Go Back   The Ford Barn > General Discussion > Model A (1928-31)

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-26-2019, 12:34 AM   #1
Penthode
Member
 
Penthode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 50
Default 1950 vs Modern Quaker State Oil Comparison

I came across this clip on YouTube this evening.

I am reassured in my belief that modern motor oil technology has progressed almost beyond comprehension in the last 70 years to benefit the vintage car community.

Watch "Is Oil Good After 70 Years? Let's find out!" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/-zHlxeu_yuM
Penthode is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 07:11 AM   #2
History
Senior Member
 
History's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: NC Mountains
Posts: 384
Default Re: 1950 vs Modern Quaker State Oil Comparison

The roads while I grew up were awful compared to today's roads and vehicles with more than 100,000 miles seemed to always be worn out. It's very common today to see vehicles with over 200 - 300,000 miles with the original engine.

I remember certain people always making claims about this or that engine oil. "This oil will sludge up everything, this oil never leaves any sludge". I never knew who to believe. I used "piston ease" " recycled" oil in an old oil burner I had.

Interesting there's as much science behind oil as there is.


Oh, why do people call it motor oil??
History is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
Old 11-26-2019, 11:36 AM   #3
katy
Senior Member
 
katy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,205
Default Re: 1950 vs Modern Quaker State Oil Comparison

Quote:
Oh, why do people call it motor oil??
Because it's intended for motors?
__________________
Don't go away mad, just go away.
katy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 12:15 PM   #4
rotorwrench
Senior Member
 
rotorwrench's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 10,644
Default Re: 1950 vs Modern Quaker State Oil Comparison

Motor oil has evolved in order to protect the catalytic converters in modern cars so they lowered the amount of high pressure additive otherwise known as ZDDP. It has had corrosion preventatives and additives to hold particles in suspension for many years. The ZDDP wasn't in high concentrations until valve trains were beefed up for high compression, high torque, and high horsepower ratings in the 50s. The cams & tappets had a lot more pressure on them than the old flatheads did. The advent of adding polymer plastics was probably the largest evolution so that they could have multi viscosity lubricants that would work year round.
rotorwrench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 12:58 PM   #5
ursus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,050
Default Re: 1950 vs Modern Quaker State Oil Comparison

Dad spent 45 years working for Texaco, starting when it was called The Texas Company. I recall lots of research reports regarding engine lubrication laying around the house back in the 50's and 60's. Typically, these featured photos of wear patterns for different oil formulations after a period of miles. Texaco used the company cars driven by its salesmen for many of these tests.
ursus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 01:11 PM   #6
ryanheacox
Senior Member
 
ryanheacox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Northwest CT
Posts: 724
Default Re: 1950 vs Modern Quaker State Oil Comparison

That was a very interesting video. I did have a question though. Did the oil degrade at all just while sitting in the can for 70 years? If so, in what way? At the end he goes over TBN numbers and the old oil was very low (bad). Wonder if it started out that way or changed over time? I doubt the additive numbers changed much but who knows.
ryanheacox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 11:11 PM   #7
History
Senior Member
 
History's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: NC Mountains
Posts: 384
Default Re: 1950 vs Modern Quaker State Oil Comparison

Quote:
Originally Posted by katy View Post
Because it's intended for motors?
No, we run engines in model A's .

Motors are electric.
History is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2019, 11:22 PM   #8
Pete
Senior Member
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wa.
Posts: 3,565
Default Re: 1950 vs Modern Quaker State Oil Comparison

Quote:
Originally Posted by History View Post
No, we run engines in model A's .

Motors are electric.
They can be hydraulic or gravitional also.
Pete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2019, 09:38 AM   #9
rotorwrench
Senior Member
 
rotorwrench's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 10,644
Default Re: 1950 vs Modern Quaker State Oil Comparison

Anything that provides motive power can be considered a motor. An engine has moving parts with emphasis on the plural "parts". An electric motor only has one moving part so it just barely falls outside the definition of an engine.
rotorwrench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2019, 10:57 AM   #10
30 Closed Cab PU
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,613
Default Re: 1950 vs Modern Quaker State Oil Comparison

Definitions via Wikipedia. See below in Red. Seems both ways can be correct. In some engineering environments motor and engine are separate definitions, but in common use they are interchangeable.


Terminology[edit]

The word engine derives from Old French engin, from the Latin ingenium–the root of the word ingenious. Pre-industrial weapons of war, such as catapults, trebuchets and battering rams, were called siege engines, and knowledge of how to construct them was often treated as a military secret. The word gin, as in cotton gin, is short for engine. Most mechanical devices invented during the industrial revolution were described as engines—the steam engine being a notable example. However, the original steam engines, such as those by Thomas Savery, were not mechanical engines but pumps. In this manner, a fire engine in its original form was merely a water pump, with the engine being transported to the fire by horses.
In modern usage, the term engine typically describes devices, like steam engines and internal combustion engines, that burn or otherwise consume fuel to perform mechanical work by exerting a torque or linear force (usually in the form of thrust). Devices converting heat energy into motion are commonly referred to simply as engines.[3] Examples of engines which exert a torque include the familiar automobile gasoline and diesel engines, as well as turboshafts. Examples of engines which produce thrust include turbofans and rockets.
When the internal combustion engine was invented, the term motor was initially used to distinguish it from the steam engine—which was in wide use at the time, powering locomotives and other vehicles such as steam rollers. The term motor derives from the Latin verb moto which means to set in motion, or maintain motion. Thus a motor is a device that imparts motion.
Motor and engine are interchangeable in standard English.[4] In some engineering jargons, the two words have different meanings, in which engine is a device that burns or otherwise consumes fuel, changing its chemical composition, and a motor is a device driven by electricity, air, or hydraulic pressure, which does not change the chemical composition of its energy source.[5][6] However, rocketry uses the term rocket motor, even though they consume fuel.
A heat engine may also serve as a prime mover—a component that transforms the flow or changes in pressure of a fluid into mechanical energy.[7] An automobile powered by an internal combustion engine may make use of various motors and pumps, but ultimately all such devices derive their power from the engine. Another way of looking at it is that a motor receives power from an external source, and then converts it into mechanical energy, while an engine creates power from pressure (derived directly from the explosive force of combustion or other chemical reaction, or secondarily from the action of some such force on other substances such as air, water, or steam).[8]
30 Closed Cab PU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2019, 11:20 AM   #11
katy
Senior Member
 
katy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,205
Default Re: 1950 vs Modern Quaker State Oil Comparison

No comment!
__________________
Don't go away mad, just go away.
katy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:39 AM.