List of Flat-Tappet Oils - Page 37 - CorvetteForum - Chevrolet Corvette Forum Discussion

Notices
C3 Tech/Performance V8 Technical Info, Internal Engine, External Engine, Basic Tech and Maintenance for the C3 Corvette

List of Flat-Tappet Oils

Closed Thread

 
 
 
Old 12-15-2017, 11:38 AM
  #721  
68post
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Nov 2012
Location: Indianapolis IN
Posts: 382
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by corvetero View Post
That's the oil used by the BMW M3 E46, I'm pretty sure that can be found in USA
OK. Then that would be yet another "German Castrol"/ "European Spec" and imported into the US. My BMW doesn't call for that particular oil and I wasn't aware of its existence.

Probably a great oil for someone's track day, bet you could really abuse the equipment and this oil would take it in stride.
68post is offline  
Old 01-31-2018, 08:25 PM
  #722  
Jim Rogers
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Jun 2011
Posts: 310
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts
Default

billo--

I'm wondering why in the first post you say:

Testing that showed the new oils would still have acceptable ZDDP for flat-tappet cams was done with very mild cam profiles and very low spring pressures. This is not what is found in even a mild performance engine, but may work - or at least appear to work- in older stock-type engines that don't see hard driving, have mild cams and tired valve springs or just see very few road miles - hence the perspective for some that ZDDP levels are not a genuine issue.
You're making the strong implication that SN/M oils (800 ppm zddp) are not really acceptable in stock flat tappet engines.

How do you account for the Sequence IIIG tests that show that these oils pass the ACLW test easily under the 60 micron limit (usually at around 37 microns)?

Totally agree that for aftermarket/performance applications, more zddp is better. But the data appear to show that, for stock engines, there is no need to say they "might" work or "appear" to work or you need "tired springs."

Last edited by Jim Rogers; 01-31-2018 at 08:26 PM.
Jim Rogers is offline  
Old 02-06-2018, 12:00 AM
  #723  
billla
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
Thread Starter
 
Member Since: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle WA
Posts: 6,051
Thanked 19 Times in 11 Posts
St. Jude Donor '14
Default

Originally Posted by Jim Rogers View Post
You're making the strong implication that SN/M oils (800 ppm zddp) are not really acceptable in stock flat tappet engines.
I'm making a flat statement that SN/SM oils are not acceptable in any flat tappet engine based on my discussions with cam companies and broad anecdotal evidence.

Originally Posted by Jim Rogers View Post
How do you account for the Sequence IIIG tests that show that these oils pass the ACLW test easily under the 60 micron limit (usually at around 37 microns)?
I'm not an engineer and won't pretend faux knowledge by Googling that test Everything I've written was from cam manufacturers and backed up from broad but openly admitted anecdotal evidence.

Originally Posted by Jim Rogers View Post
Totally agree that for aftermarket/performance applications, more zddp is better. But the data appear to show that, for stock engines, there is no need to say they "might" work or "appear" to work or you need "tired springs."
I said nothing of the sort. I simply stated that an engine that has a low-lift, easy ramp cam and low spring pressure may not experience the same types of failures we see in more modern cam profiles and higher pressure springs. This was simply to acknowledge the anecdotal evidence provided by the "I've been running SN/SM oil for a long time in my NNN and it's worked fine!" crowd.

As always, folks are welcome to run whatever oil they choose based on whatever research, guidance and engineering data they like. I simply collected and collated information across sources and maintain a list of oils that state specific support for flat-tappet cams and are above the SL specification for ZDDP. I offer that given the cost differential and the value of classic Corvettes, I personally see little reason to take a chance.

Last edited by billla; 02-06-2018 at 12:00 AM.
billla is offline  
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to billla For This Useful Post:
63mako (02-15-2018), 68post (02-06-2018), H P Bushrod (02-16-2018)
Old 02-06-2018, 11:55 AM
  #724  
Jim Rogers
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Jun 2011
Posts: 310
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by billla View Post
...I said nothing of the sort.
I quoted you directly-- those were your exact words.

With all due respect (and I mean that sincerely as you've put a fair amount of effort into this over the years), I don't think it's reasonable to rely on anecdotes and information from manufacturers of extreme, high performance cams to say that SM/N oils are "...not acceptable in any flat tappet engine."

Why rely on anecdotes when there is an explicit test designed specifically to address this issue? Why maintain ignorance of the fact that all SN/M oils easily pass the Sequence IIIG test that was specifically designed to verify that oils do not allow undue wear of stock valvetrains? Why rely on cam manufacturers who are not making stock cams? While the more extreme cams they sell might legitimately benefit from high zddp oil, they also have every incentive to cover their asses by recommending the highest levels of any additive purported to protect their product.

And, more importantly, why reinforce a myth with anecdotes over data and then say "...folks are welcome to run whatever oil they choose based on whatever research, guidance and engineering data they like" when the fact is that you are proffering this thread as research and guidance? As the originator and maintainer of this thread, it is incumbent on you to make sure that your advice is fact-based and sound. It is a contradiction to maintain a potentially false narrative with strident arguments over many years and justify it with a disclaimer that you are not an expert and people can rely on whatever sources they wish.

The above is probably coming off as far more harsh than I intend as I am also not an expert. I am one of the many trying to resolve whether 800 ppm zddp is ok for my stock Corvette engine. SAE testing sequences appear to indicate that it's not a problem, people on forums indicate it is a problem. I was hoping this thread might resolve the question, instead it appears to repeat anecdotes as justification of the forum position and doesn't even mention, let alone consider, the SAE testing side of the debate. The result is an unsatisfying thread for those interested in the relative merits of both sides.

I think you should consider modifying your statements about the need for >1000 ppm zddp in stock engines. Either provide evidence that the SAE testing sequence is incorrect or provide full disclosure in the first post that there is legitimate engineering data that shows that SM/N oils are fine for flat tappets on stock cams but you simply disagree and are choosing not to present or discuss it.

Last edited by Jim Rogers; 02-06-2018 at 12:21 PM.
Jim Rogers is offline  
Old 02-07-2018, 02:49 PM
  #725  
billla
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
Thread Starter
 
Member Since: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle WA
Posts: 6,051
Thanked 19 Times in 11 Posts
St. Jude Donor '14
Default

Originally Posted by Jim Rogers View Post
I quoted you directly-- those were your exact words.
No, they're certainly not. Show me where I said "you need tired springs." Why in the world would anyone "need" tired springs? Again - you can read it any way you like, of course, but I explained what I said, my words are there and your restatement of it was flatly incorrect.

Originally Posted by Jim Rogers View Post
I don't think it's reasonable to rely on anecdotes and information from manufacturers of extreme, high performance cams to say that SM/N oils are "...not acceptable in any flat tappet engine."
Is the venerable "390" cam an "extreme, high performance cam"? I don't believe so - yet this is made today by CompCams, and they recommend a pre-SM/SN oil.

Jim, I can tell you have an axe to grind here and honestly - I'm not the honing stone You note that you're also not an expert, but apparently have read some papers - and so you're right and I'm spreading a "false narrative" and I'm disingenuous for posting information consistent with information provided by virtually every cam manufacturer.

In the end, the only thing I see you advocating for is cheaper, more readily available oil. Is there another reason that a classic Chevy owner wouldn't invest a few dollars more in an oil change, if nothing else for peace of mind? Regardless, your post is here with information for folks if they choose to give it credence.

I don't see a need to engage on this; I'll continue to suggest that classic Corvette and other muscle car owners spend a little more money and go through a little more effort to protect their investment.
billla is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to billla For This Useful Post:
40flier (04-01-2018), 63mako (02-15-2018)
Old 02-10-2018, 01:46 PM
  #726  
H P Bushrod
Moderator
 
H P Bushrod's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 2002
Location: Maryville Tn
Posts: 34,769
Thanked 69 Times in 54 Posts
CI 5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12 Veteran
St. Jude Donor '09-'10-'11-12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17
NCM Sinkhole Donor
Default

Closed per OP's PM request.
H P Bushrod is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: List of Flat-Tappet Oils


Sponsored Ads
Vendor Directory

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: