Adding two-stroke oil for lubricity - this study says NO.

[Drock]

Bingo.

If you don't control the variables, you don't get data, you get noise.

There's no way to control the variables, so there's no way to get anything but noise.

The good news is, there's one thing even worse than noise:

Thinking that noise is data. That mistake is all over the Internet.

I don't know? I wouldn't call it noise, I'd call it real world data. After all no one drives their cars & trucks in a lab. For instance what's the average lifespan of a 6.2L CUCV, 200-400,000 miles? And what's the most common engine failure? We basically have 30 years of data to sort through, we would just need to break it down by the type of oil & fuel available and used at any given time. Did we see a spike in engine failures around 2000 when they took the Zink out of oil? Or how about when they started adding ethanol to the fuels? Did they change something with diesel when they took the lead out of gasoline?

 

[rustystud]

Confounding variables.

The basis of scientific analysis is control the variables then pick one you’d like to focus on to see how it changes under changing conditions.

All of us are starting with old - in some cases 30 to 50 years old - engines of dubious service and maintenance (Hey, private Snuffy, did you get the oil changed in those 15 HMMWVs like I asked you? Of course Snuffy got to 12 of them, had to go find filters, got sidetracked, forgot, the trucks were needed that day for an op so he just checked that box and let ‘em go), operating conditions were different in Florida panhandle, Texas, Montana, Alaska, So Cal with respect to heat, humidity, salt water, fuel additives, original break in, highway speeds vs a life spent tooling around base with the ever-widening bottom of the base commander taking up the right seat.

Or was your engine one that got run b*lls to the wall in desert heat, sand, silica dust that got past the air filter every day with the fan running 90% duty cycle midday.

65 on the highway? Hauling max load? Abuse none of us (save those who can afford to buy these by the dozen at auction and scrap one or two without loss) would think of doing to “our babies” on a daily or even once a year mud run basis?

Then after years of this, they got parked, sat for many more years on end with no maintenance, acids in the oils eating at the internals until one of us rescued the beast, changed the oils, the S3 box, glow plugs, added ZDDP for insurance and fired the thing right up.

what kind of reproducible results can come from this?

Metal wear in the engine? Was this analysis done prior to the first oil change in ten years as a basis for comparison?

Then you got your internal components coming from multiple manufacturers and, while held to the strictest MILSPEC guidelines, there are small variances in metal alloy uniformity, machining, fit and finish all of which can concatenate to affect wear, tear and longevity.

I’m reminded of the old Lada and Yugo factory stories where soviet citizens said never to buy a car made on a Monday or a Friday. Monday the factory workers were too hung over to pay attention while on Friday they were preoccupied with the weekend and getting into the condition that would lead to their Monday hangover and cut corners to meet quotas.

Total Quality Management is great in theory, but...


So data gathered from any such prospective analysis could at best show trend lines- maybe - but I don’t think it would be definitive in any sense.

I’m sure I missed some things; field expedient repairs, engine rebuilds, oil pump/water cooler failures, other things that could affect engine performance, wear and usable life while still meeting minimums for reuse. My engine has a tag on it showing it was rebuilt (heads, if not the entire engine) in 2009 at Ft. Lewis, WA (for a truck that spent its life in North Carolina). How does that kind of “reset” affect such a data base?

Would that we could ALL start with pristine, fresh, blueprinted engines with break-in oil and uniformly controllable environmental and operating variables from which to collect meaningful data.

NB


PS: Thanks for the note on the roller lifters. Funny, I poked around on that hot rod forum and elsewhere and was under the impression that pretty much any engine built after 1990 had them. I guess not.

OK, you make a good point.

 

[HelluvaEngineer]

Probably waaaay off the reservation now, but I just noticed this. Maybe it's been around forever but I had never seen it. (Yes I realize the ad says "NEW!")

 

[NormB]

Probably waaaay off the reservation now, but I just noticed this. Maybe it's been around forever but I had never seen it. (Yes I realize the ad says "NEW!")
View attachment 710157

It say “diesel” anywhere in that ad?

 

[HelluvaEngineer]

It say “diesel” anywhere in that ad?

If I blend it with some diesel oil is that worse than the diesel oil I blend on my gas engine?

Sent from my VIVO XL using Tapatalk

 

[MarcusOReallyus]

I don't know? I wouldn't call it noise, I'd call it real world data.

It's noise. If you don't know what other things are changing, you can't draw any valid conclusion about the results you get. You don't know what else might have caused the effect you are seeing.

 

[98G]

It's noise. If you don't know what other things are changing, you can't draw any valid conclusion about the results you get. You don't know what else might have caused the effect you are seeing.

Yes but...

Many times those running the studies have a result they want to see and they massage the data to reflect that result.

So I'm not sure which is worse - untampered data polluted with so much noise it's unintelligible, or noise free data that has been tampered with to reflect the results that those performing the study want to see.

Example - the EPA website claims that tampering with emissions equipment will result in worse fuel economy. Many many many real world examples show the opposite is true.

Want examples from the medical field? I have a whole bunch...

Without delving too far into politics, it's impossible to find a study on climate change that isn't conducted by someone with an agenda. You see results framed as "see? Anthropogenic climate shift is certain! ", or "see? It's all pullshot!" Either way, the results were dictated prior to the study being performed, and the study was either framed to yield those results, or the data was massaged after the fact.

With regard to motor vehicles we have several sources of potential bias -

1) "I want to sell you some snake oil"

2) "I want your dirty diesel off the road, so anything that accelerates wear is a step to the good."

3) "I'm more concerned about emissions than I am about the longevity of your engine"

I'm sure you can think of your own examples...

Edit - some reading relevant to statistics manipulation

http://www.larryniven.net/reasoning/img0.shtml

 

[Drock]

I still think the most accurate information your going to get is from owners themselves. For example how did we all figure out that we should do the "dog head" relay mod? By collectively coming to the conclusion that this was a common problem, and coming up with a solution. So same can be said about engine failure, what's the most common internal item to fail on the 6.2 and what's the best way to combat the problem? As I said before the oil companies own the car companies. Therefore they have a vested interest in old vehicles failing, and new vehicles being purchased.

 

[rustystud]

Yes but...

Many times those running the studies have a result they want to see and they massage the data to reflect that result.

So I'm not sure which is worse - untampered data polluted with so much noise it's unintelligible, or noise free data that has been tampered with to reflect the results that those performing the study want to see.

Example - the EPA website claims that tampering with emissions equipment will result in worse fuel economy. Many many many real world examples show the opposite is true.

Want examples from the medical field? I have a whole bunch...

Without delving too far into politics, it's impossible to find a study on climate change that isn't conducted by someone with an agenda. You see results framed as "see? Anthropogenic climate shift is certain! ", or "see? It's all pullshot!" Either way, the results were dictated prior to the study being performed, and the study was either framed to yield those results, or the data was massaged after the fact.

With regard to motor vehicles we have several sources of potential bias -

1) "I want to sell you some snake oil"

2) "I want your dirty diesel off the road, so anything that accelerates wear is a step to the good."

3) "I'm more concerned about emissions than I am about the longevity of your engine"

I'm sure you can think of your own examples...

Edit - some reading relevant to statistics manipulation

http://www.larryniven.net/reasoning/img0.shtml

You hit the nail on the head with this statement ! That's why I've said from the beginning, you will never get "real" data from either the vehicle manufactures or the oil companies or the government. All have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are now.
So I will err on the side of caution and add my oil and fuel additives. Just to be on the safe side.

 

[rustystud]

I still think the most accurate information your going to get is from owners themselves. For example how did we all figure out that we should do the "dog head" relay mod? By collectively coming to the conclusion that this was a common problem, and coming up with a solution. So same can be said about engine failure, what's the most common internal item to fail on the 6.2 and what's the best way to combat the problem? As I said before the oil companies own the car companies. Therefore they have a vested interest in old vehicles failing, and new vehicles being purchased.

Your correct. All we can rely on is antidotal data from other vehicle owners. Has this helped you ? Yes, No. Did your engine last longer then the last one ? Has your injection pump problem gone away ? Have you lost another cam again ? If you add up all the answers from the tens of thousands of military vehicle owners you can come up with a pretty good idea of what works and what doesn't. I mean really, how many times do we have to tell someone that you need the little cork in the axle to keep the differential oil from washing out the grease in your wheel bearings ? Is that a "scientifically" researched answer ? Of course not, but we all know it is the correct answer. There are hundreds of answers just like that one all gleaned from the "collective consciousness" . OK I couldn't help myself with that "Star Trek Borg" reference , but the statement is a true one. The only problem is, how do we implement it ?

 

[dependable]

how many times do we have to tell someone that you need the little cork in the axle to keep the differential oil from washing out the grease in your wheel bearings ?

That's a new one on me. Is that a joke, like blinker fluid? (seriously).

 

[Swamp Donkey]

That's a new one on me. Is that a joke, like blinker fluid? (seriously).

No joke. They seal the keyway on the rear axle spindles.

 

[NormB]

You know what they say you're doing when you ASSuME. [no reflection on Swamp Donkey ]

Most of my adult life I've been under the assumption that

- Engine R&D routinely involves TQM methodologies of design, assembly, TESTING, then fielding for "real world" performance data.

- Said R&D would include fluids, additives, filters and MTBF estimation.

- MILSPEC requirements are even MORE stringent than those applying to vehicles/equipment/gewgaws (parts) for general civilian consumption/use/applications.

I know this is wrong. Anecdotally, at least, I just know it is.

Being in the medical field going on 30 years, I've seen what carefully controlled lab condition and clinical trials vs. real world efficacy and side effects are produced. Meds once considered as safe as water (in which umpteen thousands of people drown every year from mop buckets, bath tubs, public pools to oceans in the presence and under the watchful eye of parents and trained professional lifeguards even - so take that simile with a grain of salt, which... don't get me started) get yanked off the market within a year not because of the MED so much as OTHER things it can interfere with, and the list of "under one per cent" reported side effects from the venerable PDR has ALWAYS interested me more than the "10% - or 30% - of patients report" side effects. Treat a few thousand or hundred thousand people and pretty soon those untoward side effects become a real number - and a real problem.

The best and the brightest, and CDC, FDA, NIH, WHO and other alphabet agencies telling me those meds are "safe" and "effective" don't give me a warm and fuzzy copacetic feeling any more. Especially with what I know about FDA politics and things like Sudafed-PE vs. -PSE or even Mucinex' (alleged) active ingredient or what happened with Baycol or many other once-popular meds.

Anyway...

I've mentioned my sister and brother-in-law own a first year civilian H1 hatchback. It's loaded. Even has AC, which is a must in south Florida. Through heat, MORE heat, humidity, and floods (they don't have the fording kit although I've suggested it - they haven't needed it for 25 years, why get one now?), they've got upwards of 240,000 miles on it.

BIL is a senior airframe and powerplant mechanic (they own several companies on the space coast) and I should ask him what his maintenance schedule has been. And which engine they've got.

More anecdotal information, but it's interesting.

My neighbor has a ten year old Ram diesel with close to 200k miles and it doesn't use a drop of oil.

When I look at ads for used diesel pickups (still thinking about it, although I like my Tacoma, if I won the lottery I'd have a duramax power pack installed), they routinely have upwards of several hundred thousand miles on them "highway miles" (sure, and if you believe that, I have a line on 1,000/acre waterfront property in West Palm Beach for you, just send $100 for details and an investment package). Is this normal?

When's the last time you heard of a military vehicle of the same vintage with similar roots and longevity?

I'm still contemplating a spare engine/transmission to put in a crate in my garage down in TN until I can get around to "blueprinting" it - disassemble, measure, replace, rebuild - then put it aside for my kids to sell off at my estate sale because you just KNOW the rules of the universe favor the prepared, and with one in store I'll likely NEVER have to replace mine. Then again, at the rate I'm going, it'll take about 333 years just to break the 100,000 mile mark, but you never know. Better to have it and not need it, right?

NB

 

[frank8003]

That's a new one on me. Is that a joke, like blinker fluid? (seriously).

You mean you can buy them!?
I had to make my own. Just try to find a bottle of cheap wine now with real cork in it.
I tried lots of cheap wine before I found a real cork!

 

[dependable]

^I'd be SOL, as I primarily drink beer.

That is kind of strange though, all the trucks I've worked on, the rear wheel bearings are supposed to be running in gear oil, and some of them went back into the 1950s. From what I can see by searching, the use of corks were pretty much limited to M series trucks.

 

[Swamp Donkey]

View attachment 710375

You mean you can buy them!?
I had to make my own. Just try to find a bottle of cheap wine now with real cork in it.
I tried lots of cheap wine before I found a real cork!
View attachment 710370View attachment 710371View attachment 710372View attachment 710373View attachment 710374

They are available. That pack of 50 cost me $11 shipped. They came sealed in a single military foilbacked package as a quantity of 50. Run that NSN with the dashes through Ebay.

 

[The FLU farm]

That is kind of strange though, all the trucks I've worked on, the rear wheel bearings are supposed to be running in gear oil, and some of them went back into the 1950s. From what I can see by searching, the use of corks were pretty much limited to M series trucks.

That's what I was wondering; what about the wheel bearings I have that are made to and running happily in oil?!?

At one point I did try keeping the oil in my Jeep's rear full floater from getting into the bearings, but soon realized that not only was that work, it was completely unnecessary work.

 

[rustystud]

That's a new one on me. Is that a joke, like blinker fluid? (seriously).

I guess we have to tell one more !

 

[Floridianson]

I agree, this was a well done study. Note that it had to be done by "private" individuals. The fuel companies would never do a study like this as they know the outcome already. I posted an article from the "Independent Fuel Station Association" (which my best friend belongs to since he owns a gas station) on the Deuce forum. In this article they where talking about the newer motor oils that meet the new emissions standards. The oil companies knew the oil was bad on older tappet cam engines and gave advice to the station owners on how to "deflect" car owners from suing due to engine damage. This information never came to light for the general public of course, but all us diesel mechanics knew about it. The same has happened with diesel fuel. Spin the information until all the older engines are gone, then there is no worries ! Makes a person extremely angry, but what can you do ? They have the media in their pockets and the blessing of the Government since it was the government which forced the change. There is correct information out there but you need to dig for it, and if you post it you will have a ton of payed "Trolls" dispute it all day long. It's the world we live in now.

What do you guys think about starting a thread just on the oil thing.
Rusty your were driving that train so would you do the honors of starting a thread?
This thread is

 

[rustystud]

What do you guys think about starting a thread just on the oil thing.
Rusty your were driving that train so would you do the honors of starting a thread?
This thread is

I was hoping someone with computer skills would step up and make some kind of spread sheet we could all post to. This will take a few years to get enough data compiled to make an honest assessment of any oils used.