ZDDP in newer engines

[IT_Architect]

I have two low mileage 2006 Saturn Vues, both with 2WD, and the Honda 3.5 V6 MDX power trains. I know how to beat rust in southern Michigan with the right preventative procedures and the right vehicles. The objective now is to get a million miles out of them. I can see from the MileMaker site 300,000 to 500,000 happens a lot, some over 700,000, and a couple with over a million miles. The main challenge will be minimizing the effects of winter and short trips. I'm convinced that synthetics low temperature advantages can help. They've been on good dino oil and 3000 mile change schedules until now. Both look very clean when you look into the valve covers.

I've read a lot, including on this forum, about how ZDDP helps with flat tappet engines, and read oil analysis links. However, I would think that any place in the engine that tests the lubricant's shear strength would benefit as well. Any engine with even 30,000 miles will show wear on the upper rod bearing inserts. I noticed the article on this forum named Oil University is not sold on the supposition that that ZDDP is not required. I wouldn't dream of trusting the EPA to do what is in the best interest of U.S. citizens, from an environmental standpoint, or any other standpoint, or have even the slightest scientific evidence to back up their claims, nor that oil companies and auto makers can pull a rabbit out of their hat to neutralize every assault the EPA devises, which is why I surface this topic for new engines.

I intend to change oil between 3000-4000 miles to keep the engine clean. If you haven't seen the filter used on the J35, it's approximately 2/3rds the size of our kids sippy cups. The filters must either be in bypass all the time, or using chicken wire to filter with. However, I noticed the same filter may be used on many vehicles. I'll probably be going with the Purolator Pure 1.

For oil, I'm leaning pretty much toward Mobile 1 0W-20 Advanced Fuel Economy or perhaps Mobil 1 Extended Performance 5W-20. I realize Amsoil Signature is a fine oil with the ZDDP included, but I don't know of any local sources that don't charge retail plus an arm and a leg, running it double the miles would mean it would be twice as dirty when I change it, and I'd rather be able to just buy it off the shelf and do it myself or bring it to my oil change place and have it done for $10. I don't think the sales model of Amsoil would work for me. I don't do Amway either even though they have better products sometimes than you can buy in the store, even if they can make a case for being more cost effective. I can add ZDDP in the proper ratio, the question is if I should.

I appreciate your thoughts.

 

[MolaKule]

ZDDP isn't the holy grail of anti-wear (AW) and anti-oxidants (AO).

There are other unseen components in modern oils that will provide the extra AW and AO you need.

Use the viscosity recommended and do VOA's and at least three UOA's to determine how well your particular choice of oil plays with the engine.

 

[dparm]

I have never been a fan of adding anything to an existing oil formulation. If Mobil, Amsoil, Pennzoil, Silkolene, etc. thought that ZDDP would do the job in a given formulation, they'd add it. As MolaKule mentioned, there are many other [modern] additives that can do the same work. There are enough oil analyses on this site that prove you can still have a healthy engine without using ZDDP.

Renewable Lubricants, for example, uses antimony.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Welcome to the forum!

Originally Posted By: IT_Architect
If you haven't seen the filter used on the J35, it's approximately 2/3rds the size of our kids sippy cups. The filters must either be in bypass all the time, or using chicken wire to filter with. However, I noticed the same filter may be used on many vehicles. I'll probably be going with the Purolator Pure 1.


I'd have no worry about the filter size; consider that the Toyota 4.7L V-8 engine uses a very similarly-sized "teacup" filter, as does the Chrysler 3.3/3.8L V-6 engine, etc. That said, the Purolator PureONE is a fine filter. It's made in the United States, right here in Fayetteville, NC. Use it with confidence. I've used it before and will likely use it again.

Our MDX is nearing in on 100,000 miles, and I've been doing 5,000 mile changes with synthetic; my wife does a lot of short-tripping and I don't feel comfortable with longer intervals on this engine. But the engine is a real gem, and runs strong and smooth. I've used M1 0W-20 in it before and once my stash of cheap QSUD 5W-30 has run out, I may go back to it.

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: IT_Architect
it double the miles would mean it would be twice as dirty when I change it,


The following statement will blow your mind. Changing your oil too much increases wear.

 

[dennishiip]

I would forget about any additional ZDDP and consider MOS2 or Ceratec

 

[CATERHAM]

As mentioned don't worry about the ZDDP level in modern oils for your vehicles, it's plenty.

In the Saturn use a light synthetic oil in the 0W/5W-30 grade such as Pennzoil Platnium.
For the MDX, 5W-20 is specified. Don't know if the 0W-20 grade has been back spec'd but assuming it isn't I suggest running a high VI 5W-20 synthetic such as PP 5W-20.

 

[A_Harman]

You have to carefully read the first post in the thread: what the OP was saying was his 2006 Saturn Vue's have the Honda 3.5L MDX engine in them. GM actually did use the Honda engine for a few years.

 

[CATERHAM]

Thanks A_H., I didn't catch that although MDX was an Acura name plate not Honda which had me wondering.

The OP's idea of using M1 AFE 0W-20 is a good one or PP 5W-20 which is equally as light at non extreme temp's.

 

[IT_Architect]

Wow! For some reason I didn't get the notification E-mails. I must have set something up wrong.

- I'll probably skip ZDDP. I'll see how the TAN works out first. I'm guessing fine in my case since I don't plan to push the miles.
- I'll probably go with the 0W-20 or the PP. The spec was 5W20 but that probably has more to do with Dino oil than engine requirements. Logically, I don't see where I'm accepting any risk with the lower end (40C), and since synthetics are more stable, I'll be gaining if it ever gets past the high end. (100C+)
- I was joking when I said they must be using chicken wire to filter with such a tiny filter. That turned out to be not far from the truth. The PureONE PL14610 or PL14612 are rated at the same efficiency, but at 40 microns. The apologists point out that the old VWs didn't even have an oil filter. I'd rather see an FL1 on the firewall.

It isn't likely to happen though.

Thanks TONS!

 

[IT_Architect]

I found they actually sell oil filter relocation kits for this size filter that remotes to the FL1/PH8A size filters.

 

[Errtt]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't zinc only come into play as an anti-additive once the oil barrier is lost, which isn't often? Sort of as a last resort.
And if an oil has a low zinc pack then one could generally expect the other anti-wear additives to come into play, maybe have a stronger than normal dose? i.e. phosphorus, moly, maybe boron to a lesser degree. If/should oil gets squeezed out.
I'm early learning phase, and slow and stupid.

 

[IT_Architect]

Zinc dithiophosphate (ZDDP) is both an anti-wear additive and maintains alkalinity. The lack of it in the newer oils in theory causes problems for some flat tappet/follower engines, where there are extreme localized pressure points. My point is the oil film is under intense pressure on the top half of the rod bearing as well, and thus new engines might benefit from earlier levels of ZDDP. Amsoil Signature has legacy levels of ZDDP, which is why it cannot be certified, and probably why it does better in the 4 ball test.

 

[dave1251]

But you do not have a flat tappet cam with "high pressure points".

The best answer to your post was the first one posted IMO. Molakule has forgotten more about lubrication in the last two weeks then most of us here will know in our lifetimes.

 

[IT_Architect]

Quote:
But you do not have a flat tappet cam with "high pressure points"

Please re-read. I was addressing the immediately preceding post, that ZDDP is a multi-purpose additive, that increases wear resistance and reserve alkalinity.

While I don't have a flat tappet cam, the upper rod bearing shells are without question high pressure points and high wear points. The author of the Oil University article, who is also very knowledgeable, sees merit in having legacy levels of ZDDP. What I see that differentiates this high pressure area is the rod journal and bearing are made of dissimilar metals of different hardness, thereby making them less likely to gall. Thus, I decided to float the question here to solicit other opinions. The general consensus on this thread is that restoring ZDDP to legacy levels would provide minimal benefit.

 

[racin4ds]

Good luck getting anywhere near 1 million miles if its an Auto trans... the engine may do it but you'll be 3-4 transmissions in. And given their cost you're further ahead buying a new vehicle!

 

[Hokiefyd]

Honda allows the use of 0W-20 in the J35. 5W-20 is on the cap, but 0W-20 is allowed per the Honda lubrication job aid that's on the counter in every Honda parts department.

M1 0W-20 is a fine oil in this engine.

 

[regal55]

I know Toyota still sells shimmed flat tappet engines in the Yaris (these are common in the 500k mi+ clubs.) Many of the owners used Walmart Synthetic Syntech from '05+, so that oil would have had the low zddp SM rating. Supporting the argument that the lower zddp levels aren't harmful.


ZDDP can provide protection at the top of the engine after its parked, sits, and drains the oil to the sump, so the zddp is providing start up protection, something Moly can't.

Part of the move to 0W-20W oils is to get the heads lubricated as soon as possible on start up, not implausible to think this is partially driven by the low zddp mandates.

A ZDDP additive is very inexpensive compared to Moly, its interesting that there is so much support for MOS2 additive but little for ZDDP around here. Hard to argue with a study from respected professors of tribology?

But surely its possible that newer oils have found a substitute but the frustration part is not being able to measure these via Blackstone's GC/MS, it requires a real leap of faith. Which is hard to do for us ChE's at my level without access to NMR and several thousand dollar analytical chemistry.

So yes I have a little inexpensive bottle of ZDDP Max, the cost is such a small insurance.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: IT_Architect
Quote:
But you do not have a flat tappet cam with "high pressure points"

Please re-read. I was addressing the immediately preceding post, that ZDDP is a multi-purpose additive, that increases wear resistance and reserve alkalinity.

While I don't have a flat tappet cam, the upper rod bearing shells are without question high pressure points and high wear points. The author of the Oil University article, who is also very knowledgeable, sees merit in having legacy levels of ZDDP. What I see that differentiates this high pressure area is the rod journal and bearing are made of dissimilar metals of different hardness, thereby making them less likely to gall. Thus, I decided to float the question here to solicit other opinions. The general consensus on this thread is that restoring ZDDP to legacy levels would provide minimal benefit.


Don't depend on zddp to provide wear protection in rod bearings. It's mostly for protecting cams and piston rings where contact loads are high and relative sliding velocities are low. Rod bearings operate in the hydrodynamic lubrication regime where there is always an oil film that separates the bearing from the journal.

 

[Pablo]

Originally Posted By: IT_Architect
Amsoil Signature has legacy levels of ZDDP, which is why it cannot be certified......


This isn't true.