Inpep: I just went back and re-read your explanation. It makes perfect sense to me and i have nothing to argue with you about on this. In fact, i would even go further in saying that one can use too heavy of a viscosity lubricant, which would result in increased drag and / or less than expected results.
I still don't get where we are "diverging" on what we are looking for as an end result though. Isn't the goal of a lubricant to reduce external frictional losses to a minimum without introducing further drag into the equation of its' own accord? I understand about viscosity, "shearing" of oil, the use of fillers to widen thermal stability, etc...
What i'm getting at is this: If a product is the slipperiest substance known to man, and it is both thermally and chemically stable for the intended use, how could system losses or internal drag be reduced any further? Obviously, i'm taking into consideration that the mating surfaces are properly machined, etc... Help me out here, will ya? Sean
>
I still don't get where we are "diverging" on what we are looking for as an end result though. Isn't the goal of a lubricant to reduce external frictional losses to a minimum without introducing further drag into the equation of its' own accord? I understand about viscosity, "shearing" of oil, the use of fillers to widen thermal stability, etc...
What i'm getting at is this: If a product is the slipperiest substance known to man, and it is both thermally and chemically stable for the intended use, how could system losses or internal drag be reduced any further? Obviously, i'm taking into consideration that the mating surfaces are properly machined, etc... Help me out here, will ya? Sean
>