If you'd like to see this, go to reply #17 in the 540 RAT "sticky" at the top of the page.

540 RAT
Member SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers)

 

So now you're posting that you've updated your sticky...with cross-posted information from another site? Really don't get this, do you?

Folks will subscribe to the sticky if they care...and they'll get notified when you update it. No need to post about updates.

And, in the end - still the same claim that ZDDP doesn't matter...and still completely in opposition to every flat-tappet cam manufacturer.

Have you had any manufacturer yet say that one of your recommended SM/SN oils is suitable for flat-tappet cam use...or even contracted them?

 

Saw the posting on speed talk. I thought the diesel oils would do better. Thanks for your testing its apreciated.

 

540_Rat thanks for the post

 

It was OK'ed for him to post the update by me. Let's agree to disagree and press on. I value everyone's input here. I want everyone here to keep posting your information and let the members decide what to eat and what to leave off the plate.

 

The film strength testing has merit but it is just one of many criteria. My thought is to use it along with other good information to make an informed decision based on your cam and sptng specs, HP, RPM, driving style and usage. There are plenty of oils ranked at the top on 540 Rat's list that are are also on Billa's list that are designed for spark engines, have increased levels of ZDDP and are available in conventional or synthetic from 4 to 8 dollars a quart. You can have your cake and eat it too.

 

I say if people are dumb enough to run Diesel oil in their GASOLINE powered motors, let them! Me, my motors see the far side of 6500RPM on most drives, even the LeMans winning Diesels won't rev that high.

 

This subject seems to get awful emotional..so I tend to stay out of it and just absorb the data from everyone. I know Rick pretty well and when I use the word *detailed* to describe him...or *thorough*..or just plain 'ole fashioned hard headed in his quest for facts on any subject..it's meant as a compliment. We haven't always agreed on everything..but he's handed over a lot of research to me that has always made me think and re-evaluate my position on things. Sometimes I change my mind...other times not. But it's always interesting data.

Rick is an engineer with a passion for facts on everything....so what you're getting here is the info he has at this stage of his testing..and he keeps adding to it. I can't believe the $$$ and time he's spending on this and tell him all the time his '57 would be finished by now with his 540 installed and smoking tires if he would re-focus..but he loves this stuff. I find it very interesting and it adds to info I've received from some oil industry chemists and engineers over the years.

I encouraged him to let folks know he had added more info since I'm sure there are others like me who don't subscribe to any thread and need a little prodding once in awhile.

I have no doubt these threads have been passed along to some oil folks..and its interesting that no one has offered anyone to add to it. I'd love to see their take on it all. Rick's whole premise is pretty much if you manage to keep the parts from getting together in the first place...it doesn't matter much what other protection is in there. Surely can't hurt to have some added margin from an *emergency* wear protection source like ZDDP....but his tests show that there are many ways to *skin a cat* which is what my oil industry guys have told me for years. They've concocted various blends for 40+ years using all sorts of ingredients to meet the needs. Without a full detailed analysis of every component and the tests they did...it's tough to tell. One that always interested me is that the oil recommenedd for natural gas engines that are modified normal diesel engines with flat tappet cams instead of roller cam in the diesels, actually have very low ZDDP in them. They have cats on them..but so do many diesels these days. Whatever they are using in those oils is protecting the flat tappets (admittedly low rpm, low spring pressure etc).


Hey..Rick still busts on me for using Royal Purple..but my junk looks good when I tear it down!

JIM

 

Hows your turbo project going ?

 

As noted many times, the tests show nothing - nothing - about wear, but simply about film strength. The idea that film strength replaces ZDDP simply isn't another way to skin a cat - it's simply not correct.

I've encouraged the OP many times to a) contact flat-tappet cam manufacturers with his claims and b) contact the oil manufacturers he recommends for flat-tappet cams to see if they agree with his application recommendations. So far, nada. In general, I wouldn't care about this - but every.single.flat-tappet.cam. manufacturer recommends 1,000 - 1,400 ppm ZDDP, period.

A good engineer doesn't rely on single-dimension testing or their own beliefs - they validate with other engineers and information sources, and use industry-standard test methodologies...as one oil vendor (Brad Penn) notes on another thread:

http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic...art=90#p376742

"I would like to begin by stating unequivocally that the test utilized for comparison of the different motor oils is NOT an industry accepted test and has not been peer reviewed or validated by any certification body such as American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), American Petroleum Institute (API) or the American Chemistry Council (ACC). Therefore, I do not consider the test data valid. I should note that non-ASTM associated bench tests are not the most reliable indicators of field performance.

Additionally, I think the primary concern I had with the information is that one cannot effectively measure “load carrying capacity/film strength” in a 30 second test that is NOT considered a standard industry test with the rigorous inter-laboratory round robin studies needed to generate the measurement system precision statements. The gold standard to evaluate the different lubricants would be controlled engine testing in which cam lobe loss is measured as well as piston ring loss. The API Service Category SM and the latest SN oils listed contain friction modifiers (friction modifiers are added in API SM & SN oils for fuel economy benefits) which are one reason why they might perform better in a 30-second “break-in” period. It is my opinion that a 30-second test is not a proper performance test of the load-carrying capacity of a lubricant in boundary lubrication regimes."

 

Read the entire thread through. Ken Tyger is the head lubrication engineer for Brad Penn and joined Speedtalk (this was his first post) just to comment on this test. I have no issue with the test as it reguards to initial film strength. I do have issue with drawing conclusions on extreme pressure additives long term effectivness using a testing protocol for film strength that lasts 30 seconds using new oil. If your read through the speedtalk thread there are many posts that are commenting along the same lines.

 

I did read the entire thread.

Your comments seem to be a restatement of exactly what I quoted from that post...so I'm not sure the point you're making...?

 

I didn't mean to imply film strength was *another way to skin a cat*.

What I said was that oil engineers have always had many ways to create the necessary wear protection as well as all the other attributes needed for a particular blend. ZDDP is not the only thing that can save parts. Just throwing additional ZDDP or anything else into an oil blend may or may not create the desired outcome.

The things the Brad Penn guy mentioned about the way their oil *sticks* to parts is definitely a feature I see in their product. I've always liked that if for nothing else having an oil film already in place is better to me than having a quick flowing oil that runs off after shutdown. You can lay a part on the table with Brad Penn on it and 2 mos later it will still be *wet*. I don't know what's in their blend to do that...but it does. I used to work on a nitro drag car that had no upper end oiling at all. Right after setting valves we would soak the valvetrain with Brad Penn and stick the covers on. Never had any troubles with it. Look at many oils today (look through oil fill hole or pull a cover) and the parts are near bone dry after sitting overnight.

There was a guy on the forums a few years ago running Walmart Tech 2000 in his 7 second BBC dragster. He insisted on leaving the oil in the entire season and then checking the bearings every year. They always looked new,,which means that whatever film strength that oil has is sufficient for what he was doing and the simple oiling system was working fine. It was a roller motor..so it doesn't tell us anything about flat tappets wear.

I personally don't think I've ever actually seen an issue with an oil itself that I knew of...it was a mechanical problem. Ford did use to fuss a lot about using oil that was too thick in some of their gas engines.

Anyway,,,I like the testing whether the conclusions are the end all/be all last word or not. A good engineerr with any marketing background at all would get on here with some real tech discussions to educate the masses.

Isn't this stuff fun?


JIM

 

Turbo build is moving forward. Had some *job* changes lately that have kept me tied up. The shortblock is together with the lower compression pistons (had to rebalance), cam is degreed...pistons notched for radial clearance and all 8 holes ck'd. The plan is to get heads together this weekend and get it fired up on test stand..then dropped into car next week.

JIM

 

The point I am making is this is the exact same thing I have been saying repeatedly for a few months on the numerous threads posted on "oil testing" threads on this forum confirmed by the head lubrication engineer at a specialty racing oil company.

 

 

Diesel oil works great in Tractors and motorcycle oil works wonders in motorcycles, plenty of car oil that works great in cars

 

Yup and even diesel/car oil that work great in motorcycles.

http://www.zrxoa.org/forums/showthre...a-T6-Synthetic


Note the SM rating....................

 

Film strength is the primary mode of protection. That said any flat tappet cam will "shear" the film strength of the oil. When, not if this happens the phosphorous sacrificial layer deposited on highly stressed internals that are subjected to heat and pressure that develops over time as the ZDDP molocules are broken down under extreme pressure is the "last line of defense". Yes, Any flat tappet cam will "shear" the film strength of any oil. You do need ZDDP. Read this:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/oilshear.htm

I have explained why in great detail numerous times on the many threads on this and on the oil sticky. I have answered your questions above. Not repeating myself here again. If you havent read it yet, we have a search function. Or click on my name and open my posts and go through them if you need more detail.

 

My interest in - and problem with - 540 RAT's testing is solely in regards to his comments regarding the need for ZDDP with flat-tappet cams. His guidance is counter to every single flat-tappet cam and oil manufacturer. All of them. Yet he chooses not to contact those engineers to get their perspective on his testing.

The simple fact - not opinion - is that all of these manufacturers specify 1,000+ ZDDP for flat-tappet cams. I post on these threads to ensure folks are aware that 540 RAT's guidance is counter to those manufacturers - and they can make up their own minds from there.

Which brings me to "following him around" - this is by his choice; he was provided a sticky for his testing, something not done lightly by the Mods, which he chooses not to use. All the debate could be there, but instead he chooses to post and repost, and now even cross-posting from other sites.

This is a community, and folks are welcome to post what they like, where they like. It gets heated sometimes, and it gets personal sometimes. There's good information posted here, and utter BS. The Mods reign lightly over the top, hearding cats where they need to. In the end, it works very well. If you don't like information, ignore it. If you don't like a poster, that's what the Ignore function is for.