ZDDP concentration in Amsoil Zrod oil

[Pablo]

I think the key here is that Z-rod is not just a relatively high ZDDP oil. That part seems relatively clear. Amsoil thinks it silly to get into a 1201 ppm oil is better than a 1200 ppm oil. It's the overall formulation that is critical. Too much of any additive is not good. For example. Amsoil Z-rod has just enough antioxidants and metal protectants for for storage, more than average street oils, but not so much to foul plugs and such. And yes the up front price of the oil is more, no need to keep repeating that.

 

[SumGuy]

Now that I’ve had 4 more hours of sleep I can see where “…


Could mean the year “1990” or “1990 ppm”.

Z

I meant year.

I have a remanufactured 318 bought from a chrysler dealership in 1987 (so it has flat tappets) that had about 10k miles put on it from 1987 to 1998 and has been in storage until the last couple years when I changed the oil (10w30 non synthetic, probably penzoil or quaker state) but car only driven a few dozen miles since then.

I don't recall doing anything special during break-in other than maybe changing the oil after the first 100 miles.

I'm curious what zinc levels that would have been available in ordinary off the shelf oil back in the late 80's and early 90's because that's what the engine used during it's early life. But now that I'm back at the car, I want to get my head around what oil I need to be looking for since so much has changed in the past 25 years. So zinc levels are my focus on this.

Viscosity is secondary, I didn't think oils with large viscosity ranges were durable, but maybe that's different now. This car will never be winter driven so I don't need low temperature oil. But the car will sit for long extended periods of time for the forseeable future, I'd rather not have to change it just because of the passage of time vs the miles put on it, but maybe that's not realistic (you tell me).

 

[ka9mnx]

Any Euro Xw-40 (5w-40 in my case) with ACEA A3/B4 and Porsche A40 works for me. Forget ILSAC and API for anything but newer (last 10-15 years) designed engines. Even then I would be using a ACEA 5w-30.

ILSAC and API are the minimum specifications.

 

[zray1]

@…. This car will never be winter driven so I don't need low temperature oil. But the car will sit for long extended periods of time for the forseeable future, I'd rather not have to change it just because of the passage of time vs the miles put on it, but maybe that's not realistic (you tell me).

As far as I know, the main objection to leaving old oil in an engine over the off season would be if the engine has significant blow-by. If it does, then oil can be considered to be contaminated with the acidic combustion gases which have a deleterious effect on the bearings and cylinder walls.

For that reason, if the oil is close to needing to be changed, it’s better to do it before extended storage rather than afterwards.

I don’t know how much blow-by it takes to upset the oils chemistry to a significant degree.

This is more of an issue with classic cars as they have often have greater piston / cylinder clearances, and more blow-by issues as a result, that modern cars do.

 

[Jetronic]

As far as I know, the main objection to leaving old oil in an engine over the off season would be if the engine has significant blow-by. If it does, then oil can be considered to be contaminated with the acidic combustion gases which have a deleterious effect on the bearings and cylinder walls.

For that reason, if the oil is close to needing to be changed, it’s better to do it before extended storage rather than afterwards.

I don’t know how much blow-by it takes to upset the oils chemistry to a significant degree.

This is more of an issue with classic cars as they have often have greater piston / cylinder clearances, and more blow-by issues as a result, that modern cars do.

And their carburettors often run the engines rich, which adds even more fuel to the crankcase.

I can smell them for a while after they passed

 

[kschachn]

Catalytic converters most definitely have sensors for proper operation. If the catalyst is poisoned by phosphorus then you’ll know it.

However it takes quite a bit of burned oil to do this. How bad is your consumption? If it’s not reaching the catalyst then it’s quite irrelevant the ZDDP level in the oil.

You have quite a lot going on in this thread. Maybe make some individual threads with the various concerns.

 

[Fabulous50s]

I've owned and built several (non exotic) flat tappet engines. You need to remember a direct acting OHC engine and a pushrod engine have different spring pressured acting on the lifters and cam. I've built both. There us no rocker ratio at play.

Also a stock spring pressure engine won't generally have any issues, it's high lift and high spring pressure that destroy stuff. That said, we see plenty of modern roller lifter/rocker failures which have nothing to do with ZDDP....we think.

Catalytic converter poisoning is only an issue with excessive oil consumption. All the vehicles I've built don't have Catalytic converters, so that's a non issue.

I did own a 2010 K24 Honda (wife's car) which consumed a quart every 800 miles for many years. Never threw any Catalytic inefficiency codes, sold it with 180k on it. So who knows. Ran 5w-40 T6 for much of the K24s life. A head rebuild stopped the oil consumption a year before it was sold.

 

[kschachn]

I did own a 2010 K24 Honda (wife's car) which consumed a quart every 800 miles for many years. Never threw any Catalytic inefficiency codes, sold it with 180k on it. So who knows. Ran 5w-40 T6 for much of the K24s life. A head rebuild stopped the oil consumption a year before it was sold.

The one vehicle that I personally saw generate an efficiency code due to the oil was consuming in excess of 1 quart in 500 miles.

 

[MolaKule]

I meant year.

I have a remanufactured 318 bought from a chrysler dealership in 1987 (so it has flat tappets) that had about 10k miles put on it from 1987 to 1998 and has been in storage until the last couple years when I changed the oil (10w30 non synthetic, probably penzoil or quaker state) but car only driven a few dozen miles since then.

I don't recall doing anything special during break-in other than maybe changing the oil after the first 100 miles.

I'm curious what zinc levels that would have been available in ordinary off the shelf oil back in the late 80's and early 90's because that's what the engine used during it's early life. But now that I'm back at the car, I want to get my head around what oil I need to be looking for since so much has changed in the past 25 years. So zinc levels are my focus on this.

Viscosity is secondary, I didn't think oils with large viscosity ranges were durable, but maybe that's different now. This car will never be winter driven so I don't need low temperature oil. But the car will sit for long extended periods of time for the forseeable future, I'd rather not have to change it just because of the passage of time vs the miles put on it, but maybe that's not realistic (you tell me).

Okay if you had asked what the API service level the oil was at in 1987 we could have answered that early on. Also, the owner's manual should state the API service level.

From what I can find, the oil was at a service level of API SJ. At that time we formulated to a ZDDP level where the Phosphorus was 850 to 1000ppm and the Zinc was at about the same treatment levels.

One thing you have to realize is that modern oils, even with lower ZDDP levels, have secondary anti-wear chemistry and are superior to the oils of history.

The viscosity grades for the 318 varied from a 10W30 to 10W40.

Any modern 10W30 synthetic should operate satisfactorily in this engine.

 

[SumGuy]

Okay if you had asked what the API service level the oil was at in 1987 we could have answered that early on. Also, the owner's manual should state the API service level.

From what I can find, the oil was at a service level of API SJ. At that time we formulated to a ZDDP level where the Phosphorus was 850 to 1000ppm and the Zinc was at about the same treatment levels.

One thing you have to realize is that modern oils, even with lower ZDDP levels, have secondary anti-wear chemistry and are superior to the oils of history.

The viscosity grades for the 318 varied from a 10W30 to 10W40.

Any modern 10W30 synthetic should operate satisfactorily in this engine.

API classifications SA through SH are now obsolete. API SJ, for example, meets the 1998 - 2000 requirements of auto makers and is not yet, apparently, obsolete.

If the requirements of an engine made in or refurbished with parts that date to, say, 1980 to 1988 are API SF, is it possible that API SF might specify a certain level of zinc / ZDDP that are now "obsolete" (if API SF is obsolete, which it is) and hence API SJ or later, if they specify lower levels of zinc, would not make a suitable replacement for SF?

 

[MolaKule]

... which it is) and hence API SJ or later, if they specify lower levels of zinc, would not make a suitable replacement for SF?

Apparently you missed these comments. Again:
"The viscosity grades for the 318 varied from a 10W30 to 10W40.
Any modern 10W30 synthetic should operate satisfactorily in this engine
One thing you have to realize is that modern oils, even with lower ZDDP levels, have secondary anti-wear chemistry and are superior to the oils of history."

Thinking that API SH and SJ oils were somehow superior to today's oils is an exercise in futility.

 

[SumGuy]

Is it not possible that an older engine techology or metalurgy might require a particular oil component that is not needed for current engines and hence said component is no longer considered for api standards?

Is it always the case that the current API spec is taking into account the requirements for engines going back 50, 75 years as well as today's brand new engines?

I'm not arguing that the older oils were superior. I'm wondering why high zddp / high zinc specialty oils are offered for flat tappen cars if today's reduced-level ZDDP oils are making up for that missing lubricating quality in some other, equivalent or better way.

 

[Fabulous50s]

I think ZDDP was cheap compared to phosphorus and other synergies used today. Engines were made with higher tension piston rings and generally didn't consume oil until later in years. Catalytic converters and overall emissions were only gradually phased in and long term emissions weren't looked at.

So the market did what it always does, made lubricants that did the job as cheaply as possible with what was available at the time.

 

[MolaKule]

Is it not possible that an older engine techology or metalurgy might require a particular oil component that is not needed for current engines and hence said component is no longer considered for api standards?

No.

Is it always the case that the current API spec is taking into account the requirements for engines going back 50, 75 years as well as today's brand new engines?

Yes.

I'm not arguing that the older oils were superior. I'm wondering why high zddp / high zinc specialty oils are offered for flat tappen cars if today's reduced-level ZDDP oils are making up for that missing lubricating quality in some other, equivalent or better way.

I explained that earlier in Post #31: "One thing you have to realize is that modern oils, even with lower ZDDP levels, have secondary anti-wear chemistry and are superior to the oils of history."

Do you expect a different answer every time you ask the same question?

 

[zray1]

I'm wondering why high zddp / high zinc specialty oils are offered for flat tappen cars if today's reduced-level ZDDP oils are making up for that missing lubricating quality in some other, equivalent or better way.

People want a simple answer to everything,

Casting modern oils as the villain and zddp (oil and /or additives) as the hero gives people a simplistic solution to hold onto. Like any good conspiracy theory, the zddp proponents take a little bit of fact or truth, and spin it misguidedly and erroneously to have universal application.

Z

 

[ka9mnx]

No.

Yes.

I explained that earlier in Post #31: "One thing you have to realize is that modern oils, even with lower ZDDP levels, have secondary anti-wear chemistry and are superior to the oils of history."

Do you expect a different answer every time you ask the same question?

Thanks. Allowed me to not have to explain again...and did better than I could!