I am just a dumb oil user with an old flat-tappet auto engine, street driven only. I have headaches from reading all the posts about reduced levels of ZDDP (Zn Pos.) in new SM rated API oils and there effect on flat-tappet wear.
Forget about break-in for the moment. Forget about racing and motorcycles.
Below is a post from the Rennlist forum and it’s url below. As copied below, Bob Olree says reduced levels of ZDDP in SM is not an issue for flat tappets (I assume after break-in).
There is also another url below linking to a report on development of the GroupIII test at GM with partners.
My question is: Are reduced levels of ZDDP in SM rated oils really an issue for flat tappets or NOT ?
=========
JasonAndreas
Technical Guru
Rennlist Member
12/4/06
Chris,
If you have access to SAE papers at work read, "How much Zdp is Enough".
I referenced it from, "At our September chapter meeting, there was discussion of a magazine article which purported that new engine oils are short on an additive called ZDDP which, among other things, acts as an anti-wear lubricant. The article contends that ZDDP’s anti-wear properties are needed in older engines in particular, such as the collector cars which many of our Chapter members own. Fortunately, Chapter member Jerry Garfield was also at our meeting, and took a copy of the article back to the GM Tech Center and shared it with Bob Olree, a co-worker and Powertrain engineer. Here is what Bob had to say on the subject:
“In developing the ILSAC GF-4 ( API SM) passenger car engine oil standards, the subject of backwards serviceability was addressed by the ILSAC/OILCommittee. The current standard contains two flat-tappet engine tests, the Sequence IVA and IIIG. The Sequence IVA addresses low temperature cam and follower scuffing and the Sequence IIIG addresses high temperature wear. The engine used in the Sequence IIIG test is converted from the production roller-follower valve train to a flat-tappet valve train. These tests are included to insure that older flat-tappet engines are protected. The ILSAC/OIL Committee and its member companies (OEMs, oil, and additive) went to great lengths to be sure that older engines are protected by these latest oils.
ZDDP is a multi-functional additive. It is first and foremost an anti-oxidant, secondly an anti-scuff, thirdly an anti-wear, and lastly an anti-corrosion additive. The reason that it can be reduced from the peak levels that it once was used at is that ashless anti-oxidants have been developed which can replace it.
Flat tappet camshafts have a tendency to scuff during break-in. ZDDP is very effective in controlling break-in scuff. In my view, EOS should only be used as an assembly aid in rebuilding flat-tappet engines to address this break-in scuffing. Once an engine is broken in, it needs very little ZDDP to protect it. Please see the SAE paper I wrote on this subject. When camshaft scuffing and wear were first encountered in the early 1950s it was discovered that ZDDP, at the level found in current ILSAC GF-4 oils, was very effective in controlling these issues.
As with almost things in this world, a little bit of ZDDP is good but more is not necessarily better.”
The EOS (Engine Oil Supplement) mentioned above is a GM product sold at GM dealers under part number 1052367. It is a pre-lube for use when replacing camshafts, lifters, some rocker arms, etc. In the GM parts catalog there is a Precaution: Not recommended for use as an additive to engine oil."
Source:
http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/showthread.php?t=315506&page=2&pp=15
Development Report:
www.astmtmc.cmu.edu/docs/gas/sequenceiii/procedure_and_ils/IIIG/Sequence%20IIIG%20Research%20Report%2002-24-04.pdf
Reduced levels of ZDDP in SM oils - ISSUE or NOT
- Thread starter glenncof
- Start date
- Status
Nice links and it appears that you have answered you own question.
The answer is No.
Yeah nice links. I'm pretty sure that almost nobody on the entire BITOG site has as much authority on this matter than Bob Olree. It would be silly to contradict him without some serious ammo.
Yup! That has always been my stand RE: ZDDP is not the be-all, end-all of all AW/EP additives.
A balanced additive package is what a properly broken and induce-hardened camshaft would require for long and reliable service life.
Again, you "old-schoo"/internet lurker folks wake up and smell the coffee!!! ZDDP is not the sole miracle additive in an engine oil, period.
I miss your presence here already GMorg....
What? ZDDP is not the be-all, end-all of all AW/EP additives? 
But I've got 50 bottles of zddp additive! 
But I've got 50 bottles of zddp additive! Quote:But he didn't deny that. The point was, I think, that there are other additive strategies that do the job perfectly well.
Quote:Nor can you deny it is a tried and true well-known good one.
... ZDDP is not the sole miracle additive in an engine oil, period.Period. (for added emphasis, of course!)
And without poisoning cats.
I don't know but going form SM rated mobil 1 10w-30 weight oil with low ZDDP to Mobil 1 MX4T 10w-40 weight oil made my car run 20'F cooler.
My car is a 1985 5.0L Z28 camaro.
MX4T has about 2.5 times the anti ware addtives as SM mobil 1. The MX4T has a SG,SH rating.
More = better. Why chance it?
Because stories of people losing a cam lobe in their SBC is becoming more common I have herd people try to tell me that the SBC has an oiling system design flaw. Then I have to tell them its an oil design flaw and that the SBC has just about the best oiling system ever made in a V8 small block.
oilpan4,
"Losing a cam lobe"...are you referring to original Stock cams and solid lifters ???? If modified, all bets are off. Improper break-in, all bets off.
"run 20F cooler"...How do you know this, Are you out running your cooling capacity ?
Quote:I have yet to hear and/or read of anyone with a STOCK broken-in flat tappet SBC loosing a cam lobe because he was using SM/GF-4 oil for reasonable OCIs. If you have CREDIBLE evidence it's happening, please share it with us. P.S. I recall quite distinctly all the cam lobe failures in SBCs/BBCs from the '60s thru '80s from people simply not changing their oil enough. So even if an oil has tons of ZDDP in it, doesn't necessarily imply you won't have cam lobe failures.
Because stories of people losing a cam lobe in their SBC is becoming more common...
Our shop has had trouble with an old 2.6 litre Porsche engine making 280 HP at 8,700 RPM on 113 Race gas. We used to get 40 hours on an engine and never had an early failure in 5 years of racing, and when SM came around (M1 20W-50) we lost 4 engines in 3 hours! (15 minutes on the track and they were way off tune) Eating cam lobes was typical, but bearing scuff was also a lot higher than normal. When we started to add EOS durring break-in (which takes place on a dyno) our issues went away.
I know this is a far cry from anything streetable.....
Quote:Aha! Just as I suspected when you first posted that...it was a break-in problem. The bearing scuffing is probably related to the increased use of VII in M1 SM formulations as indicated by the reduced HTHS across the entire line.
Eating cam lobes was typical, but bearing scuff was also a lot higher than normal. When we started to add EOS durring break-in (which takes place on a dyno) our issues went away. I know this is a far cry from anything streetable.....
A racing engine using street car oil???
SM, may be the reason I heard nextel cup cars stoped using mobil 1 a few years ago.
One of the mods over on Thirdgen.org lost 2 V6 cams in a row on a 3.4L V6 because he used mobil 1 with out any break in addtive when he swaped cams. Yea I know he forgot/left out a step in the instalation process. He got it right on the 3rd try, when he used CraneCams cam break in oil addtive.
All I know is that last summer I went from driving around with my temp gauge stuck on 220'F after my car warmed up to changing my oil and next start up it did not go above 200'F. After I started using MX4T it went down to 200'F from 220'F and stayed there. The only thing that changed was my oil.
It was mid summer, so its not like it got any cooler out.
But with MX4T running $8.50/Qt after sales tax, I have to use some thing cheaper. So now I'm using Synthetic Rotella T with a SJ,SL gasoline rating and exhausting my stash of SJ rated Mobil 1 15w-50 weight oil I bought in 1999.
And I all ways use STP blue bottle oil addtive (not with MX4T) it was VOA tested on here and showed about 2000ppm of both Zn and P. That is enough to raise the Zn and P levels about 100 ppm when mixed with 6Qt's of week ZDDP motor oil.
But I am thinking about switching to CraneCams cam break in lube, some one on here ordered a VOA and it tested some thing like 600,000 ppm of Zink. What ever is in there must be mostly ZDDP or ZDP. One bottle should be enough for 3 or 4 oil changes. At $8.50/8oz bottle it is a little expensive and a little over kill to just dump in the hole bottle.
Quote:Yeah, that's pretty much expected. Similar tack to the so-called experts who commonly declare "I've never seen or heard of it, so therefore it does not exist." "I don't like you're attitude, therefore your comment does not exist." Censorship at it's finest!
Please keep the responses directed to the questions/issues presented. Don’t waste your time posting personal barbs like this, ’cause we’ll just come on in and do this to them. . .
Quote:Nope, it's not censorship at all. We have board rules. They apply with equal force to all of us. You need to have a look at them. You are welcome and encouraged to take your best shot at any statement made by any member here. You are not permitted, however, to make personal attacks on other members. It's just not consistent with the climate of mutual respect which the owner insists we maintain. All members, you, me, and everyone else, are required to live up to these standards. If you won't, you will be removed, without further warning.
Quote:Yeah, that's pretty much expected. Similar tack to the so-called experts who commonly declare "I've never seen or heard of it, so therefore it does not exist." "I don't like you're attitude, therefore your comment does not exist." Censorship at it's finest!
Please keep the responses directed to the questions/issues presented. Don’t waste your time posting personal barbs like this, ’cause we’ll just come on in and do this to them. . .
Quote:So it's a LB9 or L69. The specs on the stock cam in those engines is: Code:
My car is a 1985 5.0L Z28 camaro.
Lift Duration I/E Lobe Int. Exh. Int. Exh. Separation .403 .415 202° 206° 114.5°
Hardly radical by any stretch of the imagination. The idea that anyone would need an extra large amount of ZDDP in the STOCK form of this engine (unless breaking in a new cam) isn't credible IMHO.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
