What oil "clings" best to an infrequently run engine?

[SammyChevelleTypeS3]

Supporting Andy Granatelli ...

Andy worked for Studebaker motor company and at same time purchased Paxton turbo / supercharger company. He then had those made options on certain Stude models. STP was at one time famous for the fact Andy actually had a major motor car company place those STP stickers on the oil fill cap on some engines stating something to the effect : use a pint of STP at oil change. LoL Wonder how many people followed those silly instructions? Andy must have been some salesman. I think he even took a spell driving some race cars.

 

[SammyChevelleTypeS3]

I've met Richard Petty. I've talked oil with Richard Petty. He doesn't know nor care what's in STP. They just hand him a check. They funded his racing program, that's it. I doubt he ever used the stuff.

How many people are knowledgeable and experienced enough in lubrication and engine wear patterns to find, acknowledge, and properly conclude the root cause of engine sludge, damage, etc...? Very few. Even many reputable engine builders can't do that. If the consumer thinks STP is doing them good, they'll never even consider it being the cause of any issues they may have. Marketing/advertising goes deep into psychology. There's a reason it's a multi-billion dollar industry. Good marketers know how to get inside your head like they seem to have done with you.

Richard Petty , I think deep down knew where his greatest help winning races came from. A guy named Maurice Petty. His brother and his long time engine builder made a big difference to that 43 car.

 

[cheesepuffs2]

The suggestions to do occasional startups not only recoats your cylinder walls but recharges your battery and seems to be the best approach.

Occasional startups where the car is left in place to idle for a short period of time, as opposed to a real drive of any distance, will not recharge the battery but instead cause it to go flat faster.

 

[cheesepuffs2]

If it was causing harm to engines, it wouldn't still be on store shelves and rung-up on store cash registers everyday, after 70 years. Nobody is currently suing Energizer over it and I more-so trusted the brain of Richard Petty's since 1981, over anyone's inside this thread. The STP Oil Treatment is the reason why it's plastered over the family's pro racing circuit since 1981.

I'm done talking this..... especially since I don;t use the product personally. I've bought a couple bottles of Rislone lately and it's a shame I had to pour that stuff inside an engine that contains a sponsored oil of BITOGs. But that's how well Rislone works and I suppose you are probably about to slam that product also?

Rislone and STP Oil Treatment still gets purchased by the thousands every day. But BITOG members inside this thread seem to know negatively different about it's success?...... hahahaha....... alll .0001% of the motor oil supplement buying population?....... hahahaha again.

Trusted the brain of Richard Petty? He didn't/doesn't endorse STP for all these years out of the kindness of his heart, or because he found the product to be exceptional. They paid him large sums of money over the years and he delivered them ad placement in return. It's merely transactional and speaks nothing to the quality or usefulness of the product.

 

[4WD]

Spam has also been on grocery store shelves since 1937, doesn’t make it a good choice either…

My hurricane cabinet would disagree … however, I don’t use STP

 

[wpod]

I've met Richard Petty. I've talked oil with Richard Petty. He doesn't know nor care what's in STP. They just hand him a check. They funded his racing program, that's it. I doubt he ever used the stuff.

How many people are knowledgeable and experienced enough in lubrication and engine wear patterns to find, acknowledge, and properly conclude the root cause of engine sludge, damage, etc...? Very few. Even many reputable engine builders can't do that. If the consumer thinks STP is doing them good, they'll never even consider it being the cause of any issues they may have. Marketing/advertising goes deep into psychology. There's a reason it's a multi-billion dollar industry. Good marketers know how to get inside your head like they seem to have done with you.

I know the original owners this boat. During 8th grade through the early 20 year olds we did minibikes , motor cycles and hot rod cars and boats as we grew up. They told me if it wasn't for the sponsor money the sport would be unaffordable.

 

[MolaKule]

Occasional startups where the car is left in place to idle for a short period of time, as opposed to a real drive of any distance, will not recharge the battery but instead cause it to go flat faster.

Why?

If the OP chooses, he can idle it for at least 15 minutes or take it for a drive. It is his choice.

 

[irollo]

First

 

[oldhp]

Spam has also been on grocery store shelves since 1937, doesn’t make it a good choice either…

HEY!!!!! What's wrong with SPAM??? Fried Spam and eggs or Spam on buttered toast is AWESOME!!!

 

[cheesepuffs2]

Why?

If the OP chooses, he can idle it for at least 15 minutes or take it for a drive. It is his choice.

He says in the OP that his plan is for this car to sit for two years. He's not taking it for drives, that's why he's concerned about how he's storing it. Idling the car several times for 15 minutes at a time over two years is not going to sufficiently recharge the battery. It'll just kill it, while adding moisture to the crankcase from idling without getting hot enough.

And really OP, you're going to want to trickle charge this battery once in awhile anyway.

 

[FCD]

It's much better to take it for a drive , even a short one than just to let it idle, that way the oil and everything else will warm up much faster, and will help burn off moisture.

 

[Micktrik]

Wouldn't a high ester based oil have a metal loving polarity to metal vs group 3 and 4?

Yes, it should. Hard to determine which products have the most ester lubricant in them. Perhaps Redline or Motul? Phosphate Esters like Zinc Dialkyldithio-phopsphate have historically been employed to do this job but have somewhat recently been seen on the "unemployment lines" due to lack of use these days. I have used Motul 800 in 2 cycle engines and have been amazed at the performance after tearing down an a chainsaw motor that had an air leak. Very good oil that boats ester base.

 

[4WD]

Spam has also been on grocery store shelves since 1937, doesn’t make it a good choice either…

Spam is for when there is nothing on the grocery store shelves - but it’s in my emergency food stash …

Back on subject - a semi might be an improvement …

 

[JohnnyJohnson]

Well of course it has to be the magnetic one with smart molecules!

 

[RooflessVW]

Could use something like VpCI-326?

 

[2.7ecoboostFordBronco]

I know this is a fairly old thread and I’m going off topic, but there is a pervasive philosophy(myth?) in small airplane circles that straight weight group II (conventional, non-synthetic, non-blend) works the best in situations where an engine is run, for instance, only once a month. The theory, I think, is that lower viscosity index means thicker oil at ambient temps that takes a longer time to run off. I don’t know if I fully buy into it, because it seems that additive package would play an equally important role. Airplane oils are constrained to ashless dispersant, mostly non-detergent additives, due to the cylinders head temps being near twice as high as autos.

P66 makes a dedicated preservative oil for airplane engines that are planned not to be operated for over a month. Interestingly it’s a 20W-50 but it’s probably a group II base with a different add pack than their normal aviation 20W-50.

I don’t know why synthetics aren’t/couldn’t be used for this application other than their higher viscosity index usually leading to lower thickness at ambient temps. It seems they would resist oxidation over time better than a mineral oil and provide adequate film, with the right add pack though. It’s probably too niche for anyone to bother with the R&D for a synthetic.

 

[Hohn]

Good marketers know how to get inside your head like they seem to have done with you.

Exactly. STP, MMO, Lucas oil treatment, dura-lube etc are all still sold while being provably net negative to neutral at best for oil.

 

[Hohn]

As for assembly lube, I can tell you the best we’ve found for the incredibly high loads on our 95 L rods and mains is straight 100cSt Spectrasyn base oil. There’s a drum of it on the assembly line and all the short block assembly lube is PA100 with zero EP additive. Plus it’s perfectly soluble in Premium Blue.

 

[Olds394]

I know this is a fairly old thread and I’m going off topic, but there is a pervasive philosophy(myth?) in small airplane circles that straight weight group II (conventional, non-synthetic, non-blend) works the best in situations where an engine is run, for instance, only once a month. The theory, I think, is that lower viscosity index means thicker oil at ambient temps that takes a longer time to run off. I don’t know if I fully buy into it, because it seems that additive package would play an equally important role. Airplane oils are constrained to ashless dispersant, mostly non-detergent additives, due to the cylinders head temps being near twice as high as autos.

P66 makes a dedicated preservative oil for airplane engines that are planned not to be operated for over a month. Interestingly it’s a 20W-50 but it’s probably a group II base with a different add pack than their normal aviation 20W-50.

I don’t know why synthetics aren’t/couldn’t be used for this application other than their higher viscosity index usually leading to lower thickness at ambient temps. It seems they would resist oxidation over time better than a mineral oil and provide adequate film, with the right add pack though. It’s probably too niche for anyone to bother with the R&D for a synthetic.

View attachment 274597

View attachment 274598

Great, another thing I didn’t know I needed!

 

[MolaKule]

I know this is a fairly old thread and I’m going off topic, but there is a pervasive philosophy(myth?) in small airplane circles that straight weight group II (conventional, non-synthetic, non-blend) works the best in situations where an engine is run, for instance, only once a month. The theory, I think, is that lower viscosity index means thicker oil at ambient temps that takes a longer time to run off. I don’t know if I fully buy into it, because it seems that additive package would play an equally important role. Airplane oils are constrained to ashless dispersant, mostly non-detergent additives, due to the cylinders head temps being near twice as high as autos.

P66 makes a dedicated preservative oil for airplane engines that are planned not to be operated for over a month. Interestingly it’s a 20W-50 but it’s probably a group II base with a different add pack than their normal aviation 20W-50.

I don’t know why synthetics aren’t/couldn’t be used for this application other than their higher viscosity index usually leading to lower thickness at ambient temps. It seems they would resist oxidation over time better than a mineral oil and provide adequate film, with the right add pack though. It’s probably too niche for anyone to bother with the R&D for a synthetic.

Added to the base oils would be a tackifier and a dihydro-1H-imidazole derivative is all that is needed to make an anti-rust oil that clings.