|
oil additive question
#143862
10/31/08 01:09 PM
10/31/08 01:09 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 162
MA.
plymguy
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 162
MA.
|
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: plymguy]
#143863
10/31/08 01:14 PM
10/31/08 01:14 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
i have. bought 6 bottles. cam isnt flat yet
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: 68Bullit]
#143868
11/01/08 01:10 PM
11/01/08 01:10 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 21,819
Kirkland, Washington
Pacnorthcuda
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 21,819
Kirkland, Washington
|
Quote:
Sorry to move in on the thread, but does anyone know how the CompCams additive works?
I used Comps additive in the first two crankcase fills of my Voodoo cam swap. Cam is alive. I have heard, but I am not sure, that Comps additive is actually a megadose of Moly, not zinc. And there are some people that state moly can, in fact, offer the protection we need. IF thats true, I don't know, but the stuff did work for me.
But now I am using ZDDPlus. I also toss in a bottle of STP red--not so much for the zinc, but rather the 'cling factor'--I believe a cam that has sit for weeks in an engine is more likely to have lubrication clinging to the lobes with STP. Maybe, maybe not, but I sleep well at night.
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: plymguy]
#143869
11/02/08 09:38 AM
11/02/08 09:38 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 8,020
Pangaea
B5 Bee
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 8,020
Pangaea
|
Here's another product that increases the ZDDP in oil. www.cam-shield.comThe Hughes additive appears to be moly, I think it's the same for Comp Cam.
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: 62maxwgn]
#143871
11/02/08 10:55 AM
11/02/08 10:55 AM
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 902
Mopar Lane,Mississippi
67HEMI
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 902
Mopar Lane,Mississippi
|
I called Mobil 1 and their 20w-50 extended service synthetic has 1200 ppm zync and double the supersyn of their regular synthetic. I run it in my car and my sons car (which has flat tappet hydraulic cam)and have had no problems. Mine has a solid roller but I like having the extra slick stuff to keep things lubed, plus both of our cars see a lot of street use.
'33 Plymouth 5 Window Coupe Blown Aluminum HEMI w/bolt ons (under construction)
'69 Chrysler 300 Convertible 375 HP 440
'71 Plymouth Duster 360 W/EFI (Wife's Ride)
'12 Ram MegaCab Dually 6.7 Cummins
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: 62maxwgn]
#143875
11/02/08 12:15 PM
11/02/08 12:15 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 21,819
Kirkland, Washington
Pacnorthcuda
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 21,819
Kirkland, Washington
|
Quote:
If you do your homework ,you can find "GOOD" oil and don't need addatives.This subject has been beat to death on a few other forums. 
True, but one must take into account that oils are constantly being reformulated and levels of zinc and phosphourus are changing. Oil companies can (and do) make changes 'between' the rolling of the API or diesel specs--So a SL,SM, CI or CJ oil that tests ok today may not have the same levels next month.
Its a real risk that is part of the problem.
I would not however, include some brands such as Brad Penn, Redline, Amsoil etc that are specifically marketed to us and the zinc issue discussed within their marketing programs.
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: 62maxwgn]
#143876
11/03/08 11:02 AM
11/03/08 11:02 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
CompSyn
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
|
Quote:
If you do your homework ,you can find "GOOD" oil and don't need addatives.This subject has been beat to death on a few other forums.
When discussing oil additives the issue of compatibility between the oil and the additive remains up for debate.
In THIS bench test for example, it is shown that adding a well known oil additive to gear and motor oil causes oil foaming. How much this bench test can be related to real world use remains unseen. But one thing is certain; adding an oil additive to an already blended oil product shows an effect. In the case of this bench test, the effect is not a favorable one.
I visualize it this way. Consider a quart of motor oil as a container of chemicals, or more exactly, balanced chemicals blended by a Chemist or Tribologist in a laboratory with carefully selected chemical components. Some of these chemicals are known to complement one another. Sometimes the blended result is positive while other times it is negative. Comparatively, when you mix two separate oil products, blended by two separate companies, what will the outcome be? Will it be positive OR negative? The answer to this question is obscure at best and outcomes may vary. The next question could be, am I willing to take a gamble and blend two separate oil products?
Another area where this topic gets clouded is the issue of extreme contact loads in performance flat-tappet camshaft applications. In recent times, many of us have experienced, heard, read, or know someone who has had a flat-tappet cam failure. Many times this has been attributed to such things as lifter quality, poor cam metallurgy, and of course the lower zinc/phosphorus content in newer API (SM) rated motor oils. In the latter possibility, the temptation to utilize an oil additive to supplement an apparently weak lubricant is understandable. However, I believe that with a little research, it can be reasonably determined that a properly blended motor oil will contain the right chemical properties which can provide optimal camshaft protection without the need for additional oil additives.
Conclusion –
Rather than spending hard earned funds on an oil additive which may give questionable results, use those funds towards a properly formulated and proven motor oil; a balanced lubricant.
CompSyn
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: CompSyn]
#143880
11/04/08 08:34 PM
11/04/08 08:34 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Conclusion –
Rather than spending hard earned funds on an oil additive which may give questionable results, use those funds towards a properly formulated and proven motor oil; a balanced lubricant.
CompSyn
While I agree with this statement, I have not been able to fine "good" oil in the lower viscosities that are sometimes needed, like 5W30. I know that the newer engines are rollerized at many of the wear points where zinc etc helps, but there are lots of other metal on metal points too, like rings, pushrods, oil pumps, etc. We just don't know yet if engine life is going to be shorter with SM oil, and won't for a long time. Because of this, I like to get some additive in the oil weights that don't come in the good stuff, particularly on things like our camper van (6.0 Chev in a 3500 extended van, hauling around over 8000# all the time) It needs to be on 5W30 to maintain the 100K warranty.
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
#143881
11/04/08 09:22 PM
11/04/08 09:22 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
CompSyn
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
|
Quote:
Quote:
Conclusion –
Rather than spending hard earned funds on an oil additive which may give questionable results, use those funds towards a properly formulated and proven motor oil; a balanced lubricant.
CompSyn
While I agree with this statement, I have not been able to fine "good" oil in the lower viscosities that are sometimes needed, like 5W30. I know that the newer engines are rollerized at many of the wear points where zinc etc helps, but there are lots of other metal on metal points too, like rings, pushrods, oil pumps, etc. We just don't know yet if engine life is going to be shorter with SM oil, and won't for a long time. Because of this, I like to get some additive in the oil weights that don't come in the good stuff, particularly on things like our camper van (6.0 Chev in a 3500 extended van, hauling around over 8000# all the time) It needs to be on 5W30 to maintain the 100K warranty.
Oil additives typically increase the viscosity of the oils they are added to. So if your goal is a 5W-30 oil, it may end up much thicker after the additive is added.
Below are a couple examples of high zinc/phos oils that are in the lower viscosity spectrum you are after.
AMSOIL Series 3000 100% Synthetic 5W-30 Diesel Oil (HDD)
• (HDD) Zinc = 1379ppm
• (HDD) Phosphorous = 1266ppm
AMSOIL Dominator® Synthetic 5W-20 Racing Oil (RD20)
• (RD20) Zinc = 1676ppm
• (RD20) Phosphorous = 1509ppm
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: B5 Bee]
#143882
11/05/08 11:51 AM
11/05/08 11:51 AM
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 270
Washington, IL
Hughes
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 270
Washington, IL
|
The Hughes additve, our additive, is a soluble moly. When we researched this subject a few years ago a lot of the chemist at the oil companies were telling us that adding a ZDDP package to shelf oil is not the same as when they actually blend it in during the oil making process. The oil companies did not like the idea of putting Zinc additives into the crank case. This is how we were steered to soluble moly which can be added to the crankcase and will blend and stay in supsension with the oil, any oil. That all being said, I agree with whoever said to just buy a good oil and steer clear of additives. That is always the best way to go. We have our own Racing oil and AMSOIL, Brad Penn, Valvoline's "Not for street use" oils and some others are all good...for now. The trick is to just be sure and keep up with changing formulations (Remember when Rotella was good?.
Oil companies tend to keep formulation changes pretty close to their chest.
Just remember how this whole Zinc, oil, flat cam situation started. The Nascar boys were having a lot of cam failures and couldn't figure out why. It took a lot of research and pressure by the S.A.E. and Richard Childress racing to finally get to what the real culprit was. Now we all know it was the oil companies changing their formulas without telling anyone.
We offer our Extreme Pressure Additive for guys that can't find the "Good" racing oils in their part of the world and don't want to pay to ship cases of oil. You can just buy a case of additve and buy any good shelf oil locally and you are good to go for 12 oil changes.
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: CompSyn]
#143883
11/05/08 02:34 PM
11/05/08 02:34 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Compsyn, I am familiar with the diesel oil, but haven't looked at the racing oil.
Several years ago, when this whole SM oil controversy was just starting, I built a new engine for the TT340. I broke it in on Rotella, and then, at the recommendation of Amsoil, switched it to 5-30 diesel oil. It had run 500 miles on the Rotella without issue, and then failed 3 pushrods within 200 miles on the Amsoil. I replaced the pushrods and rockers and broke them in with Rotella again, then went to 15-40 Amsoil diesel oil, at their recommendation. The pushrods failed again within 300 miles. At that time, Amsoil would not tell me how much additive was in the oil, and they would not answer my question as to if they were using their same SM oil with soot additives. This was also during the period that they claimed older cars and small engines would be just fine on their SM oil. Their story has now changed on that. The pushrods and rockers were again replaced, broken in with Rotella, and then switched to Mobile 1 motorcycle oil and there have been no more issues. I guess I just don't trust Amsoil products anymore, justified, I don't know. I also don't know if the racing oil has reduced detergents, as many racing oils do.
The other issue is that I don't run synthetic oil in the daily drivers, so those would be of the question for me, anyway, on most of my vehicles.
I am glad that folks are finally starting to admit that the SM oils are a potential issue, and coming out with better oil packages, but there are weaknesses in most of them.
Diesel oils-many are now reduced additive and some of the additives are not the best for gas engines. There is little/no choice in low visocity non-synthetics.
Old car oil has good oil, but usually carries a solvent to swell seals, which is not for an engine in good condtion.
Motorcycle oils are great, but viscosity selection is limited.
As I said, using additive is not my first choice, but I think the choices I would like don't exist yet.
What I use:
TT340 1970 Chally-10-40 or 20-50 Mobil 1 motorcycle oil.
John Deere lawn tractor-air cooled-the same Mobil 1 10-40 or Brad Penn 10-30
Drivers-old Escort (200+k), Old Tracer (125+k), new Chev 6.0 campervan, new Honda crv--Castrol 5-30 SM oil with 1/2 bottle of EOS.
The only oil related (assumed) failures I have ever had in 40 years were the above mentioned pushrods on Amsoil.
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
#143885
11/05/08 09:55 PM
11/05/08 09:55 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
CompSyn
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
|
Quote:
Compsyn, I am familiar with the diesel oil, but haven't looked at the racing oil.
Several years ago, when this whole SM oil controversy was just starting, I built a new engine for the TT340. I broke it in on Rotella, and then, at the recommendation of Amsoil, switched it to 5-30 diesel oil. It had run 500 miles on the Rotella without issue, and then failed 3 pushrods within 200 miles on the Amsoil. I replaced the pushrods and rockers and broke them in with Rotella again, then went to 15-40 Amsoil diesel oil, at their recommendation. The pushrods failed again within 300 miles. At that time, Amsoil would not tell me how much additive was in the oil, and they would not answer my question as to if they were using their same SM oil with soot additives. This was also during the period that they claimed older cars and small engines would be just fine on their SM oil. Their story has now changed on that. The pushrods and rockers were again replaced, broken in with Rotella, and then switched to Mobile 1 motorcycle oil and there have been no more issues. I guess I just don't trust Amsoil products anymore, justified, I don't know. I also don't know if the racing oil has reduced detergents, as many racing oils do.
The other issue is that I don't run synthetic oil in the daily drivers, so those would be of the question for me, anyway, on most of my vehicles.
I am glad that folks are finally starting to admit that the SM oils are a potential issue, and coming out with better oil packages, but there are weaknesses in most of them.
Diesel oils-many are now reduced additive and some of the additives are not the best for gas engines. There is little/no choice in low visocity non-synthetics.
Old car oil has good oil, but usually carries a solvent to swell seals, which is not for an engine in good condtion.
Motorcycle oils are great, but viscosity selection is limited.
As I said, using additive is not my first choice, but I think the choices I would like don't exist yet.
What I use:
TT340 1970 Chally-10-40 or 20-50 Mobil 1 motorcycle oil.
John Deere lawn tractor-air cooled-the same Mobil 1 10-40 or Brad Penn 10-30
Drivers-old Escort (200+k), Old Tracer (125+k), new Chev 6.0 campervan, new Honda crv--Castrol 5-30 SM oil with 1/2 bottle of EOS.
The only oil related (assumed) failures I have ever had in 40 years were the above mentioned pushrods on Amsoil.
booster,
Sorry to hear about the run of bad luck with your 340. By chance, did you file a warranty claim with Amsoil at the time? I have seen a few reports of people experiencing "assumed" oil issues with Amsoil. But they said Amsoil was upfront with them and prepared to resolve the issue. I’d be disappointed if this was not the case.
Just for curiosity, what was the timeframe that this happened? Amsoil published this Flat Tappet and Camshaft Lobe Lubrication Technical Service Bulletin back in 2007. I do recall that the oil industry as a whole claimed that the newer API (SM) rated oils were compatible with flat-tappet cams when the SM category was first introduced in 2004.
Interestingly, according to this Hot Rod Magazine technical article, Flat Tappet Cam Tech - Righting the Wrongs, the author asserts that the camshafts used in the early SM oil testing had better surface hardening than typical camshafts stating,
“Motor oil industry sources maintain that even with their significantly reduced anti-wear additive content, the new oils still pass standard industry tests that measure valve-train wear (including with flat tappets). But cam grinders counter that the type of heat-treat used on the reference test cams was atypical of standard industry practice. Who’s right on this one is hard to determine.” - Hot Rod Magazine
Quite possibly, Amsoil bought into this fallacy as did the rest of the oil industry at that time and assumed that their SM rated oils were compatible with flat-tappet camshafts, and we all know the end result. This makes since that people gave up on the industry and began mixing in their own additives of choice; still very much a popular practice. But today, we can see that Amsoil as well as others have addressed the issue of zinc/phos levels and flat-tappet cam use. And with the wide range of oil analysis labs available to the public, we have the ability to periodically test the oils we put in to our muscle cars to make sure no secret re-formulations have occurred. For the most part, I think the oil industry as a whole is much more forthright with regards to this topic than they were in years past. Plus with the other resources we have in oil analysis and the Internet, we shouldn’t have to be in the dark any longer.
Lastly, to your question about detergents. The new AMSOIL Dominator® Synthetic Racing Oils have been shown by Virgin Oil Analysis (VOA) to have reasonable detergent amounts for street use with a TBN of 6.4. So this oil is actually a good multi purpose street/race oil that would do well in a 3,000-5,000-mile street driven oil change interval depending on the application.
CompSyn
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: CompSyn]
#143886
11/05/08 11:30 PM
11/05/08 11:30 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I didn't file any claim with Amsoil, as I had heard that it is more trouble than it is worth to get a couple hundred $. Timeframe was 2004/2005, and yes, all the manufacturers were saying the same thing about the SM being just fine for flat tappet and small engines. I know because I called them all. Another interesting thing that I heard from a pretty reliable source (Amsoil dealer) was that during that time period a lot of the oil with different gradings was really SM oil. Because of the backward compatibility of SM per standard, and the fact that there never was a MINIMUM amount of zinc, phos, etc, they could legally put SM in any bottle, almost any grade. SM in an SL bottle was just fine, legally, and even in other older grades. We now know that it was not a good idea. I would not be surprised that other manufacturers did the same thing to use up their stocks of old bottles. I wonder how many folks wound up running SM when they thought they had SL?
Ever since my adventure in pushrod failures, I have followed a few hotrod boards, small engine and lawn tractor boards, and some other late model boards. We all know what happened on the hotrod boards with cam failures. On the small engine boards, it appears there are more posts of oil burning on relatively low hour engines, and lots of bent valves, many from pushrod failures. The later model car boards are very hard to read, but right after the transition, there was a bit of a flurry of complaints of older, higher mileage cars that started to use oil over a fairly short time. Might be coincidence.
I have been hoping someone would be willing to put in the time and money to do a side by side test with SM and SJ to see what happens to modern engines in the long run. I am sure the OEMs have the info, but they aren't talking, as they need the SM for the emissions preservation. Even an oil pump running test would be interesting. I don't think we have a clue as to whether using SM oil will cause oil burning in less miles than older ratings, but you have to be suspect because it is a metal to metal sliding surface. How do you know if it was the oil that caused the problem at 150K that should have happened at 200K?
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: plymguy]
#143887
11/06/08 12:02 AM
11/06/08 12:02 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,954
Blairsden, CA
Triggerfish
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,954
Blairsden, CA
|
Check out www.bobistheoilguy.com There's lots of info that supports not using additives that could compromise the original formula an oil was designed with. I use Brad Penn 1 Racing oil in my hemi & its a great oil w/ 1300+ PPM Zinc & over 1200 PPM of Phosphorous. And its only partial synthetic. Valvoline VR1 also is high in zinc & highly recommended. Check out www.bradpennracing.com
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: Triggerfish]
#143888
11/06/08 12:19 AM
11/06/08 12:19 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
An interesting side note that I didn't mention earlier about new, rollerized engines.
We just got a new Honda (ya, I know) CRV with 4 cylinder. The manual says to absolutely NOT to change the oil before 5000 miles. It appears, from what I have been able to learn, that Honda is using a very heavily loaded (moly for sure) break in oil, and they don't want the engine seeing regular SM oil for at least 5000 miles. The factory fill is very dark and looks like it already has 5000 miles on it!
We also have a new Chev (ya, I still know) Express 3500 camper van with a 6.0 V8. GM says to not change the oil until the oil monitor tells you to, or at 1 year. The oil in the van is also quite dark compared to SM, but not as dark as the Honda. I even went to the Chev dealer to look at oil in fresh off the truck engines, and it also was dark.
It certainly appears that the OEM engines need (and get) better antiscuff than SM provides during breakin. After that, I think it is anybody's guess.
Anybody got any info on what the analysis of original fill is on the new cars?
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
#143889
11/06/08 12:37 AM
11/06/08 12:37 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 36,040
Lincoln Nebraska
RapidRobert
Circle Track
|
Circle Track
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 36,040
Lincoln Nebraska
|
slightly off topic but a VERY interesting breakin article. "breakin secrets" at www.mototuneusa.com
live every 24 hour block of time like it's your last day on earth
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: 74SatSundance]
#143892
11/06/08 03:42 PM
11/06/08 03:42 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,186
Wherever I am.
Junky
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,186
Wherever I am.
|
Quote:
Yeah, all this talk makes me want to add some EOS to my engine. I recently decided to use some OLD (unopened NOS) oil I got from the junkyard, to thin it down for the colder temps as the 15-40 Delo (CI-4 i have been stock piling) is too thick for these colder temps in NE. Every once and awhile I found some old oils at the yards and i have been stock pileing it as I get it. So when the colder temps came I switched the oil and added some Quaker state 10-30 from 1988-1989 time frame and added a some EOS for good measure. I figured since I hardly run it this time of year that it can only help, especially upon initial startup .
Settle down. Our stock to mildly built flat tappet cam engines don't need more than about 1200 ppm zinc. I run heavy duty, 5-40 Shell Rotella T synthetic oil, which as about 1400 ppm zinc. That's more than enough for my mild engine. Now, if you are running high lift, high pressure springs, then more zinc is needed.
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: Junky]
#143893
11/06/08 03:53 PM
11/06/08 03:53 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 571
Western NC
68Bullit
mopar
|
mopar
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 571
Western NC
|
Quote:
Quote:
Yeah, all this talk makes me want to add some EOS to my engine. I recently decided to use some OLD (unopened NOS) oil I got from the junkyard, to thin it down for the colder temps as the 15-40 Delo (CI-4 i have been stock piling) is too thick for these colder temps in NE. Every once and awhile I found some old oils at the yards and i have been stock pileing it as I get it. So when the colder temps came I switched the oil and added some Quaker state 10-30 from 1988-1989 time frame and added a some EOS for good measure. I figured since I hardly run it this time of year that it can only help, especially upon initial startup .
Settle down. Our stock to mildly built flat tappet cam engines don't need more than about 1200 ppm zinc. I run heavy duty, 5-40 Shell Rotella T synthetic oil, which as about 1400 ppm zinc. That's more than enough for my mild engine. Now, if you are running high lift, high pressure springs, then more zinc is needed.
Are we talking 1400ppm per quart, or 1400 total ppm in a 5 quart oil change?
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: 68Bullit]
#143894
11/06/08 04:18 PM
11/06/08 04:18 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Yeah, all this talk makes me want to add some EOS to my engine. I recently decided to use some OLD (unopened NOS) oil I got from the junkyard, to thin it down for the colder temps as the 15-40 Delo (CI-4 i have been stock piling) is too thick for these colder temps in NE. Every once and awhile I found some old oils at the yards and i have been stock pileing it as I get it. So when the colder temps came I switched the oil and added some Quaker state 10-30 from 1988-1989 time frame and added a some EOS for good measure. I figured since I hardly run it this time of year that it can only help, especially upon initial startup .
Settle down. Our stock to mildly built flat tappet cam engines don't need more than about 1200 ppm zinc. I run heavy duty, 5-40 Shell Rotella T synthetic oil, which as about 1400 ppm zinc. That's more than enough for my mild engine. Now, if you are running high lift, high pressure springs, then more zinc is needed.
Are we talking 1400ppm per quart, or 1400 total ppm in a 5 quart oil change?
isnt that the same amount of zinc?
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
#143895
11/06/08 04:53 PM
11/06/08 04:53 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 571
Western NC
68Bullit
mopar
|
mopar
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 571
Western NC
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Yeah, all this talk makes me want to add some EOS to my engine. I recently decided to use some OLD (unopened NOS) oil I got from the junkyard, to thin it down for the colder temps as the 15-40 Delo (CI-4 i have been stock piling) is too thick for these colder temps in NE. Every once and awhile I found some old oils at the yards and i have been stock pileing it as I get it. So when the colder temps came I switched the oil and added some Quaker state 10-30 from 1988-1989 time frame and added a some EOS for good measure. I figured since I hardly run it this time of year that it can only help, especially upon initial startup .
Settle down. Our stock to mildly built flat tappet cam engines don't need more than about 1200 ppm zinc. I run heavy duty, 5-40 Shell Rotella T synthetic oil, which as about 1400 ppm zinc. That's more than enough for my mild engine. Now, if you are running high lift, high pressure springs, then more zinc is needed.
Are we talking 1400ppm per quart, or 1400 total ppm in a 5 quart oil change?
isnt that the same amount of zinc?
I dunno. If it's 1400ppm per quart, then no. It would then be 7000ppm for 5 quarts
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: 05dakota]
#143897
11/06/08 09:34 PM
11/06/08 09:34 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,186
Wherever I am.
Junky
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,186
Wherever I am.
|
Quote:
ppm is parts per million, volume in pan has no effect.
Exactly! It has nothing to do with volume.
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: B5 Bee]
#143899
11/07/08 08:29 AM
11/07/08 08:29 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
CompSyn
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
|
Quote:
In the last year I have found about 60 qts of left over older formula SJ and SL at various stores.
So tonite I was in a Walmart checking the back of the shelves. I noticed they carry Royal Purple, it has a SL rating. The Mobil 1 'High Mileage' oil also has a SL rating, not SM like other Mobil 1 formulas. Anyone know the Zn-Ph ppm of these two?
I prefer not to run diesel oil because of too much detergent and the racing oil has too little, requiring more frequent oil changes. Something I can get locally off the shelf would be great if High Mileage Mobil 1 has enough ZDDP.
The straight 30wt Castrol also has a SL rating, other 30wt oils I have seen in the past is still SL oil.
Mobil 1 10-40 High Mileage, SL/CF rated:
PHOSPHOROUS: 860
ZINC: 1035
I’ll keep looking for a up to date UOA/VOA for Royal Purple
CompSyn
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: CompSyn]
#143901
11/08/08 07:49 AM
11/08/08 07:49 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
CompSyn
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
|
Quote:
Quote:
In the last year I have found about 60 qts of left over older formula SJ and SL at various stores.
So tonite I was in a Walmart checking the back of the shelves. I noticed they carry Royal Purple, it has a SL rating. The Mobil 1 'High Mileage' oil also has a SL rating, not SM like other Mobil 1 formulas. Anyone know the Zn-Ph ppm of these two?
I prefer not to run diesel oil because of too much detergent and the racing oil has too little, requiring more frequent oil changes. Something I can get locally off the shelf would be great if High Mileage Mobil 1 has enough ZDDP.
The straight 30wt Castrol also has a SL rating, other 30wt oils I have seen in the past is still SL oil.
Mobil 1 10-40 High Mileage, SL/CF rated:
PHOSPHOROUS: 860
ZINC: 1035
I’ll keep looking for a up to date UOA/VOA for Royal Purple
CompSyn
Here is VOA info I found on Royal Purple API (SL) Rated 5W-20 motor oil.
Zinc: 666ppm
Phosphorous: 563
CompSyn
BTW, check out the New AMSOIL Group Discount for moparts.com members.
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: 493_DART]
#143902
11/08/08 08:11 AM
11/08/08 08:11 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,978
VA
DAMOPARS
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,978
VA
|
Quote:
EOS is now available--they changed the part # . i think its also $20 a bottle
Only stuff to use at break in and regular oil changes.
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: DAMOPARS]
#143903
11/08/08 01:03 PM
11/08/08 01:03 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
"Here is VOA info I found on Royal Purple API (SL) Rated 5W-20 motor oil.
Zinc: 666ppm
Phosphorous: 563
CompSyn"
That looks more like an SM level than SL. I still wonder who else is playing those kind of games.
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: CompSyn]
#143904
11/08/08 02:29 PM
11/08/08 02:29 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 8,020
Pangaea
B5 Bee
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 8,020
Pangaea
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In the last year I have found about 60 qts of left over older formula SJ and SL at various stores.
So tonite I was in a Walmart checking the back of the shelves. I noticed they carry Royal Purple, it has a SL rating. The Mobil 1 'High Mileage' oil also has a SL rating, not SM like other Mobil 1 formulas. Anyone know the Zn-Ph ppm of these two?
I prefer not to run diesel oil because of too much detergent and the racing oil has too little, requiring more frequent oil changes. Something I can get locally off the shelf would be great if High Mileage Mobil 1 has enough ZDDP.
The straight 30wt Castrol also has a SL rating, other 30wt oils I have seen in the past is still SL oil.
Mobil 1 10-40 High Mileage, SL/CF rated:
PHOSPHOROUS: 860
ZINC: 1035
I’ll keep looking for a up to date UOA/VOA for Royal Purple
CompSyn
Here is VOA info I found on Royal Purple API (SL) Rated 5W-20 motor oil.
Zinc: 666ppm
Phosphorous: 563
CompSyn
BTW, check out the New AMSOIL Group Discount for moparts.com members.
Thanks CompSyn  .
The Mobil 1 HM doesn't look too bad, better than the other SM oils. Guess it would do in a jam but I'll find a local Amsoil dealer when my older SJ and SL oil supply is gone.
Royal Purple  , appears they need to upgrade their labels to SM.
I keep seeing GM EOS has been re-released, only with another part #.
Whats the new # and is it still ZDDP or has it been changed to Moly?
|
|
|
Re: oil additive question
[Re: B5 Bee]
#143907
11/09/08 07:18 AM
11/09/08 07:18 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
CompSyn
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In the last year I have found about 60 qts of left over older formula SJ and SL at various stores.
So tonite I was in a Walmart checking the back of the shelves. I noticed they carry Royal Purple, it has a SL rating. The Mobil 1 'High Mileage' oil also has a SL rating, not SM like other Mobil 1 formulas. Anyone know the Zn-Ph ppm of these two?
I prefer not to run diesel oil because of too much detergent and the racing oil has too little, requiring more frequent oil changes. Something I can get locally off the shelf would be great if High Mileage Mobil 1 has enough ZDDP.
The straight 30wt Castrol also has a SL rating, other 30wt oils I have seen in the past is still SL oil.
Mobil 1 10-40 High Mileage, SL/CF rated:
PHOSPHOROUS: 860
ZINC: 1035
I’ll keep looking for a up to date UOA/VOA for Royal Purple
CompSyn
Here is VOA info I found on Royal Purple API (SL) Rated 5W-20 motor oil.
Zinc: 666ppm
Phosphorous: 563
CompSyn
BTW, check out the New AMSOIL Group Discount for moparts.com members.
Thanks CompSyn .
The Mobil 1 HM doesn't look too bad, better than the other SM oils. Guess it would do in a jam but I'll find a local Amsoil dealer when my older SJ and SL oil supply is gone.
Royal Purple , appears they need to upgrade their labels to SM.
I keep seeing GM EOS has been re-released, only with another part #.
Whats the new # and is it still ZDDP or has it been changed to Moly?
New GM EOS part # 88862586
This new stuff is listed as “engine assembly lubricant”.
Zinc: 4843ppm
Phosphorous: 5099ppm
Molybdenum: 4ppm
Calcium: 31320ppm
cSt Viscosity @ 100C: 22.09
CompSyn
|
|
|
|
|
. Now I have to start reading all over again. I lost a cam on my cuda about 500 miles ago and this is a fresh engine. I don't need another rebuild this soon. I used the Castrol diesel and stuff from BG for cams at my last oil change.
