Schaeffer lubricants

[HiPowerShooter]

Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp


I'm off to McDonald's now. With so many locations, solid profitability, and over 80 billion served,,their food has to be the best you can get.


LMAO!


Thanks for that; I NEEDED to spray coffee all over my laptop!

IRT to the oil cooler; I've actually thought of removing it. I just think it's a massive leak waiting to happen.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

Of course, they help with company image. That was Ford's whole purpose with the "Premier Auto Group". It certainly wasn't to make money.


You mean, it didn't turn out that way.

*snip*

Prestige is important, because if nobody looks at your vehicles and wants to pay a premium price for them, then you'll never get your money back on investing a ton into refining it to compete against cars that already have all that you are seeking to compete against.


Which was exactly the issue with the half-arsed efforts Ford was putting into Lincoln. Instead of trying to re-invent the brand at that time they figured it better to just buy some of the luxury-exclusive brands instead. And well prior to the bankruptcy, this worked out reasonably well for them (in terms of image).

Those brands were not however profit centres, that's why Ford was able to acquire them in the first place.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
As a multiple Lincoln owner of 16 years, I will give you my assurances that Ford/Lincoln does not have the capability to build something in the luxury arena that anyone would pay that kind of money for, and never will.

None of those other base companies will ever have the capability to build something like the companies they bought.


I believe you are (perhaps intentionally) misconstruing the term capability here. Any of the large automotive companies, given that their engineers could be given the necessary financial support to follow through with it, could make a world class car. Take the Ford GT as an example of that.

The problem is not with the capability/ability, the problem is with spending the necessary money and committing the right people to it, and this is where a division like Cadillac for example has historically fallen short.

In this case it is much easier to just buy a pre-existing luxury brand, one that has already spent the money, and keep it as a feather in your hat (even if it doesn't make money). But what we saw with Ford was the lack of foresight regarding the proper upkeep required with these brands and the potentially folly of trying to "dumb down" the powertrains and other things to save money.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
You think anyone would buy a Lambo, Bentley, or Bugatti with a VW badge on the front? It's not possible. Nobody wanted a VW Phaeton until it appeared on the scene with a Bentley badge in its grille.


Exactly. The VW division had the capability to build the car. Nobody wanted to buy it because of the image.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
PAG didn't make money, because Ford was too incompetent to utilize those companies correctly. The Indians who bought LR and Jag have done multitudes better with them than Ford ever did.

I would agree that Ford did not properly utilize those brands, but they were never going to be profit centres, that's how Ford ended up buying them in the first place. This is why Lamborghini has changed hands how many times now? Same thing with Land Rover.

Superior, as in lubricants that work with engines and systems that the a lot of big companies don't care about, or have long forgotten. It's one thing I have serious respect for Valvoline for doing. VR-1 is just about the only product coming from the big companies that fits the bill for a serious power street engine, that will survive long term.


That's not really "superior" though, that's catering to niches, which was what I already touched on with my post. Better support for the "little guy" has value.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Granted, there are some major horsepower players coming out of the factory now that run OTS oils, but they are a far cry from the engines of the past.

I use M1 0w40 in 3 of my vehicles, but there's no way I'm putting that in my boats, Charger, bikes, or anything that really beats on oil.


No, but you could run Delvac 1 5w-40.


Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Actually, it's exactly like that. While most oil companies only stop to think about making a truly fortified and specialized oil for engines that will get a sump dump after the flag is waved, Schaeffer makes products that will do that, without having to throw it away the same day it is put in the engine.

That is why if you hang around people who build engines for 8 and 9 second street cars, and performance boats, you're not going to hear about sumps being filled with PYB, M1, or anything like it. They just don't cut it, and what is recommended for those engines by those companies is something that is a very temporary fill, or simply incorrect.


Actually, having hung around a guy who did just that, his lube of choice was Kendall 15w-40, not VR-1 or Schaeffers.

But you are specifically talking about products like VR-1, which are somewhere between the dedicated race oils and the PCMO's. Instead, the majors pursue the larger relationships like the 24hr races when they are dealing directly with the likes of Mercedes, Porsche, BMW....etc. M1 0w-40 is used in that venue as an example. This is obviously more lucrative financially than sponsoring a 1320 car.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Mobil is most guilty of this; recommending their lame 15/50 for a lot of hot rod engines that will shear it to water in no time flat despite their "recommendation" for use with flat tappet and older engines. That's one oil that nobody who knows anything wants to use.

UOA's don't lie. Shear prone engines eat major manufacturer's oils to water where superior regular-use lubes like Amsoil Dominator, Schaeffer's MicronMoly, and yes, even Valvoline's VR1 continue not to notice long after other oils are broken down.

It's not a fault of technology so many companies don't have an equivalent. It's a fault of will.


Yes, it is certainly a fault of will. The majors don't see a reason to cater to this small demographic and that's where the little guys can fill a niche and make money. It is a logical business move.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Of course, this is the part where you will point out that this is a specific example, and does not apply to everything that Schaeffer makes, nor everything that Mobil makes. Then I will remind you that I never said any such thing, and that this is a thread about an old English car and I only said that Schaeffer's makes superior products despite being a smaller oil company. Being specific to the OP's inquiry, the answer is a solid no. Mobil, SOPUS, and pretty much everyone out there at the top besides Valvoline don't make anything even close to the quality and performance of Schaeffer's 20/50. And even then, MicronMoly runs cooler oil temps than VR1 and is likely a superior oil.


Yes, it is about an old English car, not a drag boat or 1320 car so I do not really see the direct correlation between your observations about this product in those applications and the OP's. This isn't some super high power density mill from what I can see

Also, again the use of the term "superior", if the other doesn't make an equivalent, that's not really a fit. Mobil doesn't make a synthetic 20w-50, so this is again a niche product. Perhaps "more appropriate" would be a better choice of words here in your opinion regarding the OP's ride. I don't necessarily share that opinion but I can respect that it is yours.

I have no experience with antique British cars, but I have plenty of experience with antique boats and I'm very familiar with what works well in those.

 

[expat]

Thanks for bringing back those memories. Those little cars are real chick magnets! Enjoy... [/quote

Earlier this week I made a 500 mile road trip in Washington State in my Triumph Spitfire with our Welsh Terrier dog in the passenger seat.

Honestly, I'm not the best looking guy on the planet at 59, but the attention I was getting from the opposit sex was (almost) embarrassing.
If I were single that could have been one heck of a trip!

Incidently, my car is a 1500cc and at one time was dynoed at 104hp @ 6500rpm, but the cam was a bit hard to live with.
These days, with a milder asymmetric cam I'm produceing, I guess, no more than 90hp peak
but it's more useable.
I run 15w-40 conventional Delvac and change it before lay up each winter.
I guess I average about 4500 miles in a season.

This last trip my max oil temp that was recorded, after a long uphill grade was 200f.

The engine is fitted with an Oil to Coolant (VW) oil cooler, That I fitted mainly to help oil warm up during short trips.

An (OE option) overdrive transmission was the best modification I have made to the car

 

[DoubleWasp]

Quote:
Which was exactly the issue with the half-arsed efforts Ford was putting into Lincoln. Instead of trying to re-invent the brand at that time they figured it better to just buy some of the luxury-exclusive brands instead. And well prior to the bankruptcy, this worked out reasonably well for them (in terms of image).

Those brands were not however profit centres, that's why Ford was able to acquire them in the first place.


There is no re-inventing the Lincoln brand. Ford, like Cadillac, made sure of that when they spent years chasing quantity over quality and went from selling cars that stickered close to Rolls and Bentley, to vehicles marginally distinguishable from their base counterparts.

The investment necessary to attempt turning that around would be ludicrous.

Quote:
I believe you are (perhaps intentionally) misconstruing the term capability here. Any of the large automotive companies, given that their engineers could be given the necessary financial support to follow through with it, could make a world class car. Take the Ford GT as an example of that.

The problem is not with the capability/ability, the problem is with spending the necessary money and committing the right people to it, and this is where a division like Cadillac for example has historically fallen short.

In this case it is much easier to just buy a pre-existing luxury brand, one that has already spent the money, and keep it as a feather in your hat (even if it doesn't make money). But what we saw with Ford was the lack of foresight regarding the proper upkeep required with these brands and the potentially folly of trying to "dumb down" the powertrains and other things to save money.


The Ford GT succeeded because of the prestigious history behind the name. Call the car anything else, and it never would have gotten built, because Ford never would have sold a single one.

You missed the most important part of what I said: Ford/Lincoln does not have the capability to build something in the luxury arena that anyone would pay that kind of money for, and never will.

Quote:
Exactly. The VW division had the capability to build the car. Nobody wanted to buy it because of the image.


Ditto to what I said above.

Quote:
I would agree that Ford did not properly utilize those brands, but they were never going to be profit centres, that's how Ford ended up buying them in the first place. This is why Lamborghini has changed hands how many times now? Same thing with Land Rover.


They were never going to be profit centers, eh? Maybe not in Ford's hands:

http://newsroom.jaguarlandrover.com/en-in/jlr-corp/news/2015/08/jlr_fy_2016_q1_earnings_070815/

Quote:
That's not really "superior" though, that's catering to niches, which was what I already touched on with my post. Better support for the "little guy" has value.


What you said was:

"These companies go after niches. That doesn't mean that the majors don't make products that are just as good for those niches"

The majors don't make products as good for those niches, hence why it's superior.

Quote:
No, but you could run Delvac 1 5w-40.


Delvac is a monster in its intended application, but isn't going to hold a candle to a "boutique" street/race formula in my applications. Here, I will not say Delvac is not superior, just misapplied.

Quote:
Actually, having hung around a guy who did just that, his lube of choice was Kendall 15w-40, not VR-1 or Schaeffers.

But you are specifically talking about products like VR-1, which are somewhere between the dedicated race oils and the PCMO's. Instead, the majors pursue the larger relationships like the 24hr races when they are dealing directly with the likes of Mercedes, Porsche, BMW....etc. M1 0w-40 is used in that venue as an example. This is obviously more lucrative financially than sponsoring a 1320 car.


Bless their hearts. My engines don't run on their lucrative deals. They've left something on the table, and other outfits have offered a better product for it.

Quote:
Yes, it is certainly a fault of will. The majors don't see a reason to cater to this small demographic and that's where the little guys can fill a niche and make money. It is a logical business move.


Which is exactly why Schaeffer's makes a superior product. It was intended for its purpose, instead of them just saying "yeah, um, just use this....should be ok".

Quote:
Yes, it is about an old English car, not a drag boat or 1320 car so I do not really see the direct correlation between your observations about this product in those applications and the OP's. This isn't some super high power density mill from what I can see shrug


............Completely missing the simple fact that racing 20/50's make up a massive amount of the recommended oils for a classic engine, and that this is so for a very good reason: Pretty much all other 50's are stripped out conventional oils with poor performance in classic engines.

Quote:
Also, again the use of the term "superior", if the other doesn't make an equivalent, that's not really a fit. Mobil doesn't make a synthetic 20w-50, so this is again a niche product. Perhaps "more appropriate" would be a better choice of words here in your opinion regarding the OP's ride. I don't necessarily share that opinion but I can respect that it is yours.


No, they don't make a synthetic 20/50. They recommend those who need a 50 weight for a classic engine to use their weak 15/50. That is the product Mobil has put on the table for the 50 weight arena. There's not even a question that if you put Mobil's recommended 50 next to Schaeffer's recommended 50, Schaeffer's blows Mobil out of the water.

If AA puts up the Driveworks filter for my car, and Amsoil puts up the EAO filter for my car, does Amsoil make the superior product? Of course. We can then go back and forth about how AA (or it's supplier, rather) could certainly put up a mind blowing oil filter for my car if they really wanted to, but that wouldn't be the situation.

Mobil has put up a product that even lovers of the past generations of their 15/50 don't want to touch anymore, and Schaeffer's offers up a heavily fortified, street-use, racing synthetic that can pump through a 4 digit horsepower level engine without blinking. Superior? Absolutely. Not anyone's fault but their own that they sent a knife-fighter to a shootout.

 

[RazorsEdge]

Good points.. Some users here will never except that there ARE plenty of others oils that ARE NOT @ walmart that fit street/race applications.

It is what it is!

 

[HiPowerShooter]

I actually considered using Phillips XC 20/50 AvOil...I know it works in a Lycoming IO-360 for upwards of 50 hours.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Like I said, racing specific oils not approved for continuous use that have to be quickly dumped.

That is a valid strategy, of course, as are the other options. The majors don't have a lot of reason to be formulating oils for such applications, though. The boutiques cover much of that, while the majors trip over their own feet offering as many SN/GF-5 5w-30 examples as they can. Of course, an old school offering shouldn't be synthetic, but we know how difficult a boutique conventional can be to find, aside from a break in lube.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp

There is no re-inventing the Lincoln brand. Ford, like Cadillac, made sure of that when they spent years chasing quantity over quality and went from selling cars that stickered close to Rolls and Bentley, to vehicles marginally distinguishable from their base counterparts.

The investment necessary to attempt turning that around would be ludicrous.


No, there's (IMHO) no re-inventing it now (though they are trying). But it was something that could have been done years ago when the brand still had a reputation.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
The Ford GT succeeded because of the prestigious history behind the name. Call the car anything else, and it never would have gotten built, because Ford never would have sold a single one.


I think that's intentional exaggeration. There are plenty of names Ford could have put on it (like Shelby) that would have made it sell. However the GT name (actually the GT40 name) certainly brings with it some throwbacks to the original, which was the intention.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
You missed the most important part of what I said: Ford/Lincoln does not have the capability to build something in the luxury arena that anyone would pay that kind of money for, and never will.


Again, the use of the word capability here. They have the capability/ability to build the car. Perhaps nobody would buy it, but the ability is there. What it lacks is marketability due to brand prestige (or rather the absence thereof) so it would be a sales failure. That's not a lack of capability, that's a lack of image.


Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Ditto to what I said above.


I think we are on the same page and perhaps just being fickle about language here

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
They were never going to be profit centers, eh? Maybe not in Ford's hands:

http://newsroom.jaguarlandrover.com/en-in/jlr-corp/news/2015/08/jlr_fy_2016_q1_earnings_070815/


I'll be interested to see how that holds up. But the reason that Jaguar was able to spun into something that's making money is, according to this article:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-dri...rticle17678401/

Quote:
On the plus side, Ford did an amazing job of reinventing JLR’s manufacturing facilities and processes. Indeed, JLR types willingly say they’d not be around at all today without the Ford money and expertise. But on the product side, Ford looked for ways to spread costs right across Ford’s product lineup, the global one.


Ford spent 50 BILLION on Jaguar. They invested heavily in "fixing it" but their approach of integrating it into Ford did not help the brand.


Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
What you said was:

"These companies go after niches. That doesn't mean that the majors don't make products that are just as good for those niches"

The majors don't make products as good for those niches, hence why it's superior.


When I think of the term "superior" I think "better than". That denotes something it can be directly compared to, so in this case a 20w-50 to a 20w-50. If there is not a comparable product, that term loses its significance. I would say (and already have) that "more appropriate" or "niche geared" product would be more suitable terms.

While the majors certainly recommend products for these niches, they are not products designed specifically for them. Neither Shell or Mobil makes a product that directly competes with Dominator for example.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Delvac is a monster in its intended application, but isn't going to hold a candle to a "boutique" street/race formula in my applications. Here, I will not say Delvac is not superior, just misapplied.


I think this depends on who you talk to TBH. I'm not going to try and sway your opinion as I'm sure it is based in extensive experience. Your applications may be that much further removed from a mainstream product being "suitable" that there is indeed a significant difference. I've never personally had an application where that was the case (M1 5w-50 held up just fine in the supercharged 5.0L Ford's) but that's the thing about engines, a lot of things change depending on how they were built and who built them.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Bless their hearts. My engines don't run on their lucrative deals. They've left something on the table, and other outfits have offered a better product for it.


Sure, but your applications may not be overly relevant (and don't sound like they are) to the OP's little British mill

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Which is exactly why Schaeffer's makes a superior product. It was intended for its purpose, instead of them just saying "yeah, um, just use this....should be ok".


A more appropriate product (yes, I'm going to keep going on that, LOL!) for your application. And I agree that the often half-arsed recommendation approach when there isn't a purpose-made product leaves a person with much better options, which sounds like is the case for you and your applications with Schaeffers.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
...........Completely missing the simple fact that racing 20/50's make up a massive amount of the recommended oils for a classic engine, and that this is so for a very good reason: Pretty much all other 50's are stripped out conventional oils with poor performance in classic engines.


It isn't missing the fact, it is simply a relatively small target market. A great number of classic guys and folks that restore classic engines simply recommend an HDEO like Delvac, Rotella, Dello....etc. These engines generally do not place a demand on a lubricant that requires a race oil, particularly when we are talking about stock rebuilds and car show cars.

Drag racing is a whole other ball of wax, as each engine family has its own little quirks and weaknesses that pop up when you are pushing the envelope. And this ties into our earlier discussion about purpose built race engines (like the LeMans cars and M1 0w-40) and somebody's poked and stroked SBC that's riding on the edge of failure.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
No, they don't make a synthetic 20/50. They recommend those who need a 50 weight for a classic engine to use their weak 15/50. That is the product Mobil has put on the table for the 50 weight arena. There's not even a question that if you put Mobil's recommended 50 next to Schaeffer's recommended 50, Schaeffer's blows Mobil out of the water.


I would seriously like to see some examples of that (that's not a dig, I'm genuinely curious). I know plenty of guys in the SBF world that ran (and run) M1 5w-50 and the 15w-50 with great tear-down results. These are typically boosted windsors.

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
If AA puts up the Driveworks filter for my car, and Amsoil puts up the EAO filter for my car, does Amsoil make the superior product? Of course. We can then go back and forth about how AA (or it's supplier, rather) could certainly put up a mind blowing oil filter for my car if they really wanted to, but that wouldn't be the situation.


That's actually a neat comparison because AMSOIL and Royal Purple both market great filters, but these filters are actually assembled by the majors. These majors are also now making these same type of filters sold under their own names like the FRAM Ultra, the Purolator Synthetic and the WIX synthetic.

In this case, since the FRAM Ultra is cheaper than the EaO, they both use glass media (but different types) but one is a major brand and the other one is boutique, how do we determine which one is "superior"?

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Mobil has put up a product that even lovers of the past generations of their 15/50 don't want to touch anymore


So this is recent? Can you elaborate further. You are saying that the 15w-50 product CHANGED?

 

[Garak]

I would gather that DoubleWasp's Charger and perhaps boats are the biggest concern. Delvac 1 would work in darn near everything else, including bikes. I'm sure the Porsche would handle it in a pinch.

As for Lincoln being a real competitor for the Euro brands, well, you're both right. It's a generational thing. It could eventually become completely rebranded, but the most effective way to do this is over time. As the people who purchased new Town Cars over the years start to die off, as do those of us who were simply fans of them and owners of used Town Cars, our perceptions no longer matter. Of course, that assumes they're actually willing to build some competition for whatever luxury segment they're actually targeting and commit to it. That could be a long time going and extremely unprofitable.

 

[Rob_Roy]

Originally Posted By: HiPowerShooter
HI all...

I'm thinking of giving Schaeffer 20/50 in my MGB for the next oil change. As a bonus, it contains elevated levels of ZDDP specifically for flat tappet(as with an MG) engines. I don't want to get into the whole "there's no need for extra after break-in" debate. I understand that.

My machine shop owner/engine builder is a huge fan of it. Runs it in all his engines. Anyone have any experience and/or results with it?

Thanks!


I am not surprised that your engine builder recommends it. Schaeffer makes very high quality products, and they take a lot of pride in what they send out the door.

Their 20w-50 racing oil has about 1800 ppm of ZDDP, a nice slug of moly, and handles heat/high rpm's well. I used it for years in my drag car, which had massive valve springs and an aggressive camshaft. After a few years of redline shifts I took it apart and was pleased to see that the bearings and cam looked excellent.

Does your engine guy stock Schaeffer's Neutra fuel stabilizer? It is an excellent project.

 

[expat]

Originally Posted By: HiPowerShooter
I actually considered using Phillips XC 20/50 AvOil...I know it works in a Lycoming IO-360 for upwards of 50 hours.


With respect I'm not sure whatyou are looking for in your oil.

I would imagine (not knowing too much about aircraft) that aviation engine oil might havequite an easy life in some respects compared to howmost of us use our autos.

Short runs, acceleration and deceleration are not things I would associate with an aircraft engine.
As I understand it, they are also likely stressed compared to most auto engines.

Honestly, I would just pick a reputable, conventional motor oil, that would last your modest OCI's
in a 20w-50 (if you insist, but others heremight have an opinion on that) and go with it.
Having worked on British cars for about 50 years (yes, I did a valve lap on the family Morris Oxford, a 'B' series engine, when I was ten, although most of my work has since been with Triumphs) and I know there is always somthing to spend your money on with British cars other than motor oil.

BTW, I hope you had that rebuilt cyl head Magnafluxed, they often develope a crack in the area around #2 spark plug.

 

[BrocLuno]

My guess is that any modern moderately heavy viscosity oil would be vast;y superior to what they used back in the day ...

For that little flat tappet cam and light valve springs, I'd be inclined to use Rotella, Delvac, or Delo400 in 15-40. It'll have better shear stability and will keep wear to a minimum

Sorry, I zoned out and forgot what I was going to say - Nich market refiners and blenders fulfill an important role. And if what you are doing needs what they make, so be it... Out here it's Red Line Oil. They make some wonderful products like MTL and oil for Nitro Dragsters.

But for a restored MG, even a hopped up one, I don't think they are warranted...

Maybe a motorcycle 20-50 if you really have to go that heavy?

 

[HiPowerShooter]

Originally Posted By: expat
Originally Posted By: HiPowerShooter
I actually considered using Phillips XC 20/50 AvOil...I know it works in a Lycoming IO-360 for upwards of 50 hours.


With respect I'm not sure whatyou are looking for in your oil.



BTW, I hope you had that rebuilt cyl head Magnafluxed, they often develope a crack in the area around #2 spark plug.


That was when I first bought it...never used it, just crossed my mind.

I've rebuilt a couple of heads so far. The original large valve head did have a crack right there at the Siamesed exhuast valves. The head I've got in there now obviously has hardened seats, gas flowed intake valves and I shaved it .030" to get a little bump in compression(it's an 18v deep dish piston). The casting in those combustion chambers is like carbon velcro. I grind and polish them up real well also. Surprisingly, it's actually been a very reliable and fairly easy to maintain(after you learn the little "tricks")car. Had the dizzy recurved and left the points in as well...just look at them every other oil change or so.

 

[AirgunSavant]

I guess in todays world your name doesn't mean much anymore.
I have put products on the market for 35 years using my name.
It's a cruel world out there and I go the extra mile to pay up and keep quality high as that's all I have is my name.
Penny pinching is usually done by big oil and not the little man.

I have learned that with our tax structure cheating corners and saving a dollar here and there just gives that to the government in higher taxes. I'd rather sleep at night and make my customers happy. Especially in today's world where everybody knows it all and everybody is up your arse 24/7.

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
How does a small company like Schaeffers have better oil tech than Exxon-Mobil or Shell Oil Products US ?
When you can get essentially a racing oil like M1 0w-40 in Walmart, and also great EP oils like M1 or Castrol EP, I see no reason to risk going to a small company where the owner is too close to the production line not to meddle or penny pinch.

 

[salesrep]

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
How does a small company like Schaeffers have better oil tech than Exxon-Mobil or Shell Oil Products US ?
When you can get essentially a racing oil like M1 0w-40 in Walmart, and also great EP oils like M1 or Castrol EP, I see no reason to risk going to a small company where the owner is too close to the production line not to meddle or penny pinch.

http://www.schaefferoil.com/mission-statement.html

Schaeffers Manufacturing has more Certified Lubrication Specialists than any other Company in the World. Schaeffers chief chemist has been published countless times and is respected throughout the industry amongst his peers for his base oil, additive and overall knowledge of formulations, be they engine oils in Europe, grease or gear oil formulations for high heat or EPA approval or racing oils in the USA. The Technical department at Schaeffers Oil is beyond reproach with development of new formulas combined with in the field evaluations of application needs for specific products and an unquenchable desire for innovative chemsitry and formulations.. The fuel additive technical department is equally respected with its forward looking chemistry with the ever changing gasoline and diesel fuel production requirements.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: salesrep
Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
How does a small company like Schaeffers have better oil tech than Exxon-Mobil or Shell Oil Products US ?
When you can get essentially a racing oil like M1 0w-40 in Walmart, and also great EP oils like M1 or Castrol EP, I see no reason to risk going to a small company where the owner is too close to the production line not to meddle or penny pinch.

http://www.schaefferoil.com/mission-statement.html

Schaeffers Manufacturing has more Certified Lubrication Specialists than any other Company in the World. Schaeffers chief chemist has been published countless times and is respected throughout the industry amongst his peers for his base oil, additive and overall knowledge of formulations, be they engine oils in Europe, grease or gear oil formulations for high heat or EPA approval or racing oils in the USA. The Technical department at Schaeffers Oil is beyond reproach with development of new formulas combined with in the field evaluations of application needs for specific products and an unquenchable desire for innovative chemsitry and formulations.. The fuel additive technical department is equally respected with its forward looking chemistry with the ever changing gasoline and diesel fuel production requirements.


Do you guys have plans for oils in the 0w-30 and 0w-40 grades?

 

[salesrep]

A lot of effort was put into the 0-20 and new European spec oils. With PC-11 HDEO around the corner, that would be the primary engine oil focus. It depends on IF 0-30 or 0-40 fits into that arena and can perform up to Schaeffers standards along with meeting industry criteria and demand.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: salesrep
A lot of effort was put into the 0-20 and new European spec oils. With PC-11 HDEO around the corner, that would be the primary engine oil focus. It depends on IF 0-30 or 0-40 fits into that arena and can perform up to Schaeffers standards along with meeting industry criteria and demand.


I ask because there are a growing number of applications that use the 0w-40 grade (like all the new MOPAR SRT products as well as plenty of Euro apps) and 0w-30 is getting increasingly popular as well as a PCMO grade.

 

[expat]

Originally Posted By: HiPowerShooter
Had the dizzy recurved and left the points in as well...just look at them every other oil change or so.


I earned some beer money testing Lucas distributors for the British magazine 'Motor' back in the 70's (my brother in law was on the editorial staff)

This was whwn aftermarket electronic ignition kits were first appearing on the market.

The test verhicle was a low milage, factory supplied, long term test car. A 1.8 Austin Marina (pretty much your engine with a single Carb)

The idea was to hook the car up to a Sun diagnostic machine and look for spark missfire and ignition scatter (accuracy of ignition timing)

I will try to find the article (I did keep it after it was printed) but it was 40 or so years ago, so I'll just aproximate by memory.

The original points distributor on the car had about 6 degrees of scatter at various speeds in the rev range, and maximum rpm was actually limited by missfire due to points bounce.

British Leyland sent us a bunch (3 or 4 ) new distributors, in the hope we could find one that would work better.
We eventually got one with only 4 degrees scatter, that would rev to 6,000 rpm.

We then started testing the EI kits.
Back then, some were optical and some retained the points, but only as a low voltage trigger for an EI module. I think only one unit was Hall effect (magnet and reluctor)

The points triggered kits were not much better than the original points/codenser set up.
A couple of the other kits just plain quit working during the test. But invariably provided a big improvement over the original factory set up.

As part of my payament I was allowed to keep a Piranha kit, which I fitted to my Triumph, only to have it leave me stranded 6 months later on the way home from work!

Of course, IE has come along way since then. I don't think ANY manufacturer has used points and condenser on a verhicle for over 30 years now. and nobody questions reliability.

What do I use?

I did consider a crank triggered system like 'Mega jolt' but wanted to retain the authentic look (I have Collector insurance on my car, and Mods could effect it)
So for the last 10 years I have had fitted a Nipondenso system directly of a 4 cyl 80's era Toyota.
The reluctor fits nicely on the stock distributor shaft, the Hall effect pick up fits in place of the points, and the coil and ingnitor just sit in place of the original coil.

I have a mechanical tachometer drive, but this system will work with your electric tachometer.

I get accurate ignition up to 8k rpm (No, I did not test that speed onthe engine)

If you DO retain your points. DO remember to occasionally add a drop of oil to the distributor shaft. There is a felt pad for this under the rotor arm.

Distributor shaft bearing wear will promote points scatter. It's a plain bronze bushing and very few owner think to lubricate it. It gets NO lubrication from the engine!

 

[kschachn]

So why does a company like Schaeffer use irrelevant marketing gimmicks to promote their products then? Why would you when your products are superior and can stand on their own?