You know of course that there ARE other benefits of lead. The same for zinc and phosphorous.hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:03 pmUh, lead has A LOT of documented and verified public health effects. No doubt some are suffering from it here!GARY C wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:56 pmSame thing with TEL, now we have millions of water vapor makers on the streets and we are going to die by the second tuesday of next weekClassAct wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:59 pm
The GOV did do it. The GOV mandated catalytic converters and the zinc kills them. There isn't one single moron in the government with the brains to pour piss out of a boot, with instructions on the heel and yet they want to tell automakers and everyone how build what they build.
The government IS the problem.
Go figure the manufacturers have figured out to mass produce engines with compression ratios in excess of 12.5:1 + on unleaded 93 octane gasoline. Lead seems like a band aide in hindsight.
When are you switching to synthetic?
Moderator: Team
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
-
- HotPass
- Posts: 3462
- Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:42 pm
- Location:
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
There are, but in specialty applications. To be nostalgic for flat tappet camshafts and engines with inefficient combustion characteristics that need enhanced knock resistance seems a bit silly.Pete1 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:18 pmYou know of course that there ARE other benefits of lead. The same for zinc and phosphorous.hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:03 pmUh, lead has A LOT of documented and verified public health effects. No doubt some are suffering from it here!
Go figure the manufacturers have figured out to mass produce engines with compression ratios in excess of 12.5:1 + on unleaded 93 octane gasoline. Lead seems like a band aide in hindsight.
-Bob
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
A lot of things are expedient fixes until they get it sorted out. There was a huge push to find higher octane fuels in the 30s and 40s because forced induction meant airplanes were by and large detonation limited as far as power and range were concerned. It was partially a band aid for the still emerging combustion theories but mostly it was a band aid for not having production ready jets yet. We've had 80 years of port and chamber shape refinement and newer technologies like feedback controlled cam timing and multi spray direct injection and, what things do we have today that will be considered to be "band aids" in the future?hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:03 pmUh, lead has A LOT of documented and verified public health effects. No doubt some are suffering from it here!GARY C wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:56 pmSame thing with TEL, now we have millions of water vapor makers on the streets and we are going to die by the second tuesday of next weekClassAct wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:59 pm
The GOV did do it. The GOV mandated catalytic converters and the zinc kills them. There isn't one single moron in the government with the brains to pour piss out of a boot, with instructions on the heel and yet they want to tell automakers and everyone how build what they build.
The government IS the problem.
Go figure the manufacturers have figured out to mass produce engines with compression ratios in excess of 12.5:1 + on unleaded 93 octane gasoline. Lead seems like a band aide in hindsight.
-
- HotPass
- Posts: 3462
- Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:42 pm
- Location:
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
See my post above.peejay wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:21 pmA lot of things are expedient fixes until they get it sorted out. There was a huge push to find higher octane fuels in the 30s and 40s because forced induction meant airplanes were by and large detonation limited as far as power and range were concerned. It was partially a band aid for the still emerging combustion theories but mostly it was a band aid for not having production ready jets yet. We've had 80 years of port and chamber shape refinement and newer technologies like feedback controlled cam timing and multi spray direct injection and, what things do we have today that will be considered to be "band aids" in the future?hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:03 pmUh, lead has A LOT of documented and verified public health effects. No doubt some are suffering from it here!
Go figure the manufacturers have figured out to mass produce engines with compression ratios in excess of 12.5:1 + on unleaded 93 octane gasoline. Lead seems like a band aide in hindsight.
I take exception to somehow, something is wrong with the universe that technology has marched on. It was implied by both posters that something is inherently wrong that oil doesn't need as much zinc / phosphorus and lead isn't in mass produced gasoline anymore. They had their time, but I for one, am not holding onto flat tappet camshafts or poor combustion, nor do I blame it for modern society's woes, and certainly I don't blame it on some sort of government conspiracy theory.
-Bob
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
Never said it was good but only that gov mandated cats pushed out of the market just like zink oils, the difference with the gas is that it was public knowledge as you could by either at the pump for probably a decade after the changes were implemented and then you could buy a lead substitute once tel was completely gone from the pump... unlike the zink oil change that led to no telling how many flat cams and everyone blaming the cam company's for soft cores... consumers paid out the ass and oil manufactured made bank by not disclosing the change to the consumer... Goes back to peoples concern on the Brad Pen thread.hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:03 pmUh, lead has A LOT of documented and verified public health effects. No doubt some are suffering from it here!GARY C wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:56 pmSame thing with TEL, now we have millions of water vapor makers on the streets and we are going to die by the second tuesday of next weekClassAct wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:59 pm
The GOV did do it. The GOV mandated catalytic converters and the zinc kills them. There isn't one single moron in the government with the brains to pour piss out of a boot, with instructions on the heel and yet they want to tell automakers and everyone how build what they build.
The government IS the problem.
Go figure the manufacturers have figured out to mass produce engines with compression ratios in excess of 12.5:1 + on unleaded 93 octane gasoline. Lead seems like a band aide in hindsight.
How much pollutant do you think have been pumped into the air for the 3 decades of changes and development to get us to where we are today?
Last edited by GARY C on Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
It's only a conspiracy if you don't take the time to learn the facts... It's documented history as to what came first and who implemented it!hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:26 pmSee my post above.peejay wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:21 pmA lot of things are expedient fixes until they get it sorted out. There was a huge push to find higher octane fuels in the 30s and 40s because forced induction meant airplanes were by and large detonation limited as far as power and range were concerned. It was partially a band aid for the still emerging combustion theories but mostly it was a band aid for not having production ready jets yet. We've had 80 years of port and chamber shape refinement and newer technologies like feedback controlled cam timing and multi spray direct injection and, what things do we have today that will be considered to be "band aids" in the future?hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:03 pm
Uh, lead has A LOT of documented and verified public health effects. No doubt some are suffering from it here!
Go figure the manufacturers have figured out to mass produce engines with compression ratios in excess of 12.5:1 + on unleaded 93 octane gasoline. Lead seems like a band aide in hindsight.
I take exception to somehow, something is wrong with the universe that technology has marched on. It was implied by both posters that something is inherently wrong that oil doesn't need as much zinc / phosphorus and lead isn't in mass produced gasoline anymore. They had their time, but I for one, am not holding onto flat tappet camshafts or poor combustion, nor do I blame it for modern society's woes, and certainly I don't blame it on some sort of government conspiracy theory.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
-
- HotPass
- Posts: 3462
- Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:42 pm
- Location:
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
Using your last statement, then we should have never progressed to internal combustion engines. How do Flinestone cars suffice?GARY C wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:29 pmNever said it was good but only that gov mandated cats pushed out of the market just like zink oils, the difference with the gas is that it was public knowledge as you could by either at the pump for probably a decade after the changes were implemented and then you could buy a lead substitute one tel was completely gone from the pump... unlike the zink oil change that led to no telling how many flat cams and everyone blaming the cam company's for soft cores... consumers paid out the ass and oil manufactured made bank by not disclosing the change to the consumer... Goes back to peoples concern on the Brad Pen thread.hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:03 pmUh, lead has A LOT of documented and verified public health effects. No doubt some are suffering from it here!
Go figure the manufacturers have figured out to mass produce engines with compression ratios in excess of 12.5:1 + on unleaded 93 octane gasoline. Lead seems like a band aide in hindsight.
How much pollutant do you think have been pumped into the air for the 3 decades of changes and development to get us to where we are today?
The problem is people tend to draw a line in the sand and stop where they want it to stop in history. Judging by the posts here, I'd peg the average poster here around 60yo, and their engine choices / statements / politics seem right in line with that. Go to the typical race track and the demographics are about the same. Hence their being nostalgic about items that others find silly and elicit a "whyyyy?"
There were soft cams, this is documented by several sources and coincided with cores also being hard to obtain due to bankruptcies and other market forces.
Sorry, I misplaced my tinfoil hat.GARY C wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:32 pmIt's only a conspiracy if you don't take the time to learn the facts... It's documented history as to what came first and who implemented it!hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:26 pmSee my post above.peejay wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:21 pm
A lot of things are expedient fixes until they get it sorted out. There was a huge push to find higher octane fuels in the 30s and 40s because forced induction meant airplanes were by and large detonation limited as far as power and range were concerned. It was partially a band aid for the still emerging combustion theories but mostly it was a band aid for not having production ready jets yet. We've had 80 years of port and chamber shape refinement and newer technologies like feedback controlled cam timing and multi spray direct injection and, what things do we have today that will be considered to be "band aids" in the future?
I take exception to somehow, something is wrong with the universe that technology has marched on. It was implied by both posters that something is inherently wrong that oil doesn't need as much zinc / phosphorus and lead isn't in mass produced gasoline anymore. They had their time, but I for one, am not holding onto flat tappet camshafts or poor combustion, nor do I blame it for modern society's woes, and certainly I don't blame it on some sort of government conspiracy theory.
-Bob
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
Your assumptions are nothing short of a conspiracy theory... And an incorrect one at that!hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:34 pmUsing your last statement, then we should have never progressed to internal combustion engines. How do Flinestone cars suffice?GARY C wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:29 pmNever said it was good but only that gov mandated cats pushed out of the market just like zink oils, the difference with the gas is that it was public knowledge as you could by either at the pump for probably a decade after the changes were implemented and then you could buy a lead substitute one tel was completely gone from the pump... unlike the zink oil change that led to no telling how many flat cams and everyone blaming the cam company's for soft cores... consumers paid out the ass and oil manufactured made bank by not disclosing the change to the consumer... Goes back to peoples concern on the Brad Pen thread.hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:03 pm
Uh, lead has A LOT of documented and verified public health effects. No doubt some are suffering from it here!
Go figure the manufacturers have figured out to mass produce engines with compression ratios in excess of 12.5:1 + on unleaded 93 octane gasoline. Lead seems like a band aide in hindsight.
How much pollutant do you think have been pumped into the air for the 3 decades of changes and development to get us to where we are today?
The problem is people tend to draw a line in the sand and stop where they want it to stop in history. Judging by the posts here, I'd peg the average poster here around 60yo, and their engine choices / statements / politics seem right in line with that. Go to the typical race track and the demographics are about the same. Hence their being nostalgic about items that others find silly and elicit a "whyyyy?"
There were soft cams, this is documented by several sources and coincided with cores also being hard to obtain due to bankruptcies and other market forces.
Sorry, I misplaced my tinfoil hat.GARY C wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:32 pmIt's only a conspiracy if you don't take the time to learn the facts... It's documented history as to what came first and who implemented it!hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:26 pm
See my post above.
I take exception to somehow, something is wrong with the universe that technology has marched on. It was implied by both posters that something is inherently wrong that oil doesn't need as much zinc / phosphorus and lead isn't in mass produced gasoline anymore. They had their time, but I for one, am not holding onto flat tappet camshafts or poor combustion, nor do I blame it for modern society's woes, and certainly I don't blame it on some sort of government conspiracy theory.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:43 pmIt sure is nice to sit in traffic and not have a migraine from cars smelling like gasoline. I think most of the population would agree.ClassAct wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:59 pmThe GOV did do it. The GOV mandated catalytic converters and the zinc kills them. There isn't one single moron in the government with the brains to pour piss out of a boot, with instructions on the heel and yet they want to tell automakers and everyone how build what they build.peejay wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:23 pm
"The Gov" didn't do jack. The automakers went to the API and said, you know, we haven't made solid lifter engines since the 80s or 90s, we don't need these additives in the oil, and if you make a new spec that doesn't require so many high pressure additives, we can meet long-term emissions targets with smaller, cheaper converters.
The government IS the problem.
Also, as pointed out, the automakers drove the change. Also, why would an oil company go through the expense of putting something in their product that isn't needed. That's how capitalism works #USA. I know that doesn't fit your narrative, but probably not much does.
Can someone explain to me why conventional oil is better for breaking in than synthetic? Wondering what everyone's thought process is here.
Seems to me the additive package matters a lot more than the base stock source, and with synthetic having better thermal and shear stability, seems the better choice considering the heat put off by an engine wearing in.
It's sad to see intelligent people so ignorant of the truth. What a joke. I'm done with this thread. If I wanted to deal with Marxists I join a gun forum.
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
The ICE is a bandaidpeejay wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:21 pmA lot of things are expedient fixes until they get it sorted out. There was a huge push to find higher octane fuels in the 30s and 40s because forced induction meant airplanes were by and large detonation limited as far as power and range were concerned. It was partially a band aid for the still emerging combustion theories but mostly it was a band aid for not having production ready jets yet. We've had 80 years of port and chamber shape refinement and newer technologies like feedback controlled cam timing and multi spray direct injection and, what things do we have today that will be considered to be "band aids" in the future?hoffman900 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:03 pmUh, lead has A LOT of documented and verified public health effects. No doubt some are suffering from it here!
Go figure the manufacturers have figured out to mass produce engines with compression ratios in excess of 12.5:1 + on unleaded 93 octane gasoline. Lead seems like a band aide in hindsight.
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
Why does everyone say that like a bandaid is a bad thing? I'm sporting a 2" square one right now that is all that remains of the 10" specimen that was protecting an abdominal incision incurred during a recent internal plumbing repair..
Felix, qui potuit rerum cognscere causas.
Happy is he who can discover the cause of things.
Happy is he who can discover the cause of things.
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
It's a cover for a cut you got when you could not actually deal with the subject at hand.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
-
- HotPass
- Posts: 3462
- Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:42 pm
- Location:
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
You seemed to have glossed over my question of what is the technical basis for conventional vs. synthetic for break in. Looking for more than “everyone else does it”.GARY C wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 3:34 amIt's a cover for a cut you got when you could not actually deal with the subject at hand.
-Bob
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
Take the risk of thinking for yourself, much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come to you that way. -Hitchens
Re: When are you switching to synthetic?
It doesn't work as well so it's controlled wearhoffman900 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 6:49 amYou seemed to have glossed over my question of what is the technical basis for conventional vs. synthetic for break in. Looking for more than “everyone else does it”.