>>vehicles, including ATV, aircraft and Cummins diesel. Mobil One,
> > 15000
> > >>>>>miles between oil changes, easy to find. A little more expensive,
> > but
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>you
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>get what you pay for. Using cheap oil is really false economy, you
> > pay
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>for
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>it in the long run. Why be cheap with the least expensive and most
> > >>>>>important maintenance item on your engine?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Larry, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
> > >>>>>----- Original Message -----
> > >>>>>From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey@adelphia.net>
> > >>>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> > >>>>>Subject: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Gary Casey"
> > >>>>>><glcasey@adelphia.net>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>><<I'm always open to any body's input, so If you care to comment on
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>which
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>>oil
> > >>>>>>you feel is best, please do.>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>I would also like to hear from experienced users. One thing I
> > usually
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>do
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>is
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>evaluate the oil consumption of the engine. If it is "good" then I
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>would
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>>consider semi-synthetic oil. If the consumption is on the high side
> > I
> > >>>>>>usually use a "straight-weight" detergent oil. Reason? Cost. The
> > >>>>>>synthetic, because of the lower viscosity, will slightly reduce fuel
> > >>>>>>consumption, maybe by 1 or 2%. If the engine burns oil, why throw
> > the
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>extra
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>money away? Also, if the engine doesn't run very often the oil
> > that's
> > >>>>>>thicker at ambient temp will take longer running off the cam lobes.
> > >>>>>>However, I saw an ad for some synthetic that bragged about
> > preventing
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>that,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>so it would be interesting to get more comments. Incidentally, I've
> > >>>>>>typically used Shell, mostly because it is easier to find, but I've
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>talked
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>>to some that say that the Phillips oil has some advantages. There
> > is
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>also
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>>folklore out there that says that engine rebuilders love Shell
> > >>>>>>semi-synthetic because of all the extra business they get from cam
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>wear.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>I
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>don't think I buy that.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>Gary Casey
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>--
> > >>>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>--
> > >>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>--
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: CFrank@edony.com
I'm an Exxon Elite fan myself, using it in my '46 Ercoupe for while now.
-----Original Message-----
From: Konrad L. Werner [mailto:klwerner@comcast.net]
Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Konrad L. Werner"
<klwerner@comcast.net>
For what its worth:
I talked to a Racer at Reno '03 about the oil(s) he used in his Engine. His
answer was "Redline Synthetic" for racing only, and Aeroshell while flying
enroute to Reno and going back home, ...and any other year round flying. He
said that Redline Racing Oil gave him a little extra oomph when competing,
but that it would not handle 100LL well at all. How much oomph exactly, I
don't know. It probably was not much, but then milliseconds count in racing
and can mean life or death for being # 1. Some sacrifices need to be made
to get closer to the competitive edge. That's why he uses of the shelf
aviation oil in his engine when not racing (which is most of the time), as
it does its intended job best.
While I have extensively used Mobil-1 in all my gasoline engined cars over
the years, I would certainly not use it in an aircooled aircraft engine
burning 100LL. There are better oils out there made just for that specific
environment.
But thats just my personal opinion worth around 1/50 of a Buck.
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Healy
To: engines-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy" <jhealy@socal.rr.com>
I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what it is
worth.
Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my airport.
He
said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He asked,
"What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat generated and
more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or longer
engine life remains to be seen.
J. Healy
jhealy@socal.rr.com
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: William Shaffer <shafferaviation@yahoo.com>
when Mobil AV1 came out I was talked into putting it my Bellanca tubro viking the
new engine had 325 hrs. 37 hrs later the engine seized so hard on climb out
it evrn bent the prop. so be careful of useing fully synthetic oil with leaded
fuel such as av gas.
w.p.shaffer
Hans Teijgeler <hans@jodel.com> wrote:
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Hans Teijgeler"
Amen to that Cliff.
One more thing to keep in mind: Fully synthetic engine oil (like the
Mobil-one that was mentioned) does NOT like leaded fuel.
So run on mogas or use semi-synthetic oil at best. These are the options
that you have.
FWIW.
Hans
(Subaru EJ-25 on jodel airframe)
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-engines-list-
> server@matronics.com] Namens flyv35b
> Verzonden: maandag 9 mei 2005 15:16
> Aan: engines-list@matronics.com
> Onderwerp: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "flyv35b"
>
>
> I'm going to jump in here and take James' side on this one. I think this
> kind of a response is uncalled for. But besides that, if you didn't want
> any opinions or factual information then why did you (or whoever it was)
> ask
> the question in the first place?? If you want to believe that your snake
> oil makes your plane go super fast go ahead and believe it. I don't think
> any reasonable person cares. Just don't put someone down who was just
> trying to present some factual information that contradicts your claims.
> The CAFE foundation did do a lot of good and came up with quite a bit of
> very useful information about aircraft efficiency that hadn't been
> documented before and probably put to rest some unfounded rumors in the
> process.
>
> Cliff A&P/IA
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Baldwin"
> To:
> Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>
>
> > --> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
>
> >
> > Larry -
> > Sorry, I thought maybe dispelling rumor info like this would help those
> > less technically informed make better decisions for product choice. I
> > never assumed it was your info. I'm not a CAFE member or anything but
> > they have done some good work. JBB
> >
> >
> > Larry Martin wrote:
> >
> >>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin"
> >>
> >>Wow, I should leave this alone, but I just wish I was that smart. Do
> you
> >>really think anyone gives a rats rear end about CAFE foundation or
> >>whatever?
> >>If we want to think good oil makes us go faster, then let us believe it
> >>and
> >>quit trying to confuse us with facts that we don't care about. The fact
> >>is
> >>that reducing fiction by using a better quality oil will improve
> >>performance, how much may not be measurable, but have not doubt, it
> helps.
> >>Go have another beer.
> >>
> >>Do not archive
> >>.
> >>Larry Martin, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
> >>
> >>
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "James Baldwin"
> >>To:
> >>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>--> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Gentlemen -
> >>>This type of ridiculous claim is usually the result of very imperfect
> >>>control of the factors related to the comparison mentioned below.
> >>>Theory, and physics, seldom err and in this case the speed increase
> >>>of an aircraft is proportional to the cube root of the horsepower ratio
> >>>of the comparison, ALL OTHER FACTORS REMAINING THE SAME. This is
> seldom
> >>>achieved as has been proven by the CAFE Foundation in Santa Rosa,
> >>>California. It got to the point where their comparisons of aircraft
> >>>performance got down to atmospheric stability variables (air rising in
> a
> >>>low pressure ambient or falling in a high pressure influence) which
> were
> >>>not only hard to define, but impossible to control.
> >>>A 5 knot speed increase from (Varieze 100 HP O-200) somewhere around
> 140
> >>>knots to 145 knots would represent a 3.6% gain. This equates to an
> >>>11.2% gain in horsepower. From a motor oil change? Highly doubtful
> >>>and for sure unproven on a fleet basis. This sounds like the genesis
> >>>of a conversation after too many beers.
> >>>This theory was proven empirically to me when my friend replaced his
> 150
> >>>HP O320 in his Grumman Cheetah with a 180 HP O360, turning it into a
> >>>Grumman Tiger. We knew the performance of the Cheetah from experience
> >>>and guess what? The 20% gain in horsepower resulted in about 5-6% gain
> >>>in IAS (the approximate cube root of the HP ratio). I knew better than
> >>>to nail it down any closer than that because of the previously
> mentioned
> >>>variables that are almost impossible to control. If you have further
> >>>interest go to their website and read up. By the way -- I won a beer
> >>>on that one. JBB
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Joe Healy wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy"
> >>>>
> >>>>I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what it
> >>>>is
> >>>>worth.
> >>>>Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my
> >>>>airport.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>He
> >>
> >>
> >>>>said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
> >>>>What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He
> >>>>asked,
> >>>>"What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
> >>>>So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat generated
> >>>>and
> >>>>more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>longer
> >>
> >>
> >>>>engine life remains to be seen.
> >>>>
> >>>>J. Healy
> >>>>jhealy@socal.rr.com
> >>>>----- Original Message -----
> >>>>From: "Larry Martin"
> >>>>To:
> >>>>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin"
> >>>>>
> >>>>>For the most part it's just preference or opinion or because it's
> what
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>I've
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>always used. Well here's my opinion and what I currently use in all
> my
> >>>>>vehicles, including ATV, aircraft and Cummins diesel. Mobil One,
> 15000
> >>>>>miles between oil changes, easy to find. A little more expensive,
> but
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>you
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>get what you pay for. Using cheap oil is really false economy, you
> pay
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>for
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>it in the long run. Why be cheap with the least expensive and most
> >>>>>important maintenance item on your engine?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Larry, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
> >>>>>----- Original Message -----
> >>>>>From: "Gary Casey"
> >>>>>To:
> >>>>>Subject: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Gary Casey"
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>><> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>which
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>oil
> >>>>>>you feel is best, please do.>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I would also like to hear from experienced users. One thing I
> usually
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>do
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>is
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>evaluate the oil consumption of the engine. If it is "good" then I
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>would
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>consider semi-synthetic oil. If the consumption is on the high side
> I
> >>>>>>usually use a "straight-weight" detergent oil. Reason? Cost. The
> >>>>>>synthetic, because of the lower viscosity, will slightly reduce fuel
> >>>>>>consumption, maybe by 1 or 2%. If the engine burns oil, why throw
> the
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>extra
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>money away? Also, if the engine doesn't run very often the oil
> that's
> >>>>>>thicker at ambient temp will take longer running off the cam lobes.
> >>>>>>However, I saw an ad for some synthetic that bragged about
> preventing
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>that,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>so it would be interesting to get more comments. Incidentally, I've
> >>>>>>typically used Shell, mostly because it is easier to find, but I've
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>talked
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>to some that say that the Phillips oil has some advantages. There
> is
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>also
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>folklore out there that says that engine rebuilders love Shell
> >>>>>>semi-synthetic because of all the extra business they get from cam
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>wear.
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>I
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>don't think I buy that.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Gary Casey
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>--
> >>>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>--
> >>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>--
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy" <jhealy@socal.rr.com>
OK boys, calm down.
It looks like I really hit a bandstand nerve, as some were quick to whip out
their HP 41C's. Nice touch, Spock, with the two decimal place correction.
Well I have to admit that I can't argue with the fundamental cubic
relationship between power and air speed.
James, I checked out the CAFE site, but there is nothing there about the
effects of various oils on air speed or engine power. There is a nice one on
the effects of a wax job though.
My first response was to add to the Cummins diesel experience posted by
Larry Martin. I was only passing along a related experience, that of a
professional drag racing team which found that using Mobil One could shave a
few hundredths of a second from their quarter mile times. On the basis of
that information, another EZ pilot I know tried Mobile One in his EZ and
found lower engine temperatures and noticeable speed increase. He claimed a
5 knot increase.
Now we could probably expect that he rounded off to the nearest 5 knots.
Perhaps he even exaggerated a bit, I don't know. This was not a scientific
test and that was never the point. The point was that he noticed an
improvement in both air speed and oil temperatures. How much is debatable.
Now if you are suggesting that he imagined the whole thing based on your
calculations then I'll make a note of that.
J. Healy
----- Original Message -----
From: "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "James R. Cunningham"
<jrccea@bellsouth.net>
>
>
> James Baldwin wrote:
>
> > A 5 knot speed increase from (Varieze 100 HP O-200) somewhere around 140
> > knots to 145 knots would represent a 3.6% gain. This equates to an
> > 11.2% gain in horsepower.
>
> I got 11.11% when I ran the numbers. I don't think I'm going to argue
about the
> difference. An 11% increase in horsepower is sure more than I would
expect from
> an oil change though.JimC
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Konrad L. Werner" <klwerner@comcast.net>
I am not an Exxon Elite fan. Not that its not a good oil, but I personally prefer
Aeroshell over Exxon Elite in Aircraft engines.
However, I do prefer Exxon's Mobil-1 Synthetic over any other "S-x" rated oils
in my gas guzzlers.
Second choice is Castrol GTX mineral oil which I have used in my gasoline engined
cars as well.
I am on my third Dodge/Cummins Diesel, which run on either Shell Rotella or Chevron
Delo 400.
To ask which Oil is the best is truly a "slippery" subject to answer.
It depends on to many variables to come up with one simple answer.
do not archive
P.S. If someone were to give me a free case of Exxon Elite, I'd take it and perhaps
even use it!
----- Original Message -----
From: CFrank@edony.com
To: engines-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 10:17 AM
Subject: RE: Engines-List: RE: OIL
--> Engines-List message posted by: CFrank@edony.com
I'm an Exxon Elite fan myself, using it in my '46 Ercoupe for while now.
-----Original Message-----
From: Konrad L. Werner [mailto:klwerner@comcast.net]
To: engines-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Konrad L. Werner"
<klwerner@comcast.net>
For what its worth:
I talked to a Racer at Reno '03 about the oil(s) he used in his Engine. His
answer was "Redline Synthetic" for racing only, and Aeroshell while flying
enroute to Reno and going back home, ...and any other year round flying. He
said that Redline Racing Oil gave him a little extra oomph when competing,
but that it would not handle 100LL well at all. How much oomph exactly, I
don't know. It probably was not much, but then milliseconds count in racing
and can mean life or death for being # 1. Some sacrifices need to be made
to get closer to the competitive edge. That's why he uses of the shelf
aviation oil in his engine when not racing (which is most of the time), as
it does its intended job best.
While I have extensively used Mobil-1 in all my gasoline engined cars over
the years, I would certainly not use it in an aircooled aircraft engine
burning 100LL. There are better oils out there made just for that specific
environment.
But thats just my personal opinion worth around 1/50 of a Buck.
do not archive
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "steve korney" <s_korney@hotmail.com>
Scott...
Aero Shell 100W Plus will take your engine to TBO as well as any other
oil.....
Best... Steve
----Original Message Follows----
From: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: RE: Engines-List: RE: OIL
--> Engines-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
So lets get back on track here, what is the best oil for air cooled
engines? I have found no information on this, so by default I use Aero
Shell 100W Plus. How is the Aero Shell Semi Synthetic? Is it worth the
extra costs?
At 04:31 PM 5/9/2005 +0200, you wrote:
>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Hans Teijgeler" <hans@jodel.com>
>
>Amen to that Cliff.
>
>One more thing to keep in mind: Fully synthetic engine oil (like the
>Mobil-one that was mentioned) does NOT like leaded fuel.
>
>So run on mogas or use semi-synthetic oil at best. These are the options
>that you have.
>
>FWIW.
>
>Hans
>(Subaru EJ-25 on jodel airframe)
>
>
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-engines-list-
> > server@matronics.com] Namens flyv35b
> > Verzonden: maandag 9 mei 2005 15:16
> > Aan: engines-list@matronics.com
> > Onderwerp: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >
> > --> Engines-List message posted by: "flyv35b"
> > <flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
> >
> > I'm going to jump in here and take James' side on this one. I think
this
> > kind of a response is uncalled for. But besides that, if you didn't
want
> > any opinions or factual information then why did you (or whoever it
was)
> > ask
> > the question in the first place?? If you want to believe that your
snake
> > oil makes your plane go super fast go ahead and believe it. I don't
think
> > any reasonable person cares. Just don't put someone down who was just
> > trying to present some factual information that contradicts your
claims.
> > The CAFE foundation did do a lot of good and came up with quite a bit
of
> > very useful information about aircraft efficiency that hadn't been
> > documented before and probably put to rest some unfounded rumors in the
> > process.
> >
> > Cliff A&P/IA
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >
> >
> > > --> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
> > <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > >
> > > Larry -
> > > Sorry, I thought maybe dispelling rumor info like this would help
those
> > > less technically informed make better decisions for product choice.
I
> > > never assumed it was your info. I'm not a CAFE member or anything
but
> > > they have done some good work. JBB
> > >
> > >
> > > Larry Martin wrote:
> > >
> > >>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> > >>
> > >>Wow, I should leave this alone, but I just wish I was that smart. Do
> > you
> > >>really think anyone gives a rats rear end about CAFE foundation or
> > >>whatever?
> > >>If we want to think good oil makes us go faster, then let us believe
it
> > >>and
> > >>quit trying to confuse us with facts that we don't care about. The
fact
> > >>is
> > >>that reducing fiction by using a better quality oil will improve
> > >>performance, how much may not be measurable, but have not doubt, it
> > helps.
> > >>Go have another beer.
> > >>
> > >>Do not archive
> > >>.
> > >>Larry Martin, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>----- Original Message -----
> > >>From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > >>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> > >>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>--> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
> > >>><jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > >>>
> > >>>Gentlemen -
> > >>>This type of ridiculous claim is usually the result of very
imperfect
> > >>>control of the factors related to the comparison mentioned below.
> > >>>Theory, and physics, seldom err and in this case the speed increase
> > >>>of an aircraft is proportional to the cube root of the horsepower
ratio
> > >>>of the comparison, ALL OTHER FACTORS REMAINING THE SAME. This is
> > seldom
> > >>>achieved as has been proven by the CAFE Foundation in Santa Rosa,
> > >>>California. It got to the point where their comparisons of aircraft
> > >>>performance got down to atmospheric stability variables (air rising
in
> > a
> > >>>low pressure ambient or falling in a high pressure influence) which
> > were
> > >>>not only hard to define, but impossible to control.
> > >>>A 5 knot speed increase from (Varieze 100 HP O-200) somewhere around
> > 140
> > >>>knots to 145 knots would represent a 3.6% gain. This equates to an
> > >>>11.2% gain in horsepower. From a motor oil change? Highly
doubtful
> > >>>and for sure unproven on a fleet basis. This sounds like the
genesis
> > >>>of a conversation after too many beers.
> > >>>This theory was proven empirically to me when my friend replaced his
> > 150
> > >>>HP O320 in his Grumman Cheetah with a 180 HP O360, turning it into a
> > >>>Grumman Tiger. We knew the performance of the Cheetah from
experience
> > >>>and guess what? The 20% gain in horsepower resulted in about 5-6%
gain
> > >>>in IAS (the approximate cube root of the HP ratio). I knew better
than
> > >>>to nail it down any closer than that because of the previously
> > mentioned
> > >>>variables that are almost impossible to control. If you have
further
> > >>>interest go to their website and read up. By the way -- I won a
beer
> > >>>on that one. JBB
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Joe Healy wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy"
<jhealy@socal.rr.com>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what
it
> > >>>>is
> > >>>>worth.
> > >>>>Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my
> > >>>>airport.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>He
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
> > >>>>What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He
> > >>>>asked,
> > >>>>"What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
> > >>>>So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat
generated
> > >>>>and
> > >>>>more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>longer
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>engine life remains to be seen.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>J. Healy
> > >>>>jhealy@socal.rr.com
> > >>>>----- Original Message -----
> > >>>>From: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> > >>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> > >>>>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>For the most part it's just preference or opinion or because it's
> > what
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>I've
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>always used. Well here's my opinion and what I currently use in
all
> > my
> > >>>>>vehicles, including ATV, aircraft and Cummins diesel. Mobil One,
> > 15000
> > >>>>>miles between oil changes, easy to find. A little more expensive,
> > but
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>you
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>get what you pay for. Using cheap oil is really false economy,
you
> > pay
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>for
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>it in the long run. Why be cheap with the least expensive and
most
> > >>>>>important maintenance item on your engine?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Larry, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
> > >>>>>----- Original Message -----
> > >>>>>From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey@adelphia.net>
> > >>>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> > >>>>>Subject: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Gary Casey"
> > >>>>>><glcasey@adelphia.net>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>><<I'm always open to any body's input, so If you care to comment
on
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>which
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>>oil
> > >>>>>>you feel is best, please do.>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>I would also like to hear from experienced users. One thing I
> > usually
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>do
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>is
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>evaluate the oil consumption of the engine. If it is "good" then
I
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>would
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>>consider semi-synthetic oil. If the consumption is on the high
side
> > I
> > >>>>>>usually use a "straight-weight" detergent oil. Reason? Cost.
The
> > >>>>>>synthetic, because of the lower viscosity, will slightly reduce
fuel
> > >>>>>>consumption, maybe by 1 or 2%. If the engine burns oil, why
throw
> > the
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>extra
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>money away? Also, if the engine doesn't run very often the oil
> > that's
> > >>>>>>thicker at ambient temp will take longer running off the cam
lobes.
> > >>>>>>However, I saw an ad for some synthetic that bragged about
> > preventing
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>that,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>so it would be interesting to get more comments. Incidentally,
I've
> > >>>>>>typically used Shell, mostly because it is easier to find, but
I've
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>talked
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>>to some that say that the Phillips oil has some advantages.
There
> > is
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>also
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>>folklore out there that says that engine rebuilders love Shell
> > >>>>>>semi-synthetic because of all the extra business they get from
cam
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>wear.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>I
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>don't think I buy that.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>Gary Casey
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>--
> > >>>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>--
> > >>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>--
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
I can understand being a fan of XXXXXX oil, but based on what? To bad the
market is not larger so somebody would perform a oil comparison.
At 12:17 PM 5/9/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>--> Engines-List message posted by: CFrank@edony.com
>
>I'm an Exxon Elite fan myself, using it in my '46 Ercoupe for while now.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Konrad L. Werner [mailto:klwerner@comcast.net]
>To: engines-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>
>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Konrad L. Werner"
><klwerner@comcast.net>
>
>For what its worth:
>I talked to a Racer at Reno '03 about the oil(s) he used in his Engine. His
>answer was "Redline Synthetic" for racing only, and Aeroshell while flying
>enroute to Reno and going back home, ...and any other year round flying. He
>said that Redline Racing Oil gave him a little extra oomph when competing,
>but that it would not handle 100LL well at all. How much oomph exactly, I
>don't know. It probably was not much, but then milliseconds count in racing
>and can mean life or death for being # 1. Some sacrifices need to be made
>to get closer to the competitive edge. That's why he uses of the shelf
>aviation oil in his engine when not racing (which is most of the time), as
>it does its intended job best.
>
>While I have extensively used Mobil-1 in all my gasoline engined cars over
>the years, I would certainly not use it in an aircooled aircraft engine
>burning 100LL. There are better oils out there made just for that specific
>environment.
>
>But thats just my personal opinion worth around 1/50 of a Buck.
>
>do not archive
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joe Healy
> To: engines-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 11:34 AM
> Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>
>
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy" <jhealy@socal.rr.com>
>
> I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what it is
> worth.
> Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my airport.
>He
> said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
> What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He asked,
> "What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
> So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat generated and
> more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or longer
> engine life remains to be seen.
>
> J. Healy
> jhealy@socal.rr.com
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Konrad L. Werner" <klwerner@comcast.net>
Dear Scott,
A comparison like that has been done by Aviation Consumer (I believe?) a couple
of years ago. If I recall correctly Aeroshell tested better than Exxon (which
Exxon then questioned, of course).
Exxon in turn tested better than Phillips (which Exxon & Phillips did not question).
Castrol Aviator was not even around yet, I think?
Keep in mind that these were laboratory tests to mimic the real worlds need for
wear-, tear- & corrosion protection.
Each of these oils are good oils, while some may be slightly better. Remember,
the best thing to do to any engine is fly it often and regularly, regardless of
oil brand.
A hangar queen with the best oil is worst off than the daily flown hauler run on
any of the other oils. And change the dark soup regularly to get rid of the
junk accumulated.
P.S.: Is there anyone out there that could offer us ~2000hrs in his/her Twin to
run Brand-X in #1, and Brand-Y in # 2 exclusively, so we would have a more direct
comparison? Now, if we had a Tri-Motor then we could also run Brand-Z at
the same time as well as do not archive. A quad engine test may really be to
much to ask, I think!
----- Original Message -----
From: Scott Bilinski
To: engines-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 12:31 PM
Subject: RE: Engines-List: RE: OIL
--> Engines-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
I can understand being a fan of XXXXXX oil, but based on what? To bad the
market is not larger so somebody would perform a oil comparison.
At 12:17 PM 5/9/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>--> Engines-List message posted by: CFrank@edony.com
>
>I'm an Exxon Elite fan myself, using it in my '46 Ercoupe for while now.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Konrad L. Werner [mailto:klwerner@comcast.net]
>To: engines-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>
>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Konrad L. Werner"
><klwerner@comcast.net>
>
>For what its worth:
>I talked to a Racer at Reno '03 about the oil(s) he used in his Engine. His
>answer was "Redline Synthetic" for racing only, and Aeroshell while flying
>enroute to Reno and going back home, ...and any other year round flying. He
>said that Redline Racing Oil gave him a little extra oomph when competing,
>but that it would not handle 100LL well at all. How much oomph exactly, I
>don't know. It probably was not much, but then milliseconds count in racing
>and can mean life or death for being # 1. Some sacrifices need to be made
>to get closer to the competitive edge. That's why he uses of the shelf
>aviation oil in his engine when not racing (which is most of the time), as
>it does its intended job best.
>
>While I have extensively used Mobil-1 in all my gasoline engined cars over
>the years, I would certainly not use it in an aircooled aircraft engine
>burning 100LL. There are better oils out there made just for that specific
>environment.
>
>But thats just my personal opinion worth around 1/50 of a Buck.
>
>do not archive
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joe Healy
> To: engines-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 11:34 AM
> Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>
>
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy" <jhealy@socal.rr.com>
>
> I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what it is
> worth.
> Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my airport.
>He
> said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
> What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He asked,
> "What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
> So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat generated and
> more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or longer
> engine life remains to be seen.
>
> J. Healy
> jhealy@socal.rr.com
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Richard Sipp" <rsipp@earthlink.net>
Aviation Consumer www.aviationconsumer.com has run a number of articles over
the past year on the various oil choices. They conducted several tests on
the popular brands. Their wrap up article is in the current May 2005 issue.
Dick Sipp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Bilinski" <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: RE: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> --> Engines-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
> <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
> So lets get back on track here, what is the best oil for air cooled
> engines? I have found no information on this, so by default I use Aero
> Shell 100W Plus. How is the Aero Shell Semi Synthetic? Is it worth the
> extra costs?
>
>
> At 04:31 PM 5/9/2005 +0200, you wrote:
>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Hans Teijgeler" <hans@jodel.com>
>>
>>Amen to that Cliff.
>>
>>One more thing to keep in mind: Fully synthetic engine oil (like the
>>Mobil-one that was mentioned) does NOT like leaded fuel.
>>
>>So run on mogas or use semi-synthetic oil at best. These are the options
>>that you have.
>>
>>FWIW.
>>
>>Hans
>>(Subaru EJ-25 on jodel airframe)
>>
>>
>> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> > Van: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
>> > [mailto:owner-engines-list-
>> > server@matronics.com] Namens flyv35b
>> > Verzonden: maandag 9 mei 2005 15:16
>> > Aan: engines-list@matronics.com
>> > Onderwerp: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>> >
>> > --> Engines-List message posted by: "flyv35b"
>> > <flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
>> >
>> > I'm going to jump in here and take James' side on this one. I think
>> > this
>> > kind of a response is uncalled for. But besides that, if you didn't
>> > want
>> > any opinions or factual information then why did you (or whoever it
>> > was)
>> > ask
>> > the question in the first place?? If you want to believe that your
>> > snake
>> > oil makes your plane go super fast go ahead and believe it. I don't
>> > think
>> > any reasonable person cares. Just don't put someone down who was just
>> > trying to present some factual information that contradicts your
>> > claims.
>> > The CAFE foundation did do a lot of good and came up with quite a bit
>> > of
>> > very useful information about aircraft efficiency that hadn't been
>> > documented before and probably put to rest some unfounded rumors in the
>> > process.
>> >
>> > Cliff A&P/IA
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
>> > To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
>> > Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>> >
>> >
>> > > --> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
>> > <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
>> > >
>> > > Larry -
>> > > Sorry, I thought maybe dispelling rumor info like this would help
>> > > those
>> > > less technically informed make better decisions for product choice.
>> > > I
>> > > never assumed it was your info. I'm not a CAFE member or anything
>> > > but
>> > > they have done some good work. JBB
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Larry Martin wrote:
>> > >
>> > >>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
>> > >>
>> > >>Wow, I should leave this alone, but I just wish I was that smart. Do
>> > you
>> > >>really think anyone gives a rats rear end about CAFE foundation or
>> > >>whatever?
>> > >>If we want to think good oil makes us go faster, then let us believe
>> > >>it
>> > >>and
>> > >>quit trying to confuse us with facts that we don't care about. The
>> > >>fact
>> > >>is
>> > >>that reducing fiction by using a better quality oil will improve
>> > >>performance, how much may not be measurable, but have not doubt, it
>> > helps.
>> > >>Go have another beer.
>> > >>
>> > >>Do not archive
>> > >>.
>> > >>Larry Martin, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>----- Original Message -----
>> > >>From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
>> > >>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
>> > >>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>>--> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
>> > >>><jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>Gentlemen -
>> > >>>This type of ridiculous claim is usually the result of very
>> > >>>imperfect
>> > >>>control of the factors related to the comparison mentioned below.
>> > >>>Theory, and physics, seldom err and in this case the speed increase
>> > >>>of an aircraft is proportional to the cube root of the horsepower
>> > >>>ratio
>> > >>>of the comparison, ALL OTHER FACTORS REMAINING THE SAME. This is
>> > seldom
>> > >>>achieved as has been proven by the CAFE Foundation in Santa Rosa,
>> > >>>California. It got to the point where their comparisons of aircraft
>> > >>>performance got down to atmospheric stability variables (air rising
>> > >>>in
>> > a
>> > >>>low pressure ambient or falling in a high pressure influence) which
>> > were
>> > >>>not only hard to define, but impossible to control.
>> > >>>A 5 knot speed increase from (Varieze 100 HP O-200) somewhere around
>> > 140
>> > >>>knots to 145 knots would represent a 3.6% gain. This equates to an
>> > >>>11.2% gain in horsepower. From a motor oil change? Highly
>> > >>>doubtful
>> > >>>and for sure unproven on a fleet basis. This sounds like the
>> > >>>genesis
>> > >>>of a conversation after too many beers.
>> > >>>This theory was proven empirically to me when my friend replaced his
>> > 150
>> > >>>HP O320 in his Grumman Cheetah with a 180 HP O360, turning it into a
>> > >>>Grumman Tiger. We knew the performance of the Cheetah from
>> > >>>experience
>> > >>>and guess what? The 20% gain in horsepower resulted in about 5-6%
>> > >>>gain
>> > >>>in IAS (the approximate cube root of the HP ratio). I knew better
>> > >>>than
>> > >>>to nail it down any closer than that because of the previously
>> > mentioned
>> > >>>variables that are almost impossible to control. If you have
>> > >>>further
>> > >>>interest go to their website and read up. By the way -- I won a
>> > >>>beer
>> > >>>on that one. JBB
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>Joe Healy wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy"
>> > >>>><jhealy@socal.rr.com>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what
>> > >>>>it
>> > >>>>is
>> > >>>>worth.
>> > >>>>Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my
>> > >>>>airport.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>He
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>>>said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
>> > >>>>What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He
>> > >>>>asked,
>> > >>>>"What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
>> > >>>>So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat
>> > >>>>generated
>> > >>>>and
>> > >>>>more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>longer
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>>>engine life remains to be seen.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>J. Healy
>> > >>>>jhealy@socal.rr.com
>> > >>>>----- Original Message -----
>> > >>>>From: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
>> > >>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
>> > >>>>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>For the most part it's just preference or opinion or because it's
>> > what
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>I've
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>always used. Well here's my opinion and what I currently use in
>> > >>>>>all
>> > my
>> > >>>>>vehicles, including ATV, aircraft and Cummins diesel. Mobil One,
>> > 15000
>> > >>>>>miles between oil changes, easy to find. A little more expensive,
>> > but
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>you
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>>>>get what you pay for. Using cheap oil is really false economy,
>> > >>>>>you
>> > pay
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>for
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>it in the long run. Why be cheap with the least expensive and
>> > >>>>>most
>> > >>>>>important maintenance item on your engine?
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>Larry, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
>> > >>>>>----- Original Message -----
>> > >>>>>From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey@adelphia.net>
>> > >>>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
>> > >>>>>Subject: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Gary Casey"
>> > >>>>>><glcasey@adelphia.net>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>><<I'm always open to any body's input, so If you care to comment
>> > >>>>>>on
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>which
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>>oil
>> > >>>>>>you feel is best, please do.>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>I would also like to hear from experienced users. One thing I
>> > usually
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>do
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>is
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>evaluate the oil consumption of the engine. If it is "good" then
>> > >>>>>>I
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>would
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>>consider semi-synthetic oil. If the consumption is on the high
>> > >>>>>>side
>> > I
>> > >>>>>>usually use a "straight-weight" detergent oil. Reason? Cost.
>> > >>>>>>The
>> > >>>>>>synthetic, because of the lower viscosity, will slightly reduce
>> > >>>>>>fuel
>> > >>>>>>consumption, maybe by 1 or 2%. If the engine burns oil, why
>> > >>>>>>throw
>> > the
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>extra
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>money away? Also, if the engine doesn't run very often the oil
>> > that's
>> > >>>>>>thicker at ambient temp will take longer running off the cam
>> > >>>>>>lobes.
>> > >>>>>>However, I saw an ad for some synthetic that bragged about
>> > preventing
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>that,
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>so it would be interesting to get more comments. Incidentally,
>> > >>>>>>I've
>> > >>>>>>typically used Shell, mostly because it is easier to find, but
>> > >>>>>>I've
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>talked
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>>to some that say that the Phillips oil has some advantages.
>> > >>>>>>There
>> > is
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>also
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>>folklore out there that says that engine rebuilders love Shell
>> > >>>>>>semi-synthetic because of all the extra business they get from
>> > >>>>>>cam
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>wear.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>I
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>don't think I buy that.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>Gary Casey
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>--
>> > >>>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>--
>> > >>>>>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>--
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> Scott Bilinski
> Eng dept 305
> Phone (858) 657-2536
> Pager (858) 502-5190
>
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Edward Chmielewski" <edchmiel@mindspring.com>
"...quit trying to confuse us with the facts..." ???
I think Larry's the one who needs the beer! LOL!
Ed in JXN
----- Original Message -----
From: "flyv35b" <flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "flyv35b" <flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
>
> I'm going to jump in here and take James' side on this one. I think this
> kind of a response is uncalled for. But besides that, if you didn't want
> any opinions or factual information then why did you (or whoever it was) ask
> the question in the first place?? If you want to believe that your snake
> oil makes your plane go super fast go ahead and believe it. I don't think
> any reasonable person cares. Just don't put someone down who was just
> trying to present some factual information that contradicts your claims.
> The CAFE foundation did do a lot of good and came up with quite a bit of
> very useful information about aircraft efficiency that hadn't been
> documented before and probably put to rest some unfounded rumors in the
> process.
>
> Cliff A&P/IA
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>
>
> > --> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> >
> > Larry -
> > Sorry, I thought maybe dispelling rumor info like this would help those
> > less technically informed make better decisions for product choice. I
> > never assumed it was your info. I'm not a CAFE member or anything but
> > they have done some good work. JBB
> >
> >
> > Larry Martin wrote:
> >
> >>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> >>
> >>Wow, I should leave this alone, but I just wish I was that smart. Do you
> >>really think anyone gives a rats rear end about CAFE foundation or
> >>whatever?
> >>If we want to think good oil makes us go faster, then let us believe it
> >>and
> >>quit trying to confuse us with facts that we don't care about. The fact
> >>is
> >>that reducing fiction by using a better quality oil will improve
> >>performance, how much may not be measurable, but have not doubt, it helps.
> >>Go have another beer.
> >>
> >>Do not archive
> >>.
> >>Larry Martin, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
> >>
> >>
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> >>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> >>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>--> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
> >>><jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> >>>
> >>>Gentlemen -
> >>>This type of ridiculous claim is usually the result of very imperfect
> >>>control of the factors related to the comparison mentioned below.
> >>>Theory, and physics, seldom err and in this case the speed increase
> >>>of an aircraft is proportional to the cube root of the horsepower ratio
> >>>of the comparison, ALL OTHER FACTORS REMAINING THE SAME. This is seldom
> >>>achieved as has been proven by the CAFE Foundation in Santa Rosa,
> >>>California. It got to the point where their comparisons of aircraft
> >>>performance got down to atmospheric stability variables (air rising in a
> >>>low pressure ambient or falling in a high pressure influence) which were
> >>>not only hard to define, but impossible to control.
> >>>A 5 knot speed increase from (Varieze 100 HP O-200) somewhere around 140
> >>>knots to 145 knots would represent a 3.6% gain. This equates to an
> >>>11.2% gain in horsepower. From a motor oil change? Highly doubtful
> >>>and for sure unproven on a fleet basis. This sounds like the genesis
> >>>of a conversation after too many beers.
> >>>This theory was proven empirically to me when my friend replaced his 150
> >>>HP O320 in his Grumman Cheetah with a 180 HP O360, turning it into a
> >>>Grumman Tiger. We knew the performance of the Cheetah from experience
> >>>and guess what? The 20% gain in horsepower resulted in about 5-6% gain
> >>>in IAS (the approximate cube root of the HP ratio). I knew better than
> >>>to nail it down any closer than that because of the previously mentioned
> >>>variables that are almost impossible to control. If you have further
> >>>interest go to their website and read up. By the way -- I won a beer
> >>>on that one. JBB
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Joe Healy wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy" <jhealy@socal.rr.com>
> >>>>
> >>>>I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what it
> >>>>is
> >>>>worth.
> >>>>Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my
> >>>>airport.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>He
> >>
> >>
> >>>>said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
> >>>>What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He
> >>>>asked,
> >>>>"What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
> >>>>So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat generated
> >>>>and
> >>>>more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>longer
> >>
> >>
> >>>>engine life remains to be seen.
> >>>>
> >>>>J. Healy
> >>>>jhealy@socal.rr.com
> >>>>----- Original Message -----
> >>>>From: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> >>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> >>>>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>For the most part it's just preference or opinion or because it's what
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>I've
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>always used. Well here's my opinion and what I currently use in all my
> >>>>>vehicles, including ATV, aircraft and Cummins diesel. Mobil One, 15000
> >>>>>miles between oil changes, easy to find. A little more expensive, but
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>you
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>get what you pay for. Using cheap oil is really false economy, you pay
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>for
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>it in the long run. Why be cheap with the least expensive and most
> >>>>>important maintenance item on your engine?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Larry, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
Nope, don't need another beer, had plenty already. LOL back to you. I just
not a fan of long dissertations. Sorta like asking what time it is and
being told how to build a watch.
The dangers of using leaded gas with synthetic oil is news to me. Nice to
know, I guess. I've been using synthetic oil for years and I'm sure at
times with leaded gas. I don't recall having any oil related problems, in
fact just to opposit..
Do not archive.
Larry Martin, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edward Chmielewski" <edchmiel@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "Edward Chmielewski"
<edchmiel@mindspring.com>
>
> "...quit trying to confuse us with the facts..." ???
>
> I think Larry's the one who needs the beer! LOL!
>
> Ed in JXN
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "flyv35b" <flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
> To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
>
>
> > --> Engines-List message posted by: "flyv35b"
<flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
> >
> > I'm going to jump in here and take James' side on this one. I think
this
> > kind of a response is uncalled for. But besides that, if you didn't
want
> > any opinions or factual information then why did you (or whoever it was)
ask
> > the question in the first place?? If you want to believe that your
snake
> > oil makes your plane go super fast go ahead and believe it. I don't
think
> > any reasonable person cares. Just don't put someone down who was just
> > trying to present some factual information that contradicts your claims.
> > The CAFE foundation did do a lot of good and came up with quite a bit of
> > very useful information about aircraft efficiency that hadn't been
> > documented before and probably put to rest some unfounded rumors in the
> > process.
> >
> > Cliff A&P/IA
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> >
> >
> > > --> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
<jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > >
> > > Larry -
> > > Sorry, I thought maybe dispelling rumor info like this would help
those
> > > less technically informed make better decisions for product choice. I
> > > never assumed it was your info. I'm not a CAFE member or anything but
> > > they have done some good work. JBB
> > >
> > >
> > > Larry Martin wrote:
> > >
> > >>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> > >>
> > >>Wow, I should leave this alone, but I just wish I was that smart. Do
you
> > >>really think anyone gives a rats rear end about CAFE foundation or
> > >>whatever?
> > >>If we want to think good oil makes us go faster, then let us believe
it
> > >>and
> > >>quit trying to confuse us with facts that we don't care about. The
fact
> > >>is
> > >>that reducing fiction by using a better quality oil will improve
> > >>performance, how much may not be measurable, but have not doubt, it
helps.
> > >>Go have another beer.
> > >>
> > >>Do not archive
> > >>.
> > >>Larry Martin, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>----- Original Message -----
> > >>From: "James Baldwin" <jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > >>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> > >>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>--> Engines-List message posted by: James Baldwin
> > >>><jamesbaldwin@dc.rr.com>
> > >>>
> > >>>Gentlemen -
> > >>>This type of ridiculous claim is usually the result of very imperfect
> > >>>control of the factors related to the comparison mentioned below.
> > >>>Theory, and physics, seldom err and in this case the speed increase
> > >>>of an aircraft is proportional to the cube root of the horsepower
ratio
> > >>>of the comparison, ALL OTHER FACTORS REMAINING THE SAME. This is
seldom
> > >>>achieved as has been proven by the CAFE Foundation in Santa Rosa,
> > >>>California. It got to the point where their comparisons of aircraft
> > >>>performance got down to atmospheric stability variables (air rising
in a
> > >>>low pressure ambient or falling in a high pressure influence) which
were
> > >>>not only hard to define, but impossible to control.
> > >>>A 5 knot speed increase from (Varieze 100 HP O-200) somewhere around
140
> > >>>knots to 145 knots would represent a 3.6% gain. This equates to an
> > >>>11.2% gain in horsepower. From a motor oil change? Highly doubtful
> > >>>and for sure unproven on a fleet basis. This sounds like the
genesis
> > >>>of a conversation after too many beers.
> > >>>This theory was proven empirically to me when my friend replaced his
150
> > >>>HP O320 in his Grumman Cheetah with a 180 HP O360, turning it into a
> > >>>Grumman Tiger. We knew the performance of the Cheetah from
experience
> > >>>and guess what? The 20% gain in horsepower resulted in about 5-6%
gain
> > >>>in IAS (the approximate cube root of the HP ratio). I knew better
than
> > >>>to nail it down any closer than that because of the previously
mentioned
> > >>>variables that are almost impossible to control. If you have further
> > >>>interest go to their website and read up. By the way -- I won a
beer
> > >>>on that one. JBB
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Joe Healy wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Joe Healy"
<jhealy@socal.rr.com>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>I have some third hand input that supports the Mobile One. For what
it
> > >>>>is
> > >>>>worth.
> > >>>>Mobile One was recommended to me by another Vari EZ driver at my
> > >>>>airport.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>He
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>said he picked up 5 knots in his EZ just by switching to this oil.
> > >>>>What made him try it was some advice from a drag racing buddy. He
> > >>>>asked,
> > >>>>"What is the fastest oil?" and Mobile One was the answer.
> > >>>>So, apparently this oil results in less friction, less heat
generated
> > >>>>and
> > >>>>more horsepower to the prop. Whether that means less engine wear or
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>longer
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>engine life remains to be seen.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>J. Healy
> > >>>>jhealy@socal.rr.com
> > >>>>----- Original Message -----
> > >>>>From: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> > >>>>To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> > >>>>Subject: Re: Engines-List: RE: OIL
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>For the most part it's just preference or opinion or because it's
what
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>I've
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>always used. Well here's my opinion and what I currently use in
all my
> > >>>>>vehicles, including ATV, aircraft and Cummins diesel. Mobil One,
15000
> > >>>>>miles between oil changes, easy to find. A little more expensive,
but
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>you
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>>get what you pay for. Using cheap oil is really false economy, you
pay
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>for
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>it in the long run. Why be cheap with the least expensive and most
> > >>>>>important maintenance item on your engine?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Larry, N1345L www.angelfire.com/un/ch701
>
>
> --
>
>
--
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|