Accel Brand Oil

[jpc647]

I've been searching through a lot of forums and information regarding Accel Brand oil. For those unfamiliar its SF grade, in 10w-40. The spec sheet from Warren Distribution(owner) states it has 1100ppm of Zinc and 1000ppm phosphorus.

The SF is the part that worries me. I have a 1972 Cutlass with a Rocket 350 motor and I'm looking to replace the needed Zinc for the flat tappet cam. It's not an ultra high performance motor, so the boutique oils like Brad Penn just aren't going to happen. On the flip side, the 2.5x price tag per quard of the Accel Brand worries me too. Decent oil for less than Super Tech(Walmart brand, also by Warren Distribution)

If it's branded SF can anyone still check up on it? Or is this a way for Warren Distribution to sell junk oil using cheap base stocks, and get away with it because it's "outdated" and can't be monitored. I usually do oil changes between 2500-3000 miles anyway, so I'm not to worried about sludge with the SF grade. Used Mobil clean 5000 for a long time, and recently switched over to Quaker State. The defy being a semi-synthetic will probably clean out too much and I'll have problems with leaks, etc.

I can't see, to find a spec sheet for the QS High Mileage that lists the Zinc rating.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Why not use a HDEO?

 

[eljefino]

Originally Posted By: jpc647

If it's branded SF can anyone still check up on it? Or is this a way for Warren Distribution to sell junk oil using cheap base stocks, and get away with it because it's "outdated" and can't be monitored.


This. The zinc is a crutch for junk base stocks.

This oil is for the uninformed to top off their beaters. At least it has some additives, unlike the SA stuff others have sold.

 

[bullwinkle]

QS Defy, in 10W40, is in the 1200 PPM range for zinc as well. Warren usually does OK with their oil, I would think it would be fine in a Olds 350 (unless it has a radical aftermarket cam), my experience with GM V8s of those days is that they ate cam lobes even with the higher zinc oil of that era.

 

[Zaedock]

Your engine does not require any additonal ZDDP that doesn't already come in modern SN oil.

I would probably pick a GRPIII synthetic in the 5W30 flavor, but if you wanted a conventional, I personally like SOPUS products.

If your heart is set on more ZDDP, Defy would be a great choice as mentioned.

 

[jpc647]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
Why not use a HDEO?


Benn considering Rotella T, in the midst too. Or the STP additive to whatever off the shelf oil I've been using.


Originally Posted By: eljefino
Originally Posted By: jpc647

If it's branded SF can anyone still check up on it? Or is this a way for Warren Distribution to sell junk oil using cheap base stocks, and get away with it because it's "outdated" and can't be monitored.


This. The zinc is a crutch for junk base stocks.

This oil is for the uninformed to top off their beaters. At least it has some additives, unlike the SA stuff others have sold.

Interesting. Okay. I know a couple of guys who use it religiously, one with a freshly redone barracuda. That's what got me thinking about it.

Whats the actual difference between SF and the current SM. Can it be quantified? How much cheaper of a base stock would they really be using?

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
QS Defy, in 10W40, is in the 1200 PPM range for zinc as well. Warren usually does OK with their oil, I would think it would be fine in a Olds 350 (unless it has a radical aftermarket cam), my experience with GM V8s of those days is that they ate cam lobes even with the higher zinc oil of that era.


My fear with the Defy is with Semi-synthetic. The rear main seal drips when parked for a while, as does the oil pan. I fear the synthetic might in my case be more trouble than it's worth. Not looking to replace the rear main until I have to. And the pan mean I have to remove the engine, would rather not unless I want to rebuild.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
Why not use a HDEO?



Agreed- if it can tolerate a 40-weight without excessive oil pressure use one of the synthetic 5w40s. Otherwise, plain old Rotella T5 syn blend is available in an 10w30. Very solid oils with plenty of add pack for older engines, but at a tolerable price point.

As for your rear main drip, I had one of the Jeeps (notorious for rear main dripping) increase its leak rate when I tried M1 5w40 TDT instead of Rotella T6 synthetic. Switching back to T6 slowed the drip rate back to normal. IMO T6 is not a synthetic I'd worry about increasing leakage- IIRC its a "III+" base stock generated from processing slack wax- very high quality stuff, but not Group IV synthetic which does seem to be a little more prone to finding its way past seals, at least anecdotally. I personally don't think ANY synthetic is going to start making your seals gush dramatically, but if its a concern I would err on the side of sticking with Group III synthetics.

 

[05LGTLtd]

Originally Posted By: jpc647




Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
QS Defy, in 10W40, is in the 1200 PPM range for zinc as well. Warren usually does OK with their oil, I would think it would be fine in a Olds 350 (unless it has a radical aftermarket cam), my experience with GM V8s of those days is that they ate cam lobes even with the higher zinc oil of that era.


My fear with the Defy is with Semi-synthetic. The rear main seal drips when parked for a while, as does the oil pan. I fear the synthetic might in my case be more trouble than it's worth. Not looking to replace the rear main until I have to. And the pan mean I have to remove the engine, would rather not unless I want to rebuild.


Defy is a high mileage oil and has "The active seal-recovery agents" per QS.

 

[KCJeep]

Defy is a bargain, as such I doubt it is all that high in synthetic base stock. Couple that with the HM seal conditioners it contains and IMO you have needlessly discounted one of the very best oils for your application.

Rotella or some such HDEO also ought to do the trick, the high zinc in that Accel SF oil is just lipstick on a pig.

 

[jpc647]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Why not use a HDEO?



Agreed- if it can tolerate a 40-weight without excessive oil pressure use one of the synthetic 5w40s. Otherwise, plain old Rotella T5 syn blend is available in an 10w30. Very solid oils with plenty of add pack for older engines, but at a tolerable price point.

As for your rear main drip, I had one of the Jeeps (notorious for rear main dripping) increase its leak rate when I tried M1 5w40 TDT instead of Rotella T6 synthetic. Switching back to T6 slowed the drip rate back to normal. IMO T6 is not a synthetic I'd worry about increasing leakage- IIRC its a "III+" base stock generated from processing slack wax- very high quality stuff, but not Group IV synthetic which does seem to be a little more prone to finding its way past seals, at least anecdotally. I personally don't think ANY synthetic is going to start making your seals gush dramatically, but if its a concern I would err on the side of sticking with Group III synthetics.





I've always used the 10w-40 in the car. Haven't had a problem with oil pressure yet. No reason why I couldn't use 10w-30 I suppose. But I've read the Rotella only has 860ppm zinc. Car is obviously only a summer time take to shows or go get an ice cream in car. You mean t6 is not a synthetic you wouldn't worry about increasing leakage? Because you switched back to T6. What was a typo, right?

Originally Posted By: 05LGTLtd
Originally Posted By: jpc647




Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
QS Defy, in 10W40, is in the 1200 PPM range for zinc as well. Warren usually does OK with their oil, I would think it would be fine in a Olds 350 (unless it has a radical aftermarket cam), my experience with GM V8s of those days is that they ate cam lobes even with the higher zinc oil of that era.



My fear with the Defy is with Semi-synthetic. The rear main seal drips when parked for a while, as does the oil pan. I fear the synthetic might in my case be more trouble than it's worth. Not looking to replace the rear main until I have to. And the pan mean I have to remove the engine, would rather not unless I want to rebuild.


Defy is a high mileage oil and has "The active seal-recovery agents" per QS.


I guess I don't know what "Active Seal-recovery agents are. Isn't Quaker State also known for being prone to sludge up engines? Didn't everyone hate QS 10 years ago?


Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Defy is a bargain, as such I doubt it is all that high in synthetic base stock. Couple that with the HM seal conditioners it contains and IMO you have needlessly discounted one of the very best oils for your application.

Rotella or some such HDEO also ought to do the trick, the high zinc in that Accel SF oil is just lipstick on a pig.


Thanks for the information regarding the Defy. I'll write to QS and find out the details. Why do you say that about the Accel oil though? Has anyone done any testing of it to show it's "weak" compared to something else? Or are we just assuming cheap base stocks are used.

This is the spec sheet Warren sent me. :

 

[chainblu]

I've been hoping PQIA would do an analyses on this oil for some time now, but nothing yet.

Personally, I doubt they (Warren) use "cheap base stocks" for this 10w40. I'd wager they probably use the same base stocks as their other oils, which numerous UOAs have proven to be very capable. I'm also guessing they have to give it an SF rating (partly) because of the zinc content.

I think your Cutlass would do fine with this oil. I use it in a '78 half ton Chevy truck with an overworked 305 that I tow cars with sometimes. No problems.

 

[Garak]

Defy, an HDEO, or VR-1 are the simplest options if one is worried about ZDDP levels.

 

[morepwr]

I use VR-1 in my old cars and have had no trouble at all.

 

[GMorg]

The MSDS for Accell 10W40 shows only three ingredients and accounts for most of the volume. It appears to be 90-99% hydrotreated paraffinic, 0.1-1% middle distillates, and ZDDP. Keep in mind that not all of the ingredients are listed on the MSDS.

MSDS:
http://216.81.211.106/MSDSweb/00C61422_AC14SFP6_USENG.pdf

 

[jpc647]

Originally Posted By: chainblu
I've been hoping PQIA would do an analyses on this oil for some time now, but nothing yet.

Personally, I doubt they (Warren) use "cheap base stocks" for this 10w40. I'd wager they probably use the same base stocks as their other oils, which numerous UOAs have proven to be very capable. I'm also guessing they have to give it an SF rating (partly) because of the zinc content.

I think your Cutlass would do fine with this oil. I use it in a '78 half ton Chevy truck with an overworked 305 that I tow cars with sometimes. No problems.


I'm at the point that I think any oil will be "fine". Sort of wondering if the ZDDP might just be a little better for it. Like in my DD, it runs fine on 87 octane, but with 93 the engine generates 7 more hp and 4 more ft lbs of torque from 3500 all the way to 7000 rpms. So I run premium, because when I thromp on it, I want to know i'm getting everything I can. Same deal here, especially if there are cost effective alternatives.


Originally Posted By: Garak
Defy, an HDEO, or VR-1 are the simplest options if one is worried about ZDDP levels.

Thanks. I'm choosing between Accel, Defy and the Shell Rotella T. There was an old thread on here about the Rotella where everyone was bashing it and not wanting to use it anymore. Can't remember who started it.


Originally Posted By: GMorg
The MSDS for Accell 10W40 shows only three ingredients and accounts for most of the volume. It appears to be 90-99% hydrotreated paraffinic, 0.1-1% middle distillates, and ZDDP. Keep in mind that not all of the ingredients are listed on the MSDS.

MSDS:
http://216.81.211.106/MSDSweb/00C61422_AC14SFP6_USENG.pdf


Not sure if this is good or bad, rookie when it comes to what makes oil good vs bad. Quick google search was way over my head when they brought in the Chemistry.

 

[jpc647]

Originally Posted By: Zaedock
Your engine does not require any additonal ZDDP that doesn't already come in modern SN oil.

.


Why do you say that? I know GM released a statement regarding it, but that was geared towards ls series motors.