What in heaven's name are you talking about?

It was "technically ignorant" - meaning you are not trained or versed in the details and science of the topic. Webster says: "lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified".

I am technically ignorant of "harmonic convergence". I can admit that without copping, or encouraging, an attitude.

This happens all the time in the high-end audio world - the charlatans and spin doctors there depend on the reader's technical illiteracy so that their fraudulent claims are never challenged - our job is to be agent provacateurs to keep those hucksters being a bit more relevant and truthful.

Same deal here - the Amsoil guy built a Straw Man, and we addressed the Straw Man, limb by limb.

By your own admission, this is a challenging problem for you:

"I'm really starting to think that I should have bought the Super 7 rather than the S2000. The 7 might be old, but at least they're not so exotic that you can't use common lubricants. The S2000 is turning out to be a major disappointment in several areas. "

I have never heard anyone else on this board refer to the S2000 as exotic - I do not know what "common lubricants" means, as all the lubes for the S2000 are commonly available - ithey are just apparently exotic to some dealers (because they often lazy and technically ignorant, or both), and now, at least one board member. i do not call anything exotic or uncommon if I could not order gallons of it in 5 minutes on the Internet, which i submit I can for any liquid in the S2000.aybe I should go to my old fall back recommendation: boar mucous. Now that is exotic!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by xviper
"Modifry" has been and is currently running such tests.

 

The comments came across just like the BS we see in so many of the trashy audio rags. If you want REAL attitude, try audioasylum.com.

If S2ki is going to turn into a gathering place for purveyors of misinformation who attack when questioned, I certainly won't be renewing my membership.

RED

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RED MX5

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Road Rage

 

I don't think RR is one of the most popular guys on the forum, but he does make sense when talking about oil. Quite a few people here piss me off at some time or another, but most offer some info that help me.

Thanks to all for helping me enjoy my car more every day.

 

Oy vey,.... I think we got here is failure to communicate.

I very much appreciate RR's incredible patience, expertise and ability to remain "fair and balanced" I continue to be very grateful for his insights and hope that you continue to contribute to this site. Remember what brought us all together in the first place!

 

There had been some great discussion on this topic and I think both the SAE90 oil and multi-grade oil perspective are well represented.

Summarizing what I have seen, it is clear that SAE 90 is what Honda recommended and it is more suitted in application where the ambient temperature is higher (e.g. >0C) due to its capability to stand severe service at or above this temp. LE 607 was identified to be among the top of the SAE 90 list. In colder environment, multi-grade is more suitted because SAE 90 may not provide sufficient protection when cold. Mobile 1 75W90 was popular among fellow S2k owners.

I think the choice for low ambient temperature (<0C) is obvious - use 75W90, which is consistent with the Honda TSB, because the protection offered by a mono-vis oil will not likely be adequate. So the main point of the discussion here is whether a 90W oil will prolong the longetivity of the differential >0C. Based on what I have seen and heard, the answer is - LIKELY, because mono-vis usually performs better than multi-vis in this temperature range.

In addition, based upon RR's and Modifry's post, the operating temperature of the S2000 differential is often below the range when a 75W90 will thicken up to match a 90W oil. That means that we are now talking about a ISO 110 (75W90) v.s. a ISO 220 (SAE 90). Can we even compare them?

I think that is the reason why Honda recommends SAE 90 in the owners manual -- because the S2000 differential operates mostly in a temperature range when 90W oil will provide good protection. Honda then realized that a SAE 90 may not provide sufficient protection in low ambient temperature; therefore, released a service news indicating the use of 75W90 is also acceptable. From a legal perspective, I could understand why SAE 90 remains in the owners manual.

Based on these information and suggestions, since I live in California, and my car do see occasional track days and regular autocross sessions, I'd go with the SAE 90 per the owners manual.

However, I haven't seen a lot of discussion / recommendation about SAE 90 oil, aside the LE 607. As Red MX5 mentioned, there are a few others good candidates out there such as the Slikolene BOA, and Gearlube SRD. Does anyone have any experience with these oils or have plans to evaluate them?

 

RR,

What's your take on the Redline 75W-90 synthetic gear fluid?

The numbers appear to be better than both the LE and the AMSOIL or am I interpreting them incorrectly?

http://www.redlineoil.com/pdf/5.pdf

 

There has been discussion of at least one other 90w:

http://forums.s2ki.com/forums/showthread.p...ht=90w+gear+oil