30 wt oil for my 1965 VW Bug

[dave1251]

Originally Posted by loneryder
An SG 30wt oil would be fine for you bug. That was the standard around that time. I question using an SN oil because a lot of good stuff has been taken out of SN's that your Bug would need.



I dont know why people believe this especially in 1965 oils had less ZDDP than modern SN PCMO's? Not to mention there are more and more effective AW additives in modern PCMO's. Progressive API certifications do not allow more wear in testing for certification.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted by y_p_w
Both API SG and CF are outdated and I don't believe the API will license any oil claiming to meet just those. I guess it's kind of like using something claiming to meet Dexron-III standards. It may very well be compliant, but the API sure as heck isn't going to be involved with it.

Absolutely. That being said, though, any HDEO with current specifications isn't going to be a monograde. This is one of the cases where we have to trust the oil company, and if Walmart says CF/CF-2/SG compliant (as much as I complain about Walmart) I will believe them.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted by Garak
Originally Posted by y_p_w
Both API SG and CF are outdated and I don't believe the API will license any oil claiming to meet just those. I guess it's kind of like using something claiming to meet Dexron-III standards. It may very well be compliant, but the API sure as heck isn't going to be involved with it.

Absolutely. That being said, though, any HDEO with current specifications isn't going to be a monograde. This is one of the cases where we have to trust the oil company, and if Walmart says CF/CF-2/SG compliant (as much as I complain about Walmart) I will believe them.

Isn't it technically a monograde as long as there's no VII in the brew? I'm sure that modern Group II base oils have increased the VI a bunch compared to Group I.

 

[ekpolk]

My first car was a 69 VW that I drove for a little over a year during 1979-80. I sidelined it only because the road salt (New England. . .) had done so much damage to the front end I couldn't afford to fix it to pass inspection.

Oil? I wouldn't worry too much about it. I've long forgotten what the manual specified, but in those days, I didn't pay enough attention anyway. Remember, that engine was designed to be robust and durable (relatively) back in the motor oil dark ages. Use anything that's close to the spec (if you can find it).

I hate to admit it here (I plead expired statute of limitations!), but my standard was whether or not there was something black and slippery darkening the end of that stubby little dipstick. If yes, then good to go. . .

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted by y_p_w
Isn't it technically a monograde as long as there's no VII in the brew? I'm sure that modern Group II base oils have increased the VI a bunch compared to Group I.

Absolutely. I'm talking mostly about what we see labelled as SAE 30, SAE 40, or SAE 50. As already noted, some of them might be a 20w-XX or better (i.e. at least one Amsoil variant). What I'm meaning, though, is if you go through Petro-Canada's, Shell's, Mobil's, etc. database and pull up the SAE 30 on the HDEO side, you'll tend to find obsolete specifications only. Leaving high end boutique multigrades with no VIIs aside, an "ordinary" SAE 30 monograde, even with better base stocks, as you mention, would have great difficulty (and in some cases, probably impossible) meeting CK-4, E7, E9, and OEM approvals.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted by Garak
. . .What I'm meaning, though, is if you go through Petro-Canada's, Shell's, Mobil's, etc. database and pull up the SAE 30 on the HDEO side, you'll tend to find obsolete specifications only. Leaving high end boutique multigrades with no VIIs aside, an "ordinary" SAE 30 monograde, even with better base stocks, as you mention, would have great difficulty (and in some cases, probably impossible) meeting CK-4, E7, E9, and OEM approvals.

Obsolete in terms of today's cars and oils. But the OP is asking about an engine installed in a 1965 car, that while it did receive improvements over the years, was designed in the 1930s, to be reliable and durable, using the extremely primitive (by our standards) oils then available. I realize that the discussion has expanded beyond the original question, and that's fine. I'd just emphasize that I wouldn't be worried at all about using an "obsolete" spec oil, a proper grade diesel oil, or just about anything (except a non-detergent type) that falls into the specified grade. Obviously, there isn't even an early two-way cat to "poison," so even a diesel SAE 30 should be just fine.

 

[Garak]

Yes, exactly. That's why I'd suggest that any SAE 30 marketed as an HDEO today (as long as not CF-2 only) would be perfectly suitable for his use, assuming the label is trustworthy, and I would include the SuperTech in that.

 

[y_p_w]

I thought the big deal with these is that the engines are robust but not necessarily made to the tolerances of a modern engine. Apparently 15W-40 is often recommended and was back-spec'ed to all VW air-cooled vehicles.

 

[ekpolk]

It has been so long -- almost forty years -- I can hardly remember, but I'm almost certain I used various 30s in my VW. I was hung up on there being something extra special about QS back in those days (they used to made a big deal about "Pennsylvania Grade Crude" -- talk about UN-synthetic!) so it was probably one of the QSs (though being a student, cheap was also important). Given the nature of these engines, though, the use of a 40 wt would seem entirely reasonable. Not so sure about a 50 or 60, though -- might absorb enough of the modest power that you couldn't get the car moving!

 

[Garak]

Doug Hillary has spoke on the matter here before. While a 15w-40 would certainly work, Doug stated that an SAE 30 like this would be perfectly serviceable.