oil on moving parts?

Oct 16, 2007 105 Replies

On 10/18/2007 10:50 AM Jon Miller spake thus:

Alright, I just want to hammer a few nails into that particular coffin ("plastic compatibility").

Folks: it's *bullshit*, plain and simple. Or model-railroading urban legend. Call it what you want.

That's not to say that there may have been a time, back in the Paleolithic Lionel Era, where there actually were some types of plastic that could be harmed (softened, dissolved, deformed) by certains types of oil.

Those days are gone. I challenge anyone to find a type of plastic in use today that can be harmed by any lubricant that a model railroader might apply (assuming that said lubricant is one easily available on the market, not some super-exotic NASA brew or something like that).

No oil will harm your plastic models. (Which is not to say, of course, that you shouldn't be careful about slopping oil all over plastic surfaces; it still is a very good idea to use it *sparingly* and to only get it where it's needed, between the moving parts.)

legend. Call it what you want.<

As of today I would totally agree that to be true. There might be a problem if you own _really old_ Athearn or simular engines. MR, I believe, did some soak tests (probably 30+ years ago) and published it. It clearly showed the plastics of that time expanding and cracking with certain types of lube. I certain modern engineering plastics (which most or all gears are made from) can't be hurt with any lub.

Fred Meyer or some other similarly universal store with a locksmith. Graphite makes great lock grease, too.

Why on earth don't you follow those simple rules yourself?

On 10/20/2007 11:36 AM Erik Olsen DK spake thus:

That's almost as funny as a "speeling flame" post.

He should be bottom posted by the demon Vlad for all eternity.

Actually, I have been, fairly consistantly. I wasn't replying to a statement in the post at that point, so no lead-in was necessary there.

It seems that you haven't read or understood the text at

formatting link
at all.

Nobody asked you. Go back into your cave, it isn't spring yet.

Yes, top posting is very annoying indeed. It should be avoided if possible.

Groet, saalut, Wim.

Cavemen like Ray will just tell you that it isn't possible to avoid top posting.

Stick that man on top of a post, too!

Well, if it bothers you both so much I'll do my very best to avoid it.

Now, do tra>wim van bemmel wrote:

-- Ray

Most of my trains

run between the rails.

Why do you ask?

Paul

-- Excuse me, I'll be right back. I have to log onto a server in Romania and verify all of my EBay, PayPal, bank and Social Security information before they suspend my accounts.

Working the rockie road of the G&PX

Enquiring minds want to know.

-- Ray

You bottom posting extremist!!

On 10/21/2007 5:39 AM Ray Haddad spake thus:

?oot ,tfel ot thgir morf txet daer yllamron osla uoy oD .gnitsop-pot fo tnelaviuqe lacigol eht s'taht esuaceB

There's no excuse for demanding that anyone top, bottom or middle post. It's entirely up to the person posting. If you want to post at the top, do so. If you prefer the middle, go for it. If you prefer the bottom, do that. But whatever you do, don't ever demand that someone else conform to your way of thinking.

Does top posting really bother you so much that you turn a valid thread into one of your rants?

-- Ray

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required