I am getting ready to put up some tests collected from 3 main sources who have published data in a form that can be converted to a time on Johns track. The easy one is Johns data. All the relative times come off his data on Zero Friction vs. other common graphite. If I have set it up wrong, I can go back and correct with the edit. I assumed that if we took Quicktime Derby's car and converted it to graphite, it would run the times I show, with only a few types of graphite able to crack the 3 sec. mark.
Next is Max-v data. Very slow cars, so it took a bit of a leap to separate out the poor car from the axle friction and then put it back on a fast car-BUT because the process was not so good, the times are still slow. DD4H got much better times for Max-v than he got for himself. The last published data is from Doc Jobe. His data is a weighted, controlled, wheel spin. That data includes a wheel on an axle with no graphite as the slowest, and Hodges G-M as the fastest. I have good estimates of cars with no lube at all, and I assume Hodges G-M to be close to DD4H in the absence of hard data. If this is not correct, again I will change and update. I have used both, but I do not consider myself a good enough builder to be able to say one way or the other. I will take input from good builders if they would like to contribute, but I think I would restrict input to Sub 3 builders One problem is the big differences in Hob-E-Lube. Both Jobe and Max-v have it slow (Max-v has it off the chart slow, so bad it looks like the car might have had other problems). They infer it was graphite only. Now over the past many years, Hob-E-Lube has had Moly in it and many racers are sure it is super. Johns data confirms it as a fast graphite. So how could it be so slow in the other tests? I have tried to get some history from Woodland, and if I ever do, I'll update, but they can't remember if they had a graphite only version way back in time. Anyone recall if that was the case? So I have put M? behind that data meaning- did it not have Moly?. I also have not been successful in getting friction estimates, or any other data except the spin time on the XRL8 graphite out of Woodland. Makes you wonder if it isn't another ***Dust knock-off. Here is a general rule with graphite- If it only contains very small particles, it will be slow. If it just has somewhat large and thick graphite like Max-v, it can be fast. The fastest G-M mixtures have large flake Graphite with very small Moly in a secret mix. When you try to blend a bit of super fine graphite with some thicker graphite, the results tend to be closer to the **Dust zone. XLR8 is a blend of different flake graphite. Anyway, I will hold off for a bit to collect any inputs so that I can do an accurate estimation. As always, "Your results may vary".
Next is Max-v data. Very slow cars, so it took a bit of a leap to separate out the poor car from the axle friction and then put it back on a fast car-BUT because the process was not so good, the times are still slow. DD4H got much better times for Max-v than he got for himself. The last published data is from Doc Jobe. His data is a weighted, controlled, wheel spin. That data includes a wheel on an axle with no graphite as the slowest, and Hodges G-M as the fastest. I have good estimates of cars with no lube at all, and I assume Hodges G-M to be close to DD4H in the absence of hard data. If this is not correct, again I will change and update. I have used both, but I do not consider myself a good enough builder to be able to say one way or the other. I will take input from good builders if they would like to contribute, but I think I would restrict input to Sub 3 builders One problem is the big differences in Hob-E-Lube. Both Jobe and Max-v have it slow (Max-v has it off the chart slow, so bad it looks like the car might have had other problems). They infer it was graphite only. Now over the past many years, Hob-E-Lube has had Moly in it and many racers are sure it is super. Johns data confirms it as a fast graphite. So how could it be so slow in the other tests? I have tried to get some history from Woodland, and if I ever do, I'll update, but they can't remember if they had a graphite only version way back in time. Anyone recall if that was the case? So I have put M? behind that data meaning- did it not have Moly?. I also have not been successful in getting friction estimates, or any other data except the spin time on the XRL8 graphite out of Woodland. Makes you wonder if it isn't another ***Dust knock-off. Here is a general rule with graphite- If it only contains very small particles, it will be slow. If it just has somewhat large and thick graphite like Max-v, it can be fast. The fastest G-M mixtures have large flake Graphite with very small Moly in a secret mix. When you try to blend a bit of super fine graphite with some thicker graphite, the results tend to be closer to the **Dust zone. XLR8 is a blend of different flake graphite. Anyway, I will hold off for a bit to collect any inputs so that I can do an accurate estimation. As always, "Your results may vary".
