Lucky Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 It seems there's a consensus that Redline Shockproof is the stuff to use in the V11 bevel box, and so I was all set to get me some when I came across the following exchange (coughed up by Google, of course). Any thoughts, anyone? The URL: http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?t=123703910 DO NOT use redline shockproof unless you change your trans oil every 3 weeks. Just wondering, why you say that ? i´ve using my Redline Shockproof Synchromesh in my car for the past 2 years, with no problems of any kind.. __________________ Shockproof works like this: There's tiny chunks of calcium in the fluid, hence it's "milky" appearance. Under load, they get in betwen the gears and as they're crushed they absorb the force by breaking into smaller chunks. Shockproof fluid is nothing new, it's been a drag racer's dream for decades. But what happens in a street car, is that once all those chunks are broken up (it doesn't take long either, maybe 3,000 Miles at MOST) you're basically left with horse piss for gear oil. It's awesome stuff, but it has it's place. It's place is in a drag car that gets launched hard, and launched hard often. In a street car, it's garbage. The MT-90 is a 75W90 fully synthetic gear oil, and is perfect for a street car. Switch to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeeve Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 It seems there's a consensus that Redline Shockproof is the stuff to use in the V11 bevel box, and so I was all set to get me some when I came across the following exchange (coughed up by Google, of course). Any thoughts, anyone? The URL: http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?t=123703910 DO NOT use redline shockproof unless you change your trans oil every 3 weeks. Just wondering, why you say that ? i´ve using my Redline Shockproof Synchromesh in my car for the past 2 years, with no problems of any kind.. __________________ Shockproof works like this: There's tiny chunks of calcium in the fluid, hence it's "milky" appearance. Under load, they get in betwen the gears and as they're crushed they absorb the force by breaking into smaller chunks. Shockproof fluid is nothing new, it's been a drag racer's dream for decades. But what happens in a street car, is that once all those chunks are broken up (it doesn't take long either, maybe 3,000 Miles at MOST) you're basically left with horse piss for gear oil. It's awesome stuff, but it has it's place. It's place is in a drag car that gets launched hard, and launched hard often. In a street car, it's garbage. The MT-90 is a 75W90 fully synthetic gear oil, and is perfect for a street car. Switch to that. If you search back in the forum, you'll find a post where Ratchethack contacted Redline directly for info on which grade to use & recommended change intervals. Obviously, the grade was "Heavy," or this thread would have a different title... The recommended change interval was "none." Would Redline be voluntarily opening themselves up to all kinds of lawsuits for melted final drives, gearboxen, etc. if their product degraded in the fashion your [unsubstantiated] rumour suggests? I don't think so! 1st hand reports from a plethora of satisfied users here on V11LM.com [the competency of whose membership I am FAR more sanguine about than some forum populated in almost its entirety by BDCs] seems to scuttle this bit of scuttlebutt quite handily. And FWIW, the you quoted clearly doesn't understand that the calcium content in gear and motor oils is solely there to buffer acids, & if it existed in the form of "little bits of chalk" it wouldn't do anything to protect the gears by "absorbing the force," but more likely would screw up bearings & seals. I know how you can test it! Grind up some pieces of chalk and add them to your motor oil after you're about ready for an oil change & see how much longer it lasts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete roper Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 If you search back in the forum, you'll find a post where Ratchethack contacted Redline directly for info on which grade to use & recommended change intervals. Obviously, the grade was "Heavy," or this thread would have a different title... Snip And FWIW, the you quoted clearly doesn't understand that the calcium content in gear and motor oils is solely there to buffer acids, & if it existed in the form of "little bits of chalk" it wouldn't do anything to protect the gears by "absorbing the force," but more likely would screw up bearings & seals. I know how you can test it! Grind up some pieces of chalk and add them to your motor oil after you're about ready for an oil change & see how much longer it lasts! Once again it's a case of the ignorant leading the cretinous. 'Little bits of chalk?' Oh for f@ck's sakes. Yes, nowadays every 'gloid and his half-wit brother uses the net but it really is getting ridiculous! Mind you, I've got a really good bridge to sell you. One owner, high miles but well maintained....... Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ratchethack Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 Heh, heh. . . Wotever happened to the concept of considering the SOURCE of information before awarding it any credibility?? Is it any wonder that wherever you look, propaganda mills and their benefactors are achieving record success lately?! Why, on this very Forum, there's been a long-standing notion, consistently upheld with wot a "true believer" presents as "PROOF" -- I refer, of course, to the existence of the fabled V11 Hayabusa Eater! Now other than myself, to the best of my recollection, few have ever challenged this, or the credibility of the "proof" behind it. Must be a fact, then. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
savagehenry Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 That Redline sells exceptional products is backed by the fact that many here (and elsewhere) use it and love it. And believe me, the complaints would pile up fast here if ANYONE even remotely suspected that it was the cause of premature trans. wear. Lots of good running machines and happy owners in the real world(me included) vs. one dissenting story from the air and someone's thoughts, the choice is yers ...S.H. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 Why, on this very Forum, there's been a long-standing notion, consistently upheld with wot a "true believer" presents as "PROOF" -- I refer, of course, to the existence of the fabled V11 Hayabusa Eater! Fabled?!? I've seen such a V11 myself, it was parked up next to a flying pig!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
callison Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 Milky? The stuff is a purty red color. Milky must have been "Maxx Mazda - Resident Asshole"'s thought process... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quazi-moto Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 Well, wadda ya know? I guess that means the V-Twin Transmission Oil with Shockproof is nothing but chalky horse piss also! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 Heh, heh. . . Wotever happened to the concept of considering the SOURCE of information before awarding it any credibility?? Is it any wonder that wherever you look, propaganda mills and their benefactors are achieving record success lately?! Why, on this very Forum, there's been a long-standing notion, consistently upheld with wot a "true believer" presents as "PROOF" -- I refer, of course, to the existence of the fabled V11 Hayabusa Eater! Now other than myself, to the best of my recollection, few have ever challenged this, or the credibility of the "proof" behind it. Must be a fact, then. . . Yes, thank you for clearing that up. The tribe has spoken as one. Faith restored. Have downloaded Redline's PDF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John in Leeds Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Yes, thank you for clearing that up. The tribe has spoken as one. Faith restored. Have downloaded Redline's PDF. Beware of tribes 'speaking as one' Redline shockproof heavy is excellent though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike wilson Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Wotever happened to the concept of considering the SOURCE of information before awarding it any credibility?? Go and read the thread. What was posted is not the best quote, by a long way. I was going to add some but find myself embarrassed by a surfeit of riches. How about: "not recommending the heavy 70W90 weights " for starters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlaing Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 According to this PDF Shockproof heavy is (by weight) 4% calcium, 0.2% phosphorus and 0.6% Molybdenum... http://www.redlineoil.com.au/Uploads/Downl...gopds%20001.pdf Unlike engine oil, I don't think they are concerned about acid build up in the gearbox oil. Like Phosphorus, Calcium is likely there to reduce wear or as the Mazda guy suggested, shock. Does it wear out in 3 weeks of racing by being pulverized? I don't know. But I think water contamination reduces its life, so I plan on disregarding the guy that fed Ratchet that info, and I'll be changing mine soon. I'll let y'all know if the shifting improves. Of course some of you won't believe me if it does improve...same as you won't believe a $100,000 V11 with BigBore engine like Guarro's can keep up with an un-modified 2007 or earlier Hayabusa.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRENTTODD Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 I'll let y'all know if the shifting improves. Of course some of you won't believe me if it does improve...same as you won't believe a $100,000 V11 with BigBore engine like Guarro's can keep up with an un-modified 2007 or earlier Hayabusa.... I BELIEVE I BELIEVE !!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ratchethack Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 Of course some of you won't believe me ...same as you won't believe a $100,000 V11 with BigBore engine like Guarro's can keep up with an un-modified 2007 or earlier Hayabusa.... I BELIEVE I BELIEVE !!!!!! Say Brent. Surely you jest. Incredibly, it would seem this one might have a few good laffs in it yet! I reckon some hereabouts might've missed all the previous brouhaha on the perpetual, still-unsuccessful hunting expedition for "The Bigfoot of Motorcycling". Of course, I refer once again to the ridiculously futile quest for the Grand Fantasy and Hallowed Hallucination of all motorcycledom, the "V11 Hayabusa Eater" -- as quoted directly above in this post by evidently the World's Sole True Believer: "a $100,000 V11 with BigBore engine like Guarro's". Just to update the Forum, that sad little safari still ain't returned from the bush with anything more'n an infestation o' deer ticks and a bad case o' dingleberry clumps. . . I just love digging up old corpses of long-terminated demons to prove they're still dead. Doesn't everyone? Sure we do. So now that it's been well dug up again, let's have another whack or 2 on the old stake thru the heart o' this one just for good measure, shall we? In review of the FACTS previously presented by Yours Truly ad nauseum, please consider: 1. Guaro Guareschi's BigBore BOT racer never had ANY V11 parts on it wotsoever -- nary a casting, forging, stamping, cam, crank, cog, valve or piston. . . NAY! more'n likely not so much as one single V11 bolt or screw were ever to be found on ANY iteration of that particular motorcycle, NOR on any other iteration of any BigBore-based BOT racer ever built. Please consider (part II): If we have NO V11-sourced MOTOR parts on a particular motorcycle, and we ALSO have NO V11-sourced CHASSIS parts on that particular motorcycle, well then my friends, this may just be me, but I think it's safe enough to conclude that we have no V11 motorcycle here! Capice? 2. Next, despite the BigBore manufacturer's enthusiastic claims that "Sure we can do it!" -- As far as anyone knows (I've asked until I'm blue in the face), there have never been ANY credible recorded sightings anywhere -- no optical photos, no infrared imaging, no radar blips, no sonar scans, no radio telescope photos, no telltale condensation trails across the stratosphere above Area 51, no long-range nuclear magnetic resonance signature -- nor any otherwise documented evidence OF ANY KIND that would support the existence of a V11 chassis with a BigBore motor in it, anywhere in THIS universe! No such evidence has ever appeared here on this Forum, nor anywhere else! Why, you'd think if there ever had been such a thing, surely at least a sighting or 2 would have washed up on the shores of this here Forum! Where else would one expect to find such a thing (if it existed), if not here?!?! Ever consider why #2 above is true? For starters, one must by all means visit the BigBore web site and read carefully (as I have, many times). Now of all the wacky stuff that happens in and all around the hard-scrabble, often loony, 2-wheeled World, can you conceive that even the most daft, round-the-bend moto-nutter would spend $20-25K USD to purchase wot originally left Mandello as a 1000cc Guzzi big block (see the BigBore Web site) - then strip it, and rebuild it into a Big Bore motor (again, please carefully observe -- THIS IS IN NO PART, WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, A V11 MOTOR!) and then imagine said nutter would install this motor -- with the expenditure of an additional $50-75K USD for all manner of custom made bolt-on trusses and bandages machined out of pure unobtainium -- into a non-competitive, anachronistic, relatively severely technology-challenged, nearly 200 lb. overweight "flexi-flyer" crutched-up V11 chassis designed decades ago on the back of an envelope (. . . or so one version of the story goes) and intended for a motor of HALF the BigBore's output capacity -- that was already competitively obsolete at the time of its conception?? It would seem that not too many o' even y'er most deeply disturbed, raving berzerk Moto Nutters have the kinda disposable jack, in rare combo with the requisite lack o' sanity (historically, an extremely short-lived rare combo at that), that would be necessary to build such a thing -- wot amounts to a rolling exhibition of sheer lunacy, with zero competitive value, and extremely limited, and purely imaginary percieved value , as fantasized by some ultra-tiny population of equally reality-challenged, and equally deeply disturbed, berzerk Moto Nutters in some funny farm in a galaxy far far away! Now leave us take a hypothetical, and say said nutter were to actually build such a monstrosity on a V11 chassis. Since it wouldn't have a V11 motor, could it be considered a V11 a-tall? Not by any reasonable definition I'm aware of, and I b'lieve I'd be well within most credible company on this one. In order for a V11 to BE a V11, seems to me it has to have both a V11 motor AND a V11 chassis. Otherwise, I'm afraid it'd merely be a "bitsa". . . Extending all this aforementioned requisite conjecture, speculation, and sheer foolishness the next logical step, one might ask if even such a non-existent hypothetical thing as THIS could be competitive in any measurable way against a OE Hayabusa? Since this supposed "Hayabusa Eater" would still be both vastly underpowered AND vastly overweight relative to the big 'Zook, even though it ain't a V11, I'd say the probabilities are weighted very heavily toward the ZIP end of the great SLIM to ZIP continuum ANYWAY! Hence, THERE ARE NO EXAMPLES -- NONE, ANYWHERE -- OF THE FABLED "V11 HAYABUSA EATER"! NEVER HAVE BEEN, AND NEVER WILL BE. I've repeatedly asked on this Forum for anything credible -- anything a-tall -- that would amount to any evidence supporting PROOF of the existence of a "V11 Hayabusa Eater". And yet, in response, wot has repeatedly been submitted as "PROOF" is Guaro Guareschi's championship BOT racer -- which (again) is DECIDEDLY and CONCLUSIVELY 100% DEVOID OF ANY V11 PARTS WOTSOEVER! Now then. Does that put some perspective around the depth of naiveté, the abject ignorance, the fabulously scary level of denial, and the perpetually childish wishful thinking of the particularly rare category of delusional beliefs held exclusively by the World's Most Gullible on this one? I would most enthusiastically invite anyone wishing to maintain at least one foot firmly planted in earthbound reality to take a few good whacks on the ol' stake y'erself. Exorcising demons is always good practice! I'll be on the edge of my chair, anticipating the latest, most creative round of fabrications, twists and distortions soon to follow. This oughtta be good. Following the historical pattern of yore, it's bound to be at least as amusing as cable TV! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeeve Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Hence, THERE ARE NO EXAMPLES -- NONE, ANYWHERE -- OF THE FABLED "V11 HAYABUSA EATER"! NEVER HAVE BEEN, AND NEVER WILL BE. Well, I'm in agreement w/ you on basically every point, other than the usual warning of "never say "Never"" just 'cause there's always the possibility of someone out there w/ far more $ than sense who'll prove you wrong [whether purposefully or just out of blind 'million monkey typists writing Shakespeare' statistical chance.] That aside, let's speculate upon the envelope of this hypothetical beast: First off, let's face it: A/C engines cannot compete in all out hp w/ water-pumpers of similar displacement. So play in the same league w/ the 'busa, it will be a water-cooled engine. (Right there, it ain't no V11!) Second, let's address the cylinder(s): it was calculated sometime in the 20's? or so that you need approx. 150cc per cylinder for the same power capacity, ie: the 1300cc Hayabusa will normally eat the lunch of any similarly configured (water-cooled, 4v/cyl) twin of less than 1600cc! Power is a function of rpm, and a 4 cyl's smaller pistons can be spun faster. Now, adding 500cc to a v11 mill is asking a bit much: the factory has already done this from the original (massively overbuilt) v700, and there's just no more room to absorb the (geometrically increasing) forces of more displacement. As has been pointed out, the Spineys just don't have enough rigidity to channel that kind of power reliably to the ground. So, a redesigned frame, w/ a focus on lightness & increased rigidity = no longer a v11, altho' I'd love to run up a batch of Ti frames [whether Spine or Tonti, really doesn't matter to me: can you imagine just how much fun it would be to retrofit to our existing Guzzis? Yeehaw! Losing that wt. is like free ponies, and better handling is always a welcome mod... ] Ahh, to have but $$$ enough & time... And then there's the little ancillaries like improving the running gear, suspension, etc. etc. It makes more financial sense to go plunk down the cubic dollars on a desmoseidici than to chase MG v11 will-o-the-wisps... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now