> > From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2005/06/09 Thu AM 11:26:16 GMT > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: PESO: This morning's shoot > > mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Rumour has it that this particular circle of producing more and more > >powerful > >models for sale to the public was directly responsible for the creation of > >modern lubricants. It is alleged that, at one point, the engines were so > >powerful that they were destroying themselves between service intervals due > >to the inadequate specifications of lubricants available at the time. > > I've read that another direct cause of improvement in lubricant > technology was the success of the original Mini Cooper. Apparently its > engine was of unit construction type, like a motorcycle, meaning that it > used the engine oil to lubricate the gearbox. (Transmission gears are > brutal on oil.)
Unit construction does not necessarily mean that there is a common oil supply, merely that the engine and gearbox are built as one unit. Early cars had a shaft from the engine to the gearbox and motorcycles had a chain, adjustable by the movement of a separate gearbox. You are right about the mini (all of them) having a particularly stupid method of lubrication. This was continued on all FWD BMC cars. What it meant was that neither the gearbox or the engine were lubricated correctly (or, rather, were supplied with the correct type of lubricant in the case of the gearbox) and, if anything went wrong, both of them got knackered. It was purely a procution engineering decision - cheaper to make it like that. Yet they ran for considerable mileages in some cases. And money was still lost on most of them..... > > -- > Mark Roberts > Photography and writing > www.robertstech.com > > ----------------------------------------- Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
