At 05:00 22/08/02, you wrote: >Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 23:25:32 -0400 >From: John Laurenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: ScottOiler > >The ScottOiler does not change flow rates with increasing or decreasing >vacuum. The vacuum line connects to a small opened or closed float valve. >When vacuum from the engine is applied to one side it opens the valve. It >is either on or off.
I expect that you're right about that, having no doubt examined the ScottOiler in some detail. The perfect chain lube system (apart from being fully enclosed and not using a chain :-)) would have some kind of speed sensitivity built in - nil flow at nil miles per hour would be a good start. No doubt the S.O. just *seems* to give less flow at high speeds because it should be giving more (as the chain is whizzing by faster)? The HawkeOiler is as speed sensitive as its rider, I suppose! A spray can is more handy for me with my urban usage at the moment, however if I was going to fit another chain oiler I'd have to say that the H.O. is fundamentally superior to the S.O. on basic operational principles. BTW on dyno graphs - they are always WOT (Wide Open Throttle), therefore a graph that shows e.g. "torque is down 10% at 4,000 rpm" may not reflect riding reality as very little time off the racetrack is WOT. The torque experienced at X,000 rpm in part-throttle road riding may be better or worse than the dyno graph suggests, however the small diameter header pipes on the GTS were no doubt there for a reason, like favouring performance at low rpm / small throttle angle. Very likely I'll be experiencing the effect of the Renegade downpipes myself in the next couple of months, unless I decide to have the collector box rebuilt (it's probably too far gone for that, though).
