Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data - Team Camaro Tech
Tips & Tricks Member submited how-to's

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 16 (permalink) Old Sep 4th, 12, 09:48 AM Thread Starter
Senior Tech
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 153
Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

The info is too long to insert here, so if you'd like to see it, go here:

http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=32471
540 RAT is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 16 (permalink) Old Sep 6th, 12, 06:18 PM
Gold Lifetime Member
Bryon
 
bcm66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 4,659
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

Thanks for the information. I have read your other threads. There I also asked questions like...

What is your background, degree, work experience, etc. ?

Never saw any answers...

68 Camaro SS 396 - 468 BBC now, M21, 12 bolt 3.73 coded housing but w/ 3.31 gears.
Looking for 68 Camaro with body number NOR 181016
CRG -
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bcm66 is offline  
post #3 of 16 (permalink) Old Sep 7th, 12, 05:00 AM
Gold Lifetime Member
Matt
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lauderhill, Florida
Posts: 1,039
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

And the great oil debate lingers on.We need zinc......Too much zinc is not good......Use the thinnest weight possible.......Use Rotella.......Don't use Rotella........Use synthetic......Don't use synthetic in older engines......Everyone's major concern with wear seems to be over flat tappet cams and lifters.The highest friction,most heavily loaded area's in ANY engine are the crank/rod bearings and the piston rings dragging across the cylinder walls in addition to the cam and lifter interface.Manufacturers have eliminated flat tappet cams and replaced them with hydraulic roller designs,however ALL engines still have crank and rod bearings and All engines still have cylinder rings scraping on the cylinder walls.My point is this: With what ever the oil manufacturers have added/eliminated to their oils over the years, ALL engines still need adequate wear protection to survive on ALL of their wear surfaces.So the big question is:If low/no zinc is going to "destroy" a flat tappet cam and lifters,what about all of the other wear surfaces that are common to the MILLION's of engine's in all of the modern vehicles being manufactured today? Regardless of cam design, flat tappet or roller,WHY isn't anyone concerned about excessive wear in the other high load area's of their engines.You have to ask yourself if the whole zinc "issue" is even an issue at all.If zinc is no longer being added to todays motor oils for wear protection than why aren't all of our engines seizing and dying.Todays modern engines are kicking out more power and are lasting longer and are far more reliable than any of our coveted muscle car engines of the 60's and 70's and they run fine on low/no zinc oil.You can't tell me that running a roller camshaft is the be all end all to engine wear/destuction! I welcome anyone elses input on this beaten to death topic.

1969 SS Garnet Red X55 350 Factory 4 speed
12 Bolt 3.55 Posi
461 BBC TKO600
Matt 69 is offline  
 
post #4 of 16 (permalink) Old Sep 7th, 12, 07:24 PM
Senior Tech
Steiner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lyman, SC
Posts: 8,348
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

As far as general wear protection (not getting into zinc), the worst motor oil on the shelf today is still much better than the best one on the shelf thirty years ago.

'69 Camaro
Dart 400-AFR 195-224/224 HR-Powerjection III TB with F.A.S.T. Sportsman XFI
TKO 600-Moser 3.42-Detroit Truetrac
500hp/538lbft

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

'69 Camaro Beater-SFT 327-M20-Moser 4.10-sold
'02 Z/28 vert-stock-sold and totaled
Steiner is offline  
post #5 of 16 (permalink) Old Sep 8th, 12, 06:55 AM
DT
Gold Lifetime Member
Donny
 
DT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Rockland Cty/Melb bch Fla
Posts: 5,186
Garage
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcm66 View Post
Thanks for the information. I have read your other threads. There I also asked questions like...

What is your background, degree, work experience, etc. ?

Never saw any answers...
Hey Big B, you won't get any. This guy is all over the internet as pointed out to me by another TC member. I too thought this info was great. The guy never responds to anything leaving one to believe this may be all BS?

1969 X66 396 LeMans Blue, M20, 373 (Sold)
1969 Convertible LS3 TKO 600, 373
DT is offline  
post #6 of 16 (permalink) Old Sep 8th, 12, 07:02 AM
Gold Lifetime Member
Bryon
 
bcm66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 4,659
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

I am starting to think so. Without some answers, I have doubts that it is all valid. Let's hope we hear some answers.

68 Camaro SS 396 - 468 BBC now, M21, 12 bolt 3.73 coded housing but w/ 3.31 gears.
Looking for 68 Camaro with body number NOR 181016
CRG -
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bcm66 is offline  
post #7 of 16 (permalink) Old Sep 8th, 12, 08:44 AM
Moderator
Guess
 
HwyStarJoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: New Taxes York
Posts: 15,364
Cool Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steiner View Post
As far as general wear protection (not getting into zinc), the worst motor oil on the shelf today is still much better than the best one on the shelf thirty years ago.

*---------------------------------*


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

HwyStarJoe is offline  
post #8 of 16 (permalink) Old Aug 11th, 13, 09:04 PM
Tech Team
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 95
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

Bringing back the dead. Does anyone know if there was any follow up on this thread?

Kelvin
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

certified gearhead
1969 RS Z/28
xxxg00w0pilot is offline  
post #9 of 16 (permalink) Old Aug 12th, 13, 04:14 AM
Senior Tech
Steiner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lyman, SC
Posts: 8,348
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

Let me preface this by saying that I believe that any of today's oil formulations are fine for most completely stock valvetrains. This is what the API's guidelines and tests are made for. Does that mean that they are sufficient for every valvetrain/engine ever produced or being produced? No. Does that mean that they are sufficient for every aftermarket component that may result in much higher loads than most stock parts? No. Are there some current manufacturers that do not recommend a standard 30 weight oil (oils above 30 weight do not have limits on phosphorus or zinc) for their engines? Yes.

Here's what I got from it......

This person lists himself as "Member: SAE" which leads everyone to believe he is an SAE certified engineer. However, there are only two qualifications needed to become an SAE member: $81 and a mailing address.

The testing device (which is never shown or named) is called "definitely not a one armed bandit" device which used to be made by the Timken company and was discredited some time ago because it can be manipulated and Timken stopped making it or using it. Reason being the results could easily be skewed by pulling harder or softer on the testing lever which applies force to the pin against a spinning ring. However, the description of the test device being used perfectly matches what a Timken tester (one armed bandit) is but the user says he carefully and slowly adds weights to the device the exact same way on each test sample so as to have no variances.

There was some testing of zinc additives and higher zinc oils that attempted (in my opinion) to show that they did not work or offered no additional protection. However, the way the testing was performed showed that the person performing the test has no idea how zinc works and is activated. Under heat and pressure, ZDDP gradually lays down a sacrificial ceramic layer on the microscopic peaks and valleys of metal which is the last line of defense when the oil film is broken such as in sliding, scrubbing, pivoting parts. The tester heated his samples, put them in a tester that forces a pin against a spinning ring, and ran it for 30 seconds. Anyone ever heard of a 30 second camshaft break-in? Anyone ever seen a rocker pivot or valve stem that is a rotating part supported by an oil film?

With all that said, I do believe his test showed good results... Those results being how well different oils' film strengths perform in a Timken tester. It can be a helpful indicator but is not the end all in protection rating. As said, this tester is a spinning ring with a pin pressed against it. Does that sound like it's representative of every working part inside an engine? It's certainly similar to a bearing such as a rod or camshaft bearing but all the zinc in the world will not save a bearing when the oil film is broken and the fact is that the poorest oil on the market has enough film strength to perform adequately if there are not other problems and the engine is operating correctly, and the BEST oil on the market is not strong enough to prevent an issue if it's not. There are independent four ball wear tests done by Amsoil using several of the same oils in this test that have completely different results. Does that mean one test invalidates the other? I don't think so.

The person doing this testing went on record as saying his recommendation was that SN rated Pennzoil Platinum 5W-30, being that it showed the highest film strength in his testing, should be used in EVERY engine that has been or will be built REGARDLESS of camshaft type, lift, duration, spring pressures, usage, etc. This statement alone would get him laughed out of any reputable engine shop, race team area, or even camshaft manufacturing facility. And it's not just flat tappet cams or just cams alone that sometimes need extra EP additive....there are several LS shops that are seeing failures on aggressive lobe cams with lower zinc oil and certain diesel engines that are seeing rocker pivot failures on the newer low zinc diesel oils.

Zinc is not the end all be all of wear protection, but it's not something to just be discounted because someone says so. After all if it were would the API still specify A MINIMUM AMOUNT THAT MUST BE IN ALL OILS? Nope.

'69 Camaro
Dart 400-AFR 195-224/224 HR-Powerjection III TB with F.A.S.T. Sportsman XFI
TKO 600-Moser 3.42-Detroit Truetrac
500hp/538lbft

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

'69 Camaro Beater-SFT 327-M20-Moser 4.10-sold
'02 Z/28 vert-stock-sold and totaled

Last edited by Steiner; Aug 12th, 13 at 04:27 AM.
Steiner is offline  
post #10 of 16 (permalink) Old Aug 12th, 13, 04:57 AM
Senior Tech
Steiner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lyman, SC
Posts: 8,348
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

Sorry, don't mean to sound like a dick and certainly don't want to discount all the work that was done by this person because it was indeed a huge task and is good information. I just don't agree with some of the recommendations he makes based on the results. I feel like it's the equivalent of saying since 93 octane fuel is considered the best available, rates highest on knock testing, and every manufacturer currently recommends 93 octane at the highest then it is sufficient for every engine that has been or will be built regardless of components used, tuning done, or vehicle usage.

'69 Camaro
Dart 400-AFR 195-224/224 HR-Powerjection III TB with F.A.S.T. Sportsman XFI
TKO 600-Moser 3.42-Detroit Truetrac
500hp/538lbft

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

'69 Camaro Beater-SFT 327-M20-Moser 4.10-sold
'02 Z/28 vert-stock-sold and totaled
Steiner is offline  
post #11 of 16 (permalink) Old Aug 12th, 13, 05:59 PM
Tech Team
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 95
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

Good insight! . Thanks

Kelvin
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

certified gearhead
1969 RS Z/28
xxxg00w0pilot is offline  
post #12 of 16 (permalink) Old Aug 12th, 13, 06:22 PM
Banned
Chet
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 749
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

Its a freaking joke! Follow proper cam break-in procedures and 90% of this lobe "problem" is eliminated. Remove any cheap foreign made lifters and you take care of the other 9%. Today's oils must be backwards compatible with older cars. It has been discussed that the levels of ZDDP that everybody is concerned with were at definite overkill levels way higher than necessary.

The truly sick part of the joke is that there are more than a dozen specialty oils out there that are no more expensive than a quart of Mobil 1 synthetic yet people continue to glean every bit of information from snake oil salesmen like RAT 540 to somehow find a cheap oil to use for their pride and joy's engine instead of paying the price for an oil that is formulated to put their fears, founded or unfounded, to rest for the cost of one oil change per year. Talking 25-30 bucks a year to put your mind at ease. So why does this debate still rage on? Makes no sense.
154567 is offline  
post #13 of 16 (permalink) Old Aug 13th, 13, 02:53 PM
DT
Gold Lifetime Member
Donny
 
DT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Rockland Cty/Melb bch Fla
Posts: 5,186
Garage
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

I here what you guys are saying. Skeptical, yeah perhaps. I should point out though that I sent RAT a quart of the Summit Racing Oil 10W40. His results came back NOT too good, for whatever that is worth too you guys. I think he is trying to do the right thing though. To each his own.

1969 X66 396 LeMans Blue, M20, 373 (Sold)
1969 Convertible LS3 TKO 600, 373
DT is offline  
post #14 of 16 (permalink) Old Aug 15th, 13, 04:52 AM
Senior Tech
Bruce
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waxhaw, NC
Posts: 2,507
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

How many of you have had cam/engine failure with your "high" mileage Camaros? I agree with Chet. I still own my first 69 that I bought in 1978 and it still runs fine with Castrol half synthetic. . . .about 25k miles. . . .just and old Camaro Guy talkin!
The Camaro Guy is offline  
post #15 of 16 (permalink) Old Aug 15th, 13, 02:12 PM
DT
Gold Lifetime Member
Donny
 
DT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Rockland Cty/Melb bch Fla
Posts: 5,186
Garage
Re: Break-In Oil “Wear Test” and “Lab Test” Data

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Camaro Guy View Post
How many of you have had cam/engine failure with your "high" mileage Camaros? I agree with Chet. I still own my first 69 that I bought in 1978 and it still runs fine with Castrol half synthetic. . . .about 25k miles. . . .just and old Camaro Guy talkin!
Bruce I hear what you are saying. The answer is probably none. The problems seem to occur on rebuilt engines with High performance camshafts using aggressive lobe design and higher spring rates. Yes of course, DIY engine builders NOT properly breaking in camshafts as well. Chet is correct, oil has to be backward compatible, period.

1969 X66 396 LeMans Blue, M20, 373 (Sold)
1969 Convertible LS3 TKO 600, 373
DT is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Team Camaro Tech forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address.
NOTE we receive a lot of registrations with bad email addresses. IF you do not receive your confirmation email you will not be able to post. contact support and we will try and help.
Be sure you enter a valid email address and check your spam folder as well.



Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome