If anyone still cares about very good oil products, I have used this for 25 years or so. Has consistently provided a 3% power boost in internal combustion engines, great anti-wear also. No affiliation btw...
Power Up Lubricants NNL 690, NNL 690G, Diesel FX, Gen49D, HydraMaxx, Genesis, Thixogrease, RCL 1000, Pen 2000 - Home
Power Up Lubricants NNL 690, NNL 690G, Diesel FX, Gen49D, HydraMaxx, Genesis, Thixogrease, RCL 1000, Pen 2000 - Home
I believe, indeed, that we can ignore the distortions that come from the non linearity of the suspension because it will be the same in both cases.
I know, of course, what are the causes of the magnetic non linearity. Including Eddy current (while I ignore why Jean Bernard Leon Foucault is called Eddy by English people ;-).
But, if the current is the same in both situations, and if it is true that a 0 Ohm source produce more distortion, why ? You did not answer this question.
A 3% power boost seems improbable. I am deeply suspicious of any aftermarket oil additives - most are garbage. If this stuff performed as claimed, race teams would be using it. As far as I know, the only additive with even a bit of credibility is molybdenum disulfide.
Yes -
Power UP - Bob Is The Oil Guy
Another chlorinated paraffin additive. Not good, would never use it. Automotive snake oil.
Last edited:
Yikes, good call Chris: chlorinated anti-wear agents in general were removed from PCEO (Passenger Car Engine Oil) in the 1940s due to grain boundary etching and corrosion, yet they live on in the form of scam additives. You can tell some of these by their commercials using the Timken tester. If they used straight chlorine bleach it would even outperform ANY additive on that machine...yet spell disaster for an engine in short order.
Re: MoS2 additives; they are counter-indicated in PCEO, the hydrodynamic lubrication regime employed by plain bearing systems is intolerant of any particles. When using clean oil the bearing/journal surfaces will not touch but the oil film between them can be in the 1/10s of a micron thickness under load. MoS2 has 3 issues when suspended in PCEO: settling, filter removal and clumping which can eventually scar bearings and journals. For more info:https://zddplus.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/TechBrief11-Internal-Combustion-Engine-Lubrication.pdf
If one keeps oil clean and with a sufficient anti-wear additive per OEM specs, there is no metal-to-metal contact needing a solid-phase lubricant such as MoS2 to remediate friction. ZDDP and increasingly Boron-based liquid anti-wear chemicals provide excellent performance without the solid-phase disadvantages.
As penny-pinching as automotive manufacturers are, if they thought they could save a dollar a car in warranty claims by using any additive, it would be a no-brainer for them to do so. Believe it or not, the OEM engineers know what lubricants are available and design the engines for maximum performance and life using those that work the best. They spend millions on 3rd party testing done by independent labs like SWRI. I've had the pleasure of working with them as well and their testing rigor is not to be believed!
Also, considering the CAFE average costs to OEMs, if they could do ANYTHING to gain even a few tenths of a MPG, it would be a no-brainer for them to be specified, but additives claiming huge mileage benefits continue to scam the public. Caveat Emptor.
Cheers,
Howie
Hey Richard!
Although Lucas Oil Stabilizer (LOS) as a long-chain paraffinic molecule has good high-pressure lubrication properties, it should never be used as a PCEO additive for one important reason: that long tangled polymer chain entrains air. This was brought to the fore by SWRI testing and reported on the Bob Is The Oil Guy site...and Lucas successfully sued to have it removed: Page Not Found - Bob is the Oil Guy. Fortunately for the observant purchaser, Lucas has those clear gearboxes on auto store counters, and this characteristic can be easily demonstrated yourself. It would be especially evident if you could compare it with one of the gearboxes loaded with plain API-rated oil.
Releasing air is a critical aspect of PCEO performance, foam has really poor high-pressure film characteristics, and oil must release entrained air rapidly in the sump before being pumped back into the bearings. Indeed to pass API certification all oils must pass ASTM D892-Foaming and D3427-Air Release testing. The addition of the LOS caused oils to fail both tests.
That's all I will say on the subject, Lucas has good lawyers and I'm poor.
Cheers!
Howie
Not sure that test is similar to what happens in car engine... oil filter seperates water and air bubbles for a stream of pure oil. After driving, look at the oil dip stick ... see if there is foamed oil.
Many Top Fuel dragsters use a ProLong oil. Can use just its additive to your favorite oil.
-RNM
Prolong is another chlorinated paraffin additive, seems to be a clone of the Power Up stuff that was just discussed. Just more crap that ruins engines in the long run. A street car isn't a top fuel dragster, either. They most likely use that brand because they are paid to.
It seems there is no generally safe and effective off-the-shelf additive, or it would already be in the oil's additive package already.
I would argue that top fuel is such a specialised application (and none of the oil actually gets back to the sump) that a lube pack for an engine that does around 1000 revolutions between rebuilds is not a good indication of long service life.
Given my Passat was driven hard for 290,000 miles on the oil recommended in the manual I would never put an additive in a modern engine. A track block which is made as loose as possible whilst still holding compression might be different.
Fun fact on modern engines. The block of choice about 12 years ago for kit car makers became the ford 2 litre or 2.3 duratec. Designed for economy, emissions and robotic assembly, which meant it flowed amazingly well out the box and 100HP/litre was easy and reliable.
200HP in a 600kg car is a lot of fun.
Given my Passat was driven hard for 290,000 miles on the oil recommended in the manual I would never put an additive in a modern engine. A track block which is made as loose as possible whilst still holding compression might be different.
Fun fact on modern engines. The block of choice about 12 years ago for kit car makers became the ford 2 litre or 2.3 duratec. Designed for economy, emissions and robotic assembly, which meant it flowed amazingly well out the box and 100HP/litre was easy and reliable.
200HP in a 600kg car is a lot of fun.
The advantage of a current source as an amp is that the amplifier cannot produce reactive current. That is what I believe results in lower distortion compared to a voltage source (note I use my words very carefully here). But because the current stays the same with frequency, then as that rises, you are driving it harder compared to a voltage source and hence more distortion (and rising response since the driver was designed to be flatter under voltage drive). No ideal, but might still measure better, but what solution are you going to apply to fix the rising response? Current drive is not the solution IMO.
I don't see that is a factor. This is about distortion IMO. This is what people are hearing when they add that parallel resistor we have talked about - and it seems that this practice is becoming more common with designers, but hush-hush!
This lowering of distortion should be measurable and some measurements show that it is. Here those measurements using current sources definitely points to lower harmonic distortion of the driver. And this distortion then is current related, not so much voltage.
I am not entirely convinced by PWM amplifiers. They can sound alright, but never heard a truly great sound from them. I am spoiled because I have heard amps that can do that.
You are quite correct about the 18 Ohm. But we heard more...
Can you explain the 8R parallel resistor (my preference to 18R series)?
That has no affect on the response, and yet we hear an improvement that I believe can be ascribed to lower distortion. I intend to measure and hope to prove it. Will you wish me good luck?
Absolutely! - IF you only measure the voltage side.
Remember what I said earlier:
The voltage tells us what we should be hearing, but the current tells us what we are actually hearing.
I believe I am on good ground to say that, the driver responds to current through the voice coil and not the voltage across its terminals. An ideal voltage source will fix the voltage, which is the same as seeing no distortion there, no matter the load. The voltage is not the problem, it is what we want to hear.
But the amplifier can produce distortion on the current side. That takes a bit to wrap one's mind around. It was not easy for me, not at the beginning.
Now let me tell you(all):
I am a strong belever that we should measure (I^2)R and not VR = W
I am a strong belever that we should measure V[expected]/W = 1+Distorton
(where W[expected] is (V[generated]^2)/R)
(where R should be calculated by applying network theory on the load(loudspeaker) model, for each(any) frequency being used(measured))
(this for practical situations where an amplifiers performance has to be evaluated(measured))
I am a strong belever that we should measure (I^2)R and not VR = W
I am a strong belever that we should measure V[expected]/W = 1+Distorton
(where W[expected] is (V[generated]^2)/R)
(where R should be calculated by applying network theory on the load(loudspeaker) model, for each(any) frequency being used(measured))
(this for practical situations where an amplifiers performance has to be evaluated(measured))
Last edited:
They do have a lot of cerwin vega surrounds, 4 voice coils up to 3 dollars, they have a two inch coil, the next one costs a bit more but they don't list a diameter.Now as your supposed expertise in magnetics and loudspeakers..... Hospitality Electronics Supply carries glue, cones, surrounds and voice coils. So the ball of proof is now in your court.
I could probably unwrap layer 1 of the largest one to see how the pre coated wire pulls off, it may be clean, may pull insulation, or may leave the coat in the interstitials.
Clean would be best, maybe heat would help.
But that is just for info, I have no magnetic circuit to put it in.
Small steps I guess.
Jn
Yes, the best in the world (subjective opinion)
I often argue about cheese with my Dutch wife - she like Gouda, I like strong Cheddar and very stinky blue cheese (she hates it). But, I've had to temper my love of cheese (the curse of high cholesterol).
She likes rollmop, I do too - after its been in the microwave for about a minute
I am not allowed to have Danish Esrom cheese, she complains it smells like sweaty socks. Of course, I disagree!!!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.