What do you guys think? Zinc additive for engine oil
07-12-2009, 11:39 AM
#13
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 2
There is an article in Mustang monthly about this subject,also for reading pleasure.
This new oil is harming old engines, that's a fact, i've seen 4 in the last few months, with destroyed/worn parts, not to cause great discussion, but Mobil 1 doesn't have the required 1200-1400 parts, of Zinc, the only oil that does is, Redline, not even sure about Royal Purple, but if you want a good oil that does have it, use Brad-Penn, they actuall post their fact sheets on line.This is the orginal Kendall oil formuals( prior to Kendall being sold), virgin crued, etc, etc. Notice most of the others don't post their sheets for a reason !
Also yes Diesel does have the zinc, ie :Rotella, but it also foams on High-rev, and breaks down, so not always the best chocie, I do run that in my 71 Landcruiser, since High rev- just ain't happening there.
Also a note, if you can find European Spec, Castrol, it still has good wear properties, since it meets European, it's different from our Wis-bang Gov standards that don't care about your engine lasting, besides then you can drive a wonderful Smart-car) ok sorry for soap box)
Here's a site for everything you ever wanted to know about Oil
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/
This new oil is harming old engines, that's a fact, i've seen 4 in the last few months, with destroyed/worn parts, not to cause great discussion, but Mobil 1 doesn't have the required 1200-1400 parts, of Zinc, the only oil that does is, Redline, not even sure about Royal Purple, but if you want a good oil that does have it, use Brad-Penn, they actuall post their fact sheets on line.This is the orginal Kendall oil formuals( prior to Kendall being sold), virgin crued, etc, etc. Notice most of the others don't post their sheets for a reason !
Also yes Diesel does have the zinc, ie :Rotella, but it also foams on High-rev, and breaks down, so not always the best chocie, I do run that in my 71 Landcruiser, since High rev- just ain't happening there.
Also a note, if you can find European Spec, Castrol, it still has good wear properties, since it meets European, it's different from our Wis-bang Gov standards that don't care about your engine lasting, besides then you can drive a wonderful Smart-car) ok sorry for soap box)
Here's a site for everything you ever wanted to know about Oil
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/
07-12-2009, 05:03 PM
#15
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California
Posts: 10,468
Royal Purple is crap. Some of the Mobil 1 does have 1,400ppm zinc, but I think it's only the 20-50 stuff? Not sure, but it's not in all of them. Redline is good, the Torco I run all has high ZDDP levels 1,400ppm or more as well as their own proprietary anti friction package that uses moly. Brad Penn I've heard is still good, and I've also heard that Penz Platinum is supposed to be good as well. Some of the Amsoil does, but some Amsoil is also SM spec so it has low ZDDP. Some diesel oil still has it and some doesn't, but yeah, diesel oil is designed for diesels, not high revving gasoline engines.
Bottom line is that you just have to pay to buy a known, good, high quality oil. I like Torco cuz you can order direct in 5 gallon pails if you want, and they'll drop ship it FAST to your front door, and it's really good oil for high performance usage. Redline can be purchased through Summit etc.
Bottom line is that you just have to pay to buy a known, good, high quality oil. I like Torco cuz you can order direct in 5 gallon pails if you want, and they'll drop ship it FAST to your front door, and it's really good oil for high performance usage. Redline can be purchased through Summit etc.
07-12-2009, 07:26 PM
#18
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California
Posts: 10,468
They have to if they want to sell oil. The oil spec is dictated primarily by the engine designers and engineers at the auto companies, it's the minimum required lubrication criteria that will work in engines manufactured during the time the most current spec is out. For the newer engines(2005-current), it's SM spec or better(Ie, when SN comes out then SM rated engines can use either SM or SN). But, it's also dictated by the EPA's requirements on pollution.
Also, the API(American Petroleum Institute) will put their API Starburst seal of approval on the newer oils that meet current lubrication criteria(The API "sets the spec" for oils, certifying that any oil with their starburst meets or exceeds the OEM lube requirements for that oil spec). All new spec oils are SUPPOSED to be backwards compatible, meaning an SM oil SHOULD work on an engine designed for SL, SJ etc. The newest oil spec is supposed to supersede and replace previous specs. The most current, SM(which specifies I think a MAXIMUM of like 800ppm phosphorus/zinc) is the API's current oil standard, but it's created MUCH controversy as many oils that meet the API SM standard and even have the API Starburst, have destroyed older engines, and by older I mean even engines manufactured in the last 10 years have been damaged in some cases.
It's created a real stir, causing many to believe(including Redline and Amsoil, Amsoil perhaps being the single most vocal) that the API Starburst that supposedly signifies the quality assurance for the newer(ie best) lube standard that is SUPPOSED to be backwards compatible, no longer holds any value. Amsoil has publicly stated that they no longer believe that the API's standard can be considered useful, because the most current oil spec can actually have detrimental impacts on engines manufactured 2004-earlier depending on the additives. The API basically has certified an oil spec as being backwards compatible, when it's been shown that it isn't the case. Redline has decided that they will no longer manufacture oils that "meet with API certification" because they too feel that the API rating is now meaningless.
The problem is that the API requires a max of like 800ppm phos/zinc to meet SM spec, but they only set a MINIMUM standard based on the lube requirements of newer engines(not taking into account mechanical redesign of engines to work with the new oil standard). ZDDP is basically an anti-scuff additive, that's designed to reduce friction and prevent metal-to-metal contact in engines by providing a sacrificial layer that "rubs off" during periods of heavy frictional loading. The ZDDP molecules stand up on end and attach themselves to metal surfaces in engines, and when oil reaches it's boundry lubrication point(where the oil has reached the limit of it's ability to lubricate and begins to shear) the ZDDP layer is there to protect. It's been chosen over the years because of it's ability to protect in extreme friction and extreme pressure(when oil is squeezed out between metal parts, such as a flat tappet cam/lifter) and it's relatively low cost. The thing is, there are BETTER additives, but they're more expensive. The new SM spec oils however, bump the standard up by specifying a maximum allowable zinc/phos content, but they don't REQUIRE the use of equal or better anti-scuff compounds. What that means is a GOOD SM oil like Mobil 1 or Amsoil may not have much ZDDP but uses other(more expensive) additives, whereas other manufacturers may not add anything else to offset the lower ZDDP levels. So the SM oil can be real hit and miss depending on who the manufacturer is.
And of course the problem for the consumer, is in most cases, we have NO IDEA what the actual lubrication capability is and how the oil handles high friction/scuff situations, as many manufacturers won't divulge information. Many suspect they keep a lid on it because they're afraid that someone may go look up the ASTM # of what they use and find out it's a crappy compound. And understand this, newer engines manufactured AFTER 2000 have even had issues, one of which is thrust bearings since they rely SOLELY the oil film and don't have pressure to float the crank. Clutch cars in particular when the pedal is depressed, reach a point where the boundry lubrication capabilities of an oil becomes critical, and even newer engines running higher performance clutch upgrades with higher pressures that load the bearing more heavily are having issues with SM oil in some cases.
The API standard used to be meaningful, but now it's up to the individual consumer to have to determine if an engine oil will meet the lube requirements of an engine or not.
Also, the API(American Petroleum Institute) will put their API Starburst seal of approval on the newer oils that meet current lubrication criteria(The API "sets the spec" for oils, certifying that any oil with their starburst meets or exceeds the OEM lube requirements for that oil spec). All new spec oils are SUPPOSED to be backwards compatible, meaning an SM oil SHOULD work on an engine designed for SL, SJ etc. The newest oil spec is supposed to supersede and replace previous specs. The most current, SM(which specifies I think a MAXIMUM of like 800ppm phosphorus/zinc) is the API's current oil standard, but it's created MUCH controversy as many oils that meet the API SM standard and even have the API Starburst, have destroyed older engines, and by older I mean even engines manufactured in the last 10 years have been damaged in some cases.
It's created a real stir, causing many to believe(including Redline and Amsoil, Amsoil perhaps being the single most vocal) that the API Starburst that supposedly signifies the quality assurance for the newer(ie best) lube standard that is SUPPOSED to be backwards compatible, no longer holds any value. Amsoil has publicly stated that they no longer believe that the API's standard can be considered useful, because the most current oil spec can actually have detrimental impacts on engines manufactured 2004-earlier depending on the additives. The API basically has certified an oil spec as being backwards compatible, when it's been shown that it isn't the case. Redline has decided that they will no longer manufacture oils that "meet with API certification" because they too feel that the API rating is now meaningless.
The problem is that the API requires a max of like 800ppm phos/zinc to meet SM spec, but they only set a MINIMUM standard based on the lube requirements of newer engines(not taking into account mechanical redesign of engines to work with the new oil standard). ZDDP is basically an anti-scuff additive, that's designed to reduce friction and prevent metal-to-metal contact in engines by providing a sacrificial layer that "rubs off" during periods of heavy frictional loading. The ZDDP molecules stand up on end and attach themselves to metal surfaces in engines, and when oil reaches it's boundry lubrication point(where the oil has reached the limit of it's ability to lubricate and begins to shear) the ZDDP layer is there to protect. It's been chosen over the years because of it's ability to protect in extreme friction and extreme pressure(when oil is squeezed out between metal parts, such as a flat tappet cam/lifter) and it's relatively low cost. The thing is, there are BETTER additives, but they're more expensive. The new SM spec oils however, bump the standard up by specifying a maximum allowable zinc/phos content, but they don't REQUIRE the use of equal or better anti-scuff compounds. What that means is a GOOD SM oil like Mobil 1 or Amsoil may not have much ZDDP but uses other(more expensive) additives, whereas other manufacturers may not add anything else to offset the lower ZDDP levels. So the SM oil can be real hit and miss depending on who the manufacturer is.
And of course the problem for the consumer, is in most cases, we have NO IDEA what the actual lubrication capability is and how the oil handles high friction/scuff situations, as many manufacturers won't divulge information. Many suspect they keep a lid on it because they're afraid that someone may go look up the ASTM # of what they use and find out it's a crappy compound. And understand this, newer engines manufactured AFTER 2000 have even had issues, one of which is thrust bearings since they rely SOLELY the oil film and don't have pressure to float the crank. Clutch cars in particular when the pedal is depressed, reach a point where the boundry lubrication capabilities of an oil becomes critical, and even newer engines running higher performance clutch upgrades with higher pressures that load the bearing more heavily are having issues with SM oil in some cases.
The API standard used to be meaningful, but now it's up to the individual consumer to have to determine if an engine oil will meet the lube requirements of an engine or not.
07-12-2009, 07:46 PM
#19
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,233
Oh man thanks so much everyone, especially 67mustang302. You guys really know a lot about this subject. If it weren't for me asking what kind of oil to get, I probably would have gone and just put in regular Mobil 1 into the stang from now on.
I really hope to help spread the word and give high ZDDP oils some business they deserve.
I really hope to help spread the word and give high ZDDP oils some business they deserve.
07-12-2009, 10:30 PM
#20
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California
Posts: 10,468
Mobil 1 is still good oil. I'm not aware of anyone having issues with it, but I don't know that many people that run flat tappets that have used it, so I couldn't say for certain if it's an issue there, it'd depend on what else they use as an additive. I do know that Torco works great with flat tappets, and they also have a special break in oil for flat tappets for even more added assurance. There's also a lot of dirt circle track guys around here that run Torco in their flat tappet race engines, and they flog the bat **** out of those things, and I haven't heard of anyone losing a cam with that oil.