[QUOTE="jim"] "thread"[/QUOTE] Made more sense before
That conclusion has long ago been shown to be not correct. Using dirty oil did not produce less wear. It produced less evidence of wear. Diminished effectiveness of the detergents and dispersants in the oil is the cause of less evidence of wear particles in the oil. This study demonstrates exactly why oil analysis can be misleading and why Cummins engines advises against using oil analysis for determining oil change intervals. When oil gets old and dirty it no longer has the same capacity to hold wear particles in suspension that clean oil does. That doesn't mean there was less wear in the study it only means there were fewer wear particles found in the oil. You seem to think that you are the first person in the entire world to stumble upon this study that has been kicking around for 10 years. Let me clue you in. You are not some messenger from heaven spreading the gospel of truth and enlightenment to the masses. For one thing the masses are already pretty convinced you don't have a clue. For another what you consider information is a crock of shit. If dirty oil was more valuable than clean oil I would be able to drain the oil out of my engine at 3000 miles and sell it as "partially stressed conditioned" oil for more than I paid for it new.
That conclusion has long ago been shown to be not correct. Using dirty oil did not produce less wear. It produced less evidence of wear. Diminished effectiveness of the detergents and dispersants in the oil is the cause of less evidence of wear particles in the oil. This study demonstrates exactly why oil analysis can be misleading and why Cummins engines advises against using oil analysis for determining oil change intervals. When oil gets old and dirty it no longer has the same capacity to hold wear particles in suspension that clean oil does. That doesn't mean there was less wear in the study it only means there were fewer wear particles found in the oil. You seem to think that you are the first person in the entire world to stumble upon this study that has been kicking around for 10 years. Let me clue you in. You are not some messenger from heaven spreading the gospel of truth and enlightenment to the masses. For one thing the masses are already pretty convinced you don't have a clue. For another what you consider information is a crock of shit. If dirty oil was more valuable than clean oil I would be able to drain the oil out of my engine at 3000 miles and sell it as "partially stressed conditioned" oil for more than I paid for it new.
wow, the mental gymnastics continue! would this translate into witchdoctorese as "dead chickens don't heal broken legs, they simply hide evidence of breakage"? where did you get this little nugget from cowboy? it's not from anything presented here! eh??? no it doesn't! no they don't. read the cites. at end of life. analysis determines that end of life. like a fuel gauge determines when your tank is empty! sorry if that's a hard concept to grasp. wow! have you ever heard of "logic"? 'cos you're not using any. whatever you say dude. you just keep on denying what you don't want to know and you'll go to your grave just as ignorant as you are today. just try not to piss in the knowledge pool too much for other people while you're on your way.
wow, the mental gymnastics continue! would this translate into witchdoctorese as "dead chickens don't heal broken legs, they simply hide evidence of breakage"? where did you get this little nugget from cowboy? it's not from anything presented here! eh??? no it doesn't! no they don't. read the cites. at end of life. analysis determines that end of life. like a fuel gauge determines when your tank is empty! sorry if that's a hard concept to grasp. wow! have you ever heard of "logic"? 'cos you're not using any. whatever you say dude. you just keep on denying what you don't want to know and you'll go to your grave just as ignorant as you are today. just try not to piss in the knowledge pool too much for other people while you're on your way.
It is pretty plain English, but who knows how it might translate into your fantasy. Well it was, but you were pretty busy madly typing "Bullshit" and "see above" And of course as usual you can't say why. Geez did your feeble mind forget the quote from Cummins already? "Cummins Inc. does not recommend that oil analysis be used to determine maintenance intervals." The question is/was what does the study you presented as evidence show? It does not show that oil gets better as it gets dirty - only a fool would believe that. And once again you show how baffled you are. If you see a flaw in logic why don't you explain what it is instead of jumping up and down and chattering like a monkey. Well i must say you are consistent. You continue to be in anguish that someone might be polluting your fantasy. But hey maybe I've got you all wrong. Would you like to buy some used oil? I'll give you a super deal only $4/qt of a special blend of pre-stressed oil. Send me $40 and $10 for shipping and handling and your mailing address and i will send you 10 quarts of the finest pre-stressed conditioned oil. But don't dawdle this is a limited once in a life time offer. -jim
It is pretty plain English, but who knows how it might translate into your fantasy. Well it was, but you were pretty busy madly typing "Bullshit" and "see above" And of course as usual you can't say why. Geez did your feeble mind forget the quote from Cummins already? "Cummins Inc. does not recommend that oil analysis be used to determine maintenance intervals." The question is/was what does the study you presented as evidence show? It does not show that oil gets better as it gets dirty - only a fool would believe that. And once again you show how baffled you are. If you see a flaw in logic why don't you explain what it is instead of jumping up and down and chattering like a monkey. Well i must say you are consistent. You continue to be in anguish that someone might be polluting your fantasy. But hey maybe I've got you all wrong. Would you like to buy some used oil? I'll give you a super deal only $4/qt of a special blend of pre-stressed oil. Send me $40 and $10 for shipping and handling and your mailing address and i will send you 10 quarts of the finest pre-stressed conditioned oil. But don't dawdle this is a limited once in a life time offer. -jim
jim wrote: Too-lean mixtures combined with unleaded gasoline and valves and seats made from materials designed to work with leaded gas caused this often during the transition from leaded to unleaded gas, with no chunks of carbon involved.
jim wrote: Too-lean mixtures combined with unleaded gasoline and valves and seats made from materials designed to work with leaded gas caused this often during the transition from leaded to unleaded gas, with no chunks of carbon involved.
thing is, what you understand comes out of your mouth. but reality and your mouth don't seem to be connected. but the fault is mine for daring to say so, right? well dude, i'm many things - insufferably pedantic, potty mouthed, a royal prick, etc. but i also say it just how it is. and when someone like you starts spewing bullshit, i'll say so. if you don't like it, don't bullshit. real simple! i can't say why you can read one thing and then misconstrue it to mean something else!!! well, i can, but then i'd be calling you "stupid" and "bullshitter" again, right? and apparently you don't like that. those are your words. you have not cited a source that i can verify. otoh, /i/ cited cummins saying the opposite with things like "an oil analysis program is strongly recommended" and advertising their change interval extension options. apparently that doesn't bother you, but you've not evidenced any ability to read or understand, so why change now? er, let me reinsert my words that you so carefully snipped: 'eh? in http://www.swri.org/3pubs/IRD1999/03912699.htm, in the "Accomplishments" section, it states: "Testing with partially stressed oil, which contained some wear debris, produced less wear than testing with clean oil." ' that's pretty straight language to most folks. apparently not comprehensible to you though. er, so if you get locked into an airtight chamber, and after an hour or so, you turn blue and start to hyperventilate, that's not lack of oxygen, it's merely lack of evidence of oxygen? that sounds like an experiment you're familiar with! you want fries with that logical thinking diploma you have? here, try some bedtime reading: http://www.npower-oilanalysis.com/ http://www.everytime.cummins.com/sites/every/applications/oil_gas/qst30_o_g.page?section=maintenance
thing is, what you understand comes out of your mouth. but reality and your mouth don't seem to be connected. but the fault is mine for daring to say so, right? well dude, i'm many things - insufferably pedantic, potty mouthed, a royal prick, etc. but i also say it just how it is. and when someone like you starts spewing bullshit, i'll say so. if you don't like it, don't bullshit. real simple! i can't say why you can read one thing and then misconstrue it to mean something else!!! well, i can, but then i'd be calling you "stupid" and "bullshitter" again, right? and apparently you don't like that. those are your words. you have not cited a source that i can verify. otoh, /i/ cited cummins saying the opposite with things like "an oil analysis program is strongly recommended" and advertising their change interval extension options. apparently that doesn't bother you, but you've not evidenced any ability to read or understand, so why change now? er, let me reinsert my words that you so carefully snipped: 'eh? in http://www.swri.org/3pubs/IRD1999/03912699.htm, in the "Accomplishments" section, it states: "Testing with partially stressed oil, which contained some wear debris, produced less wear than testing with clean oil." ' that's pretty straight language to most folks. apparently not comprehensible to you though. er, so if you get locked into an airtight chamber, and after an hour or so, you turn blue and start to hyperventilate, that's not lack of oxygen, it's merely lack of evidence of oxygen? that sounds like an experiment you're familiar with! you want fries with that logical thinking diploma you have? here, try some bedtime reading: http://www.npower-oilanalysis.com/ http://www.everytime.cummins.com/sites/every/applications/oil_gas/qst30_o_g.page?section=maintenance
I did not say all burnt valves were caused by carbon and I agree most are not. The ones that have large holes that look like they were cut with a cutting torch are the ones that indicate that the valve burn happened all at once. the valve goes from being whole to having a big hole in just a few milliseconds. How do I know this? because all burnt exhaust valves are self-limiting. They burn so far and then the cylinder can't fire and the valve will not burn any more after that. The only way a hole can get that big is for it to happen all at once. It can't happen gradually because the hole would stop getting bigger long before it got to that size. Anyway the point I was making is not how the valve burned but that what you do can have consequences under rare circumstances that never get traced back to root causes. You can never really no for sure what you might have done differently that could have produced a different outcome. The best you can do is play the odds. -jim
I did not say all burnt valves were caused by carbon and I agree most are not. The ones that have large holes that look like they were cut with a cutting torch are the ones that indicate that the valve burn happened all at once. the valve goes from being whole to having a big hole in just a few milliseconds. How do I know this? because all burnt exhaust valves are self-limiting. They burn so far and then the cylinder can't fire and the valve will not burn any more after that. The only way a hole can get that big is for it to happen all at once. It can't happen gradually because the hole would stop getting bigger long before it got to that size. Anyway the point I was making is not how the valve burned but that what you do can have consequences under rare circumstances that never get traced back to root causes. You can never really no for sure what you might have done differently that could have produced a different outcome. The best you can do is play the odds. -jim
The fault is yours Yes. When confronted with a simple question or a statement of fact you tuck your tail between your legs and run run run. You forgot "clue less" in your list of attributes. I wouldn't care what you said if it were said with any honesty. If fools like you honestly believed that dirty oil protects an engine from wear better than clean oil then all the people who change their oil at 3000 miles would be selling their used oil to fools like you at a profit. I just checked on Ebay - there is not one person selling used oil on Ebay. Why is that? Oh I'm sorry I asked another question now you have to go run and hide again. What good is a source that you can verify? You are a fool. Your verification is completely worthless. If you weren't such a lazy whiner you would have cut and past that quote from Cummins into Google and it would take you right to the document from Cummins: http://www.cummins.dk/fileadmin/dokumenter/Pdf_filer/Cummins_Litteratur/Olie_3810340-04.htm Here is another quote from Cummins that bears directly on the question of wear particles found in used oil analysis:
The fault is yours Yes. When confronted with a simple question or a statement of fact you tuck your tail between your legs and run run run. You forgot "clue less" in your list of attributes. I wouldn't care what you said if it were said with any honesty. If fools like you honestly believed that dirty oil protects an engine from wear better than clean oil then all the people who change their oil at 3000 miles would be selling their used oil to fools like you at a profit. I just checked on Ebay - there is not one person selling used oil on Ebay. Why is that? Oh I'm sorry I asked another question now you have to go run and hide again. What good is a source that you can verify? You are a fool. Your verification is completely worthless. If you weren't such a lazy whiner you would have cut and past that quote from Cummins into Google and it would take you right to the document from Cummins: http://www.cummins.dk/fileadmin/dokumenter/Pdf_filer/Cummins_Litteratur/Olie_3810340-04.htm Here is another quote from Cummins that bears directly on the question of wear particles found in used oil analysis:
