I was a longtime VR1 guy... 10w30 in my 318, and was always good to me. I have been wanting a more accessible oil as I had to order that oil every time I wanted an oil change. I broke the motor in with light springs and have upgraded to heavy springs. I have changed oil to Mobil One 5w40 European formula.... Its rating is high in zinc due to Mercedes requiring it for some of their high performance motors. Price point Mobil 1 vs Vr1 is the mobil 1 is cheaper, and oil has been perfect with better oil pressure hot by 5 lbs. I am a year into running this oil and have been very happy with the results. Clean oil drains, clean filters etc. I'm sold on it. Had the heads off and everything looks great... My flatheads run Rotella T1 SAE 30... boring simple high zinc oil. And Cheaper due to more normal drain interval's.
I understand what you are saying, I don’t have enough knowledge to understand how all of the different types of chemistry in oils work for each condition. I’m just saying that 15w-40 diesel oil still has to protect flat tappet cams because in my profession they are still out there.
I'm a good sport, and it's really hard to piss me off as long it is not getting personal. But engine oil seems to be a very touchy subject for some folks, so yeah - I understand. To answer you question, yes I learned that from the Lake Speed Jr. article you mentioned. Usually I trust the man, but If you have different information, let me know. During my lifetime I had to re-learn a lot of things and change my perspective after that, so I'm always open to better my knowledge base. Frank
I used to write a little magazine about AMC cars (see www.ramblerguy.com). While I was doing that I sent Warren Oil Company, that made house branded oil for several different sources (and a cheap oil with their own name), including Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart had an oil that said "for pre 1988 vehicles". I asked about it on my magazine letterhead, specifically asking if it had higher levels of ZDDP since it was for an earlier SAE specification. They had one of their engineers write me back and he explained things. For starters he said he'd not use an oil made to an older spec even if it was an old engine. While it would be safe, modern oil has much better qualities than older specifications. As far as ZDDP, he stated that current standard motor oil still had some in it, enough to be safe for any standard production car engine after break-in. Race engines or hot-rod engines with valve springs over ~300# per inch pressure would need an oil with added ZDDP -- either a racing/off-road oil or an additive, but standard production engines wouldn't need it. That was the main reason some ZDDP was left in -- and some other high pressure additives put in. Break-in is a special situation that requires a high pressure additive while parts seat together, but after that an additive shouldn't be needed. Another thing he noted was that dino oil basically doesn't wear out -- the additives do! It gets dirty as well, but can be indefinitely re-processed. Excess heat can destroy some properties, but more than you normally get in a car engine. If you can clean it and replenish the additives (additives make it multi-viscosity, a**** other things) it's good to go. I remember my grandfather straining used oil from the old 50 something 8N tractor into a can through some cheese cloth. That would sit covered in the shed until the next oil change. Then he'd pour the relatively clean oil off, leaving about half a quart to a quart with some sludge in the bottom. Top off with one new bottle and go for another season. At one time (through the 40s) that was common -- before multi-vicosity oil and other additives, oil was mainly just oil. Personally, I run break-in additive in the first oil change after break-in just in case, but none after that. So unless you're running stiffer than stock valve springs your engine is safe.
One of the discouraging issues about a thread such as this is that in the end, has it really helped the regular person? I for one, am just a regular guy with flat tappet engines that just wants to use an engine oil that won't kill it or be harmful. I don't race, I just drive around town and yet some of your posts come across as terrifying for guys like me. So, as I read through the maze of comments, some helpful, some not, I sit more confused as to what oil is acceptable for the m***es of us regular people. You want me to Buy Brad Penn? VR1? Really, so we buy our oil from Summit or Jegs now instead of down at Napa? Wouldn't it be easier to post a list of acceptable off the shelf oils verses arguing about which one is best? So 10W-30 Rotella T4 is no longer an acceptable oil? Signed, concerned citizen.
Thank you for posting. This is exactly why I try to stop and clean up the misinformation on this subject, it is a perfect example why the spread of misinformation is so bad. The vast majority of people on the HAMB, as well as all those hot rod/custom/cl***ic car enthusiasts around the world, have the same needs and the same concerns as you, and these guys posting up all the FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) are not doing anybody any favors. Without getting into all the technical details, which I will do in another post, but just to cut to the chase, Yes, Rotella T-4 10W-30 is still a perfectly acceptable oil to use in your flat tappet engine, be it a flat head or OHV. Rest easy and don't listen to the FUD.
Ha, one mod my buddies did that a week before his warranty expired. Drain the oil, run the car till it puked, put oil back in and called the dealership.... They put a new motor in too! Car was ot here of course. He wasn't the most honest guy when it came to such things.... Lol. But proof no oil CAN yield good results....
Yes, I have different information, a lot of it. To start with I am in the lubrication business, for over 20 years as a Field Engineer (meaning I work in the field, not out of an office, and provide lubrication engineering services to large national accounts and local distributors) with one of the largest international lubricants companies in the world. I don't mention my name, or the companies name, because I don't need some internet troll tracking me down and causing problems for me at my job. I'm not here representing the company, and I've never recommended any particular brand of oil here, I keep my comments general to the technology, not trying to sell anybody anything, just provide information and clear up misinformation. I am a Certified Lubrication Spe******t with the STLE, and a certified Machinery Lubrication Technologist II with the ICML, and have held other certs for oil condition monitoring and oil ****ysis over the years but I think I've let them expire because frankly I'm aging out of the business and I've just let them go. I also hold certificates from the major heavy equipment and diesel engine OEM's like Cat, Komatsu, IH-Dresser, Terex, JCB, Mack, ***mins, and more. I've been in the heavy equipment business overall for close to 40 years; and before I got into the business my dad worked for IH for 3 decades, starting at a tractor dealership after returning from WWII and recovering from injuries he suffered in the war. So pretty much every meal I've ever had, and every roof over my head, has been paid for via the heavy equipment industries. The last 2 decades in the lubrication side of the business. I not only provide lubrication engineering for this equipment and the engines that power them, but I've had my hands on them, I've rebuilt them in the shop and in the field. I started as an apprentice and helper in a dealership service dept and worked my way up to service manager of the largest Komatsu dealership in the state of California. When I post on the subject I'm not just repeating what I heard/read from somebody else, I'm giving information from decades of experience in the business. Re the information from Lake Speed Jr, the first big mistake he made was the claim that diesel engine oils use different type of zddp than p***enger car oils. Yes, there are different types of zddp compounds (this is one of the reasons why I've always been negative on aftermarket zinc additives, you really know nothing about the specific compounds used in the additive, and the compatibility of those compounds with the oil you're adding it to; it's just not a good idea), but it's not the black & white situation that LSJr implies in his HRM article; frankly he's wrong (every claim he made in that article is wrong). Current API spec CK-4 diesel engine oils use a combination of primary & secondary zddp compounds with a majority of secondary compounds, not the primary compounds that Jr claims. He's wrong. With my companies current CK-4 & FA-4 diesel engine oils the ratio of primary to secondary zddp is roughly 25% primary to 75% secondary. Every brand of oil is likely to have a different ratio based on the individual formulator's experience; but all of them that carry an API license have gone through extensive testing to verify they provide the necessary performance required to p*** the testing earn the license, the right to put the claim on the bottle. All brands are not equal, all brands do not perform the same, but all that carry the API license have p***ed minimum performance requirements. And those requirement are very high, far higher than what was required back when the engines we use in our traditional hot rods and custom's were brand new on the market. Regarding detergents and disperants inhibiting the activation of the zddp compounds, this is the first I've heard that claim, and I would ask from where this comes. Previously the claim, as I understood it, was that the molecules themselves would compete for space on the metal surfaces, as both detergents and zddp antiwear compounds are surface acting chemicals, i.e. they are polar and they are attracted to the metal surfaces. But after I hopefully described how that is not a problem in use, that detergents do not compete with zddp for space in the load zone of wear parts, the claim is now that these additives inhibit the activation of the zddp; that they slow this activity or process down. OK, if that is true, from where does this information come? Did somebody just pull that out of his you know what? Or is there scientific evidence of this? If so there should be a paper on it. Can he quote the source of this information? Show me that and I'll modify my position on the subject. And I do think we need to remain open to new information, so this is not a hill I'm going to die on, if additional information is forthcoming I'll listen to it as any reasonable person should. Just don't pull something out of thin air, it needs to be backed up.
It's anecdotal because you are merely repeating what you've read/heard from somebody else, you yourself have zero education or experience on the subject. You didn't present the information as something you've heard, you're presenting it as facts, which you have no personal knowledge if it is accurate or not.
I've agreed with some, disagreed with some, and some, I just shake my head and think back to when as men we'd sit around a table and guy talk this **** out.
I’m just an old uneducated hick, so what do I know? I’m just putting this out there as I recently read a lot of it and found it very believable. I’m not sure what all he reveals about his methodology, He does seem to offer a lot of information about his tests and he’s apparently been doing this and reporting the results for a very long time, He’s not selling anything or has no agenda that I can see (unlike many of these other places) I know he says the device he came up with that he tests with is proprietary and won’t say what it is, if that’s what you mean. I can’t prove or disprove anything that he says although I believe much of it to be true mostly because it just makes sense. (So do many others that are pretty smart people that have been around this stuff a long time) Basically he is saying that just because an oil has a high ZDDP level doesn’t mean it offers better friction or wear properties than some oils with lesser amounts of ZDDP. He has been publishing results for a decade or so. He has a pretty impressive background if true, and holds 3 patents related to this type of stuff. I can’t say if he’s a quack or not, I don’t know him. I’m just relaying what he has published and what I happened to come to many of the same conclusions he has through personal experience. He has welcomed anyone to disprove this with their own testing to prove it and I’m not aware of anyone that actually has. Many will point to internet or other articles as proof but that doesn’t make them any more or less factual then what he says. My point is that all these failed lobes always being blamed on either not enough ZDDP or improper break in, I think is, in a word ********. I have seen on more than one occasion a new comp cam go flat during break in using all their recommended lubricants and using their break in procedures to the letter, and guess what? it still failed. Maybe if one of these scientists types can simply explain why it’s usually 1 or 2 lobes that fail immediately, due to poor oil with low ZDDP levels or break in process yet the other 14 or 15 lobes show no sign of poor wear or damage at all while being exposed to exactly the same conditions as the one or two that failed. Then, I may be convinced otherwise, but until then I will continue to think there are likely many factors and causes for these failures and several of them have absolutely ZERO to do with ZDDP levels or not properly breaking in a cam. BTW Can someone describe the camshaft break in procedures used by GM for the Millions and millions of flat tappet cams they sold in new cars for several decades that lasted for 100,000 miles? Like I said in regards to this guy’s results “Take it for what you want” I think the guys testing is likely more accurate than many want to believe it is, because it goes against what all the cam manufacturers have been blaming it on instead of taking blame for in many cases their product inferiority. Comp in particular is very reluctant to admit their stuff is possibly at fault. ( yet they offer for an extra fee nitriding process that they say will eliminate all these failures) There is a recent testimonial from a guy that said he bought a brand new Howard’s cam set, used modern oil with low ZDDP levels but that tested high on this guys list, did no camshaft break in at all and it has been fine. There are many stories in his blog just like that. I’m wondering what does the science say about this?
I'm not challenging your right to post anything, this isn't my board and I don't grant or retract rights. I do criticize your sharing information as fact when you have no personal knowledge on the subject or whether what you are posting is factual or not. It would be better to attribute what you have to share with where you got the information from. Just take a look at Joliet Jake's post above to see the damage this can cause. I can guarantee you there are many others with the same doubts due to your posts, they just aren't saying anything, Not to mention all those in the future who will come across this thread and others where you post that misinformation. You said and and This is what I'm talking about when you post things you know nothing about and have no experience with. Please back up what you've posted here without using the HRM article from LSJr. You said you have plenty of sources, so.... You also said . How do you know that? That is an objective statement, not a subjective one. You didn't say you think it's not the best, or that in your estimation or understanding it's not the best, you just said "it's not the best". Please share your sources, you have plenty. Shall I go on?
Why do you think that I have no personal knowledge or experience with supercharged engines? Are you making an ***umption? You know what, don't answer that. You don't have to. I think my point is proven, and when these threads delve into 2 people going back and forth is when they get closed. So forget it. Everyone can see for themselves what going on. Have a great day.
Wal-Mart used to have SA oil "Not for use in cars made after 1930(?)" on the can. Knew people who just read the "oil doesn't wear out" part, but not the "additives do" part. One guy would only change the filter & top off...
Oil threads often end up in an argument. They are fun to read and educational too. I only jumped in because of the remarks about Rotella, been using it for years. I was not aware of the new blended T4 because I have a decent supply in the garage. I finally got a reply from Shell about the new blend. "Our Shell Rotella T4 15W-40 has 1200 ppm of zinc. This level of zinc is perfect for older flat tappet engines." So I’m good…..carry on…have fun and watch the blood pressure.
A local 'racer' (street) confided in me that his 312 Y powered '55 club sedan is being refitted with a roller cam. I'd LOVE to see one of those roller tappets...
Again -- "HE" is an oil engineer at Warren Oil Company: "As far as ZDDP, he stated that current standard motor oil still had some in it, enough to be safe for any standard production car engine after break-in. Race engines or hot-rod engines with valve springs over ~300# per inch pressure would need an oil with added ZDDP -- either a racing/off-road oil or an additive, but standard production engines wouldn't need it." He also stated that modern oil was far and above anything made even 10 years earlier. The letter I got was from the mid 2000s, but the info still stands. Current oil was engineered to have the minimum high pressure additives to keep any standard production flat tappet engine alive and well.
Just a couple old sayings: 1. One good test is worth 1000 opinions 2. Opinions are like ***holes, everyone has one Someone that works at a major oil company, which is constantly doing testing and evaluation of oil formulations, is a good resource to me (note the irony, that is my opinion). Blues4U has a whole working career in lubrication and access to the experts at his company. I'll listen to his information, and appreciate the time and knowledge posted in this and several previous threads discussing oil. All of my old vehicles have flat tappets, and I typically use diesel oil in them. It works for me (that's anecdotal, not a scientific based test).
I would beg to differ on that blanket statement. In the thread “ engine math “ you posted a picture of engine firing orders, while I did not check them all I did notice a couple things wrong with that information. Eg. the pic shows the distributor at the front on the y block, the firing order of the ford flat head is incorrect and shows # 3 firing twice ( perhaps that was tougue in cheek). Perhaps the fact that MSD is emblazoned on the picture you ***umed that they did their due diligence to ensure all was correct and in good order, I responded to your post noting this, well it seems to me that you can also spread misinformation.
The Jalopy Journal
