- Joined
- Jun 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,367
Engine oil doesn't even stay good for 20 years sitting on the shelf. The additive pack degrades over the years:
Oil + filter hoarders
- Thread starter Deadwood
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,367
This isn't a thing.
Shake it up and send it
You quite literally have no idea what you are talking about. What I said is 100% correct. API SM/SN/SP energy-conserving oil is not compatible with many pre-2004 cars including mine.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,367
From the American Petroleum Institute itself:
"For automotive gasoline engines, the latest API Service Category includes the performance properties of each earlier category and can be used to service older engines where earlier category oils were recommended."
https://www.api.org/products-and-se...d-classifications/oil-categories#tab-gasoline
I'm not new to flat-tappets. I've run newer spec oils in mine without issue. Unless you're running an aftermarket high-lift cam and have high valve spring pressures, it isn't a worry.
Only if a) it will be used in a reasonable amount of time, b) won't take up an inordinate amount of storage space, and c) will stay in perfect condition and d) not be obsolete in the future.
http://www.pqiamerica.com/devilsindisguise.htm
I don't want a hoard of SH and SJ oils, nor do I want dozens of 20 year old oil filters with brittle media and interior surface rust.
Some people are clearly comfortable with older stuff and I think it’s more or less a just hobby for most folks.
Six months is about my max comfort limit with parts and fluids. Everything I posted earlier will be gone or in service by Spring.
To each his own.
You call them what you want the last three years I'd call the economic planners!
Probably is a hobby for some. This is also an open discussion, my points are valid, so I get to add my 2 cents.
Sadly, that API statement has proven to be false for that small but not insignificant number of engines with flat tappets. I'm surprised they still insist on this and haven't corrected it. The entire classic car community and specialty car community knows this, as do the folks at Summit Racing whose video I posted.
Not long ago, I asked a direct question in the Pennzoil Q&A thread (see question and answer here)
Q - Which Pennzoil synthetic oils can provide adequate anti-wear protection in high-revving (>8,000 RPM), flat-tappet engines with high-tension valve springs given that Pennzoil oils typically contain the lowest amount of ZDDP compared with other oil brands?
A - PENNZOIL RESPONSE: Pennzoil does not currently produce a motor oil for flat-tappets engines. However, we recommend using Shell Rotella T4, T5 and T6 products which are designed for older, flat tappet engines.
Now, let's look at the composition of Rotella T6 and how it differs from Pennzoil PCMOs. The glaring difference is that Rotella T6 contains 1100 PPM Zinc/ 1000 PPM Phosphorus which is not allowed in API SM/SN/SP x30, x20 oils (800 ppm limit), while under API SL it was. That makes these newer spec oils incompatible with said engines.
For many years, I didn't pay any attention to this and simply used API SN 5W30 oils in my 2 VVTL-i cars, assuming they were all good and backwards compatible. Big mistake. Intake camshaft wiped and a coffee table ornament now.
There were some really good deals / pricing mistakes on walmart.com, along with some rebates, where I ended up with maybe 120 quarts or a little more over the last year, running about $2 a quart. I figured I would stop there. I roughly go through about 45 quarts a year - 8 changes across 3 vehicles, so maybe 3 years worth or a little less.
Now a year in I am wishing I had bought more - there hasn't been any deals for a while. Not even a M1 rebate.
Now a year in I am wishing I had bought more - there hasn't been any deals for a while. Not even a M1 rebate.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
I mean, their response is wrong, as many modern OHC engines have non-roller followers (flat tappets). The problem isn't non-roller followers but rather applications that potentially demand higher AW performance than is provided by API oils, and even going back to SL and earlier, there was no guarantee that you'd have higher phosphorous levels than the current limit.
"Backwards compatible" in this context is within the realm of the API approvals. IE, a 302 with a broomstick cam isn't going to have a problem going from say API SJ to SN or SP. If you have an application that isn't adequately represented by the API testing, you might have problems, but then there was always the possibility of problems, given the lack of a mandated amount of phosphorous and the API's successively weaker testing protocols the further back you go. This was why GM for example had their own approvals ("Corvette" approval).
The way this question was worded doesnt help your case.
I have always wondered why flat tappet cams had so many issues - and cam on bucket - which is pretty much the same thing? Do not?
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Short answer? they didn't.
GM had a run of soft cam cores in the 80's IIRC, but other than that, most flat tappet engines from all of the main brands weren't problematic. Where we started to get into problems was with aftermarket cams (and lifters), some of which was due to just poor quality castings and inferior heat treatment (China!), some of it was due to poor break-in practices, and some of it was due to camshaft ramp rates and lobe profiles that were just too aggressive for the amount of phosphorous found in your bog-standard OTS engine oil at the time.
Heavy valve springs on a high winding modified pushrod engine are necessary, to keep all of those components in control and prevent float. This means considerable pressure on the lifter, as the effort of the camshaft acting on the lifter to force open the valve is multiplied by the rocker arm, to increase the amount of lift the valve sees.
On a cam-over-bucket application, even a high-winding one, there are none of those intermediate components. You just have the cam, directly acting on the bucket (which generally has a larger surface area) which sits on top of the valve and spring and directly actuates it. You can use MUCH lighter springs here, and since these engines are overhead cam, usually dual overhead cam, they typically have smaller, lighter valves as well.
Absolutely yes, there is and always was the possibility of problems. What bothers me is that it has increased post API SL in this specific application. From the handful of API SL oil analysis reports I found in the forums, the typical levels of P were in fact higher back then. Not by mandate, but by calculated choice.
There is no case. I wanted a straight answer from Pennzoil as to what oil should I be using in my engines from 2003/2004 in the API SN/SP era. I expected they'd recommend their 0W40 Euro PCMO but to my great surprise, they responded that no Pennzoil PCMO product currently on the market is suitable for my application. Only a non-API diesel oil which isn't exactly ideal in a gas engine either and doesn't even carry their brand. Think about that for a minute. I was floored.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,367
What I read from them was a very safe answer to a question that had essentially fenced them in. The questions basically said, "my application is aftermarket is demanding" but they don't know the specs of your build. So they can't really give you a specific answer of which of their oils is best. In that case, probably best for them to disengage and not promise anything given that they don't have enough information.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Some of them were, absolutely, and some of them weren't. An additional issue is that the API testing protocols back then were much less rigorous than what we have now, and just adding more phosphorous doesn't mean the product will necessarily provide better wear control. This is why OEM's pursued their own testing, due to inadequacy of the API approval process, though this is more pronounced in the Euro market where the ACEA approvals are foundational and then the OEM's layer their own protocols on top.
That was a "safe" position for them to take, to avoid liability. It's also unlikely you were talking to a formulator. The "use a diesel oil" is very common when someone tosses out "flat tappet" and the details aren't known. I run Delvac 1 5W-40 in my 351W which is apparently flat tappet (I had assumed it was roller until somebody on here informed me otherwise, given it's a '95 and all the 302's were roller by that point). But SBF's aren't known for being challenging applications either.
My 2001 M5 was cam-over-bucket (flat tappet) DOHC, but its requirements were covered by BMW's own approval, LL-01.
