Re: Let's talk hydradrive
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 3:16 pm
I never read the entire patent. It's interesting that they found that 20w (200 cSt)-120w oil was found to work well as listed on the patent but elsewhere someone had mentioned that the old Hydradrive oil was between 2000 cSt-10,000 cSt in weight. I don't know what cSt 120W oil comes in at but 80w is around 1000 cSt. It seems that the oil that it ultimately came with or was offered as options was thicker than the range listed on the patent. We've got oils going up to 500,000 cSt today so I'm curious how or if it could work with no friction slipper? If it isn't free spinning through the oil, it isn't building up heat in the oil at the same rate either. It may or may not be viable with today's technology but I do think it's at least worth a revisit.
Going back to the viscosity range listed on the patent, those numbers are consistent with the oils that were run in the one off hydraulic direct drive here. He was limited to shock oils. At the time I believe the best he had was the Losi Silicone with a limit of somewhere around 70w to 80w. I believe he even tried motor oils but everything suffered from too much viscosity loss through heat. I also don't know if his leaking problem was due to faulty o-ring materials or just through wear. Probably both. It was still neat and a tribute to home engineering of the 80's.
Going back to the viscosity range listed on the patent, those numbers are consistent with the oils that were run in the one off hydraulic direct drive here. He was limited to shock oils. At the time I believe the best he had was the Losi Silicone with a limit of somewhere around 70w to 80w. I believe he even tried motor oils but everything suffered from too much viscosity loss through heat. I also don't know if his leaking problem was due to faulty o-ring materials or just through wear. Probably both. It was still neat and a tribute to home engineering of the 80's.