Home Spindle Lube Test

Inpep: "Why are you restating things that I have already elucidated and then claiming that you were correct all the time?"

Sean: Nothing that i've seen you post "corrected" anything that i originally stated. The product that i initially recommended reduces wear and friction beyond that of any other product on the market, doesn't introduce drag of its' own accord, offers long term reliability and is quite cost effective. Where did i fail in my initial response?

What you did point out that i took for granted / overlooked in this specific thread was "longevity". I didn't take into account the ability of the lubricant to sustain the necessary lubricating properties for a long period of time i.e. a "quick & dirty" test like this might not reveal the fact that a product that "works great" now may not work very well at all after a short period of time later.

Inpep "You don't know the exact formula for that lubricant but I do!"

Sean: I posted the chemical make-up of the product based on the information that the manufacturer has posted on their website. If it is incorrect / lacking, talk to them.

Inpep "In fact one of the components, the didecyl adipate dimer ester (we abreviated to DIDA) was one of the many lubricant bases that we (BASF) made for Castrol."

Sean: That could be and i'll take your word for it. None the less, it doesn't change the contents of this thread.

Inpep "I have nothing more to add that would help you in understanding the facts of lubricating systems and lubricants themselves."

Sean: I guess not. In another thread about the same basic subject, i recommended a product that met / surpassed all of the criteria that you discussed. I mentioned the product by name, provided multiple links to it, etc... How you arrived at the idea that i was referrencing a completely different product ( Mobil 1 ) from a different manufacturer is beyond me.

The fact that you're just now responding to someone that commented on the use of Teflon on 12/16 whereas the product that i mentioned a couple of months ago uses Teflon as one of the primary ingredients ( along with multiple other additives ) basically demonstrates how out of touch you are with the topics being discussed in several overlapping threads. Sean
>

This morning I reclocked the performance to see how it's doing. Over the last 60 days I've remounted the platter at least twice to move the TT but have not cleaned the bearing or relubed it. Completely uncontrolled and non-scientific I admit, but hey, this is normal home use.

The results of three consecutive timing tests taken at 65F degrees room temperature: 184, 178 and 184 seconds! The odd result may be due to a more gentle release of the idler away from the rim. The third result, amazingly equal to the first where I snapped it away more quickly, confirms that suspicion.

Regardless, three minutes, if I recall correctly, is an admirable result for any Dual 1219. 30+ years of use aside, the automotive motor oil appears to be a capable substitute for the unknown original lubricant.

Sean,

Surely in saying:

You don't know the exact formula for that lubricant but I do!

Bob P is demonstrating his qualifications. Knowing the "exact formula" would include knowing the percentages of each of the constituents. You mentioned that you did not know this because it wasn't published on the Internet. Bob P implies he knows this through his work in the field.

Regards,

Metralla: If i said that i could levitate the Empire State Building on the internet without providing anything other than that statement as evidence, would you believe that?

I'm NOT saying that Bob is a liar as he's never said anything that would ever lead me to that conclusion. In fact, i think that Bob's contributions to this forum are uniformly high in calibre and very worthwhile / beneficial additions. The fact that i made mention of that specific product weeks and weeks ago without Bob acknowledging it in that thread and / or in this thread while thinking i was talking about a completely different product is what throws me for a loop. If he was / is familiar with it, why not point out the specific flaws in that suggestion / product to begin with? That product is what i've based most of my statements on. Knocking the wind out of my sails by being able to discredit that product and / or using it for this type of specific application would have silenced me a long time ago. It would have also taught us all what to / not to look for in such a situation. While Bob has gone into further explanation to clarify why the "quick & dirty" test may be flawed in terms of longevity, which is something that i completely overlooked and needed to be corrected, i've still not seen anything to refute my suggestion of that specific product.

Like i said, that product meets / exceeds all of the criteria that he's brought to the discussion as far as i can tell, as he's yet to explain how it doesn't. Given that he claims to have intricate working knowledge of the product that i'm talking about, it should be easy to correct any errors pertaining to its' use that i've made. I may be wrong about my suggestion, but i've yet to see anything in this or other related threads that explains why. That's why i said that i'll stand by my statements until i'm shown otherwise. Sean
>

Sean, and this is my last word on this subject, my initial foray into this subject was to state that just because a turntable turns longer using a specific lubricant does not mean that that lubricant is superior to another lubricant as you stated.
The rest of the issues brought forward had nothing to do with that original statement and therefore I did not comment on those.
Let's leave it at that!

Regards, Bob P.