What oil is best? and what ratio?

[Cracker Boy]

Pretty simple. They use less fuel, thus less oil moving through the motor.

Interesting never looked at a strato that way. I learned something

 

[Cracker Boy]

I assume you bought the Schaeffers at a shop
Where did you get it?

My local ace has it. May check them

 

[bwalker]

This is a flawed and misleading statement. Less fuel consumption per unit of work performed = improved (gas exchange process) efficiency. The same oil supply ratio exists per unit of fuel though. You assumed that fuel consumption is always equal to oil consumption, which is never true in any two-stroke motor design.

Lubricating oil separates from the transport media (the fuel in this case) more readily while the transport media is vaporizing its mass containing a 32:1 non-vaporizing oil ratio, than a 50:1 oil ratio. So a much higher volume of oil is always separating from a 32:1 ratio per unit of Time. Available oil supply exits the exhaust directly related to Time (RPMs), whether fuel consumption increases or decreases relative to each unit of time.



The oil/fuel ratio is still the same, so the same amount of oil is always available, separating from the carrier fuel and lubricating and carrying heat generated by friction away from those same parts.

The only issue that comes into play here is whether the oil supply pass-through (volume of oil) is sufficient to begin with. That is determined by the mix ratio vs friction loads @ operating RPMs, because fuel is just a transport media for the lubricant. As RPMs increase, more oil supply is always required. And as friction loads are increased, more oil supply is always required.

No matter how you slice it, it boils down to having a sufficient oil/fuel ratio vs loads@RPMs to begin with. Oil consumption rates always differ from fuel consumption rates at any given RPM.

EDIT: I'm not trying to bust any balls here... its just that most people read blanket statements like these and accept them as fact without thinking... then repeat them over and over for years without ever understanding what in sam-hell they are talking about. Where we allow that to happen we end up tolerating a population of diarrhea-mouthed herd animals. Much like we got in the world today... :-(

We all make mistakes. Life isn't a competition... its co-operation.

I get what your saying. However, assuming rpms while working are basicly the same and as a result oil migration times, the amount of oil consumed in a hour of work is less for a strato engine because they use less fuel/oil mix per hour. Some might say "yea, but less mix is going out the exhaust". While hydro carbon emmissions are much lower for a strato engine vs a traditional two stroke these HC emmissions are in the form of gasoline vapors after the oil has dropped out of suspension in the crank case when the fuel/oil vaporises.

 

[junkman]

I get what your saying. However, assuming rpms while working are basicly the same and as a result oil migration times, the amount of oil consumed in a hour of work is less for a strato engine because they use less fuel/oil mix per hour. Some might say "yea, but less mix is going out the exhaust". While hydro carbon emmissions are much lower for a strato engine vs a traditional two stroke these HC emmissions are in the form of gasoline vapors after the oil has dropped out of suspension in the crank case when the fuel/oil vaporises.

I can say a lot of that can be thrown out the window on a hopped up saw ,my 441 does not get any better fuel economy than my 440 saws .

 

[mdavlee]

This is a flawed and misleading statement. Less fuel consumption per unit of work performed = improved (gas exchange process) efficiency. The same oil supply ratio exists per unit of fuel though. You assumed that fuel consumption is always equal to oil consumption, which is never true in any two-stroke motor design.

Lubricating oil separates from the transport media (the fuel in this case) more readily while the transport media is vaporizing its mass containing a 32:1 non-vaporizing oil ratio, than a 50:1 oil ratio. So a much higher volume of oil is always separating from a 32:1 ratio per unit of Time. Available oil supply exits the exhaust directly related to Time (RPMs), whether fuel consumption increases or decreases relative to each unit of time.



The oil/fuel ratio is still the same, so the same amount of oil is always available, separating from the carrier fuel and lubricating and carrying heat generated by friction away from those same parts.

The only issue that comes into play here is whether the oil supply pass-through (volume of oil) is sufficient to begin with. That is determined by the mix ratio vs friction loads @ operating RPMs, because fuel is just a transport media for the lubricant. As RPMs increase, more oil supply is always required. And as friction loads are increased, more oil supply is always required.

No matter how you slice it, it boils down to having a sufficient oil/fuel ratio vs loads@RPMs to begin with. Oil consumption rates always differ from fuel consumption rates at any given RPM.

EDIT: I'm not trying to bust any balls here... its just that most people read blanket statements like these and accept them as fact without thinking... then repeat them over and over for years without ever understanding what in sam-hell they are talking about. Where we allow that to happen we end up tolerating a population of diarrhea-mouthed herd animals. Much like we got in the world today... :-(

We all make mistakes. Life isn't a competition... its co-operation.

I understand what you're saying. A a 460 is a thirsty pig. I can mill and get a tank gone in 7.5-9 minutes. A strato saw like a 576 runs 12. They both hold roughly .2 gallons of mix. 32:1 That's around .75oz of oil. In almost 25% more run time both engines have the same amount of oil passed into the case. When torn down a 460 crank is sopping wet and the skirt underside has enough to see the color of oil like it is in the jug. The strato saws have some but not as much as the non strato.

 

[bwalker]

I can say a lot of that can be thrown out the window on a hopped up saw ,my 441 does not get any better fuel economy than my 440 saws .

Thats because the strato function is often non functional on a ported saw.

 

[Redbull661]

261 on tree monkey's bench. been run on yamalube 2r 40 to 1.

 

[jakethesnake]

I’m having a little trouble burning the klotz be ok in smaller saws. May be ok if I cut back the ratio. I’m at 32:1.

 

[bwalker]

I’m having a little trouble burning the klotz be ok in smaller saws. May be ok if I cut back the ratio. I’m at 32:1.

Which Klotz?

 

[jakethesnake]

Which Klotz?

Benol. Everything sh it the bed on it today. All cept the 346

 

[jakethesnake]

Foiled my plug on a 55 husky. Gettin muffler spooge. I’m thinking I’m done with it till warm weather. 55 also started running weird enough I just put it away. Like a lean burn I have some regular ol low smoke hush at a oil I’m thinking in this cold weather I’m goin to use that. Those saws never gave me any issues till now.

 

[mdavlee]

Benol is castor. No way I'd run it in winter

 

[jakethesnake]

Benol is castor. No way I'd run it in winter

Yeah it’s just not working for sh it. What temperature is approximately ok to run it. It’s been below freezing here for. Decades it seems like. It was open I’d also heard about temperature issues with castor. I’ll switch to the husky low smoke.

 

[bwalker]

Benol. Everything sh it the bed on it today. All cept the 346

You will never get that stuff to burn clean in a chainsaw.

 

[bwalker]

I have seen Klotz castor start to seperare at 35 degrees. Its also nearly impossible to get it to mix in the first place at that temp.

 

[mdavlee]

You will never get that stuff to burn clean in a chainsaw.

You can milling. Other than that I don't see one getting that hot

 

[jakethesnake]

Thanks for the advice fellas. It’ll collect dust now I’d heard about the cold weather issues but honestly. I didn’t pay that much attention.
I wouldn’t recommend it either but at least I can say I do have experience with it on saws now. Ain’t for me. I cut in brutal cold usually so maybe I’ll use it up here and there on odd jobs when it’s at least above freezing

 

[bwalker]

You can milling. Other than that I don't see one getting that hot

Perhaps, but you get it hot and then you have the traditional castor buildup issues. The pic Keith posted awhile back of his 562 ran on ST is a great example.

 

[mdavlee]

Perhaps, but you get it hot and then you have the traditional castor buildup issues. The pic Keith posted awhile back of his 562 ran on ST is a great example.

I used 927 and didn't have any problems. It was summer time though.

 

[bwalker]

Thanks for the advice fellas. It’ll collect dust now I’d heard about the cold weather issues but honestly. I didn’t pay that much attention.
I wouldn’t recommend it either but at least I can say I do have experience with it on saws now. Ain’t for me. I cut in brutal cold usually so maybe I’ll use it up here and there on odd jobs when it’s at least above freezing

Last week it was minus 16 for a high here and I needed to mix gas. I was using Red Armour and it was as thick as Karo syrup. Ended up taken it in the house to warm up before I put it in the fuel. It mixed well then and staid mixed.