What Oil for older air cooled Porches?
11-17-2007, 06:56 PM
#138
Rennlist Member
For those of you not following the Pelican oil thread, I posted this morning about my UOA on the Brad Penn -
The UOA for the Brad Penn with 2400 highway miles on it came back excellent, as expected:
http://www.lnengineering.com/BPR2050_2400MI.pdf
The moly is left over of the two quarts of Valvoline that was still in the oil lines. Copper levels are significantly less. From what I have researched, copper levels are basically tied to the amount of moly used, as the inhibitors used to prevent leaching of copper because of the moly breaks down very fast and is not temperature stable.
For comparison, here's what the Valvoline Racing NSL synthetic looked like after 1500 highway miles:
http://www.lnengineering.com/vr1_nsl20w50uoa.pdf
The Brad Penn looks like it's a solid performer. Based on the TBN, I would expect a conservative drain interval at 5,000-6,000 mi with the Brad Penn if you go by the whole 50% rule of change when TBN is half of the starting amount.
I thought I would also clarify why the Brad Penn with a starting average TBN of 10 wouldn't go as long as Mobil 1 0w40, which has a similar TBN of 10. Well, it has to do with the detergents used. The Calcium Sulfonate detergent primarily used in most oils, including Mobil 1, is more temperature stable at the expense of creating more wear (it binds to the same receptors that the ZDDP is supposed to). Where the Brad Penn does use some Ca, it is about half of what most oils use because they also are using other more mild detergents that don't inhibit or clean the AW (anti-wear) film off the parts.
AND
plan on leaving the Brad Penn in there now (the same oil that has the 2400 mi on it), based on the TBN, probably until mid or late summer '08 I might have enough miles on it hopefully to get it to 5k before a year is up. I don't drive the car much, try only to put big chunks of highway miles on it, at least 200 mi in a weekend if we go out. I might have to go down to Atlanta in January and that might give me an excuse to put some more miles on it too.
Granted, I plan on probably putting in the Swepco 306 next time to do this same test, but it just takes so much time to actually put miles on and do them all on the same car, with the same kind of driving, etc. Ideally, it would be great if a few (the more the marrier) Pelicanites that have daily drivers could conduct their own 'field testing' with a selection of known oils from which eventually, we might be able to draw long term conclusions.
All I know, is from the short term tests I have done and synthetic spintron cam/lifter testing, the Brad Penn works great, but it is clear, it isn't a long drain interval oil. It's quite possible that there are other oils that will produce similar results with better TBN retention. But for most, 5k drain intervals are longer than what most of our cars see anyways and really, I still do believe that spring and fall oil changes should be the norm (which I will forego for sake of testing in my car to try to rack some miles on the Brad Penn).
I also forgot to mention that the 964 used zero oil in the 2400 mi. The VR-1 used about 3/4 a quart in the 1400 mi. Just thought I would mention that.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showt...367300&page=23
The UOA for the Brad Penn with 2400 highway miles on it came back excellent, as expected:
http://www.lnengineering.com/BPR2050_2400MI.pdf
The moly is left over of the two quarts of Valvoline that was still in the oil lines. Copper levels are significantly less. From what I have researched, copper levels are basically tied to the amount of moly used, as the inhibitors used to prevent leaching of copper because of the moly breaks down very fast and is not temperature stable.
For comparison, here's what the Valvoline Racing NSL synthetic looked like after 1500 highway miles:
http://www.lnengineering.com/vr1_nsl20w50uoa.pdf
The Brad Penn looks like it's a solid performer. Based on the TBN, I would expect a conservative drain interval at 5,000-6,000 mi with the Brad Penn if you go by the whole 50% rule of change when TBN is half of the starting amount.
I thought I would also clarify why the Brad Penn with a starting average TBN of 10 wouldn't go as long as Mobil 1 0w40, which has a similar TBN of 10. Well, it has to do with the detergents used. The Calcium Sulfonate detergent primarily used in most oils, including Mobil 1, is more temperature stable at the expense of creating more wear (it binds to the same receptors that the ZDDP is supposed to). Where the Brad Penn does use some Ca, it is about half of what most oils use because they also are using other more mild detergents that don't inhibit or clean the AW (anti-wear) film off the parts.
AND
plan on leaving the Brad Penn in there now (the same oil that has the 2400 mi on it), based on the TBN, probably until mid or late summer '08 I might have enough miles on it hopefully to get it to 5k before a year is up. I don't drive the car much, try only to put big chunks of highway miles on it, at least 200 mi in a weekend if we go out. I might have to go down to Atlanta in January and that might give me an excuse to put some more miles on it too.
Granted, I plan on probably putting in the Swepco 306 next time to do this same test, but it just takes so much time to actually put miles on and do them all on the same car, with the same kind of driving, etc. Ideally, it would be great if a few (the more the marrier) Pelicanites that have daily drivers could conduct their own 'field testing' with a selection of known oils from which eventually, we might be able to draw long term conclusions.
All I know, is from the short term tests I have done and synthetic spintron cam/lifter testing, the Brad Penn works great, but it is clear, it isn't a long drain interval oil. It's quite possible that there are other oils that will produce similar results with better TBN retention. But for most, 5k drain intervals are longer than what most of our cars see anyways and really, I still do believe that spring and fall oil changes should be the norm (which I will forego for sake of testing in my car to try to rack some miles on the Brad Penn).
I also forgot to mention that the 964 used zero oil in the 2400 mi. The VR-1 used about 3/4 a quart in the 1400 mi. Just thought I would mention that.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showt...367300&page=23
11-18-2007, 09:35 AM
#139
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The SL Exxon I bought wasnt from Autozone and its clearly SL and not SM. It even mentions pre-2004 on the back. Guess I just got lucky. Think Ill go back and get another case.. maybe its just old stock...
11-29-2007, 11:49 PM
#141
Intermediate
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: MN
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tech Data Sheet on Amsoil and Air Cooled Engines
Following this thread has been a real education. Obviously, Doug, Harry, Charles and several others have a deep background in this subject. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
After reading your comments, I emailed Amsoil about the product they recommended for my '97 C4S and my '82 Targa. (Both used their AFL Euro 5w-40.) I'm not a dealer and have no affiliation with them, but Amsoil is big on publishing performance data on their products vs. competitors. So I asked about the concerns with premature engine wear. Sure enough, they recommended I change to a 20w-50 Synthetic (product code TRO) with higher levels zinc and phosphorous.
More importantly, they provided a PDF with charts that shows how a number of brands performed in ANSI wear tests. I've attached it to this post. They also confirm that the engine wear problem is indeed an issue with high performance engines. This was known to the committee and manufacturers that created the SM standard.
If any of the experts reading this have a comment on the attachment or the 20w-50 recommendation, I would appreciate hearing from you.
After reading your comments, I emailed Amsoil about the product they recommended for my '97 C4S and my '82 Targa. (Both used their AFL Euro 5w-40.) I'm not a dealer and have no affiliation with them, but Amsoil is big on publishing performance data on their products vs. competitors. So I asked about the concerns with premature engine wear. Sure enough, they recommended I change to a 20w-50 Synthetic (product code TRO) with higher levels zinc and phosphorous.
More importantly, they provided a PDF with charts that shows how a number of brands performed in ANSI wear tests. I've attached it to this post. They also confirm that the engine wear problem is indeed an issue with high performance engines. This was known to the committee and manufacturers that created the SM standard.
If any of the experts reading this have a comment on the attachment or the 20w-50 recommendation, I would appreciate hearing from you.
11-30-2007, 12:27 AM
#142
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Airlie Beach, Australia
Posts: 870
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello,
T Rip - As stated earlier ILSAC GF-4 conforming lubricants are NOT suitable for use in a Porsche engine (the exception is the Cayenne's V6 - VW503.00 oil specification is required)
Lubricants that have (for instance) SM/CF API Quality rating with the correct viscosity AND DO NOT HAVE ILSAC GF-4 ARE SUITABLE FOR USE in most Porsche engines
Amsoil state do NOT add any additives and I for one agree with this statement
Amsoil's performance claims are just that - claims - and their 4ball test was discarded by the Germans in 1941 as unsuitable for lubricant testing. It is primarily used as a test for low "speed" high load grease testing and much better tests are used for engine lubricants
Amsoil products are good but no better than many others from Shell, BP, Castrol and etc!
Their TRO 20w-50 has NOT been a star performer when compared with other similar products from the major Oil Companies
It should also be noted that Amsoil has very few oils that are API Licenced and perhaps only one that is ACEA A3/B3/B4 Quality certified (Euro 5w-40 which has Mercedes Benz Approval)
I would continue to use what you are already using if you are happy with it!
Oils of the correct viscosity that have the ACEA A3/B3/B4 Quality compliant statement (not just "Meet's" or "Exceeds" and etc) on the label are most suitable for Porsche engines
Mixed fleet HDEO 15w-40 lubricants such as Rotella, Delo, Delvac etc are excellent products for use in all air cooled engines subject to the ambient spread of 15f to >40f
HDEOs that are API rated CJ-4/SL etc. are proving to be excellent performers in the field and can be used with confidence
Regards
Doug
T Rip - As stated earlier ILSAC GF-4 conforming lubricants are NOT suitable for use in a Porsche engine (the exception is the Cayenne's V6 - VW503.00 oil specification is required)
Lubricants that have (for instance) SM/CF API Quality rating with the correct viscosity AND DO NOT HAVE ILSAC GF-4 ARE SUITABLE FOR USE in most Porsche engines
Amsoil state do NOT add any additives and I for one agree with this statement
Amsoil's performance claims are just that - claims - and their 4ball test was discarded by the Germans in 1941 as unsuitable for lubricant testing. It is primarily used as a test for low "speed" high load grease testing and much better tests are used for engine lubricants
Amsoil products are good but no better than many others from Shell, BP, Castrol and etc!
Their TRO 20w-50 has NOT been a star performer when compared with other similar products from the major Oil Companies
It should also be noted that Amsoil has very few oils that are API Licenced and perhaps only one that is ACEA A3/B3/B4 Quality certified (Euro 5w-40 which has Mercedes Benz Approval)
I would continue to use what you are already using if you are happy with it!
Oils of the correct viscosity that have the ACEA A3/B3/B4 Quality compliant statement (not just "Meet's" or "Exceeds" and etc) on the label are most suitable for Porsche engines
Mixed fleet HDEO 15w-40 lubricants such as Rotella, Delo, Delvac etc are excellent products for use in all air cooled engines subject to the ambient spread of 15f to >40f
HDEOs that are API rated CJ-4/SL etc. are proving to be excellent performers in the field and can be used with confidence
Regards
Doug
12-02-2007, 01:35 PM
#143
Track Day
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glad I read this all the way through, as I need to do an oil change on my N/A '86 Coupe before putting it away for the winter. With snow on the ground as I type this, I guess it is indeed winter. Grrrrrrr....
Any way, Rotella T 15W-40 is what I intend to use. Hopefully I'll find it in stock in the gallon jugs at Wal-mart.
If I was tracking the car (I haven't in years now), I'd likely spring for the Synthetic 5W-40, which is what I happen to use in my Yamaha Kodiak 450 ATV.
Any way, Rotella T 15W-40 is what I intend to use. Hopefully I'll find it in stock in the gallon jugs at Wal-mart.
If I was tracking the car (I haven't in years now), I'd likely spring for the Synthetic 5W-40, which is what I happen to use in my Yamaha Kodiak 450 ATV.
12-02-2007, 04:12 PM
#144
Rennlist Member
I agree that mixed fleet HDEO CI-4 oils are fine for our aircooled engines, like Swepco 306, for example, but I do not agree that an SM or CJ-4 oil is satisfactory by any means. There is just too much evidence from various SAE journals from the development of these oils (both the gas and diesel specifications) that point to their either not being tested with older engines (as with the SM oils) or not even being as rigorous as the various manufacturer specific requirements of diesel oils compared to the requirements of the CJ-4 oils.
Doug, you have gone on record to say you like the Mobil 1 Truck and Diesel formula, which is a 5w40, and I agree, that is a decent oil, but it's CJ-4 formulation, Delvac 1 5w50 or the Delvac 1300 Super, which are both CJ oils, are not nearly as good IMHO and most certainly, blanket recommendations for brands or more general, HDEOS, should not be made unless there is hard evidence for their recommendation (like with Swepco and Brad Penn with over 2 years of conclusive evidence of its performance). It's even been published in fleet service magazines here in the US that they don't recommend using the CJ-4 oils in pre-2007 engines that have been designed for or tested with those oils. The requirements for formulation of oils for engines with after-treatment devices, ie. SM and CJ-4, can conflict with the requirements of our older aircooled engines, which are very different from even a new four-valve water-cooled engine Porsche with modern bearing materials and such.
I am not making this stuff up, it is all in print in the SAE texts I have listed on my web site, for which I am putting together summaries with key points for those who don't have access to these texts to learn more.
What I would like Porsche do is come up with a sequence for testing and granting approval for oils for the older vehicles, say with a test sequence based off a 964 or 993 aircooled engine as an analog to the water cooled test sequence, to prove once and for all whether the current recommended oils are up to snuff or not.
Doug, you have gone on record to say you like the Mobil 1 Truck and Diesel formula, which is a 5w40, and I agree, that is a decent oil, but it's CJ-4 formulation, Delvac 1 5w50 or the Delvac 1300 Super, which are both CJ oils, are not nearly as good IMHO and most certainly, blanket recommendations for brands or more general, HDEOS, should not be made unless there is hard evidence for their recommendation (like with Swepco and Brad Penn with over 2 years of conclusive evidence of its performance). It's even been published in fleet service magazines here in the US that they don't recommend using the CJ-4 oils in pre-2007 engines that have been designed for or tested with those oils. The requirements for formulation of oils for engines with after-treatment devices, ie. SM and CJ-4, can conflict with the requirements of our older aircooled engines, which are very different from even a new four-valve water-cooled engine Porsche with modern bearing materials and such.
I am not making this stuff up, it is all in print in the SAE texts I have listed on my web site, for which I am putting together summaries with key points for those who don't have access to these texts to learn more.
What I would like Porsche do is come up with a sequence for testing and granting approval for oils for the older vehicles, say with a test sequence based off a 964 or 993 aircooled engine as an analog to the water cooled test sequence, to prove once and for all whether the current recommended oils are up to snuff or not.
12-02-2007, 08:09 PM
#145
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Airlie Beach, Australia
Posts: 870
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
Charles - I am astounded at some of the content of your Post No 144
1 - CN = "I agree that mixed fleet HDEO CI-4 oils are fine for our aircooled engines, like Swepco 306, for example, but I do not agree that an SM or CJ-4 oil is satisfactory by any means"
DH = Your endorsement of a certain Brand of lubricant shows a distinct bias. In the scheme of things most mineral "mixed fleet" HDEOs with a similar specification will perform in a similar manner. Whether one or another will extend a certain engine's life is a purely academic argument. Similar specification HDEOs from Shell, Castrol, ExxonMobil, Chevron, FUCHS and etc will perform at least as well as the one you mention
The API state this;
"Engine oils that meet the API Service Category designation (see Appendix G) may be used where API Service Category SL and earlier S Categories have been recommended"
Charles, Appendix G includes the15w-40 viscosity!
This of course includes most HDEOs!!!
An SM/CF lubricant THAT IS NOT ILSAC GF-4 compliant will do an excellent job! And I may add probably a better job than a SL/CF lubricant!
API rated CJ-4 "mixed fleet" lubricants with new ash-less anti wear additives are showing at least similar performance results as the previous CI-4 version!
Charles- Why you do not defer to the ACEA A3/B3/B4 and E4,E6,E7 Quality standards when looking to lubricants for use in European engines? ACEA has long led the API in "engine friendly" lubricant ratings for European engines!
2 - CN = "There is just too much evidence from various SAE journals from the development of these oils (both the gas and diesel specifications) that point to their either not being tested with older engines (as with the SM oils) or not even being as rigorous as the various manufacturer specific requirements of diesel oils compared to the requirements of the CJ-4 oils."
DH = Charles it is not always wise to depend on "surface" data and I know you are as you say "not making it up"!
The API state this;
"API CJ-4 oils exceed the performance criteria of API CI-4 with CI-4 Plus, CI-4, CH-4, CG-4 and CF-4 and can effectively lubricate engines calling for those API Service Categories. When using CJ-4 oil with higher that 15ppm sulfur fuel, consult the engine manufacturer for service interval"
Charles - the world of HDEOs is very complex - I have been involved in it for 50 years!!!
HDEOs should NOT be confused with PETROL engine oils when specific recommendations are made for use in DIESEL engine families!!!
The use of CJ-4 oils is conjunction with high sulphur diesel fuel is not advised - wisely so. This is just one reason why some fleets will seek a "Warranty Exclusion" to use CI-4 lubricants in pots MY2006 engines. This is due to the variability of fuel quality in Linehaul/Interstate operations. They will also most likely have an imbalance of "old" engines in the Fleet too!
How do I know? Been there done that - Australia went down that path during the last six or so years!
It has NOTHING to do with using the HDEO in a PETROL engine where it is "mixed fleet" compatible!
So using a 15w-40 viscosity "mixed fleet" HDEO which is API rated CJ-4/SM in an early air cooled Porsche does NOT present any real risk of abnormal wear. It will most likely be a better lubricant than earlier versions if only because of its better foaming controls - important with dry-sump engines!
3 - Charles - You mention that I "like" Mobil 1 Truck & Diesel Formula 5w-40.
DH = You are correct - but this lubricant is not sold in Australia! I have successfully used its older Commercial relation Delvac 1 5w-40 for many many years, millions of kms and in a variety of petrol and diesel engines
But I like other lubricants too including Castrol ‘R" 10w-60, Shell Helix Ultra, Rotella T and etc etc and I use some of them as well!
Charles - Delvac 1 has NEVER been made in a 5w-50 viscosity! It is sold in Canada by Esso as a 0w-40 though!
4 - Charles you further comment on a number of issues which I have covered earlier in this Post.
But as for Delvac 1 5w-40;
I have used this lubricant for around a decade including a "tear down" inspection of one of my $45000 engines after 1.1 million kms (all parts were intolerance). In this time it has moved through had four API changes - CG-4, CH-4, CI-4 (CI-4Plus) and CJ-4. Each time the product has performed better at the extremes!
It was sold here in a Euro engine formulation too - it was called Delvac 1 SHC 5w-40 but it was discontinued as most Fleets just used Delvac 1 for commonality!
I have dealt at the highest levels with Exxon Mobil since about 1992 when this lubricant was first sold in Australia
I have had dealings with Mobil's Additive supplier (specifically on Delvac 1) at the highest of high levels - with direct linkages to the US
I have assisted Mobil in the development of Delvac 1 5w-40 in Australia and New Zealand and via the US - and with MTU-Detroit Diesel and Donaldson
I have worked with three Commercial Labs on UOA interpretation of Delvac 1 results (including Mobil's Lab)
I have hundreds of UOAs from Delvac 1 on my own (and some client) diesel engines - and a large number on Porsche 928 and other petrol engines! They are all stored on my database!
In its latest formulation Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40 and rated as CJ-4,CI-4 etc/SM,SL etc (ACEA
E5,E7, it is an excellent lubricant and better overall than its predecessor. You can use with confidence! It is the CAT supplied lubricant and has all of the most important diesel engine Manufacturer Approvals
4 - CN = You state (sic) "that blanket recommendations for HDEOs should not be made unless there is hard evidence for their recommendation....."
DH = My style is to tell it as it is IMHO - but having been involved with the subject for 50 years and after having worked with four Oil Companies and quite a number of Engine Manufacturers in field testing and refining prototype lubricants perhaps I have a little more knowledge than most!
5 - Charles I do appreciate your input but the sad thing is we now have people purchasing Supplementary Additives to put in perfectly good lubricants that can be purchased from the local Supermarket and used with confidence in early air cooled Porsche engines. They just need to know which oil is suitable and there are a lot!
You seem to "push" certain lubricants but I can assure you that any two lubricants with the same specification will perform about the same in both engine wear, deposit control and in maintaining a suitable OCI
What really has concerned me though is your use of a flawed process in evaluating lubricants;
a) this cannot be done by simple single pass UOAs
b) this cannot be done by focussing on certain "elements" in a lubricant's formulation such a P and Zn which you seem to be hung up about
c) and etc.
As a consequence many people reading this Thread must be totally confused! I am too - confused as to why certain Brands of oil and Additives are "pushed" when all that is needed are the facts!
As I have maintained all along - in an early aircooled Porsche engine use these lubricants with great confidence;
A "mixed fleet" HDEO of 15w-40 viscosity (Delo, Rotella T and etc) - CJ-4/SM will do
If you want a more viscous lubricant (5w,15w,20w-50) ensure that is API <SM/CF (but NOT ILSAC GF-4 rated) and that it preferably has a ACEA A3/B3 and or A3/B4 rating
Even Amsoil state much of what I have indicated above and like me they do NOT advise using any Supplementary Additives at all. An assembly lube used correctly on the valve train when rebuilding an engine is all that is required - and only engine oil used elsewhere!
Avoid purchasing cheap "pattern" valve train components - you may need to blame the oil if they wear out too quickly!
Note that I do not have any relationship with any Oil Company - I am retired!
I use a variety of lubricants from Shell, Castrol and Mobil!
Regards
Doug
Charles - I am astounded at some of the content of your Post No 144
1 - CN = "I agree that mixed fleet HDEO CI-4 oils are fine for our aircooled engines, like Swepco 306, for example, but I do not agree that an SM or CJ-4 oil is satisfactory by any means"
DH = Your endorsement of a certain Brand of lubricant shows a distinct bias. In the scheme of things most mineral "mixed fleet" HDEOs with a similar specification will perform in a similar manner. Whether one or another will extend a certain engine's life is a purely academic argument. Similar specification HDEOs from Shell, Castrol, ExxonMobil, Chevron, FUCHS and etc will perform at least as well as the one you mention
The API state this;
"Engine oils that meet the API Service Category designation (see Appendix G) may be used where API Service Category SL and earlier S Categories have been recommended"
Charles, Appendix G includes the15w-40 viscosity!
This of course includes most HDEOs!!!
An SM/CF lubricant THAT IS NOT ILSAC GF-4 compliant will do an excellent job! And I may add probably a better job than a SL/CF lubricant!
API rated CJ-4 "mixed fleet" lubricants with new ash-less anti wear additives are showing at least similar performance results as the previous CI-4 version!
Charles- Why you do not defer to the ACEA A3/B3/B4 and E4,E6,E7 Quality standards when looking to lubricants for use in European engines? ACEA has long led the API in "engine friendly" lubricant ratings for European engines!
2 - CN = "There is just too much evidence from various SAE journals from the development of these oils (both the gas and diesel specifications) that point to their either not being tested with older engines (as with the SM oils) or not even being as rigorous as the various manufacturer specific requirements of diesel oils compared to the requirements of the CJ-4 oils."
DH = Charles it is not always wise to depend on "surface" data and I know you are as you say "not making it up"!
The API state this;
"API CJ-4 oils exceed the performance criteria of API CI-4 with CI-4 Plus, CI-4, CH-4, CG-4 and CF-4 and can effectively lubricate engines calling for those API Service Categories. When using CJ-4 oil with higher that 15ppm sulfur fuel, consult the engine manufacturer for service interval"
Charles - the world of HDEOs is very complex - I have been involved in it for 50 years!!!
HDEOs should NOT be confused with PETROL engine oils when specific recommendations are made for use in DIESEL engine families!!!
The use of CJ-4 oils is conjunction with high sulphur diesel fuel is not advised - wisely so. This is just one reason why some fleets will seek a "Warranty Exclusion" to use CI-4 lubricants in pots MY2006 engines. This is due to the variability of fuel quality in Linehaul/Interstate operations. They will also most likely have an imbalance of "old" engines in the Fleet too!
How do I know? Been there done that - Australia went down that path during the last six or so years!
It has NOTHING to do with using the HDEO in a PETROL engine where it is "mixed fleet" compatible!
So using a 15w-40 viscosity "mixed fleet" HDEO which is API rated CJ-4/SM in an early air cooled Porsche does NOT present any real risk of abnormal wear. It will most likely be a better lubricant than earlier versions if only because of its better foaming controls - important with dry-sump engines!
3 - Charles - You mention that I "like" Mobil 1 Truck & Diesel Formula 5w-40.
DH = You are correct - but this lubricant is not sold in Australia! I have successfully used its older Commercial relation Delvac 1 5w-40 for many many years, millions of kms and in a variety of petrol and diesel engines
But I like other lubricants too including Castrol ‘R" 10w-60, Shell Helix Ultra, Rotella T and etc etc and I use some of them as well!
Charles - Delvac 1 has NEVER been made in a 5w-50 viscosity! It is sold in Canada by Esso as a 0w-40 though!
4 - Charles you further comment on a number of issues which I have covered earlier in this Post.
But as for Delvac 1 5w-40;
I have used this lubricant for around a decade including a "tear down" inspection of one of my $45000 engines after 1.1 million kms (all parts were intolerance). In this time it has moved through had four API changes - CG-4, CH-4, CI-4 (CI-4Plus) and CJ-4. Each time the product has performed better at the extremes!
It was sold here in a Euro engine formulation too - it was called Delvac 1 SHC 5w-40 but it was discontinued as most Fleets just used Delvac 1 for commonality!
I have dealt at the highest levels with Exxon Mobil since about 1992 when this lubricant was first sold in Australia
I have had dealings with Mobil's Additive supplier (specifically on Delvac 1) at the highest of high levels - with direct linkages to the US
I have assisted Mobil in the development of Delvac 1 5w-40 in Australia and New Zealand and via the US - and with MTU-Detroit Diesel and Donaldson
I have worked with three Commercial Labs on UOA interpretation of Delvac 1 results (including Mobil's Lab)
I have hundreds of UOAs from Delvac 1 on my own (and some client) diesel engines - and a large number on Porsche 928 and other petrol engines! They are all stored on my database!
In its latest formulation Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40 and rated as CJ-4,CI-4 etc/SM,SL etc (ACEA
E5,E7, it is an excellent lubricant and better overall than its predecessor. You can use with confidence! It is the CAT supplied lubricant and has all of the most important diesel engine Manufacturer Approvals
4 - CN = You state (sic) "that blanket recommendations for HDEOs should not be made unless there is hard evidence for their recommendation....."
DH = My style is to tell it as it is IMHO - but having been involved with the subject for 50 years and after having worked with four Oil Companies and quite a number of Engine Manufacturers in field testing and refining prototype lubricants perhaps I have a little more knowledge than most!
5 - Charles I do appreciate your input but the sad thing is we now have people purchasing Supplementary Additives to put in perfectly good lubricants that can be purchased from the local Supermarket and used with confidence in early air cooled Porsche engines. They just need to know which oil is suitable and there are a lot!
You seem to "push" certain lubricants but I can assure you that any two lubricants with the same specification will perform about the same in both engine wear, deposit control and in maintaining a suitable OCI
What really has concerned me though is your use of a flawed process in evaluating lubricants;
a) this cannot be done by simple single pass UOAs
b) this cannot be done by focussing on certain "elements" in a lubricant's formulation such a P and Zn which you seem to be hung up about
c) and etc.
As a consequence many people reading this Thread must be totally confused! I am too - confused as to why certain Brands of oil and Additives are "pushed" when all that is needed are the facts!
As I have maintained all along - in an early aircooled Porsche engine use these lubricants with great confidence;
A "mixed fleet" HDEO of 15w-40 viscosity (Delo, Rotella T and etc) - CJ-4/SM will do
If you want a more viscous lubricant (5w,15w,20w-50) ensure that is API <SM/CF (but NOT ILSAC GF-4 rated) and that it preferably has a ACEA A3/B3 and or A3/B4 rating
Even Amsoil state much of what I have indicated above and like me they do NOT advise using any Supplementary Additives at all. An assembly lube used correctly on the valve train when rebuilding an engine is all that is required - and only engine oil used elsewhere!
Avoid purchasing cheap "pattern" valve train components - you may need to blame the oil if they wear out too quickly!
Note that I do not have any relationship with any Oil Company - I am retired!
I use a variety of lubricants from Shell, Castrol and Mobil!
Regards
Doug
12-02-2007, 09:04 PM
#146
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Doug... I get back to my original posts some weeks ago... for 20 years I have used Castrol GTX 20w50 in air cooled VW's and Porsches with NO problems. I recently switched from Castrol because I bought a "new" car to me (83 911) and wanted to use what was best to minimize wear... and i saw all the bad posts about Castrol. So I use an SL rated Exxon (some old stock from a local parts house)... Its an average oil im sure... In the end... I think you are spot on. Most of us have never had an engine "blow up" because we used Castrol GTX or any other oil. Most of us are NOT going out and buying cases of EOS. Most of us want to stay away from a bad oil and buy a decent oil, but want to do so at our local parts house. We just want to know a good oil... and most of us don't want to drive 400 miles to get some exclusive racing oil like Brad Penn when we drive 30 miles on the weekend around our towns... I was just looking for some decent advise... but it seems that is impossible to get coherent advise on the subject of oil... people are way too obsessed on this subject. Thanks for the time to write your posts.
12-02-2007, 09:41 PM
#147
Rennlist Member
Even before this whole debate started on the forums on oils, we were trying to resolve numerous cam and lifter failures, coming up with wide test matricies with various different manufacturer parts, surface preparations and treatments, and configurations. We ended up going to a sintered silicon nitride material for our cam followers and stopped our testing. Unfortuneatly, our supplier went out of business, so we had to go back to working with imperfect conventional followers. At someone elses suggestion, we tried Brad Penn. It worked. Fast forward probably about a year and a half, I got a call from Jerry Woods about Swepco. We tried it out, and it worked just as good as the Brad Penn, and made more HP to boot, and was outperforming Mobil 1 in their cars for wear resistance.
I did not perform the real world testing, but I have many shops who can attest to the performance of these products. Just like you can attest to the performance of Delvac 1 in your enignes. I respect your experience with these lubricants. I just want to see more long term evidence that the CJ-4 oils will work as well as their predecessor CI-4 oils in an aircooled application. I have had phone calls from numerous shops, both with aircooled 911s, 356, and even some of the newest water cooled cup cars, have issues with M1 0w40 and 15w50 in their newest SM varieties, where earlier formulations were not a problem. I cannot ignore this and have been trying to educate myself as to why this might be, by getting my hands on every research paper or technical journal I can, all in my free time, much to my wife's dismay.
The API state this;
"Engine oils that meet the API Service Category designation (see Appendix G) may be used where API Service Category SL and earlier S Categories have been recommended"
Charles, Appendix G includes the15w-40 viscosity!
This of course includes most HDEOs!!!
An SM/CF lubricant THAT IS NOT ILSAC GF-4 compliant will do an excellent job! And I may add probably a better job than a SL/CF lubricant!
API rated CJ-4 "mixed fleet" lubricants with new ash-less anti wear additives are showing at least similar performance results as the previous CI-4 version!
"Engine oils that meet the API Service Category designation (see Appendix G) may be used where API Service Category SL and earlier S Categories have been recommended"
Charles, Appendix G includes the15w-40 viscosity!
This of course includes most HDEOs!!!
An SM/CF lubricant THAT IS NOT ILSAC GF-4 compliant will do an excellent job! And I may add probably a better job than a SL/CF lubricant!
API rated CJ-4 "mixed fleet" lubricants with new ash-less anti wear additives are showing at least similar performance results as the previous CI-4 version!
The other issue at hand is bearing wear, which I myself have not experienced, and just can say that it has been brought to my attention by those like Steve Weiner and Jerry Woods.
SAE TECHNICAL PAPER SERIES 2000-01-2030. Film-Forming Properties of Zinc-Based and Ashless Antiwear Additives.
SAE TECHNICAL PAPER SERIES 2006-01-3439. API CJ-4: Diesel Oil Category for Both Legacy Engines and Low Emission Engines Using Disel Particulate Filters.
SAE TECHNICAL PAPER SERIES 770635. Anti-Wear Properties of Engine Oils - Effect of Oil Additives on Valve Train Wear.
SAE TECHNICAL PAPER SERIES 922301. Formulation Technology for Low Phosphorus Gasoline Engine Oils.
SAE TECHNICAL PAPER SERIES 2006-01-3413. Effect of Lubricant Properties and Lubricant Degradation on Piston Ring and Cylinder Bore Wear in a Spark-Ignition Engine
SAE TECHNICAL PAPER SERIES 932782. Influence of Engine Oil Viscosity on Piston Ring and Cam Face Wear.
SAE TECHNICAL PAPER SERIES 2000-01-1913. Impact of Fuel and Oil Quality on Deposits, Wear and Emissions from a Light Duty Diesel Engine with High EGR
SAE TECHNICAL PAPER SERIES 2007-01-1966. API CJ-4: Diesel Oil Category for Pre-2007 Engines and New Low Emission Engines Using Cooled Exhaust Gas Recirculation and Diesel Particulate Filters.
SAE TECHNICAL PAPER SERIES 2006-32-0013. Development of Long-Life Oil for Gas Engines
SAE TECHNICAL PAPER SERIES 810330. Engine Oil and Bearing Wear
I invite you to read through the above. It's not light reading. I know, I don't know anything about oils. My wife is the Chemical Engineer, so I do have someone that understands to make sure I'm reading things correctly. I understand the need for reformulated oils and I will be the first to say that yes, most modern oils meeting these new API or ACEA standards will be better than previous oils. There is plenty of evidence for that. But there is not alot of evidence for their performance in engines of older design and also that there is alot of work that still needs to be done in developing ash-less oils that will perform better than their predecessors and deliver more than satisfactory protection during warranty periods with new car service intervals.
The API state this;
"API CJ-4 oils exceed the performance criteria of API CI-4 with CI-4 Plus, CI-4, CH-4, CG-4 and CF-4 and can effectively lubricate engines calling for those API Service Categories. When using CJ-4 oil with higher that 15ppm sulfur fuel, consult the engine manufacturer for service interval"
"API CJ-4 oils exceed the performance criteria of API CI-4 with CI-4 Plus, CI-4, CH-4, CG-4 and CF-4 and can effectively lubricate engines calling for those API Service Categories. When using CJ-4 oil with higher that 15ppm sulfur fuel, consult the engine manufacturer for service interval"
I know I could just go through the journals, but did the API do a test sequence with high-sulfur fuel for CJ-4? I thought they didn't, and that's why they state the above about use of CJ-4 oils with high-sulfur fuels.
So using a 15w-40 viscosity "mixed fleet" HDEO which is API rated CJ-4/SM in an early air cooled Porsche does NOT present any real risk of abnormal wear. It will most likely be a better lubricant than earlier versions if only because of its better foaming controls - important with dry-sump engines!
3 - Charles - You mention that I "like" Mobil 1 Truck & Diesel Formula 5w-40.
DH = You are correct - but this lubricant is not sold in Australia! I have successfully used its older Commercial relation Delvac 1 5w-40 for many many years, millions of kms and in a variety of petrol and diesel engines
But I like other lubricants too including Castrol ‘R" 10w-60, Shell Helix Ultra, Rotella T and etc etc and I use some of them as well!
DH = You are correct - but this lubricant is not sold in Australia! I have successfully used its older Commercial relation Delvac 1 5w-40 for many many years, millions of kms and in a variety of petrol and diesel engines
But I like other lubricants too including Castrol ‘R" 10w-60, Shell Helix Ultra, Rotella T and etc etc and I use some of them as well!
I for one, would like to see how Mobil has formulated their M1 5w40 VW 505.01 specification oil, as that particular VW specification is quite rigorous. I would be willing to bet that using an oil that meets the VW 505.01 spec would perform quite nicely in an aircooled engine.
4 - CN = You state (sic) "that blanket recommendations for HDEOs should not be made unless there is hard evidence for their recommendation....."
DH = My style is to tell it as it is IMHO - but having been involved with the subject for 50 years and after having worked with four Oil Companies and quite a number of Engine Manufacturers in field testing and refining prototype lubricants perhaps I have a little more knowledge than most!
5 - Charles I do appreciate your input but the sad thing is we now have people purchasing Supplementary Additives to put in perfectly good lubricants that can be purchased from the local Supermarket and used with confidence in early air cooled Porsche engines. They just need to know which oil is suitable and there are a lot!
5 - Charles I do appreciate your input but the sad thing is we now have people purchasing Supplementary Additives to put in perfectly good lubricants that can be purchased from the local Supermarket and used with confidence in early air cooled Porsche engines. They just need to know which oil is suitable and there are a lot!
What really has concerned me though is your use of a flawed process in evaluating lubricants;
a) this cannot be done by simple single pass UOAs
b) this cannot be done by focussing on certain "elements" in a lubricant's formulation such a P and Zn which you seem to be hung up about
c) and etc.
As a consequence many people reading this Thread must be totally confused! I am too - confused as to why certain Brands of oil and Additives are "pushed" when all that is needed are the facts!
a) this cannot be done by simple single pass UOAs
b) this cannot be done by focussing on certain "elements" in a lubricant's formulation such a P and Zn which you seem to be hung up about
c) and etc.
As a consequence many people reading this Thread must be totally confused! I am too - confused as to why certain Brands of oil and Additives are "pushed" when all that is needed are the facts!
Also, you don't have a clear picture of what my stance is. Yes, in the beginning, years ago, I though Zn and P was the key. As I've read more and more, I now know that it's more than Zn and P, but the oil formulation as a whole and all its additives, detergents, dispersants, and such, and the synergystic properties of how everything works together. I am trying now, more than ever, to get people to realize that adding more Zn and P is not the answer.
I'll also say that the question to what oil for older air cooled Porsches wasn't a simple and easy answer as I once thought it was. The more questions you ask, the more you learn, and the more you end up questioning yourself!
Last edited by Charles Navarro; 12-02-2007 at 10:15 PM.
12-02-2007, 10:38 PM
#148
I was recommended Brad Penn and Swepco long before I was selling it. It wasn't until late June that I figured that if I sold Brad Penn, Swepco, and even the Mobil 1 V-Twin and MX4T motorcycle oils, that I could spend more money doing research and help fund more real world testing through some of the customers and shops I work with.
Charles,
Do you now sell the Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W50 and MX4T motorcycle oils as well, or just the Swepco and BP?
Given the 8 to 18 HP increases, by your own test results with the Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W50 in air cooled VW/Porsche applications, it would seem (with the potential caveat of non-cat only applications), the extra $50 per 12 quart cost for the M1 V-Twin would be pretty well spent. Especially as I don't see any measured HP increases in your tests with BP or Swepco.
Tim
12-02-2007, 11:45 PM
#150
Rennlist Member
Charles,
Do you now sell the Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W50 and MX4T motorcycle oils as well, or just the Swepco and BP?
Given the 8 to 18 HP increases, by your own test results with the Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W50 in air cooled VW/Porsche applications, it would seem (with the potential caveat of non-cat only applications), the extra $50 per 12 quart cost for the M1 V-Twin would be pretty well spent. Especially as I don't see any measured HP increases in your tests with BP or Swepco.
Tim
Do you now sell the Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W50 and MX4T motorcycle oils as well, or just the Swepco and BP?
Given the 8 to 18 HP increases, by your own test results with the Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W50 in air cooled VW/Porsche applications, it would seem (with the potential caveat of non-cat only applications), the extra $50 per 12 quart cost for the M1 V-Twin would be pretty well spent. Especially as I don't see any measured HP increases in your tests with BP or Swepco.
Tim
I'm planning another trip to Aircooled Technology in January to do more product development and testing, and will probably do another round of dyno testing. Air Power Racing as well as a few of my other customers have also seen similar HP increases in the 8-15 hp range, just with a change in oil on everything from a 997 cup car to a 993 to a 356. Seems to be independent of displacement or HP.
Also, I was discussing HP increases and oils with Bob Cousimano from CMW Motorsports, and he did back up our findings, but did point out that those HP gains quickly diminish as the oil ages, so that HP gain might not be as long lived as you might want. That's another reason they change the oil so often I guess.
I've had the Mobil 1 V-Twin as long as I have had the Brad Penn, as my wholeseller handles both lines.
Like I have said before, I would take great care in monitoring the catalytic converter with M1 V-Twin or MX4T, along with spark plugs and o2 sensors - this warning was passed on to me by a shop that had been using Royal Purple Max Cycle, which is also very high in additives known for making deposits on emissions controls devices and spark plugs. It's hell on spark plugs in my lawnmower! Additionally, these motorcycle oils, although robust in their AW packages, for the same reason, usually have a bit less detergency than their non-motorcycle versions, so UOA would be vital to determine proper drain intervals, kind of like the Valvoline Racing non-street-legal, which because of a lower starting TBN, can really only go about 2000 mi drain intervals in a 911 - much shorter if you have an engine with significantly less sump capacity from what Valvoline says.