for the guys that are into recreational oil changing...
in [Technical]
|
From: Tegger on 5 Apr 2010 21:44 clare(a)snyder.on.ca wrote in news:n23lr5p31p6utg7mn4nsp0t0adj8qvc8ck(a)4ax.com: > On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 20:50:00 -0400, "C. E. White" > <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote: > >>On the other hand, modern cars >>have reduced problems with blow-by (better control of manufacturing >>tolerances), warm up faster and run hotter than cars from the middle >>of the last century, > > No, in fact they run COLDER to reduce Oxides of Nitrogen emissions. > You do NOT see many 195F thermostats any more (if any). "Colder" for NOx refers to combustion chamber temperatures that are kept well below 2,500F, above which is where NOx are mostly formed. Thermostat ratings have nothing to do with that. Modern engines DO warm up faster than engines of yesteryear. Emissions- control and fuel-economy regulations see to that. I question the assertion that modern engines run "hotter", though. I suspect it would be more correct to say that they reach (and stay at) operating- temperature more efficiently than older engines. -- Tegger
From: Ed Pawlowski on 5 Apr 2010 21:57 "dr_jeff" <utz(a)msu.edu> wrote in message news:HJadnVF9HtdaViTWnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d(a)giganews.com... > Ed Pawlowski wrote: >> >> <clare(a)snyder.on.ca> wrote >>> And they had a LOT of problem engines using the specified standard oil >>> on the "normal" change schedule. The problem is obvious - the oil not >>> being changed often enough for conditions. >>> This is NOT to say there was not a problem with the engine design that >>> made the operatring conditions for the oil more onerous than they >>> needed to be. >> >> >> Maybe some of the people following the "normal" schedule were actually >> driving under the "severe" criteria. I wonder how many people actually >> know what they should be following. > > What percent of people drive under "sever" criteria? 1%? What percentage had the sludge problem, 1%? I don't know the answer to either question, but that does not mean there is or is not a correlation.
From: Vic Smith on 5 Apr 2010 21:57 On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 01:44:46 +0000 (UTC), Tegger <invalid(a)invalid.inv> wrote: >clare(a)snyder.on.ca wrote in >news:n23lr5p31p6utg7mn4nsp0t0adj8qvc8ck(a)4ax.com: > >> On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 20:50:00 -0400, "C. E. White" >> <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote: >> >>>On the other hand, modern cars >>>have reduced problems with blow-by (better control of manufacturing >>>tolerances), warm up faster and run hotter than cars from the middle >>>of the last century, >> >> No, in fact they run COLDER to reduce Oxides of Nitrogen emissions. >> You do NOT see many 195F thermostats any more (if any). > > > >"Colder" for NOx refers to combustion chamber temperatures that are kept well >below 2,500F, above which is where NOx are mostly formed. Thermostat ratings >have nothing to do with that. > >Modern engines DO warm up faster than engines of yesteryear. Emissions- >control and fuel-economy regulations see to that. > >I question the assertion that modern engines run "hotter", though. I suspect >it would be more correct to say that they reach (and stay at) operating- >temperature more efficiently than older engines. Seem old cars had 180 degree thermos pretty commonly. I don't pay much attention but it seems the last few I put in were 195. Still easy to get burned by hot oil in any case. --Vic
From: Tegger on 5 Apr 2010 22:02 Vic Smith <thismailautodeleted(a)comcast.net> wrote in news:e45lr55d8spqvrg569fgjgpklbd5au69j4(a)4ax.com: > > Seem old cars had 180 degree thermos pretty commonly. > I don't pay much attention but it seems the last few I put in were > 195. > Still easy to get burned by hot oil in any case. I see 78C (172F) thermostats in new Hondas and Toyotas. Keep in mind that this is an OPENING temperature. 172F thermostats are fully-open at 194F. -- Tegger
From: clare on 5 Apr 2010 22:08
On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 01:44:46 +0000 (UTC), Tegger <invalid(a)invalid.inv> wrote: >clare(a)snyder.on.ca wrote in >news:n23lr5p31p6utg7mn4nsp0t0adj8qvc8ck(a)4ax.com: > >> On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 20:50:00 -0400, "C. E. White" >> <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote: >> >>>On the other hand, modern cars >>>have reduced problems with blow-by (better control of manufacturing >>>tolerances), warm up faster and run hotter than cars from the middle >>>of the last century, >> >> No, in fact they run COLDER to reduce Oxides of Nitrogen emissions. >> You do NOT see many 195F thermostats any more (if any). > > > >"Colder" for NOx refers to combustion chamber temperatures that are kept well >below 2,500F, above which is where NOx are mostly formed. Thermostat ratings >have nothing to do with that. Not nothing. Try to get your 1996-2010 vehicle to pass NOX with a 195 thermostat installed. It MIGHT pass - but very good chance it won't. I've had to remove hot stats and put in the recommended cold stat on quite a few vehicles to get them to pass NOX. > >Modern engines DO warm up faster than engines of yesteryear. Emissions- >control and fuel-economy regulations see to that. They DO warm up faster. > >I question the assertion that modern engines run "hotter", though. I suspect >it would be more correct to say that they reach (and stay at) operating- >temperature more efficiently than older engines. |