1960-ish Engine-Wear Protection

[Ray_Casner]

Newbie here! What is/are the preferred oil(s) for wear protection in older engines having flat-tappet cams and gear-driven distributors? I belong to a forum that champions the "oldish" (1983-1989) EFI/turbocharged Ford 2.3L SOHC "Lima" engines (TurboCoupe, SVO, Merkur, etc.), and...... the typical modern oil formulations don't protect against cam-follower wear and - most importantly - the gears that drive the distributor/oil pump, of which suffer frequent failure, despite using very expensive oils such as Royal Purple, Amsoil, Mobil 1, etc...... along with oils formulated for diseasel usage..

I'd like to find an "out-of-the-bottle" oil that will protect these components, like the oils available when such engines were produced ~ without any additives (Prolong, zinc, phosphorus, ZDDP, etc.). A blogger that goes by the name of "540 RAT" maintains a site that has - among many other things - a wear-protection ranking of currently available oils. He supposedly updates the site regularly and claims that the oil with the current highest wear protection is Dexos-Approved 5W-30 "QS Full Synthetic" (which, BTW, is available at Wally World for about $25 per 5-qt jug). Opinions?? TIA for any helpful comments!

 

[Zee09]

Welcome aboard @Ray_Casner
I'm sure someone will chime in with some good info.

 

[wings&wheels]

I remember Dad looking far and wide for Valvoline Turbo-V oil for his '85 Turbo Coupe....and being rather mad when I lifted a few quarts (in cans!) to top up my leaky Tr6.

What weights were recommended originally? Not knowing any specifics, Redline 0w or 5w-40 comes to mind as a quality oil w/ adequate additive levels, etc.

Pics of whatever you have please.

 

[Hirev]

claims that the oil with the current highest wear protection is Dexos-Approved 5W-30 "QS Full Synthetic"

I would take Quaker State ultimate protection 5w-30 over Quaker State full synthetic any day of the week but I'm not an expert.

 

[Nessism1]

There are various high ZDDP oils that might help. They won't help your exhaust cat, though. What oil viscosity is needed in those engines?

Maybe this...

Mobil Delvac Extreme Heavy Duty Full Synthetic Diesel Engine Oil 10W-30, 1 Gal​

 

[RooflessVW]

VR1 10W-30

 

[Strumpan_]

Any oil will be fine in a 1980s engine, just use s HDEO oil and it will last longer than the body.

Also can’t you just change the can follower? Like in VW EA113 engines?

 

[Propflux01]

A Newbie, but you joined in 2012?


Pretty much anything off the shelf will still work well with flat tappet engines. Keep in mind that a whole lot of engines with overhead cams ride directly on a rocker or shim bucket. The QS Ultimate protection will do fine if you want something easily available and off the shelf.

 

[Ray_Casner]

THANX, guys ~ YES, Propflux01...... it's been so long since I last posted that I forgot when I joined, lol. As for swapping out the "slider" (flat-tappet) followers ~ you're correct, Strumpan...... OEM & aftermarket roller cams & followers ARE available. The main/ongoing lube-related failure point on these dinosaur (Pinto-derived) engines is the auxiliary-shaft gear AND the distributor gear, which it drives.

FWIW ~ I worked as a Ford stealership HD Line Tech when these motors were introduced in 1974 and "we" NEVER had any failures of these gears. BUT..... when the OEMs lobbied the oil companies to remove certain additives that were shortening the life of their catalytic converters (which had to be warranted for extended periods - 50K in CA), "we" started seeing a prolific number of aux-shaft & dist gear failures, which is a phenomenon that still exists today. <shrug>

 

[Cujet]

In the end, the turbo Lima engines really did well on M1, 15W-50. Roller or flat followers.

 

[spasm3]

Amsoil Z-Rod.

 

[Nessism1]

Back when I worked for a large asian automotive OEM, a coworker told the story of when he worked for Ford, in their engine development group. He worked on a special project to improve engine oil formulations in order to mitigate aggravated wear on the 2.3. Apparently, those engines had serious challenges from way back. Another thing he said is that his group brought in a Honda Accord, and all the Ford engineers were flabbergasted by the combustion efficiency. This was in the CVCC days. The 2.3 in comparison was living in the stone age.

 

[Cujet]

Back when I worked for a large asian automotive OEM, a coworker told the story of when he worked for Ford, in their engine development group. He worked on a special project to improve engine oil formulations in order to mitigate aggravated wear on the 2.3. Apparently, those engines had serious challenges from way back. Another thing he said is that his group brought in a Honda Accord, and all the Ford engineers were flabbergasted by the combustion efficiency. This was in the CVCC days. The 2.3 in comparison was living in the stone age.

Having worked as a tech on roller camshaft development for the Lima engine, I can say Ford engineers were very well aware of the low tech nature of that engine. Their goal was to use a small, tough cast iron engine to power larger vehicles instead of a classic V8. They accomplished this with a reliable 200HP +/- a few. BSFC was about 0.55 pounds fuel per hour per HP, right in line with other engines of the day, and more than acceptable for turbocharged engines. Especially when we consider the low 8 to 1 compression ratio. Even so, the cars could achieve about 27 real world MPG on the highway.

We also worked on 700HP 4 valve turbocharged 1.7L and 1.8L racing engines. Ford chose a direction that was simple and relatively reliable to continue making relatively large vehicles.

The original Honda CVCC engines were lean burn, stratified combustion engines between 50 and 80HP, powering very light weight cars. Again, Ford engineers were well aware of how lean combustion can improve BSFC, at the expense of certain emissions. We did about 150 dyno runs for emission compliance purposes.