Cam startup/break-in lubricant
June 13th, 2022, 02:18 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 773
June 13th, 2022, 02:32 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 719
According to an engineer the failure of cams is the lack of using a good high rated oil, and breakin is not needed.
https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/201...-test-ranking/
https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/201...-test-ranking/
June 13th, 2022, 03:09 PM
#7
Administrator
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Poteau, Ok
Posts: 40,647
Chevrolet Performance 88862587 Chevrolet Performance E.O.S. Additive | Summit Racing
June 13th, 2022, 03:10 PM
#8
Administrator
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Poteau, Ok
Posts: 40,647
According to an engineer the failure of cams is the lack of using a good high rated oil, and breakin is not needed.
https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/201...-test-ranking/
https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/201...-test-ranking/
June 13th, 2022, 04:35 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 719
All kinds of magic sauce has been used over the decades. One cheap one might be bacon grease
Now imagine your friends faces, as they observed your new cam and lifters coated in bacon grease just before you installed the intake. With a high rated oil in the the pan. A lot of people like pre oiling, but really with the spark off, just turning it over with the starter for a few seconds probably does the same thing.
Now imagine your friends faces, as they observed your new cam and lifters coated in bacon grease just before you installed the intake. With a high rated oil in the the pan. A lot of people like pre oiling, but really with the spark off, just turning it over with the starter for a few seconds probably does the same thing.
June 28th, 2022, 11:47 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 33
According to an engineer the failure of cams is the lack of using a good high rated oil, and breakin is not needed.
https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/201...-test-ranking/
https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/201...-test-ranking/
June 29th, 2022, 12:48 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 719
That was debunked a long time ago on bobistheoilguy. There's a reason why manufacturers still don't recommend those "high rated oils" in their flat tappet diesels with high springs pressures. There is no replacement for ZDDP. Break-in is ALWAYS needed with a flat tappet. You just don't know how they work if you think otherwise.
The original new cams going bad was either bad cam cores, or lifters, and when those stopped years ago the problems stopped for the most part. Coil bind or excessive spring pressures have always caused problems wiping lobes out. from too much pressure.
540Rat has the Degree and does actual testing and racing. Project Farm also tests in similar ways and shows the results. Science is science, but that seems foreign to most people today. Then there is David Vizard and his testing, and his specialty oil concentrate. additive. The same one that tested great when 540Rat took a look at it and tested it. Not the best now a days according to testing but still quite good.
June 29th, 2022, 04:54 AM
#12
Out of Line, Everytime😉
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Melville, Saskatchewan
Posts: 8,966
Unfortunately, proper break in procedures and high ZDDP oils aren't the magic cam break in fix. The guy I picked up my 403 from said he had two cams go flat in a row with high ZDDP oil and proper break in procedures in a Mopar 360. My mild 214/214 cam went flat with 1100/1000 PPM ZDDP, the old Quaker State Defy 10W30 with a small bottle of the ZDDP additive and 2000 rpm for 20 minutes. One thing I didn't check was the spring pressure. They are a single spring, supposedly a mild BBC upgrade when the #6 heads were rebuilt. There seems to be way too many flat cam failures these days, exactly why I went roller, which is ridiculously expensive on an Olds V8.
June 29th, 2022, 08:22 AM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 719
Unfortunately, proper break in procedures and high ZDDP oils aren't the magic cam break in fix. The guy I picked up my 403 from said he had two cams go flat in a row with high ZDDP oil and proper break in procedures in a Mopar 360. My mild 214/214 cam went flat with 1100/1000 PPM ZDDP, the old Quaker State Defy 10W30 with a small bottle of the ZDDP additive and 2000 rpm for 20 minutes. One thing I didn't check was the spring pressure. They are a single spring, supposedly a mild BBC upgrade when the #6 heads were rebuilt. There seems to be way too many flat cam failures these days, exactly why I went roller, which is ridiculously expensive on an Olds V8.
I think a flat tappet cam going flat is a thing of the past now a days. Think back to how many years ago you saw those flat tappets go bad, and who has been having them state now they are going bad.
Breakin on cams happens fairly quickly, as the surface changes to shiny as the surface layer is worn away. The old hocus pocus on breakins seems to be busted, as more and more people find that with the normal pressures and a high quality extra low friction oil that's all that's needed. The one thing I would suggest is to make sure the oil is on all surfaces (not breakin oils) and to pour the last quart into the cam/valley area and make sure the pushrods are all spinning as it runs. Grease or molly paste on the cam and lifters, if its going to be a long while before its started for the first time.
June 30th, 2022, 04:55 AM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,868
June 30th, 2022, 07:56 AM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 719
I would love to do some breakin testing on a bench, if I had the time and money, to compare say bacon grease to things like this Red Line Grease on the cam lobes for 15 minutes, at different RPMS and with no other lubrication. Fast ramps and 140 pounds of pressure and no other cooling or lubrication for 15 minutes would be extreme testing.
But flat lobes I don't see as a big problem now a days, if the pressures are right and no binding. Summit's advice for the most part ,except for the ZDDP goes back a good 50 years or more, for new or used cams and lifters. Lubrication seems to have a long ways in those years, and now we can test and verify with 540Rat or Project Farm's work.
June 30th, 2022, 09:22 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 719
Was reading the feedback on the link you posted, it's the same story you and we see on boards everywhere discussing flat tappet camshaft failures. I think it's not too much to say people lie a lot and are full of crap generally on this topic. They mix up lifters, they reuse lifters especially .921's on a different camshaft in a different block, they don't check everything as you must and have failures and they cry about ZDDP and oil and quality of components.
I have been real careful about end play in late Oldsmobile camshafts, probably because I have been steeped in all of the problems with early Olds V8 camshafts and wear issues. I select fit the aftermarket flange bronze bearing combined with the aftermarket bronze forward end shake button, to hold the assembled installed end play to a pretty close tolerance, of course I want the timing set in alignment and distributor gear in correct location. Once the front of the block wears where the camshaft flange rides I think it becomes imperative to check and maintain correct camshaft installed location if the entire assembly is to provide any kind of long service. Front covers that are very worn at the cam button are not used. Those who shake their fist at Joe Mondello should consider he warned in detail about this 45 years ago, when oil was not a issue. Going to roller lifters as one guys suggested does lessen the stakes in terms of lobe and lifter failure in my mind but correct running positioning of the camshaft revving up and down remains extremely important.
In any event I don't think anyone can just dump a new or used hipo camshaft in any late Olds without checking EVERYTHING and expect long service, that is the bottom line, lubrication discussions aside. Reduced base circle for increased lift with standard height lifters now running lower in the lifter bore with changed geometry changes geometry even long adjusters with a adjustable valve train cannot always correct. One I was proud of was my own engine with a used Mondello 28-29 with new TRW lifters and corrected valve train geometry, ran with old Kendall 20-50w oil and stock appearing rockers and trunions, solid valve spring retainers on Crower springs the specs I've forgotten. Revved 6500 no problems with wear or breakage. Still have the engine and might use it again.
A run of 303's for the 1952 year actually had the driver's side lifter bores out of register. ALL drivers side lobes going flat in a short time on new vehicles. We have all seen the movies of production with the gang drilling and gang reaming of the bores so tough to speculate how that might have happened, but Olds at that time blamed core shift in the casting process. So Olds made up some special camshafts for the recall campaign with the lobes ground slightly off to match the incorrect lifter bore location. These camshafts were stamped with a large letter R on the flange end. All documented in Olds service bulletins. I never saw one over the years in any surviving engine. P.S. one service bulletin addressed dealer mechanics installing the special modified R camshaft in engines with out the out-of-register bores, ouch and ugh.
I think these points needed to be made once again and I know guys will just keep dropping parts in expecting Chevy success with used high mileage Old blocks and other parts. I will delete this post later knowing there isn't really any stopping what guys especially Oldsmobile first-timers will do.
Have nice day.
I have been real careful about end play in late Oldsmobile camshafts, probably because I have been steeped in all of the problems with early Olds V8 camshafts and wear issues. I select fit the aftermarket flange bronze bearing combined with the aftermarket bronze forward end shake button, to hold the assembled installed end play to a pretty close tolerance, of course I want the timing set in alignment and distributor gear in correct location. Once the front of the block wears where the camshaft flange rides I think it becomes imperative to check and maintain correct camshaft installed location if the entire assembly is to provide any kind of long service. Front covers that are very worn at the cam button are not used. Those who shake their fist at Joe Mondello should consider he warned in detail about this 45 years ago, when oil was not a issue. Going to roller lifters as one guys suggested does lessen the stakes in terms of lobe and lifter failure in my mind but correct running positioning of the camshaft revving up and down remains extremely important.
In any event I don't think anyone can just dump a new or used hipo camshaft in any late Olds without checking EVERYTHING and expect long service, that is the bottom line, lubrication discussions aside. Reduced base circle for increased lift with standard height lifters now running lower in the lifter bore with changed geometry changes geometry even long adjusters with a adjustable valve train cannot always correct. One I was proud of was my own engine with a used Mondello 28-29 with new TRW lifters and corrected valve train geometry, ran with old Kendall 20-50w oil and stock appearing rockers and trunions, solid valve spring retainers on Crower springs the specs I've forgotten. Revved 6500 no problems with wear or breakage. Still have the engine and might use it again.
A run of 303's for the 1952 year actually had the driver's side lifter bores out of register. ALL drivers side lobes going flat in a short time on new vehicles. We have all seen the movies of production with the gang drilling and gang reaming of the bores so tough to speculate how that might have happened, but Olds at that time blamed core shift in the casting process. So Olds made up some special camshafts for the recall campaign with the lobes ground slightly off to match the incorrect lifter bore location. These camshafts were stamped with a large letter R on the flange end. All documented in Olds service bulletins. I never saw one over the years in any surviving engine. P.S. one service bulletin addressed dealer mechanics installing the special modified R camshaft in engines with out the out-of-register bores, ouch and ugh.
I think these points needed to be made once again and I know guys will just keep dropping parts in expecting Chevy success with used high mileage Old blocks and other parts. I will delete this post later knowing there isn't really any stopping what guys especially Oldsmobile first-timers will do.
Have nice day. Stop scaring the kiddies The 2 biggest and common new cam mistakes beginners make are damaging the cam bearings pulling the cam out or putting the new one in. The other huge mistake is in wanting more cam duration and lift then is needed, especially with big Olds motors on the street.
http://garage.grumpysperformance.com...cations.10162/
July 1st, 2022, 01:08 AM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 33
From Shannon, also an engineer(since you seem to think that matters when pertaining to 540rat)."If you are exploring film strength, you've lost the lubrication game in a street engine. Plus some of his concluding statements have zero relevance to the test regime, or the apparent advertorial for an oil additive."
Also from that link:
"i love how rotella t6 is rated #96. oh well nice read but total unscientific nonsense."
Rotella is widely regarded as the best flat tappet oil you can buy.
"How do you develop the sacrificial layer that ZDDP builds up with extreme pressure and heat over an extended period of time in a 30 second test? You are doing a film strength test and in post after post claiming it is a test of antiwear additives. There is no way the ZDDP can be activated and generate the sacrificial layer needed to protect flat tappet cam and lifter surfaces in a 30 second test so you are not testing antiwear additives. If you are as intelligent as you think you should answer the question posted."
Also from that link:"The test is testing film strength. It is a film strength tester. To make assumptions of extreme pressure wear protection from a testing protocol not designed to test that is ludicrous. The OP has stated that "GM report says Zinc level in motor oil DOES NOT matter".Again he is assuming results that are not true based on incorrect interpretations. I agree his test results are helpful. Film strength is important in an oil. If these results are used as intended as film strength results of oil tested @ 230 degrees that is fine. Calling a film strength test "wear testing" and assuming it is a valid test for extreme pressure additives effectivness concerning long term flat tappet cam wear is incorrect. The flat tappet cam lobe/ lifter interface will break the film strength of any oil. At that point his test stops but that is exactly when the ZDDP starts protecting this high pressure point. The phophorous sacrificial layer deposited when the ZDDP is exposed to the heat and extreme pressure generated after the film strength shears is the last line of protection. As for how much is needed that is up for debate. High detergent/dispersant levels increase the need for ZDDP because they compete for the same space. The ASTM Sequence IIIG test that determines backward compatability clearly shows that there is almost 10x the lobe wear using oil that tests @ .05% ZDDP compared to an oil that tests @ .095%."
From 2012:
Dude's test method sounds suspiciously like the Timken 'one-armed bandit' frequently used to shill snake oil at state fairs and such. Wonder how well bleach, Coca-Cola or Head & Shoulders would have fared, they usually put most snake oils on the one-armed bandit to shame but no rationally thinking person would ever put them in their engine.
Also from that link:
"No, extreme pressure test is for gear oils. There is no extreme pressure in combustion engines last time I checked as there are no helical gears. One would think that timken tests and 4 ball tests should not fool BITOGers."
"Where in the SAE, ACEA, and ILSAC engine oil testing regimes is the one armed bandit, 4 ball, or RAT tests ? Surely if it were relevant, these testing bodies, as opposed to advertisers would incorporate them."
"The flat tappet lifter to lobe interface operates in boundary lubrication. Hydrodynamic oil film is already out the window. What you need is a tribofilm formed from activation of anti-wear additives (ZDDP in particular) to minimize abrasive wear of the cam lobes and lifters as much as possible. The amount of anti-wear (ZDDP) necessary is largely dependent on acceleration or "jerk" in the valvetrain, the weight of the valvetrain, valve spring pressure, and rpm. Higher lift cams with more aggressive lobes using high spring rates and turning more rpm need more ZDDP to cushion the blow."
Also from that link:
"When that data is properly analyzed and presented no oil tests better than any other oil. They all test the same. Besides that, the test he performs is not applicable to motor oils. There is absolutely nothing "directly related" to anything out of that website."
Beyond the applicability of the test to engine oils, the real nail in the coffin is his (lack of) data analysis. When his results are properly analyzed IAW the ASTM test you reference, all his results come out the same. There is no statistically valid difference between any of the oils tested. As a result, the ranking he lists is a complete fabrication. Here are his results properly presented IAW the outlines of the ASTM test. See a problem here? Mind you, this is a best-case scenario. It only goes downhill from here.With a graph of his test results showing no real difference.
Originally Posted by 540rat
Therefore, motor oil testing in a running engine, is a waste of time, effort and money, when it comes to gathering accurate data for comparison between various oils. And that is precisely why I perform all my testing with motor oil test equipment, rather than in an engine.
I am so sick of seeing 540 RAT's oil test all over the internet. It is bunk. The best way to test an oils anti wear ability is to test it is in a running engine. Any thing other than that is measuring the gas mileage of a Caddy going down hill or measuring the wattage of a stereo amp driving a simple passive resister with a sign wave (industry standard). You have to try to create the real world. Way too un-scientific.
If it is still the film strength tester how are you concluding the effectiveness of a sacrificial layer that is deposited over time with a 30 second test that in no way can develop the sacrifical layer. Your missing a key component, You have pressure, heat but your missing time. You keep posting new threads on this and I keep asking how you deposit the sacrificial layer to test it and you never respond. Your testing has merit as a valid test of film strength of different oils. It has no merit as a conclusive test of the antiwear properties of ZDDP as your method does not facilitate the deposit of the sacrificial layer of the ZDDP.
Also from that link:
"Flat-tappet cam owners - don't put your cam at risk based on this misinformation. Film strength testing is not "wear protection" testing, and you need >= 1000 ppm ZDDP to protect your cam...as specified by every.single.cam.manufacturer!"
Last edited by Vengeance; July 1st, 2022 at 01:44 AM.
July 1st, 2022, 01:29 AM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 33
I've been building engines, both race and HP street, for 56 years and in that time I've not seen much problem with break in until the oil manufacturers were forced to remove the zinc and some other things for the tree huggers. But, after that was done I've seen a lot of cams get wiped out due to a failure to follow recommended break in procedures. Today it's pretty easy to ruin a flat tappet cam, especially with the increased spring pressures that most of us run in our performance engines. I like a good quality, high zinc break in oil for just that reason and that reason only! For any roller cam engine or ring seating etc., I wouldn't waste my time or money on break in oil. It's just not needed for those purposes but, it is definitely worth it in a flat tappet engine! Just my $.02 worth from a lot of years making engines sing.
Also from that link:
"There is a chemical advantage to not having detergents in your break-in oil. For one, you don't need them, as everything should be clean as a whistle. Two, they don't compete with the anti-wear additives. You also don't really want friction modifiers in your break in oil. There are plenty of articles about this stuff out there on the internet, both from formulators and engine builders. Everyone here trusts formulators so much I'm surprised there's such a distaste for break-in oils." https://www.enginebuildermag.com/2019/08/break-in-oils
Show me a flat tappet engine build where they just threw in quaker state/mobile 1 full synthetic, never broke it in, and it didn't wipe the lobes. It doesn't exist. Only his supposed "testimonial" of someone who just happens to not be a member of any forum to make a post and document it. And this absolutely "real" person STILL broke it in.
I've owned a few Nissan products, 370Z's and a Murano, in the past ten years. They come with a break-in oil as noted in the owner's manual and also a break-in procedure. If Nissan designed and built it, I follow their recommendations. 540, you may want to edit your response where you state new vehicles don't use a break-in oil. Some do.
"There is even a chapter dedicated to break-in oils in the “SAE Lubricants Handbook.”
The Dunning-Kruger effect might apply to whoever wrote the 540Rat blog on WordPress.com. However, I don't think it applies to Project Farm. PF seems like an intelligent guy that knows what he's doing and how to manipulate an audience under the guise of "entertainment." I believe that PF is in it for the money. There is no way to get results this "linear" and "accurate" with Project Farm's non-standard and non-calibrated testing methods and equipment. The results are, however, in line with Pennzoil's product stack from a marketing point of view, I'll give him that.
BITOG Disclaimer: The Project Farm channel states that its videos are for entertainment purposes only. Project Farm does not perform ASTM tests, nor apply industry acknowledged methods and criteria, and therefore BITOG cannot endorse the results of tests of any lubricant or filter or similar product as seen on the Project Farm channel, and cautions readers giving credence to such entertainment information.
Now you need to stop spreading misinformation that can ruin people's engines.
Also from that link:
"There is a chemical advantage to not having detergents in your break-in oil. For one, you don't need them, as everything should be clean as a whistle. Two, they don't compete with the anti-wear additives. You also don't really want friction modifiers in your break in oil. There are plenty of articles about this stuff out there on the internet, both from formulators and engine builders. Everyone here trusts formulators so much I'm surprised there's such a distaste for break-in oils." https://www.enginebuildermag.com/2019/08/break-in-oils
According to an engineer the failure of cams is the lack of using a good high rated oil, and breakin is not needed.https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/201...-test-ranking/
I've owned a few Nissan products, 370Z's and a Murano, in the past ten years. They come with a break-in oil as noted in the owner's manual and also a break-in procedure. If Nissan designed and built it, I follow their recommendations. 540, you may want to edit your response where you state new vehicles don't use a break-in oil. Some do.
"There is even a chapter dedicated to break-in oils in the “SAE Lubricants Handbook.”
Originally Posted by Firewalker
Project Farm also tests in similar ways and shows the results.
BITOG Disclaimer: The Project Farm channel states that its videos are for entertainment purposes only. Project Farm does not perform ASTM tests, nor apply industry acknowledged methods and criteria, and therefore BITOG cannot endorse the results of tests of any lubricant or filter or similar product as seen on the Project Farm channel, and cautions readers giving credence to such entertainment information.
Now you need to stop spreading misinformation that can ruin people's engines.
July 1st, 2022, 04:46 AM
#19
Out of Line, Everytime😉
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Melville, Saskatchewan
Posts: 8,966
Yeah, I think detergents are understated when it comes to cam failure. It is exactly why modern diesel oils aren't ideal for aggressive flat tappet cams with high spring pressure. One of our company's synthetic diesel oil has 862 PPM of Zinc, most are probably around 1000 ppm to save particulate filters. Our CI+ oils were 1400 ppm. I imagine Moly was used as a replacement. The next round of emission compliance will probably see it drop even more. All our new Freightliner's use 10W30 Diesel spec oil, it sure helps in -40 starting. I
f they think it helps fuel economy, it is not enough to matter. All these modern, clean diesels get horrid fuel economy and are unreliable, mainly thanks to DEF failures.
f they think it helps fuel economy, it is not enough to matter. All these modern, clean diesels get horrid fuel economy and are unreliable, mainly thanks to DEF failures.
Last edited by olds 307 and 403; July 1st, 2022 at 04:49 AM.
July 1st, 2022, 09:13 AM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 719
Oils in engines work basically in 2 ways, as a cushion or wave of oil the parts right on, such as mains or rods, and the other is film strength, such as lobes or pistons. But even the rods and crank have no pressure/wave at start up and only film strength to keep them from going metal to metal.
This film strength is what both Project Farm and 540Rat test, except 540Rat also test it at high temperatures, like what would be found in engines.
This film strength is what both Project Farm and 540Rat test, except 540Rat also test it at high temperatures, like what would be found in engines.
July 1st, 2022, 06:25 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,951
Oils in engines work basically in 2 ways, as a cushion or wave of oil the parts right on, such as mains or rods, and the other is film strength, such as lobes or pistons. But even the rods and crank have no pressure/wave at start up and only film strength to keep them from going metal to metal.
This film strength is what both Project Farm and 540Rat test, except 540Rat also test it at high temperatures, like what would be found in engines.
This film strength is what both Project Farm and 540Rat test, except 540Rat also test it at high temperatures, like what would be found in engines.
I seen his crap first hand on speedtalk where he peddled his lies and hillbilly testing methods.
here, this is just a small sample from one board. https://www.kia-forums.com/threads/what-is-oil-type-sorento-use.118225/page-2
Last edited by CANADIANOLDS; July 1st, 2022 at 06:31 PM.
July 1st, 2022, 06:36 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 719
You are spreading lies from a fraudster. 540rat was exposed as a fraud years ago on many Performance boards where actual lubrication engineers exposed his bs testing methods that do not meet any engineering performance test standards in any automotive or engineering journals for oils.
I seen his crap first hand on speedtalk where he peddled his lies and hillbilly testing methods.
here, this is just a small sample from one board. https://www.kia-forums.com/threads/what-is-oil-type-sorento-use.118225/page-2
I seen his crap first hand on speedtalk where he peddled his lies and hillbilly testing methods.
here, this is just a small sample from one board. https://www.kia-forums.com/threads/what-is-oil-type-sorento-use.118225/page-2
July 1st, 2022, 07:29 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,951
Speed talk lost all credibility when they censored speech on it when the ownership changed hands because he died. Besides there is a huge difference, with hard core evidence versus actual testing versus opinions, Opinions of people who sold and had sworn ZDDP was the problem. You are a denier in denial LOL Have a good one.
i have no idea who you are and I don’t care..you are clueless and out to lunch believing that garbage. He has been spreading it since 2006 and been proven wrong over and over by lubrication engineers.
what’s your personal experience? I’ll bet its beginner level, just by what you’ve posted..a hack at best. What you’ve posted in this thread alone will hurt engines if anyone believes you
July 1st, 2022, 07:36 PM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,951
I’ve many many flat tappets both hyd and solid with big spring pressure. Never lost one yet, but according to Firebs’r I should have lost all of them because I use hi zinc oil for break in .
It’s the problem ? 🙄
150 seat, close to 400 over the nose at .700” with no break in springs . How do these ever survive?
don’t listen to this Jack a s s
It’s the problem ? 🙄
150 seat, close to 400 over the nose at .700” with no break in springs . How do these ever survive?
don’t listen to this Jack a s s
July 1st, 2022, 08:19 PM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 719
I’ve many many flat tappets both hyd and solid with big spring pressure. Never lost one yet, but according to Firebs’r I should have lost all of them because I use hi zinc oil for break in .
It’s the problem ? 🙄
150 seat, close to 400 over the nose at .700” with no break in springs . How do these ever survive?
don’t listen to this Jack a s s
It’s the problem ? 🙄
150 seat, close to 400 over the nose at .700” with no break in springs . How do these ever survive?
don’t listen to this Jack a s s
July 2nd, 2022, 02:48 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,951
There is nothing to decide. And as far as there not being a problem with wiping out cams and lifters anymore, that’s just more bs from you.
for those who thing this guy knows what he’s talking about, Google 540rat … you’ll get 15 plus years of garbage. Lubrication engineers over the years have challenged his backyard style testing and proven him so wrong over and over.
There is no grand conspiracy by salesmen to sell ZDDP in oil.
for those who thing this guy knows what he’s talking about, Google 540rat … you’ll get 15 plus years of garbage. Lubrication engineers over the years have challenged his backyard style testing and proven him so wrong over and over.
There is no grand conspiracy by salesmen to sell ZDDP in oil.
July 2nd, 2022, 06:09 AM
#27
Out of Line, Everytime😉
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Melville, Saskatchewan
Posts: 8,966
Good to hear this, his tests seemed questionable at best to me and didn't make a lot of sense. Companies don't just put products in oil for the fun of it. Unfortunately someone must have tested a failed converter and blamed it on ZDDP. Oil companies have added Moly and no doubt other additives to fill the void. I just picked up Lucas Hotrod oil for my temporary 403 in 10W30 at Napa since VR1 at Walmart only comes in 20W50. It has 2100 PPM ZDDP compared to like 1300 PPM in VR1, pretty high and about the same price as a good synthetic oil. We will see if it plugs the cheap Chinese cats I am throwing on my 70S. I believe it will also have the acid reducers for prolonged storage. Definitely a good thing up here where our cars sit for 6 months.
July 2nd, 2022, 07:26 PM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 719
Good to hear this, his tests seemed questionable at best to me and didn't make a lot of sense. Companies don't just put products in oil for the fun of it. Unfortunately someone must have tested a failed converter and blamed it on ZDDP. Oil companies have added Moly and no doubt other additives to fill the void. I just picked up Lucas Hotrod oil for my temporary 403 in 10W30 at Napa since VR1 at Walmart only comes in 20W50. It has 2100 PPM ZDDP compared to like 1300 PPM in VR1, pretty high and about the same price as a good synthetic oil. We will see if it plugs the cheap Chinese cats I am throwing on my 70S. I believe it will also have the acid reducers for prolonged storage. Definitely a good thing up here where our cars sit for 6 months.
62. “Oil Extreme concentrate” added to 10W30 Lucas Hot Rod & Classic Hi-Performance Oil conventional = 105,758 psi
This oil on its own WITHOUT the “Oil Extreme concentrate” added to it, has a wear protection capability of only 62,538 psi. But, with 2.0 OZ of concentrate added per qt, which is the amount intended for racing, its wear protection capability “WENT UP A MIND BLOWING 69%”.
zinc = TBD
July 2nd, 2022, 10:17 PM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 33
You should start putting shampoo in your engines if you think his bunk test means anything. You seem to have missed where they said shampoo beat most oil in that bunk test. It is SOLELY a test of film strength. It is 100% NOT a test of "antiwear additives". So this statement
is misinformation that can ruin people's engines. And this statement
is the real world facts.You also still haven't answered this...
The ASTM Sequence IIIG test that determines backward compatability clearly shows that there is almost 10x the lobe wear using oil that tests @ .05% ZDDP compared to an oil that tests @ .095%."
Originally Posted by Vengeance
Show me a flat tappet engine build where they just threw in quaker state/mobile 1 full synthetic, never broke it in, and it didn't wipe the lobes. It doesn't exist. Only his supposed "testimonial" of someone who just happens to not be a member of any forum to make a post and document it. And this absolutely "real" person STILL broke it in.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Cpriester123
General Discussion
12
November 8th, 2016 05:46 AM
