I did not make any blanket statements. I stated principles and some of my own experience. My specialty is fluid mechanics. As such, I do not claim to be an expert on chainsaws or lubrication. What I do claim is an understanding that there is such a thing as too much oil, for the reasons I have stated. If that were not so, why not just run 2:1 or even 100% oil? I also claim that end users do not have the wherewithal to actually make quantitative measurements of the results of different oil ratios. To do so scientifically and objectively, would require, as a minimum, the following principles to be carried out: 1) Several identical saws should be tested for each oil ratio. 2) Each saw should be run under identical conditions. This would probably mean on a controlled dynamometer, rather than actual sawing, as sawing is too variable. The same gasoline should be used in all testing also 3) Power output should be measured for each ratio, assuming the saw is properly tuned for that ratio. (MS500i excepted. It does so automatically via its fuel injection system). 4) At each oil ratio, the saw should be taken apart and inspected for wear periodically. I would suggest at 10, 50, 100, 200 and 500 hours of operation. 5) The previous test sequences would need to be done for each specific two-cycle engine oil. Only then could someone really figure out what the optimum ratio is. I would bet no user on this forum has done such tests. I suspect at least some of the saw manufacturers and oil manufacturers have done some of the tests described. They might not have done all of them. As for what kind of engineer I am or where I am registered, it is not really relevant to this discussion, as I do not claim specific expertise in saws or lubrication, but the engineering principles I have espoused are general to any industry or product. It is called scientific testing, and it is beyond what any reasonable end user can do. That is why I tend to trust certain companies, tempered by user experience. (I watch a lot of Project Farm videos also!). But, to make you happy, I happen to be a PE in Ohio. However, I consult all over the world. Now I have a suggestion for you: spell check and grammar check your posts. In you above post, the following errors were made: realise >realize; comprises>compromises; like>such as; Typicaly>typically; expierance>experienced; Its>It"s; your>you're.