Say wot?? The big difference in operating an engine at WOT or less than WOT is determined by whether the engine really is running at WOT.....or if it is simply "running at governed RPM". If an engine is designed and built with a governor to keep the engine RPM below an arbitrary MAXIMUM RPM, it is perfectly OK to operate the engine at that RPM....continuously. In fact, a lot of engines that feature a governor, are operated at governed RPM throughout most of their life. You only have to consider all the big trucks on the highways to see the largest population of governed engines. On the other hand, trying to run an "ungoverned" engine at WOT will result in total destruction of the engine in a matter of seconds. The old arguments (countless) about low RPM being "easier" on the engine and "producing less wear"......are groudless. When an engine is run at low RPM, the lubrication of the engine is less effective, whether pump or splash (but we're splitting hairs here). As to cooling, the higher RPM circulates the cooling medium with greater force and velocity (and volume) at higher RPM, so cooling is more effective at higher RPM. Water pumps, and cooling fans, are both "centrifugal pumps" or movers. At very low RPM, either of these components could theroretically rotate WITHOUT moving any of the medium they are "immersed in" (whether air of liquid). The reason is because the medium exerts a certain resistance to the impeller to set the mass of the medium into motion. If you move the impeller (or "fan blade") slowly enough, the medium simply moves off the outer edge of the impeller and flows around the end of the impeller to the backside of the impeller without influencing any more of the medium mass than is situated inside the water pump, or fan housing. In order for a centrifugal pump or mover to actually affect "flow" into and out the housing, the impeller must be spun at a fairly high RPM. So, if you think you are "saving the engine" by shifting to a higher gear so the engine can turn slower, you could be doing more harm than good. Shifting to a higher gear actually increases the pressure applied to the crankshaft rod and main journals as well as the piston wrist pin. By shifting to a higher gear, you are denying the engine the benefit of "power multiplication" offered by the lower gears in the transmission. Because the throttle must be opened wider for the engine to operated in a taller gear, the combustion pressures in the cylinder increase dramtically in contrast to using a lower gear with less throttle. Sounds contradictory? Almost. The best RPM to operate an engine is the RPM that allows the engine to accomplish its job without bogging down or lugging down, If an engine is being operated at the proper RPM for the load, that engine will be able to accept an increase in load, without having to downshift to a lower gear. If the engine RPM can not be maintained without down shifting, you are putting too much pressure on the crankshaft AND, probably don't have the best lubrication as well. This is a very general description of why it is best to err on the side of caution, and in this case, "caution" lies in the higher RPM range (and lower gears).

Thanks to the ones who explained why LzD doesn't recommend ZA.. I should have explained it myself.. SORRY.. I don't seem to have the ask toolbar so I guess I was lucky. I don't like all these toolbars so I'm sure I clicked not to install it. It seems to be serving me well. I'll give him these names & he can check them out. I have found out U can't just grab any ole firewall or any download these days. Thanks again, Dar

Raven, I will NEVER be gray. LOL! Been coloring my hair for years and years, and now that there is more natural gray than not, I'm using a very light shade so that it's all one color, but just not gray. If I were not to color, I would look like a skunk with streaks of dark among the light (white). Goldy, just stay away from those sites that promise all kinds of good things for your computer. Most of them are just scams, but the free stuff we talk about here will help you lots.

Hmm, FixMeStick - never heard of that one before. Of note : "Not a replacement for anti-virus software which protects PCs from infections, the FixMeStick is for removing infections that got past the anti-virus." About Norton . . . . there are various mentions on av-comparatives.org that Symantec had elected not to participate, although it's not stated as the general reason it's not included so it's a bit of a mystery. I think Aputernut's main point there was to remove any existing AV program before installing another. However, despite that it may work well for some users, it has a reputation in the IT fixit world as being (historically) heavy on resources, and very difficult to remove. It even requires a separate special tool to remove it completely. On the other hand, since a lot of people use it, it probably generates more complaints just by the raw numbers. Your mileage may vary. The problem is, once a program gets a reputation, many people may move away from it and continue to stick with their last impression of it. It's hard to keep up with every iteration of a program. Case in point . . . Internet Explorer, which really lagged for a very long time, but now has somewhat caught up with the competition. Nevertheless, it's left such a bad impression a lot of people won't touch it, myself included. This post was edited by kbarb on Sun, Oct 26, 14 at 11:55