I read an article in a car club magazine. It claimed around 2004 or 2005 new pollution laws caused oil manufacturers to reduce the zinc and manganese content in motor oil. The claim is older cars with push rods and non roller valve trains are having higher wear. It was recommended to use oil designed for diesel engines in older gas engines to get the zinc/manganese level up. What do you think?
change in oil content
- Thread starter rhault
- Start date
- Status
yes, true...reduced for the health of your catalytic converter.
use SL rated oil, which is what diesel oil is.
use SL rated oil, which is what diesel oil is.
Originally Posted By: rhault
I read an article in a car club magazine. It claimed around 2004 or 2005 new pollution laws caused oil manufacturers to reduce the zinc and manganese content in motor oil. The claim is older cars with push rods and non roller valve trains are having higher wear. It was recommended to use oil designed for diesel engines in older gas engines to get the zinc/manganese level up. What do you think?
Somewhere you got a bum steer.
It is Phosphorous that was lowered, because it is a cat. poison.
Here's the basic differences in table form
Links:
http://www.infineum.com/information/tables.html
http://pws.cablespeed.com/~pablomail//LINKS1.html
Go to http://www.api.org and read the details as well.
I read an article in a car club magazine. It claimed around 2004 or 2005 new pollution laws caused oil manufacturers to reduce the zinc and manganese content in motor oil. The claim is older cars with push rods and non roller valve trains are having higher wear. It was recommended to use oil designed for diesel engines in older gas engines to get the zinc/manganese level up. What do you think?
Somewhere you got a bum steer.
It is Phosphorous that was lowered, because it is a cat. poison.
Here's the basic differences in table form
Links:
http://www.infineum.com/information/tables.html
http://pws.cablespeed.com/~pablomail//LINKS1.html
Go to http://www.api.org and read the details as well.
Post a link to the article if you could. Sounds like there may be a kernel of truth but also some oversimplifications or generalizations as well.
For example, the limit is on phosphorous, not zinc and manganese. The part about "valve trains are having higher wear" sounds like supposition. Do they have any evidence?
For example, the limit is on phosphorous, not zinc and manganese. The part about "valve trains are having higher wear" sounds like supposition. Do they have any evidence?
Originally Posted By: SAM1
thanks for the replies, all.
I was under the impression that rhault started this thread.
thanks for the replies, all.
I was under the impression that rhault started this thread.
lol, maybe they were both wondering. LOL!
Originally Posted By: flatlandtacoma
Post a link to the article if you could. Sounds like there may be a kernel of truth but also some oversimplifications or generalizations as well.
For example, the limit is on phosphorous, not zinc and manganese. The part about "valve trains are having higher wear" sounds like supposition. Do they have any evidence?
Besides all the flat cams and scored lifters?
He's probably referring to this article, or one like it: http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/engine/flat_tappet_cam_tech/index.html
It's a non-issue for everybody with roller cams and OHC's.
Post a link to the article if you could. Sounds like there may be a kernel of truth but also some oversimplifications or generalizations as well.
For example, the limit is on phosphorous, not zinc and manganese. The part about "valve trains are having higher wear" sounds like supposition. Do they have any evidence?
Besides all the flat cams and scored lifters?
He's probably referring to this article, or one like it: http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/engine/flat_tappet_cam_tech/index.html
It's a non-issue for everybody with roller cams and OHC's.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
