Still trying to find my perfect grease for ball joints and tie rod ends. CRC and Lucas Red and Tacky are 60 rated. Green grease is 80.
How important is the 20 more n this application?
How important is the 20 more n this application?
How important is the Timkin ok test?
- Thread starter Chris142
- Start date
While I cannot give you an answer, my all time favorite grease was Pennzoil 707L grease. I knew many mechanics over the years who swore by it (and not at it). I do not know when Shell discontinued it, but Peak must have purchased the formulation as their High-Temp Red Grease appears to be a clone of the Pennzoil 707L when comparing Product Data Sheets.
Also, in the 1970s, when I was in high school and early college, I worked for the Pennzoil distributor in my hometown and we could not keep the 707L grease in stock.
Also, in the 1970s, when I was in high school and early college, I worked for the Pennzoil distributor in my hometown and we could not keep the 707L grease in stock.
JHZR2
Staff member
I thought you like whatever valvoline can shows up on Amazon?
have you looked at wikipedia?
“The test machine consists of a standardized bearing race mounted on a tapered arbor rotating at high speed. The race is brought into contact with a square steel test block under a constant load. The contact area is flooded with the lubricant or grease being tested. The Timken OK Load is the highest standard load at which the spinning bearing race produces no scouring mark on the test block, but only a uniform wear scar.
Timken OK Loads are listed on grease and oil property charts and are part of many specifications. It was once generally assumed that the measure and the film strength of the lubricant were directly related. Today, the primary purpose of the test is to determine whether EP additives are present and functioning. A measure of 35 pounds (16 kilograms-force or 155 newtons) or more means that EP additives are present and working well.”
So it’s really a test to showmthat there are ep compounds that are working? Doesn’t mean much then...
Also read here:
stratson.eu
Seems to say that 4 ball weld is more important.
I found the info in there interesting. A snippet:
”So what does it mean when one lubricant has a 35-pound Timken OK Load rating and another has a 100-pound Timken OK Load rating?
The truth is … it may have very little relevance to the amount of EP protection you are getting.
There are basically three reasons for this:
have you looked at wikipedia?
“The test machine consists of a standardized bearing race mounted on a tapered arbor rotating at high speed. The race is brought into contact with a square steel test block under a constant load. The contact area is flooded with the lubricant or grease being tested. The Timken OK Load is the highest standard load at which the spinning bearing race produces no scouring mark on the test block, but only a uniform wear scar.
Timken OK Loads are listed on grease and oil property charts and are part of many specifications. It was once generally assumed that the measure and the film strength of the lubricant were directly related. Today, the primary purpose of the test is to determine whether EP additives are present and functioning. A measure of 35 pounds (16 kilograms-force or 155 newtons) or more means that EP additives are present and working well.”
So it’s really a test to showmthat there are ep compounds that are working? Doesn’t mean much then...
Also read here:
WHY TIMKEN OK LOAD RATINGS SHOULD NOT BE A PRIMARY MEASURE OF EP PERFORMANCE - Stratson
WHY TIMKEN OK LOAD RATINGS SHOULD NOT BE A PRIMARY MEASURE OF EP PERFORMANCE? want to see field results? Contact us for case studies!
stratson.eu
Seems to say that 4 ball weld is more important.
I found the info in there interesting. A snippet:
”So what does it mean when one lubricant has a 35-pound Timken OK Load rating and another has a 100-pound Timken OK Load rating?
The truth is … it may have very little relevance to the amount of EP protection you are getting.
There are basically three reasons for this:
- First, the Timken Test Machine was designed in 1935 and manufac-tured until 1972 by the Timken Bearing Company. Timken used the machine to confirm that extreme pressure chemistry in cutting oils they were using to manufacture bearings was still working. It was never designed to quantify performance in any terms other than pass or fail with a 35-pound (188,250 PSI) load applied. Large wear scars or scoring represented a fail and smooth scars were a pass.The test was subsequently adopted by the industry when Timken began selling the machines and the American Standards Testing & Materials published the ASTM D-2509 procedure for testing greases and ASTM D-2782 for testing oils. From that point on manufacturers started competing for bragging rights to the highest Timken OK Load rating and the Timken OK Load test became a marketing tool more than a simple indicator of the presence of EP additives.The Timken Bearing Company has attempted to clarify the misun-derstanding about the test with this statement, “It was generally assumed that the higher the O.K. value, the more load the lube could hold without the film strength being compromised. However, this is not necessarily the case, and the primary purpose of the test is to determine whether or not the lube has an EP additive. Values higher than 35 lbs. indicate the presence of an EP additive.””
Thanks for that information. Very interesting. Over 5 years ago I found a document while perusing the Timken site that stated too high of a Timken OK Load rating could be detrimental for bearings, without stating what that level might be. I cannot find that document anymore.
I always wonder if the Timken OK Load rating of 80 on Mystic JT6 High Temp Grease is too high, since most bearing greases are in the 50 to 60 range. The JT6 seems to have excellent characteristics for a lithium complex grease.
I always wonder if the Timken OK Load rating of 80 on Mystic JT6 High Temp Grease is too high, since most bearing greases are in the 50 to 60 range. The JT6 seems to have excellent characteristics for a lithium complex grease.
JHZR2
Staff member
I guess that would relate to the question of is Moly/MoS2, or similar, an EP add in there? Because the theory was that some EP adds like that would slip on themselves and not let bearings roll. Or approximately that issue. Which was a problem. I could see that being a rationale why something could be “too good”, if correlated to the presence of certain adds that act a certain way.
But the tech may now allow much higher EP without such additives, thus making it moot in some cases. Not all. Certainly 3% and 5% moly greases are needed and used widely for certain applications, and probably aren’t a good idea for bearings ever.
I agree that there are precision issues with the Timken test. These can usually be overcome by being sure that enough tests are run. The Timken is also sensitive to operator and small differences between batches of oil and lot to lot variations of additives themselves as well as flow rate.
I do believe that the Timken is even more problematic when testing greases although these problems can be resolved as well.
I’ve run many Timken tests, especially on oils, as part of gear oil quality control, OEM specification development, correlation with OEM warranty claims and R&D projects to achieve life extension of gears and bearings in machinery operating in severe conditions.
Generally, increases in OK Load correspond to increases in additive treat level to some end point. Also, differences in scar width and unit pressure at the same applied load between different oils suggests the effectiveness of additive types? Why would these not be significant to component protection?
I don’t think that the comparison between EP on the Timken and the Four Ball EP Test is a valid comparison. Yes, they measure load-carrying but different additive reactivity is required. The Timken is gradually loaded, progressively increasing friction with load. The Four Ball is fully loaded when the switch is turn on. The additive must respond instantaneously. The additives required are different. For example, for the Timken under high load a metallic dithiocarbamate may suffice. For the Four Ball EP a more reactive chemical such as a phosphorodithioate of the same metal may be required required.
Regarding moly, most high EP lubricants base load-carrying on additive chemistry. Moly has little to do with it. Moly is more of a friction modifier based on its layered or lamellar structure.
I do believe that the Timken is even more problematic when testing greases although these problems can be resolved as well.
I’ve run many Timken tests, especially on oils, as part of gear oil quality control, OEM specification development, correlation with OEM warranty claims and R&D projects to achieve life extension of gears and bearings in machinery operating in severe conditions.
Generally, increases in OK Load correspond to increases in additive treat level to some end point. Also, differences in scar width and unit pressure at the same applied load between different oils suggests the effectiveness of additive types? Why would these not be significant to component protection?
I don’t think that the comparison between EP on the Timken and the Four Ball EP Test is a valid comparison. Yes, they measure load-carrying but different additive reactivity is required. The Timken is gradually loaded, progressively increasing friction with load. The Four Ball is fully loaded when the switch is turn on. The additive must respond instantaneously. The additives required are different. For example, for the Timken under high load a metallic dithiocarbamate may suffice. For the Four Ball EP a more reactive chemical such as a phosphorodithioate of the same metal may be required required.
Regarding moly, most high EP lubricants base load-carrying on additive chemistry. Moly has little to do with it. Moly is more of a friction modifier based on its layered or lamellar structure.
No idea how green grease rated that high. I tried it once and didn't like it. Too buttery like for my liking, doesn't stick just runs out
The 707L that shipped out of Oil City was made made by Battenfeld in Buffalo. After delivering oil to the Pennzoil warehouse in Tonawanda, truckers would often pick up a load of grease to take back to Oil City.
My favorite, too. I have a small stash.
It's very possible Peak is buying the same product.
If you do, please let us know what you think.
TRC Texas Refinery Corp's Paragon 3000 #2 tested at the 100# limit using the Timken test. The product is built like a all terrain battle tank! See their TDS below. They have also added a Moly version which meets the CAT 5% spec.
My all-time favorite for auto, outdoor power equipment, and marine is Chevron Delo EP #2. Mystik JT-6 Hi Temp is a very close second.
I use Mystik JT-6 #2 high temp red grease for just about everything. Been quite a while, but I used it to pick rear wheel bearings, chassis lube, and also deck spindle and chassis lube on a John Deere garden tractor.
L8R,
Matt
L8R,
Matt
Similar threads
