ZDDP question

[Way2QWK]

I knew that would be the responce, thats all I could find for now. The oil drop.com site seems to be a good unbiased site on oil. Most people on that forum prefer amsoil to royal purple for the reasons I mentioned. Just from what I have heard going back 10 years, I have never heard one bad thing about amsoil products.

[t-topflyer]

Originally Posted by Way2QWK

I knew that would be the responce, thats all I could find for now. The oil drop.com site seems to be a good unbiased site on oil. Most people on that forum prefer amsoil to royal purple for the reasons I mentioned. Just from what I have heard going back 10 years, I have never heard one bad thing about amsoil products.

Rich, thanks for the links just the same. I would say either one is probably a quality product since Buick owners have had positive experiences with both brands.

[A2000RICH]

guys---------i have recently spent a lot of time doing research into the oil licensing programs that are supervised and authorized by the API/ISLAC-------there is so much nonsense, bias and brand loyalty on the subject of oil that asking most folks about oil is similar to asking about religion or politics---------and i have come to feel like asking the oil companies about their product formulations is a total waste of time---------don't forget that many of them are the same "oil companies" that we have come to love, respect and thank for our great gasoline prices----------yes i do agree that some of the smaller independents are not in that same league but i liken most of them to politicians--------their motives are questionable weather they are at the highest federal level or our local town council---------one thing is for sure------everybody makes the best oil and everybody has just the thing that our cars need--------NOT-----------I have no doubt that the royal purple representative means well but he’s towing the party line--------just what is RP Synerlec????-------in the last two weeks I have read over 4000 pages of API/ISLAC/ASTM test methods, licensing requirements, and certification sequences---------I have done this to educate myself on the subject and to try to understand just what is happening to our oils----------- I have not come across a single reference to RP Synerlec---------and I can find literally thousands of references to ZDDP-----------ZDDP has been the single most accepted EP additive and has been universally used by virtually every oil company for decades--------nothing has yet to come along that can be shown to take its place------- what has happened in the last 15 years makes this extremely clear----------in order to comply with ZDDP being reduced the manufacturers have had to literally change the design of engines----------while I will certainly admit that roller cams are superior to flat tappet cams they are also much more expensive and the manufacturers would have never replaced a simple oil additive with more expensive engine parts if there were any other alternative---------- that being said i have begun to uncover some really interesting stuff and i am totally convinced that any of them could care less about older cars----------in the next couple weeks I am going to cover some of the more interesting stuff that I think everyone that has any doubts about caring for their older car should consider and read at least to the point of understanding-----------it is going to take some time and I have to spread this out due to my own time constraints but bear with me it will be worth it----------I also want to mention that all my facts will be documented with credible references---------if I fail to make them clear please don’t hesitate to question me before we get too far along----------and since this is a preliminary attempt at organizing this data you may expect some of the stuff to be not exactly in the most logical order---------when I finally get done with all of this in intend to write a good article and make it available to some of the mags---------hopefully a few of them will be willing to publish it in spite of the fact that they have oil companies for advertisers----------- first for some background------The engine oil grading system was started about 1911 by the SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers). Initially they attempted to define basic characteristics like specific gravity, flash points, and viscosity. For over a decade they only had a single spec for motor oil known as “Spec # 26.” In 1923 they attempted to broaden this spec to include a range of actual measured oil properties. Consideration as to actual oil performance didn’t occur till about 1947 with the API (American Petroleum Institute). At that time a grading system was incorporated based on the intended application of the oil. Motor oil “M” was assigned three grades. They were ML (regular or light duty) MM (premium or medium duty) and MS (severe or heavy duty). ML was straight mineral oil, MM contained limited oxidation inhibitors, and MS had oxidation inhibitors, dispersants and detergents. A similar classification that substituted the “M” with a “C” was added in 1952 for diesel oil. It wasn’t until 1969 that the API (American Petroleum Institute) the ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) and the SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) got together to form a “performance” based system of rating oils. This system also used two major categories for oil classification. They were “S” for service (intended for spark ignited gasoline engines) and “C” for commercial (intended for diesel engines). This system is the classification system that we use today and are so familiar with. Currently we are at SM but before we get to where we are I want to continue with how we got here. The first designations assigned were SA through SD. These assignments were retroactive in that the oils had already been available. SA was assigned to what was marketed up to about 1930 and was just straight mineral oil with no additives. SB was assigned to the oils that were marketed up to the early 60’s and would have been described by the MM class of oil till about 1970. The classifications SC and SD were assigned to the MS class of oils that covered the years from the early 60’s to early 70’s. As needs for better oils arose improved formulations were assigned later alphabetical values. The first such oil- SE was formulated to deal with viscosity problems in the early 70’s. SF oil was formulated for improved engine wear performance and utilized generous amounts of ZDDP. SG oil was formulated to deal with problems of oxidation and sludge formation in mid 80’s engines due to the CAFÉ (US Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards that started in 1978. To arrive at oil ratings several types of tests are done. These tests are tightly controlled by the API and well defined by the ASTM. Some of these tests are actual engine tests where an engine of certain specs is carefully built and dyno tested according to a strict regimen. That would duplicate the conditions of both stop and go driving and continued high speed highway driving. Afterward the engine is torn down and both the engine and oil are examined for condition. When one of these tests is defined virtually every oil brand is tested with the exact same type of engine. One of the things that caught my attention was ASTM D 5533-98 Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Automotive Engine Oils in the Sequence IIIE Spark-Ignition Engine. As far as I can tell this particular test originated in the early 90’s and appears to have been in use till approx 02 where it was specified for use in qualifying SH / ISLAC GF-1 and SJ / ILSAC GF-2 oil For cam/lifter wear. Under apparatus section 6.4 the test engine specified is a 1986/87 3.8-L 231 Buick engine! That’s right, the specified engine was a “109” block as can be clearly seen in fig 14 of the ASTM manual. Apparently GM continued to make these engines available for quiet a while after they were discontinued for general use. These could be ordered by API licensees from the Central Parts Distributor as a “STP” special test part. When these engines were no longer available they were replaced in Sequence IIIG and IIIF by the 3800 Buick V-6 for qualifying SL and SM oil. There is some real interesting stuff in these reports and tests and I promise two things when its over-------- its going to be interesting and you are probably not going to trust oil salesmen ever again------------stay tuned………..RC

[t-topflyer]

I may have missed this somewhere along the way as there is so much information to tread through here; but at this point I find myself asking 3 questions:

1. Is there an ideal oil or oils to use along with ZDDPlus as an additive?
2. Which oils should we decrease the amounts of ZDDPlus that we should add, and if so, by how much?
3. Are there any oil or oils we should stay away from when using ZDDPlus?

[t-topflyer]

Originally Posted by A2000RICH

--- that asking most folks about oil is similar to asking about religion or politics---------and i have come to feel like asking the oil companies about their product formulations is a total waste of time---------don't forget that many of them are the same "oil companies" that we have come to love, respect and thank for our great gasoline prices----------yes i do agree that some of the smaller independents are not in that same league but i liken most of them to politicians--------their motives are questionable weather they are at the highest federal level or our local town council---------one thing is for sure------everybody makes the best oil and everybody has just the thing that our cars need--------NOT----------- There is some real interesting stuff in these reports and tests and I promise two things when its over-------- its going to be interesting and you are probably not going to trust oil salesmen ever again------------stay tuned………..RC

Along the same lines, I respect you RC, your commitment to this issue, your experience and love for these cars. I also understand that you know this topic inside and out. However, just for my peace of mind, how is it different asking you about ZDDPlus vs asking an oil company representative about their own oil? The reason I ask is that I believe you or one of your companies is responsible for the manufacturing, distributing, marketing, etc of ZDDPlus correct? You said in one of your earlier posts that you are a business person.....With all these things in mind, and after the statement above how can I be confident that this situation is any different from what you indicate the other companies would do?......... "eveybody makes the best oil and everybody has just the thing our cars need"

[Jerryl]

Subscribed

[A2000RICH]

Originally Posted by t-topflyer

Along the same lines, I respect you RC, your commitment to this issue, your experience and love for these cars. I also understand that you know this topic inside and out. However, just for my peace of mind, how is it different asking you about ZDDPlus vs asking an oil company representative about their own oil? The reason I ask is that I believe you or one of your companies is responsible for the manufacturing, distributing, marketing, etc of ZDDPlus correct? You said in one of your earlier posts that you are a business person.....With all these things in mind, and after the statement above how can I be confident that this situation is any different from what you indicate the other companies would do?......... "eveybody makes the best oil and everybody has just the thing our cars need"

t-top---------the difference is simple-----at least to me-----my businesses have nothing to do with oil, cars or anything related------if i never sell any zddp to anyone its not gonna change my lifestyle one bit-------my cars are my hobby------ i have what i believe i need to take care of them and i have made it available to everyone else---------this might beg the question why don't i give it away???-----it takes time to bottle, label, ship etc and i really dont' care to spend my free time doing that--------i don't know anyone else that wants to do it either for nothing---------and then there is the sales and distribution that requires compensation-------and like most products nearly all the money goes to those that market and sell--------BUT without those cost systems in place no goods or services ever get to any end users-----it does explain why the product is priced the way it is-------for 9 dollars you get one bottle that is much less than the cost of the only other product that is like it- ie GM EOS since the one little bottle has the same concentration as two bottles of EOS-----------as for the product???--------i didn't invent it, I didn't spend millions of dollars analyzing how it protects engines like the SAE did, i didn't determine it was necessary for our cars in the first place, i had nothing to do with removing or reducing it from virtually every motor oil that is now available--------i just found a quality source and stashed enough of it away while it is still available--------if that doesn't give you enough confidence to believe me then so be it---------look at the oil companies and how they just simply dance around the formulations in their oil-----try to find someone at Mobil that will confirm what i found out just a few weeks ago ie that Mobil 1 10w-30 has ZERO zddp in it!-------and Valvoline 10w-30 too!!!-------i do understand trade secrets but this is critical for our cars--------there was a time when food displayed little info about what was in it--------at least now there are laws that require notice of certain things like fat, sugars, sodium, vitamins etc------and they also require ingredients listed in order of quantity----------you can bet the food companies didn't like this when it was first legislated but i for one am glad they do it---------does that mean that most folks read it????heck no but for those in the know that want to protect their bodies and live helathy it has value--------likewise i would like to see some disclosure on this issue of oil contents----------i am the first to admit that the newer grades of oil are better than they have ever been but that doesn't seem to apply to older cars------------if you don't get where i am coming from i just hope you find an oil supplier that cares about your TR more than i do...............RC

[t-topflyer]

Fair enough RC, and I am excited about what will continue to unfold with your research and this product. In the meantime, I have a couple questions:

1. Is there an ideal oil or oils to use along with ZDDPlus as an additive?
2. Which oils should we decrease the amounts of ZDDPlus that we should add, and if so, by how much?
3. Are there any oil or oils we should stay away from when using ZDDPlus?

[A2000RICH]

Originally Posted by t-topflyer

Fair enough RC, and I am excited about what will continue to unfold with your research and this product. In the meantime, I have a couple questions:

1. Is there an ideal oil or oils to use along with ZDDPlus as an additive?
2. Which oils should we decrease the amounts of ZDDPlus that we should add, and if so, by how much?
3. Are there any oil or oils we should stay away from when using ZDDPlus?

My personal opinion (not based on research) is that Mobil 1 is at the top of the food chain when it comes to oil-------they have always appeared to lead the pack as far as i am concerned and i have used it since i first read about it in the late 70's---------i did not ever buy the line about extended change intervals that Mobil 1 used to suggest------- until i got into TR's i always drove caddys and ferraris and i was always concerned with warranties--------i never saw where there was an exception for synthetic oil in the owners manuals--------for my CTS-V GM suggests Mobil 1 and that speaks to me for instant credibility--------since it has a corvette engine that would seem natural since the corvettes have suggested Mobil 1 for quite some time-------i still use it in my gnx's and nicer TR's since i feel it has everything it needs except for the recently removed zddp----------while it may not have any ZDDP i feel i have that covered---------in my daily driver cars (GN's) i have always used Valvoline probably cause "more mechanics use Valvoline than any other brand"---------just kidding--------i started using Vavoline since i got my first car--------i have the fix for Vavoline SM also so i have no reason to quit-----------i know there are lots of good oils out there and probably 99% of them have a history of protecting cars just fine-------i also know there are a few really good oils as well and most of them claim to better Mobil 1--------i could possibly believe this if their marketing and advertising claims were more refined and BELIVEABLE--------putting testimonials on line from idiot customers that claim 10% and 20% mileage increases cause they changed their oil really turns me off to anything they have to say about anything-------they know its not true so why do they do it???--------me??-------i am a cheepo-------to me i like to go to the discount auto parts store or wal-mart and buy reputable brand oil at a discount---------Valvoline at less than 2 bucks a qt and Mobil 1 at a few dollars a qt just makes sense----------i just can't bring myself to pay 50+ dollars for a oil change----------Valvoline 10w-30 and a bottle of ZddPlus gets you in for about $20 ---------its thrifty, convenient and you can find it in virtually any shopping center in the country---------it just makes sense to me--------what would i avoid??? i would avoid any oil that the manufacturer says "may not work" with a couple ounces of a simple additive thats been in most quality oil for decades--------as for dosage--------properly formulated oil rated SM will have NO MORE than a known amount of ZDDP---------a single bottle of ZddPlus will put a single TR oil change right about where SF oil would have been when your car was new..................RC

[t-topflyer]

I will agree that $50 oil changes are painful to the pocket book. Heck even $40 is. Buying Mobil 1 from a local parts store along with filter usually puts me right at $40. So, Valvoline + ZDDPlus at next oil change for me.

[TurboMonte 2]

Richard,

Did you find any diff in Zn, P between regular Valvoline oil & their Racing Oils (VR1--I believe)??? I have not yet been able to look at cans (oops--now bottles?) for S_ rating. I gather from your prev comment, that if VR1 has a SM rating on it--it will not contain more ZN, P (ZDDP) than regular Valvoline oil??

Thanks, Monte

[A2000RICH]

Originally Posted by TurboMonte 2

Richard,

Did you find any diff in Zn, P between regular Valvoline oil & their Racing Oils (VR1--I believe)??? I have not yet been able to look at cans (oops--now bottles?) for S_ rating. I gather from your prev comment, that if VR1 has a SM rating on it--it will not contain more ZN, P (ZDDP) than regular Valvoline oil??

Thanks, Monte

If it has ANY it will be more than regular 10w-30 Valvoline since the SM street oil has NONE--------------------
i did not bother to test racing oils for several reasons------first i have little reason to doubt that racing oils are deficient in necessary additives for RACING applications------they probably contain helalthy doses of ZDDP and other good stuff------that said they also do not contain what is necessary for NON race cars------real race cars get their oil changed after every race and usually the engines rebuilt-----just because we race our cars that does not make them real race cars-----the additives that are necessary for long stays in the crankcase are just not there and as such this class of oil is not really a good choice for 99% of the TR market-------long term use of these types of oils will result in other types of problems but if folks want to do it its their car------its really no different than racing tires-------also these oils are not readily available as normal oils and are usually priced at a premium-------last is the type of test i have run are not the everyday "used oil analysis" that costs less than a hundred bucks that everyone is familiar with--------they are extremely expensive and they result in a seperate charge for each element-------i don't think it makes sense to use racing oil for a street driven car and i dont' think it makes sense to spend lots of money testing oil that is unsuitable from the start-------the intent of this additive was for guys like me that just want to buy brand name quality oil at Walmart at a cheap price and not have to worry that their cars are protected...........RC

[A2000RICH]

In a previous post I mentioned the engine used in the ASTM D 5533 Sequence IIIE test. It really was a 109 block but in its test garb it was hardly fit for a TR. I want to digress for a few lines just so you can get a feel for just how much effort goes into these tests. The setup instructions for this test are about an inch thick and cover the minutest details on how to assemble the engine, run the test sequence and what and how to measure everything. Some interesting details are the engine uses a carburetor, distributor and water jacketed exhaust manifolds. The book even details how to machine a “calibrated dipstick” for checking oil level. There are pictures of the complete setup ready for testing and the engine is covered with so many wires and sensors it is barely recognizable. Unlike some of the tests I will cover later, this test is designed to test certain high temperature performance characteristics related to oil performance and cam/lifter wear.
This test is conducted in the following manner. When the engine is prepped and ready for the test sequence there is a specified break in procedure beginning with an ignition timing run of 10 minutes. Before the engine is started the oil and coolant are brought up to operating temp from external heaters and already circulating in the engine from external pumps. There is a “lifer oiling wand” in the lifter galley that sprays oil over the cam and lifters. After starting it is stated that speed be set at 1500 RPM with no load for two minutes during which time the timing be set at 36 degrees BTDC. The remaining 8 minutes of the timing run are to be run at 1500 RPM with a modest load of 8.5 HP. After the initial timing run an oil sample is taken and then a break-in run is conducted. This consists of 4 one hour consecutive stages without a stop. The first stage is run at 1500 RPM @ 8.5 hp. The second stage is 2500 RPM @28 hp. The third stage is 3000 RPM @ 46 hp and the last is 3000 RPM @ 68 hp. When break-in is completed the test run is started and consists of a single 64 hour run at 3000 RPM @ 50 hp. with stops every 8 hours long enough to remove and replace a 2 oz oil sample. At the end of the run the entire engine is disassembled and all parts are measured. Of course the oil being tested is saved along with the 8 samples taken at each 8 hour segment.
By the time this sequence was put into place it appears that it was used to qualify API grades SH and SJ. Passing the test required that cam wear meet certain minimum values. It is at this point that some of the documents that I have are not totally clear-----or at the least are not in total agreement. API 1509 states that for API SH ILSAC GF-1 the requirements for cam wear in this sequence requires cam wear to be less than 30 mm average, 64mm maximum!!!! It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that this is a misprint. This amount of wear would totally remove the entire cam lobe. ASTM-4485-07 corrects this with um and this sounds more believable. At any rate it appears that from the ASTM document that this test can be substituted with D 6984 Sequence IIIF. And the IIIF test can be substituted with D 7320 IIIG. It appears that the tester can choose either and any one can qualify for approval. In some of our later evaluations of SL and SM oil these test options are going to be very important to consider. These tests are similar to the IIIE sequence but replace the 109 block with a 3800 series II Buick V-6 engine. This approval probably came about with the unavailability of the 109 block sometime in the late 90’s.
IIIG is similar to IIIE but uses five 20 hour test runs after the break-in for a total test time of 100 hours. The engine is run at 3600 RPM @ 126 hp. IIIF is almost identical to IIIG except that the test time is 8 ten hour segments for a total time of 80 hours at 3600 RPM @ 100 hp. Cam measurements are somewhat different for these test sequences as they combine total lifter and cam lobe wear.
There are also three other engine cam test sequences and I will cover them soon and eventually we should get to the tests that define the oils that we buy today and what kind of performance is expected of them.