Molybdenum, Cam wear and Hemi tick

Status
Not open for further replies.
FlyNavyP3, OVERKILL, and AVB, thanks for the additional information.

The issue piqued my interest, so I started looking at the first engineering principals, and hypothesising potentials.

To get supportive feedback is great.

Apologies to those thinking the thread derailed, but until you know the mode of failure, you can't possibly ascribe moly as a fix.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
FlyNavyP3, OVERKILL, and AVB, thanks for the additional information.

The issue piqued my interest, so I started looking at the first engineering principals, and hypothesising potentials.

To get supportive feedback is great.

Apologies to those thinking the thread derailed, but until you know the mode of failure, you can't possibly ascribe moly as a fix.


My pleasure Shannow, I don't have any failure numbers yet as it's a holiday weekend here. I hope to have something in the next week.
 
Originally Posted By: panthermike
You don't have to use a tuner, I turn mine off by the gear +/- button. I usually just wait until I'm in 8th gear than hit gear -. This issue may be another good reason to disable mds, I do it because my exhaust(spintech) doesn't sound great with mds on.
This is how I do it as well. The + and - buttons on the column shifter. Every time you put it in park or reverse you have to hit the buttons again though. Cost is free and no tuner needed
smile.gif
 
I'm not altogether sure how relevent it is to the Hemi tick problem but I found some of the comments in this Porsche thread very enlightening...

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=1392764

In short, a Porsche owner who, because of working overseas, let his car sit for three months, always experienced a lot of tappet noise on first start-up. The clatter took twenty minutes to clear.

Some wise bod suggested that valves pressed in the open position on engine shut-down would over time see oil bleed from inside the hydraulic tappet (via the NRV) to leave behind an air gap. I found the guy's description of how the air in the hydraulic tappet might 'fight' against the inflow of new (cold) oil quite convincing.


This is probably close to being a dead thread now but I'm going to say something that I think might be important...

Some of you know I'm a ex-oil formulator, responsible for inflicting billions of litres of engine oil on an unsuspecting world! My job was to get oils to meet various specifications in the most cost-effective manner. Typically this involves fixing the oil's resistance to oxidation, deposit formation tendencies and wear performance to pass various engine & rig tests.

However at no point in my career did I ever consider how oil might impact on the lubrication and long-term operation of either hydraulic tappets or the simpler bucket & shim variety. In fact it's only in the last week or so that I've figured out what they do and how they work! And now I understand them, I see a lot of potential for problems.

For example, oils are basically meant to MOVE. However, if I've understood things properly, once a hydraulic tappet piston is full of oil, the oil basically stays there forever with no obvious means of exit. Changing your oil might have zero impact on the oil trapped inside the hydraulic tappet. Over time there's an obvious risk that this trapped oil will degrade and insoluble gunk will plate out and cause lifter stickage problems. From what I've seen on YouTube, Miata engines seem to be particularly sensitive to this problem.

The thing is, as the world (and particularly the US) has moved in the direction of ever thinner, more stable, hydrocracked oils, this has been accompanied by a marked drop in the fundamental solvency of oils. These oils may produce far less gunk but their ability to keep any gunk formed in solution is far less. Thinner also usually means more volatile (higher Noack) so you have a greater potential for 'burnt oil' deposits to get caught up in your engine oil. Will these be kept in the oil by Ashless Dispersants in the same way as 'normal' oxidation insolubles formed in-situ in the oil? I suspect not and it may be that long-term problems don't manifest themselves in the traditional 'problem areas' like the ring pack but in the more sensitive (and often overlooked) areas such as tappets.

I am beginning to think that the oil world might be a better place if the very cheapest oils on the market (all Group II US 5W30 GF-5 oils for example) were all formulated to contain 10% polyol ester? It would put back the 'missing' solvency and have a significant impact on reducing oil Noack. Both things might improve the long-term operation of engines.
 
Last edited:
Interesting comment indeed. One of my favorite oils is Havoline ProDS. According to Chevron, the DS (Deposit Shield) prevents deposits from accumulating in the first place. This is also a trait of polyol esters according to the info I got from this site. I'm wondering if there is a connection?
 
Regarding Noack, I've added the numbers for Chevron 150R (Group II) to the comparison of PAO 6 & the Polyol Ester (Hatcol 2352). Chevron 150R isn't an exact match in terms of KV100 but it's close enough to do some rough and ready calculations...

PAO6 H2352 150R

KV100 5.8 5.6 5.24
KV40 31.0 29.6 29.4
VI 138 132 109
KV-40 7800 15000 No number
Flash Point 246 263 220
Pour Point -57 -50 -13
Density 0.827 0.963 0.856
Noack 6.4 2 (no decimal point provided) 14.5

Okay, so swapping out 10% of 150R Group II for H2352 Polyol Ester will drop the Noack of a cheap Group II 5W30 by 1.25% (14.5 - 2) x 0.1. However this is just the first order effect. The higher VI & better CCS properties of the ester would allow a rebalancing of the light-to-heavy base oil balance to further heavy up the oil and use less VII polymer. This would increase the HTHS of the oil for a given KV100. If the oil were further rebalanced to equal HTHS, you could further rebalance to heavy up a tad more. It's hard to say by his much but at a rough guess, I'd say for an equal HTHS/CCS oil, a 10% swap-out of Group II for Polyol Ester might drop the Noack by about 2%. This is significant especially if you're moving a 15% Noack oil to 13%.
 
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Interesting comment indeed. One of my favorite oils is Havoline ProDS. According to Chevron, the DS (Deposit Shield) prevents deposits from accumulating in the first place. This is also a trait of polyol esters according to the info I got from this site. I'm wondering if there is a connection?


I'm happy to be proved wrong but I very much doubt if Havoline ProDS contains any ester. There are deposits and there are deposits. The blurb might be referring to ring deposits or Teost deposits, both of which can be controlled by traditional means on traditional (one simulated OCI) engine tests. I'm sort of considering non-traditional deposits that might build-up over the long-term.

Esters are anathema to a lot of oil formulators (including me in my past life). They're expensive and the very high resistance that makes them the first choice for jet engines is sort of wasted on your average car engine. From a cost standpoint, most formulators always tack towards using Group III and avoid as far as possible resorting to PAO or Ester.
 
Last edited:
SonofJoe,
That was very well thought out. It would be nice to do some testing in that area. When Shannow posted his piece on the lifter, I took a look at it, and realized the lifter could be problematic. Combine that with your thoughts, and you guys might be onto something.
 
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe


For example, oils are basically meant to MOVE. However, if I've understood things properly, once a hydraulic tappet piston is full of oil, the oil basically stays there forever with no obvious means of exit. Changing your oil might have zero impact on the oil trapped inside the hydraulic tappet. Over time there's an obvious risk that this trapped oil will degrade and insoluble gunk will plate out and cause lifter stickage problems. From what I've seen on YouTube, Miata engines seem to be particularly sensitive to this problem.



The oil in the lifters does circulate. It exits the top of the lifter to the push rod, through the push rod to the rocker arm.
 
SoJ's post was generic...there's an awful lot of hydraulic lifters that are a dead end in the lifter part (not the metering to pushrods part).
 
It's interesting...

Not every engine is GDI but oil specs are rapidly evolving (at massive cost) on the assumption that they all are. Not all engines have a Turbo but all oils are specifically tested for Teost to ensure the oil is okay for Turbos. Not every driver is really that fussed about fuel economy but almost all oils have been specifically tweaked to reduce fuel consumption.

ALL engines everywhere have tappets and....well nothing! There is nothing whatsoever in any oil spec that specifically addresses the issue of sticky-ticky tappets (hydraulic or otherwise). Which is odd really because an audible engine tick (along with oil colour) is one of the very few ways your average punter can make any kind of judgement about the quality of an engine oil.

I do wonder if, because it's a problem that might take say 50,000 miles to develop, the OEMs, whilst that might be well aware of it, can't be arsed to actually do anything about it because it's not a warranty thing.
 
The hydraulic lifters in my Mazda kind of never bleed out as sonofjoe mentioned. One of my regrets when rebuilding was not taking them apart completely and cleaning them. The whole engine was brand new looking but the hla were still full of old oil. I soaked them in oil before rebuilding, thinking it would bleed out naturally.

They don't though. And if you pump them up with oil before starting the engine, the camshafts won't depress them and can snap. Have to leave them half full or empty and let them fill with the natural amount of oil during operation.

Might get a chance to take them all part when I pull the engine next.
 
I just found this thread and no time at the moment to read it all - I'll do so later.

Note that the Hatcol 2352 referenced earlier contains a good slug of a multi-branched fatty acid that significantly drops the VI but improves high temperature stability and cleanliness.

Might want to read this primer on esters for a better understanding of polyol esters:

Esters in Synthetic Lubricants

Tom NJ
 
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
I just found this thread and no time at the moment to read it all - I'll do so later.

Note that the Hatcol 2352 referenced earlier contains a good slug of a multi-branched fatty acid that significantly drops the VI but improves high temperature stability and cleanliness.

Might want to read this primer on esters for a better understanding of polyol esters:

Esters in Synthetic Lubricants

Tom NJ



Until recently, I would have described myself as very 'anti-ester' on account of a bad experience with Priolube 3970 many years ago. However I'm beginning to wonder if esters might have more of a mainstream use in modern engine oils as a counter to some of more negative aspects of formulating with Group IIs.
 
Originally Posted By: bigj_16
I had a pair of polyester pants when I was kid
smile.gif



I had loud polyester shirts with the huge circular zipper pulls!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top