Home Spindle Lube Test


In anticipation of an phono preamp switch I gave my 30+ year old Dual 1219 turntable a lube job. It's rim drive so the platter spins freely with the drive disengaged. The test involved only common household lubricants that have other uses.

Procedure: clean the mating surfaces with 99% isopropyl alcohol; lightly lube all sufaces using Q-tip; spin platter by hand at high speed for a few minutes.

The test (taken at 58F degrees room temperature): Engage drive at 33 1/3 then disengage it, noting how long it takes the platter to come to complete rest. I repeated each test once to verify the result. The results in the order tested:

Light machine oil - Gunk Household oil: 105 seconds
Bicycle bearing grease - Castrol Synthetic: 65 seconds
Automotive motor oil - Mobil 1 grade 0W40: 160 seconds

Note: when mounting the platter on the spindle, with Gunk the platter seemed catch as it slid down. On dissasembly, the Castrol had coated the surfaces reassuringly. I left the Mobil 1 undisturbed!
rockvirgo
Inpep: By reducing wear on the mating surfaces as you described, the lubricant reduces friction that could be transferred into the platter. It also mimizes the associated the loss of energy due to the reduction of mechanical binding and / or thermal considerations.

This allows the bearing / platter stem to last longer without having to be replaced, the motor driving the platter lasts longer due to having to do less work and there is less need for error correction of the speed because the rotational mass of the platter remains more consistent due to less drag and energy loss.

Given that a good lubricant that is well chosen for the intended use achieves all of these inter-related factors simultaneously, i stand by my original statements and suggestion. The use of the slipperiest substance known to man will reduce wear, will minimize frictional and thermal losses, won't introduce its' own drag into the equation and is temperature stable beyond that of any oil based product that i'm aware of. On top of that, any "friction" or "wear" that is generated within the bearing / platter stem cavity itself that could be passed onto the platter will be somewhat better damped by this lubricant due to its' thicker nature.

The fact that this stuff can be bought for less than $15 per 8 oz bottle is WAY less than any other "audio related" or "snake oil" type lubricant that you'll ever find. Yes, it may be "overkill", but what aspect of "high end audio" isn't in most regards??? Sean
>
Then, Sean, I suggest that you put Teflon in the bearing, if you want the slipperiest substance known to man. If you were refering to Mobil 1 as the slipperiest substance, then you are incorrect. Using Teflon, I think that you will find that the surfaces that bear the load will wear out more quickly than using a grease or oil, because the teflon cannot handle that load!

BTW, friction and wear aren't substances that can be "transmitted" as you put it. Its not like vibrations!

At any rate, you can have the last word if you must, but I shall remain with my recommendation of a simple machine oil.

With respect, Bob P.
Semi, your choice of the Teflon based grease seems judicious. There is no advantage in the Lithuim based grease, except if you expect to encounter water! It is good, however, if you want to grease your car window lift mechanism!

The only comment that I could have about the inverted bearing, is that, ironically, the load on that type of bearing is lower than on the straight vertical journal bearing, where all (well, most) of the load is on the tip and therefore could use a thinner lubricant, but as you have pointed out, what's to keep it there?.

Bob P.
Semi, when discussing the lighter load on the inverted bearing, I meant that lighter lubricant can be used, but one needs to find a way of keeping it at the bearing. My previous message might have been misleading.

Bob P.
Inpep: You obviously never read my original recommendations on the subject. If you had done so, we wouldn't have been having "the great debate" that we are now. Nor would others have been able to use your responses to me as "ammo" to try and undermine my credibility. Those detractors should take note that you've just proven my point with your above responses, which they will be made aware of by the end of this post.

The product that i recommended is a hybrid that is based on various lubricants combined into one product. While your comments about Teflon are right on the money, this product does not rely on Teflon alone. That's because Teflon will fail by itself when placed under a load. As such, they've added Moly to the formula, which will hold up under load. On top of that, Moly is thick enough to cling to the surfaces, which in turn helps suspend the Teflon.

Only problem with this is that both of these substances lack "flowability", so circulation and self-induced drag could come into play. Not wanting to add fillers to the formula, which would improve the flow but do nothing but subtract from the long term performance of the lubricant, they added a straight weight oil. The oil increases "flowability" and makes the entire product more "liquid", increasing circulation and parts coverage.

The specific materials in this product consist of Polytetraflouroethylene, Molybdenum Di Phosphordithlioate, Methacrylate / Vinyl Pyrrolidine Copolymer, Petroleum Hydrocarbon Motor Oil, Polyalpha Olefin, Didecyl Adipate Dimer Ester, etc... I have no idea as to the exact percentages used of any of them, all i know is that it works and works as claimed. For the record, this product is not water soluble, so moisture isn't a problem either.

Given their claims, this product was submitted to the US Government for testing. During testing at the NIST, this product was found to be "the slipperiest substance known to man". Based on the test results as performed by the US Government and other results submitted, the Guiness book of World Records recognizes this product as "the worlds most efficient lubricant". Given the fact that this product is marketed in several different forms designed for various load and thermal conditions, i'm quite certain that there is one that will work for just about any given application. This is one of the few "additives" and / or lubricants that is actually approved by the FTC as meeting its' claims.

As such, i'll stand by my original statements. Like i've said before, i'll eat crow, acknowledge my mistakes and be greatful for the corrections as they come. I don't want to be responsibe for "spreading disinformation". As far as i can tell, this isnt' one of those times.

As to your comment: "friction and wear aren't substances that can be "transmitted" as you put it. Its not like vibrations!", this is absolutely wrong. Friction and wear occur from part to part contact and / or natural erosion within that specific environment to a lesser extent. Any time that you have part to part contact, the end result of that "collision" ( to whatever extent ) is that you'll have vibrations generated. Given that those vibrations can be dissipated via hydraulic damping, the use of a lubricant that takes that criteria into consideration could very easily reduce those vibrations as transferred to other nearby materials. The only problem is that the mechanical energy has to be dissipated somewhere. With hydraulic damping, that energy is dissipated as heat / thermal loss within the lubricant itself. As such, the lubricant also has to be able to withstand the thermal conditions that it will be operating under with great ease if it is to be used with high levels of reliability over a long period of time.

Please correct me if i'm wrong or clarify areas that are lacking the proper explanation. Sean
>