Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » [GMCnet] Which oil is better? ( Blackstone's view )
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Which oil is better? ( Blackstone's view ) [message #321208 is a reply to message #321192] |
Fri, 28 July 2017 11:55   |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Fred,
Thank you for posting that valuable information.
As much as we all like to think, we understand, an article like his is
worth reading and understanding.
Lot of what he covered was on the ASE Certification test I took to pass,
both the first time and the recertification.
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Fred Hudspeth
wrote:
>
> The degreed mechanical engineer who wrote this article asserts that the
> ZDDP
> issue is a myth!
>
> https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-test-ranking/
>
> 'Consistent with Blackstone's opinion rendered circa 2010...
>
> Fred Hudspeth
>
> Fred Hudspeth
> 1978 Royale (TZE 368V101335) - Tyler, TX
> 1982 Airstream Excella (motorhome) - Cooper Landing, Alaska
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:56:40 +0000
> From: Bob Dunahugh
> To: "gmclist@list.gmcnet.org"
> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Wich oil is better? ( Blackstonr's view )
> Message-ID:
>
> namprd14.prod.outlook.
> com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Outstanding review. But we still have to deal with Zinc. And the diesel
> formula's cover that. Bob Dunahugh
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Newark,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Which oil is better? ( Blackstone's view ) [message #321211 is a reply to message #321208] |
Fri, 28 July 2017 15:02 |
Mike Kelley
Messages: 467
Registered: February 2017
Karma: -2
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thanks Jim K, Fred H, and Bob Dunahugh:
Soo - is it your opinion that ZDDP is a myth? If this author's testing is on all newer cars - could he be wrong regards our 1970's GMC MH engines?
Mike/The Corvair a holic
Still using "Demo 400LE" in my Vairs and GMCMH's
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 28, 2017, at 11:55 AM, Jim Kanomata wrote:
>
> Fred,
> Thank you for posting that valuable information.
> As much as we all like to think, we understand, an article like his is
> worth reading and understanding.
> Lot of what he covered was on the ASE Certification test I took to pass,
> both the first time and the recertification.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Fred Hudspeth
> wrote:
>
>>
>> The degreed mechanical engineer who wrote this article asserts that the
>> ZDDP
>> issue is a myth!
>>
>> https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-test-ranking/
>>
>> 'Consistent with Blackstone's opinion rendered circa 2010...
>>
>> Fred Hudspeth
>>
>> Fred Hudspeth
>> 1978 Royale (TZE 368V101335) - Tyler, TX
>> 1982 Airstream Excella (motorhome) - Cooper Landing, Alaska
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:56:40 +0000
>> From: Bob Dunahugh
>> To: "gmclist@list.gmcnet.org"
>> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Wich oil is better? ( Blackstonr's view )
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> > namprd14.prod.outlook.
>> com>
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Outstanding review. But we still have to deal with Zinc. And the diesel
>> formula's cover that. Bob Dunahugh
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Kanomata
> Applied/GMC, Newark,CA
> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
> http://www.appliedgmc.com
> 1-800-752-7502
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Which oil is better? ( Blackstone's view ) [message #321212 is a reply to message #321192] |
Fri, 28 July 2017 15:14 |
Richard Denney
Messages: 920
Registered: April 2010
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
He may be a Degreed Mechanical Engineer (and he must be German, too--with
all those capitalized nouns), but he sure could benefit from a Degreed
Technical Writer. :) His articles have too much advocacy and it undermines
the data he's presenting.
But the data are really interesting. He's making the case that the oil and
its additives add up to one important feature--the load-carrying capacity
of its film at operating temperature. He does not test its ability to carry
a specified load, but rather how much area is protects at a known gross
overload. As I understand it (for those who couldn't stomach his whole
blog), he rubs two pieces of steel together, at high and known load,
continuously lubricated by a film of oil (meaning that it is squirted onto
the apparatus rather than being pumped into the interface, in which case he
says any oil will work). At high pressure, the film fails and leaves a
scar. He knows the force he's using, so he measures the area of the scar
(which is where the oil film failed) to get the pounds/square inch.
He tests at 230 degrees. which I think is pretty close to realistic for us.
It's a compelling test, and I think it's a good one.
He also makes an important point that I think is the first time I've
thought of it that way: The purpose of a high-volume pump is to make it
possible to use thin oil. Thin oil drains back faster and moves more heat
away from the engine parts. This is consistent with what I've heard Dick
Paterson say for years ("NASCAR runs race engines at 8000 or 9000 RPMs all
day long with 30psi oil pressure").
And he makes the case that zinc is one possible anti-wear additive, but by
itself won't overcome an otherwise poor oil. He argues that current
anti-wear additives (leading to the SN designation, and the Dexos 1 rating)
are better than zinc used in older dino oils from decades past. He would
argue that the industry has overcome the problem of reduced zinc and
phosphorus.
One of the highest-ranking oils out of the bottle was Mobil 1 5W30, API SN,
according to his testing. New formulations were clearly better than those
we liked in years past.
I think now that my engine is broken in I'll switch to Mobil 1 5W30 API SN,
which is probably what I was going to use anyway, again remembering all
those recommendations from Dick P.
Rick "data speaks for itself, but in this case only through a cacophony of
table-thumping" Denney
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Fred Hudspeth
wrote:
>
> The degreed mechanical engineer who wrote this article asserts that the
> ZDDP
> issue is a myth!
>
> https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-test-ranking/
>
> 'Consistent with Blackstone's opinion rendered circa 2010...
>
> Fred Hudspeth
>
> Fred Hudspeth
> 1978 Royale (TZE 368V101335) - Tyler, TX
> 1982 Airstream Excella (motorhome) - Cooper Landing, Alaska
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:56:40 +0000
> From: Bob Dunahugh
> To: "gmclist@list.gmcnet.org"
> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Wich oil is better? ( Blackstonr's view )
> Message-ID:
>
> namprd14.prod.outlook.
> com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Outstanding review. But we still have to deal with Zinc. And the diesel
> formula's cover that. Bob Dunahugh
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>
--
'73 X-Glacier 230 "Jaws"
Northern Virginia
Offlist email: rick at rickdenney dot com
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Which oil is better? ( Blackstone's view ) [message #321213 is a reply to message #321211] |
Fri, 28 July 2017 15:19 |
Richard Denney
Messages: 920
Registered: April 2010
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
He's not testing on cars, but in a test apparatus that provides a much more
severe test, and he tests all oils at failure. His apparatus seems to me to
resemble a flat tappet--a steel something rubbing on another steel
something and much greater force than any flat tappet we will see.
He's saying that zinc is an outdated technology, and that there are other
wear modifiers now available that (according to his testing) seem to work
better. He also says that the zinc additives undermine currently available
oils.
Rick "noting the propensity for internet chatter to transform itself into
settled knowledge that is still wrong, or at least overstated and
extrapolated" Denney
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Mike Kelley wrote:
> Thanks Jim K, Fred H, and Bob Dunahugh:
> Soo - is it your opinion that ZDDP is a myth? If this author's testing is
> on all newer cars - could he be wrong regards our 1970's GMC MH engines?
> Mike/The Corvair a holic
> Still using "Demo 400LE" in my Vairs and GMCMH's
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 28, 2017, at 11:55 AM, Jim Kanomata
> wrote:
>>
>> Fred,
>> Thank you for posting that valuable information.
>> As much as we all like to think, we understand, an article like his is
>> worth reading and understanding.
>> Lot of what he covered was on the ASE Certification test I took to pass,
>> both the first time and the recertification.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Fred Hudspeth
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The degreed mechanical engineer who wrote this article asserts that the
>>> ZDDP
>>> issue is a myth!
>>>
>>> https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-
> test-ranking/
>>>
>>> 'Consistent with Blackstone's opinion rendered circa 2010...
>>>
>>> Fred Hudspeth
>>>
>>> Fred Hudspeth
>>> 1978 Royale (TZE 368V101335) - Tyler, TX
>>> 1982 Airstream Excella (motorhome) - Cooper Landing, Alaska
>>>
>>> Message: 4
>>> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:56:40 +0000
>>> From: Bob Dunahugh
>>> To: "gmclist@list.gmcnet.org"
>>> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Wich oil is better? ( Blackstonr's view )
>>> Message-ID:
>>>
>>> >> namprd14.prod.outlook.
>>> com>
>>>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>
>>> Outstanding review. But we still have to deal with Zinc. And the diesel
>>> formula's cover that. Bob Dunahugh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GMCnet mailing list
>>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>>> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim Kanomata
>> Applied/GMC, Newark,CA
>> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
>> http://www.appliedgmc.com
>> 1-800-752-7502
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>
--
'73 X-Glacier 230 "Jaws"
Northern Virginia
Offlist email: rick at rickdenney dot com
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Which oil is better? ( Blackstone's view ) [message #321214 is a reply to message #321211] |
Fri, 28 July 2017 15:29 |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
If your breaking in a new camshaft, I would advise people to put in some
ZDDP as you never know on breakig in a camshaft.
Too much of any additive is not good, as ZDDP by itself does not always
have the lubricating qualities of oil.
Back in late 1980, SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers ) jumped on the SPE
(Society of Petroleum Engineers) for coming up with the 10-40 Oil as they
had to put in so much additives to stabilize the oil to achieve 10-40 that
the engines were wearing excessively.
Before, 10-30 was the best they could do.
Apparently the Petro Engineers were able to over come this later.
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Mike Kelley wrote:
> Thanks Jim K, Fred H, and Bob Dunahugh:
> Soo - is it your opinion that ZDDP is a myth? If this author's testing is
> on all newer cars - could he be wrong regards our 1970's GMC MH engines?
> Mike/The Corvair a holic
> Still using "Demo 400LE" in my Vairs and GMCMH's
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 28, 2017, at 11:55 AM, Jim Kanomata
> wrote:
>>
>> Fred,
>> Thank you for posting that valuable information.
>> As much as we all like to think, we understand, an article like his is
>> worth reading and understanding.
>> Lot of what he covered was on the ASE Certification test I took to pass,
>> both the first time and the recertification.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Fred Hudspeth
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The degreed mechanical engineer who wrote this article asserts that the
>>> ZDDP
>>> issue is a myth!
>>>
>>> https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-
> test-ranking/
>>>
>>> 'Consistent with Blackstone's opinion rendered circa 2010...
>>>
>>> Fred Hudspeth
>>>
>>> Fred Hudspeth
>>> 1978 Royale (TZE 368V101335) - Tyler, TX
>>> 1982 Airstream Excella (motorhome) - Cooper Landing, Alaska
>>>
>>> Message: 4
>>> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:56:40 +0000
>>> From: Bob Dunahugh
>>> To: "gmclist@list.gmcnet.org"
>>> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Wich oil is better? ( Blackstonr's view )
>>> Message-ID:
>>>
>>> >> namprd14.prod.outlook.
>>> com>
>>>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>
>>> Outstanding review. But we still have to deal with Zinc. And the diesel
>>> formula's cover that. Bob Dunahugh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GMCnet mailing list
>>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>>> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim Kanomata
>> Applied/GMC, Newark,CA
>> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
>> http://www.appliedgmc.com
>> 1-800-752-7502
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Newark,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Which oil is better? ( Blackstone's view ) [message #321216 is a reply to message #321211] |
Fri, 28 July 2017 15:20 |
James Hupy
Messages: 6806
Registered: May 2010
Karma: -62
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Roller cams and roller rockers have little, to no, need for high
concentrations of zinc and phosphorus. Both of which are suspected of
shortening the life of "catastrophic converters". Most all modern engines
now use overhead cams with roller followers. So, API has been complying
with stricter guidelines on the use of metals as a wear prevention
additive.
Where does that leave the flat tappet engines? On low lift, and shallow
angle of attack cam lobe designs, not much of a problem. BUT, if you get
more agressive with lift and steeper, more abrupt, cam lobes, that require
stiffer spring tension, experience has shown higher wear rates with the new
oils. As the tappet faces and camshaft lobes, and to some extent valve tips
and rocker arm contact surfaces see accelerated wear, that metal goes into
the lube oil, some of which is trapped by oil filters, some not. Just a
factor of friction.
Jim Hupy
Salem, Or
78 GMC ROYALE 403
On Jul 28, 2017 1:02 PM, "Mike Kelley" wrote:
> Thanks Jim K, Fred H, and Bob Dunahugh:
> Soo - is it your opinion that ZDDP is a myth? If this author's testing is
> on all newer cars - could he be wrong regards our 1970's GMC MH engines?
> Mike/The Corvair a holic
> Still using "Demo 400LE" in my Vairs and GMCMH's
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 28, 2017, at 11:55 AM, Jim Kanomata
> wrote:
>>
>> Fred,
>> Thank you for posting that valuable information.
>> As much as we all like to think, we understand, an article like his is
>> worth reading and understanding.
>> Lot of what he covered was on the ASE Certification test I took to pass,
>> both the first time and the recertification.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Fred Hudspeth
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The degreed mechanical engineer who wrote this article asserts that the
>>> ZDDP
>>> issue is a myth!
>>>
>>> https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-
> test-ranking/
>>>
>>> 'Consistent with Blackstone's opinion rendered circa 2010...
>>>
>>> Fred Hudspeth
>>>
>>> Fred Hudspeth
>>> 1978 Royale (TZE 368V101335) - Tyler, TX
>>> 1982 Airstream Excella (motorhome) - Cooper Landing, Alaska
>>>
>>> Message: 4
>>> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:56:40 +0000
>>> From: Bob Dunahugh
>>> To: "gmclist@list.gmcnet.org"
>>> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Wich oil is better? ( Blackstonr's view )
>>> Message-ID:
>>>
>>> >> namprd14.prod.outlook.
>>> com>
>>>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>
>>> Outstanding review. But we still have to deal with Zinc. And the diesel
>>> formula's cover that. Bob Dunahugh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GMCnet mailing list
>>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>>> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim Kanomata
>> Applied/GMC, Newark,CA
>> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
>> http://www.appliedgmc.com
>> 1-800-752-7502
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Which oil is better? ( Blackstone's view ) [message #321217 is a reply to message #321216] |
Fri, 28 July 2017 15:34 |
Richard Denney
Messages: 920
Registered: April 2010
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jim--I recommend reading the article (as laborious as it is to do so).
Looking down the list of 200 or so oils that he's tested, it seems to me
that the very latest formulations (in the last two or three years) do
significantly better than formulations I recall being well-favored by GMC
owners 6-8 years ago (or longer), when the ZDDP thing first popped up. I
wonder if your experience takes into account these latest
formulations--there may not have been time to know, just based on actual
engine wear (as opposed to his accelerated failure testing). There may be
some much better additive packages being used now.
Rick "his testing is more severe, but still similar to, high-lift
aggressive cams with flat tappets" Denney
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:20 PM, James Hupy wrote:
> Roller cams and roller rockers have little, to no, need for high
> concentrations of zinc and phosphorus. Both of which are suspected of
> shortening the life of "catastrophic converters". Most all modern engines
> now use overhead cams with roller followers. So, API has been complying
> with stricter guidelines on the use of metals as a wear prevention
> additive.
> Where does that leave the flat tappet engines? On low lift, and shallow
> angle of attack cam lobe designs, not much of a problem. BUT, if you get
> more agressive with lift and steeper, more abrupt, cam lobes, that require
> stiffer spring tension, experience has shown higher wear rates with the new
> oils. As the tappet faces and camshaft lobes, and to some extent valve tips
> and rocker arm contact surfaces see accelerated wear, that metal goes into
> the lube oil, some of which is trapped by oil filters, some not. Just a
> factor of friction.
> Jim Hupy
> Salem, Or
> 78 GMC ROYALE 403
>
> On Jul 28, 2017 1:02 PM, "Mike Kelley" wrote:
>
>> Thanks Jim K, Fred H, and Bob Dunahugh:
>> Soo - is it your opinion that ZDDP is a myth? If this author's testing
> is
>> on all newer cars - could he be wrong regards our 1970's GMC MH engines?
>> Mike/The Corvair a holic
>> Still using "Demo 400LE" in my Vairs and GMCMH's
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Jul 28, 2017, at 11:55 AM, Jim Kanomata
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Fred,
>>> Thank you for posting that valuable information.
>>> As much as we all like to think, we understand, an article like his is
>>> worth reading and understanding.
>>> Lot of what he covered was on the ASE Certification test I took to
> pass,
>>> both the first time and the recertification.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Fred Hudspeth
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The degreed mechanical engineer who wrote this article asserts that
> the
>>>> ZDDP
>>>> issue is a myth!
>>>>
>>>> https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-
>> test-ranking/
>>>>
>>>> 'Consistent with Blackstone's opinion rendered circa 2010...
>>>>
>>>> Fred Hudspeth
>>>>
>>>> Fred Hudspeth
>>>> 1978 Royale (TZE 368V101335) - Tyler, TX
>>>> 1982 Airstream Excella (motorhome) - Cooper Landing, Alaska
>>>>
>>>> Message: 4
>>>> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:56:40 +0000
>>>> From: Bob Dunahugh
>>>> To: "gmclist@list.gmcnet.org"
>>>> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Wich oil is better? ( Blackstonr's view )
>>>> Message-ID:
>>>>
>>>> >>> namprd14.prod.outlook.
>>>> com>
>>>>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>>
>>>> Outstanding review. But we still have to deal with Zinc. And the
> diesel
>>>> formula's cover that. Bob Dunahugh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GMCnet mailing list
>>>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>>>> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jim Kanomata
>>> Applied/GMC, Newark,CA
>>> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
>>> http://www.appliedgmc.com
>>> 1-800-752-7502
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GMCnet mailing list
>>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>>> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>
--
'73 X-Glacier 230 "Jaws"
Northern Virginia
Offlist email: rick at rickdenney dot com
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Which oil is better? ( Blackstone's view ) [message #321223 is a reply to message #321192] |
Fri, 28 July 2017 20:51 |
Larry
Messages: 2875
Registered: January 2004
Location: Menomonie, WI
Karma: 10
|
Senior Member |
|
|
fbhtxak wrote on Thu, 27 July 2017 18:02
The degreed mechanical engineer who wrote this article asserts that the ZDDP
issue is a myth!
https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-test-ranking/
'Consistent with Blackstone's opinion rendered circa 2010...
Fred Hudspeth
Fred Hudspeth
1978 Royale (TZE 368V101335) - Tyler, TX
1982 Airstream Excella (motorhome) - Cooper Landing, Alaska
After reading the above article and reflecting on it for some time I choose his third pick...0W40 Mobil 1 "FS" European Car Formula. Choose it for the "0" at cold starts to get oil flowing to surfaces ASAP, and the "40" to give me the oil pressure I wanted at a hot run. Oil pressure is 45lbs at a hot highway run with 30lbs at a hot idle. Also because it is readily available and priced about the same as all of the other comparable oils and highly rated right out of the bottle without additional additives. Here is the full review.
3. 0W40 Mobil 1 "FS" European Car Formula, ACEA A3/B3, A3/B4, API SN, synthetic = 127,221 psi
This new oil replaces the older version called, 0W40 Mobil 1, European Formula, API SN, synthetic. See below for the older version's ranking position.
zinc = TBD
phos = TBD
moly = TBD
This new "FS" version was tested in Summer 2016. This oil produced the highest psi value ever seen in my testing, from any motor oil just as it comes right out of the bottle, with no aftermarket additives. Very impressive.
However, a 40wt hot viscosity rated motor oil is too thick to be ideal for most engines. It is best to select the thinnest motor oil viscosity that will still provide acceptable "hot" oil pressure. And you do NOT need to select the "highest rated" motor oil, just as it comes right out of the bottle, from this Wear Protection Ranking List. There are many highly ranked oils here, that will provide your engine with excellent wear protection. So, you have many oils to choose from.
I also went on to test this oil at the much higher temperature of 275*F. At that elevated temperature, any hotter and thinner oil is expected to experience a drop in Wear Protection Capability. This oil did have a 16% drop in capability. But, even at that elevated temperature, it produced an impressive 106,876 psi, which still kept this much hotter and thinner oil in the INCREDIBLE Wear Protection Category.
I also tested this oil to find out its onset of thermal breakdown, which was 280F.
This is just what I'm doing on a new rebuild of a Cad 500.
Larry 
78 Royale w/500 Caddy
Menomonie, WI.
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Which oil is better? ( Blackstone's view ) [message #321265 is a reply to message #321192] |
Sat, 29 July 2017 21:26 |
fbhtxak
Messages: 191
Registered: April 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mike,
Re " Soo - is it your opinion that ZDDP is a myth? "
My experience and many engineering analyses like that in the link suggest
that it is. I have seen no engineering-based documents to the contrary.
When reduced ZDDP became a "hot button" issue years ago, I called
engineering acquaintances in ExxonMobil's lube oils department in the
downstream sector. I was at the time recently retired from the upstream
sector(i.e., exploration/drilling/production) of the corporation. In short,
I was assured that the reduction of ZDDP would have no impact on the
service life of "old technology flat-tappet' automotive engines. They
asserted that successor ExxonMobil and all API-certified oils had been
formulated to more than adequately compensate for the reduced ZDDP.
I accepted their assurances and continued to use conventional API-certified
oils in my '78 Royale OEM "403". I did that until I had Cinnabar
preemptively replace it in November with a fresh "403" from Dick Paterson's
business. It had about 140K miles on it (about 120K were mine over 23
years). A few months earlier, I found during a "wellness check" that there
was some communication between adjacent cylinders 5 and 7 (in the firing
order) on the driver side cylinder head - a pending head gasket failure.
Other than that, there were no signs of any significant wear (based on
Blackstone analyses) nor degradation in performance. Rather than remove the
top half of the engine to replace head/intake gaskets at 140K miles, I
elected to just "R&R" the engine... That is my experience (but that, and the
opinions, of others may vary...).
The engineer's observations and findings in the link appear consistent with
the principles of tribology, a hairy (as I remember it) engineering course
in many mechanical engineering curricula - but maybe other engineering
curricula as well, based on remarks made by other likely engineers on this
forum.
Finally, the API certification mark ("starburst") and service symbol
(donut") found on the packaging of oils are assurance that the oil "meets
performance requirements set by US and International vehicle and engine
manufacturers and the lubricant industry" (from
http://agriculture.mo.gov/weights/fuel/pdf/MotorOilsandLubricants.pdf ). I
used those oils, without regard to brands (including some "house" brands) in
the OEM "403" (and always changing at 3k mi. or 1 year intervals, whichever
came first). I, however, use synthetic oils in engines designed (or rebuilt
- as for Paterson engines) to use synthetic oil - and especially if required
by manufacturers. I otherwise use conventional API oils as I did in the OEM
"403".
Soo - this is my opinion (and probably "way TMI")!
Fred
Fred Hudspeth
1978 Royale (TZE 368V101335) - Tyler, TX
1982 Airstream Excella (motorhome w"454") - Cooper Landing, Alaska
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 15:02:00 -0500
From: Mike Kelley
To: gmclist@list.gmcnet.org
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Which oil is better? ( Blackstone's view )
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Thanks Jim K, Fred H, and Bob Dunahugh:
Soo - is it your opinion that ZDDP is a myth? If this author's testing is
on all newer cars - could he be wrong regards our 1970's GMC MH engines?
Mike/The Corvair a holic
Still using "Demo 400LE" in my Vairs and GMCMH's
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 28, 2017, at 11:55 AM, Jim Kanomata wrote:
>
> Fred,
> Thank you for posting that valuable information.
> As much as we all like to think, we understand, an article like his is
> worth reading and understanding.
> Lot of what he covered was on the ASE Certification test I took to pass,
> both the first time and the recertification.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Fred Hudspeth
> wrote:
>
>>
>> The degreed mechanical engineer who wrote this article asserts that the
>> ZDDP
>> issue is a myth!
>>
>> https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-test-ranking/
>>
>> 'Consistent with Blackstone's opinion rendered circa 2010...
>>
>> Fred Hudspeth
>>
>> Fred Hudspeth
>> 1978 Royale (TZE 368V101335) - Tyler, TX
>> 1982 Airstream Excella (motorhome) - Cooper Landing, Alaska
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Nov 04 21:56:48 CST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04159 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
