What additives are best for timing chain life?

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by burla
Originally Posted by PimTac
Originally Posted by burla
Originally Posted by Chris142
The reason I ask is that we bought the 07 fjcruiser. There have been some reports of chain problems with the engines.

But we don't know both sides of the story. Maybe they had over extended oci's?

I'm running Chevron supreme 10w30 in ours. It looks like a good oil on paper to me. I'm thinking of only using that oil in the fj. My other cars get what's on sale but they don't have over head cams like the Toyota does.



The cause is our gov't and their CAFE agenda, they care more about fuel economy then your timing chain, even if it is .01 mpg over the fleet that is America. Move up one grade viscosity, problem solved. Doesn't mean you wont have a timing chain fail, those are wear items, but your choosing to take your vehicle back to a time where timing chains weren't issues. Vehicles used to not be spec'd for 20 weight, and premature taming chain replacements were very rare.






Broken record.



ewe, LMAO.

What difference is it if that is the answer to the question. Call the question a broken record or better yet sit it out of you can't behave.




You are not adding to the conversation, just rambling on with your thin oil conspiracy.

This has been talked to death here. It's a combination of things.

Narrower chains.
Longer and more convoluted chains.
GDI soot.
Smaller displacement engines that have more power than the old V8s had.

 

[spasm3]

I have to wonder about the timing chain wear and more multi-valve engines. More valve springs to spin with the timing chain. I'm sure it takes a lot more force to spin 4 valve springs per cylinder than 2.

 

[Kjmack]

You are not adding to the conversation, just rambling on with your thin oil conspiracy.

It isn't a thin oil conspiracy , it's the truth long OCI and 20 wt. And GDI don't get along . Pentosin a synthetic fluid producer that carries many OEM certs . not just says they meet them , has come out publicly and stated 20 Wt. oils are not good at long OCI intervals . They are not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes on the thin oil "conspiracy" .

 

[burla]

Seams like you should put your personal attacks aside and do some research on the matter Pim Tack. My info comes from studying the hold up with the gf-6 and reading a lot of white paper on it. Understand the gf-6 is CAFE driven, they already solved lspi to the extent they are going to with sn+. Do you really think 0w16 is for metal protection? Why are they testing that? Not a conspiracy a fact, they have fuel economy as a goal and entice manu's with credits for doing as much. move along, you are not helping the conversation like at all.

 

[burla]

I wont post back here til I find the paper with the most credit on the matter, this is a good discussion shouldn't fall down like others.

 

[burla]

Here you go Pimtac, you don't think this guy is a conspiracy guy?

road to gf6 and timing chain wear

What is behind interest in improving timing chain wear?

Reith: Tightening emissions legislation is the primary driver

 

[burla]

Shear stable viscosity improvers that allow you to start with a heavier base oil is another thought. But flies in the face of what the govt wants.

 

[OilUzer]

Originally Posted by Kamele0N
Originally Posted by OilUzer
Moly.
haven't used Red Line yet but that's why I like it.
.
No s... Sherlock

I know that this is Moly... But which variation/version of it?

Which one is in a can of LM MoS2? Mo E/A? What does E/A stand for?


OP asked: ""Moly? Boron? ZDDP?"

I was responding to that question and not yours!

 

[zeng]

Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
Wow, so this problem is just going to drag on as the epic battle of the interests continues to rage.

My take on problematic modern chains:
Soot abrasives + inadequate viscosity = chain wear
GDI = more soot loading than PFI
TDGI = even more soot loading than GDI

Regulations have driven automakers to both GDI, higher power densities and perpetually slashed viscosities, compounding problems for soot wear issues IMO

Viscosity? A higher viscosity oil film that's harder to break given a standard torque load will for obvious reasons spend less time in a boundary state that enables the soot to micro-abrade and wear the chain link interface. The type of cyclic 'torque reversal' loading seen on chains is more of a hammering than a sliding or rubbing force, which brings into question the efficacy of some common solid-forming AW addtives also. Diesel engines have always had to deal with abrasive soot loading of the oil and have always specified higher viscosity oils. Coincidence?

This.

 

[ChemLabNL]

"It isn't about additives as much as viscosity"

This ^

Generalization: "If your engine parts are going to bounce off each other, then you want a lot of Moly"

Just use a dadgum Dexos2.

 

[Kamele0N]

@OilUzer...accepted

 

[OilUzer]

Originally Posted by Kamele0N
@OilUzer...accepted

np, I noticed that my post was right after your question! I should've used the quote button or said op ...

 

[dlundblad]

Chris, you could probably get away with a 5w or 10w40 in your climate as well. Maybe mix some same brand and variety of 10w30 and 10w40.

5w30 is spec'd for that engine right? I'd also keep the OCI's short because of the dust and keep that air filter changed.

 

[dnewton3]

There is no quick answer here.

Timing chain applications are as susceptible to design inputs as are crank journal bearings, cam lobes, and about everything else. Timing chain life is governed by tension, angle of articulation (ie the radius they have to circumnavigate), the amount of lube they get (splash or pressure fed), the design (link plate or roller chain), etc ...

Some designs can last a very long time with very little need for anything special in terms of lubes. (for example, our '05 4.6L in my fleet that has 258k miles on it, and still exhibits great wear data and no timing chain slap.)
Other designs are prone to issues and no lube will save them from ultimate demise.

I would think that a decent amount of zddp might help extend life a bit if you have a system prone to issues of design concerns, but they are not miracles in a bottle. They may delay the inevitable, but they won't stop it.

 

[crainholio]

Originally Posted by Chris142
The reason I ask is that we bought the 07 fjcruiser. There have been some reports of chain problems with the engines.


2007 seems to have been a bad year for the 1GR-FE timing chain based on my research after buying an '07 4Runner project. While mine was definitely a case of poor oil change maintenance by the original owner, I found quite a few other cases of elongated timing chains in this model year and early 2008 models. I also noted cases of 2005-2006 vehicles with other problems, one shown very sludged under the valve cover, with no visible timing chain elongation as shown by the #1 tensioner plunger position.

If yours isn't throwing P0016 error code, I'd just keep up the OCIs at 5K using an oil w/ a good shot of moly, e.g. QSUD, PP High Mileage, PYB High Mileage.

And if you want to inspect your timing chain condition, just remove the 4-bolt cover plate on the front of the engine inboard of the power steering pump just above the serpentine belt. Take a pic of the #1 tensioner showing the plunger extended length...should be < 1/2" of plunger from the tensioner body casting. Mine was nearly 3/4" and throwing P0016 consistently.

 

[4WD]

Originally Posted by PimTac

The reason I ask is that we bought the 07 fjcruiser. There have been some reports of chain problems with the engines.

But we don't know both sides of the story. Maybe they had over extended oci's?

This has been talked to death here. It's a combination of things.

Narrower chains.
Longer and more convoluted chains.
GDI soot.
Smaller displacement engines that have more power than the old V8s had.


Plan to keep my last two a long time so got short chain engines

 

[StevieC]

The PentaStar engine has lots off chain but they are a tad wider the narrow type and are supported well and as a result seem to have 0 issues. There are a couple of folks with 300K miles on these engines already 0 issues on other forums. My dad has 300K KM (180K Miles) and hasn't had a problem and this is a newer engine design rolled out in 2011 so I think it has a lot to do with chain quality and engine design and less to do with the length of the chain and what oil is used.

Chain shown here:

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by ChemLabNL
"It isn't about additives as much as viscosity"

This ^

Generalization: "If your engine parts are going to bounce off each other, then you want a lot of Moly"

Just use a dadgum Dexos2.





A bit of over exaggerating. If you have engine parts bouncing off of each other then you have a poor engine indeed.

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
I'd think timing chain failure would be due to a cheap crappy design and not the fault of the oil.


Interestingly, chain brand matters little. Aftermarket chains made in China are holding up similarly. Furthermore, these failures are happening on dealer serviced, non sludged, proper schedules. Range Rovers are notorious for chain issues. It's not the design, it's the service schedule and oil viscosity.

 

[SHOZ]

My timing chain is "stretched" on my Gen Coupe with 97k now. This pic is at about 70k miles IIRC. But they came out with a new part number and it is beefier.