Calcium vs Magnesium vs Zinc in Engine Oils - Lake Speed Jr

Very, very smart guy. Talked to him when he worked at Joe Gibbs Racing about differential gear oil.
Good stuff. Surprised he's on board with the SP add packs. Guys in racing are usually chasing high additive levels.

Per that XOM patent, "cleaning booster" is/was used. If you lower the detergents, something has to replace the cleaning ability to keep deposits at bay.
 
Last edited:
Lake Speed Jr just made some guys around here spin their heads off their shoulders with that video!!
Game changer

TBN not important 🤔🤔🤔
No need to spend money on that anymore 👍
 
Lake Speed Jr just made some guys around here spin their heads off their shoulders with that video!!
Game changer

TBN not important 🤔🤔🤔
No need to spend money on that anymore 👍
He repeated the TBN thing in I think it was his 3 Penzoil oils compared video as well.

I do like his videos, seems to be a smart dude.
 
"Tbn is a dinosaur. A relic of the past."

To be fair he is coming from a racing background & I doubt racers are interested in doing long extended drains (Where I believe TBN plays a better role). After some more digging I was reminded that BN & AN used together can be an excellent tool. Using these measurements is best to start with a virgin oil sample for BN & AN to reflect a starting point.

When the two converge (AN & BN) is around when iron wear rises more rapidly. Who wouldn't want this useful information if they could get it included, for little to no money, in a UOA? Why would this information, example below, not be helpful in analyzing used oil?

IMO it is far from unhelpful or unuseful. I'll go against the grain & disagree with his dinosaur comment.

TAN-TBN.png.jpg
 
Last edited:
"Tbn is a dinosaur. A relic of the past."

To be fair he is coming from a racing background & I doubt racers are interested in doing long extended drains (Where I believe TBN plays a better role). After some more digging I was reminded that BN & AN used together can be an excellent tool. Using these measurements is best to start with a virgin oil sample for BN & AN to reflect a starting point.

When the two converge (AN & BN) is around when iron wear rises more rapidly. Who wouldn't want this useful information if they could get it included, for little to no money, in a UOA? Why would this information, example below, not be helpful in analyzing used oil?

IMO it is far from unhelpful or unuseful. I'll go against the grain & disagree with his dinosaur comment.

View attachment 159695
I was wondering that too. Good point.
 
When the two converge (AN & BN) is around when iron wear rises more rapidly. Who wouldn't want this useful information if they could get it included, for little to no money, in a UOA? Why would this information, example below, not be helpful in analyzing used oil?

IMO it is far from unhelpful or unuseful. I'll go against the grain & disagree with his dinosaur comment.

you’ve provided a slightly manipulative picture from an interested party..


 
"Good performance in your engine oil isn’t about having a high-detergent TBN measurement alone: It’s about having the right balance of oxidative stability, soot dispersancy, deposit control, wear performance, detergency and TBN retention"
 
"Tbn is a dinosaur. A relic of the past."

To be fair he is coming from a racing background & I doubt racers are interested in doing long extended drains (Where I believe TBN plays a better role). After some more digging I was reminded that BN & AN used together can be an excellent tool. Using these measurements is best to start with a virgin oil sample for BN & AN to reflect a starting point.

When the two converge (AN & BN) is around when iron wear rises more rapidly. Who wouldn't want this useful information if they could get it included, for little to no money, in a UOA? Why would this information, example below, not be helpful in analyzing used oil?

IMO it is far from unhelpful or unuseful. I'll go against the grain & disagree with his dinosaur comment.

View attachment 159695

This was based on one study conducted by Chevron which they kinda skewed and used as more of a marketing tool than anything. Other studies have been done that shows no correlation between TBN and TAN to engine wear. It's because of how the two tests are performed and the acid and base used for titration. So long as the oil has base, it can still neutralize acids and effectively prevent corrosion.
 
I forget, do racers change the oil after each race or rebuild/change engine and the oil?

Sounds like TBN is still important. No? What's the bottom line? Can this have a yes or no answer? lol As long as it's not 0 you are good.

is the video basically saying due to the "better" fuel , TBN does not deplete as fast? And a very high starting TBN is not as necessary as it used to be? Unless your OCI is 25K miles.
 
Last edited:
Lake is well versed in long drain intervals as well. He's not just some guy locked in the racing world. Racing is his forte, but he has a good bit of fleet data as well, including their own team haulers. He is correct in that TBN is a bit of a dinosaur. It's still good data to have, but monitoring oil oxidation number is a better indicator, along with soot, dilution, and so on. You just have to look at the big picture rather than just one parameter.
 
I forget, do racers change the oil after each race or rebuild/change engine and the oil?
Depends on what kind of racing.

The guy isn't wrong. Many over the years here have said TBN is basically overrated (no pun intended)

He formulates race oils and states such, chunk at a time. In some ways this is 180° from path API license scheme has lead to with additive sellers marketing packages.

If you are curious, Amsoil is a hybrid blender. Some oils are one add, one base oil at a time, others are purchased packages with extra additives, and some like OE are purchased packages with API controlled base oils.
 
I knew TBN wasn't that significant, but I didn't know it was quite that insignificant.
 
... You just have to look at the big picture rather than just one parameter.

Curious what if you get an accurate report/analysis showing TBN of zero or near zero regardless of the other parameters?

Can't we say that oil is shot through the heart as oppose to the calf muscle?

btw, I'm not suggesting that if the TBN is greater zero (let's say even 2 or 3), everything is ok. But if it's zero, Houston, we have a problem! No?
 
Last edited:
One thing he mentions is the balance of detergent/anti-wear. Knowing Red Line does not use esters that "clean", I think looking back it's not unreasonable to think the wear spikes we saw with Red Line was in fact, wear. Red Line using esters and boat load of calcium probably had issues with aw films competing with the high detergency. The other issue is they don't fully license or test their oils through the approval process, so you're really going on faith with their oils. Not saying Red Line is bad, but it's one brand which has consistently showed unusual and sporadic results. Not trying to make this a post about Red Line, but it comes to mind when thinking about this relationship between detergents/AW.

*Also a reason to NEVER use an aftermarket additive to a fully formulated oil. You're not gaining anything and only asking for trouble. That balanced formulation has to remain balanced.
 
Other studies have been done that shows no correlation between TBN and TAN to engine wear. It's because of how the two tests are performed and the acid and base used for titration.

Hey, I gotta say, I'm over the moon that there's finally someone out there who gets it! I mean, I've been preaching about this stuff forever, but it seems like everywhere you go, there's this bizarre cult of alkalization, scale, and chalk enthusiasts. It's like they're addicted to TBN for PCMO or something! We're not running some heavy fuel ocean engine here, folks. It's very gentle PCMO, and we definitely don't need any extra chalk thrown into the mix :)
 
Back
Top