ZINC or MOLY...which is best???

Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
1,081
Location
oklahoma
Okay so in experimenting with oils in my 4.0L Jeep with 80k & minor leaks, I am about to finish up an OCI with Pennzoil HM 10w30 in it. As compared to the Trop-artic I had in it before, it runs quieter & smoother and the leaks that sometimes could leave a dot on the concrete have stopped. Next on deck waiting to go in is some Maxlife 10w30. I think most HM oils (including Pennzoil) have a decent amount of ZDDP in them when compared to normal oils. But Maxlife seems to be the exception to the rule and has lots of Moly but little if any ZDDP??? That being the case, does Valvoline know something the others don't or is it just that one additive costs less than another and that is how the select them? I would want to use the HM oil that has the best additive pkg and I am wondering between the two additives, which is best & why? thx
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 29, 2009
Messages
2,804
Location
NJ
Honestly, if your leak has stopped and improved with the Pennzoil HM, keep using it. Why ruin a good thing.
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
941
Location
Houston, TX
 Originally Posted By: Anies
Honestly, if your leak has stopped and improved with the Pennzoil HM, keep using it. Why ruin a good thing.
Exactly...don't try to do too much Suv
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
134
Location
Wi
Maxlife 10W30 semi syn has a good amount of zinc and moly in it. $14 for 5 quarts at Walmart.
 
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
15,217
Location
Canada
All SM oils, both Maxlife and Pennzoil HM, are SM oils, if they are fairly new. The limit for ZDDP in these oils is 800ppm. All SM oils will usually have a ZDDP amount between about 650-800ppm. Maxlife does not have 'little if any ZDDP' - it has the same amount as Pennzoil, give or take 5%. Moly IS more expensive to put in oil than ZDDP, which is a big part of the reason moly levels have dropped in oils in recent years. I like the idea of lots of moly in an oil, as I think high-moly oil 'generally' show lower wear amounts than others. Old Havoline, before Ds, used to have 300-500ppm of moly in it, and it showwed amazing results almost all the time. For this reason, I like the idea of Maxlife more than other HM oils - Maxlife still has over 200ppm of moly in the add-pack. BUT, as Anies said, if the Pennzoil HM worked for you, don't ruin a good thing!
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
1,093
Location
Kentucky
 Originally Posted By: FastSUV
Okay so in experimenting with oils in my 4.0L Jeep with 80k & minor leaks, I am about to finish up an OCI with Pennzoil HM 10w30 in it. As compared to the Trop-artic I had in it before, it runs quieter & smoother and the leaks that sometimes could leave a dot on the concrete have stopped. Next on deck waiting to go in is some Maxlife 10w30. I think most HM oils (including Pennzoil) have a decent amount of ZDDP in them when compared to normal oils. But Maxlife seems to be the exception to the rule and has lots of Moly but little if any ZDDP??? That being the case, does Valvoline know something the others don't or is it just that one additive costs less than another and that is how the select them? I would want to use the HM oil that has the best additive pkg and I am wondering between the two additives, which is best & why? thx
The Valvoline Maxlife series has 830 Zinc, 760 Phosphorus, and 300 moly. If you look at their PDS, they have lowered calcium and added 490 ppm sodium. They also use a ZDDP pack that is more durable than normal, but, I believe all oils will soon be using this ZDDP pack. There are some great discussions on moly in the forum on adds. We even had EM and Valvoline CE's come and talk with us. At 300 ppm, moly is a HEAVY FM, LIGHT AW. Combine that with their ZDDP and detergent pack and you get a great oil. The MaxLife is 70% GPII and 30% GPIII. The MaxLife Synthetic is about 85% GPIII with some GPIV in the add pack(according to Valvoline tech)
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2008
Messages
25,050
Location
ON, Canada eh?
Stick with the High Mileage if it has helped your leaks... I wouldn't worry about ZDDP/Moly in your engine because the 4.0's can't be killed easily! Drive Happy!
 

FastSUV

Thread starter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
1,081
Location
oklahoma
Well as far as why I'd switch from Pennzoil HM to Maxlife is just because I already have the Maxlife in my stash and bought it with the intention of experimentation. But in general, I think I would like YB over Valvoline WB and so I am a little apprehensive about using Valvoline just because I never have used it in the past. I was always a Castrol & M1 man, but this site convinced me that Pennzoil is one of the best. But I was under the impression that the Pennzoil HM had lots more ZDDP than Maxlife and Max-life's main edge was that it was syn-blend and had much more moly than Pennzoil HM. Can you confirm that ZDDP levels between the two are close and that Pennzoil has much less moly? If that is the case, then I have been looking for a good oil to switch to in my 180k non-daily driver that is currently using M1-HM formula but won't even see 5k in a year so I am thinking a blend or dino might be a better choice. Thanks again guys
 

FastSUV

Thread starter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
1,081
Location
oklahoma
 Originally Posted By: StevieC
Stick with the High Mileage if it has helped your leaks... I wouldn't worry about ZDDP/Moly in your engine because the 4.0's can't be killed easily! Drive Happy!
Yeah they are good motors except this is an '01 and these newer ones have a nasty habit of cracked heads & busted piston skirts especially so maybe not as good as they used to be? But this thread is now spilling over into my 5.9 magnum engine because if the Maxlife really has plenty of ZDDP but way more moly than Pennzoil HM, then I might consider it for my 5.9L Jeep too.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
1,648
Location
Little Rock, AR
FastSUV, I think you'll find that all the HM oils will equally deal with your leak problem.
 Originally Posted By: addyguy
Moly IS more expensive to put in oil than ZDDP, which is a big part of the reason moly levels have dropped in oils in recent years. I like the idea of lots of moly in an oil, as I think high-moly oil 'generally' show lower wear amounts than others. Old Havoline, before Ds, used to have 300-500ppm of moly in it, and it showwed amazing results almost all the time.
Good pt - and Schaeffers is the king of Moly. But they don't have an HM offering.
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2002
Messages
6,388
Location
Washington St.
It is not either-or zinc-or-moly. They work together to be better than either is alone. The zinc phosphate compounds produce a wear resistant layer on the parts. Zinc phosphate and molybdenum phosphate compounds together produce a layer that is both more wear resistant and lower friction. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob...97674bd3014285b Only the ILSAC GF-4 labeled oils have the upper limit of .08% phosphorus. SM oils that are not GF-4 can be higher if the oil maker chooses. Dual-rated diesel & gasoline engine oils are an example...0.12% max phosphorus with the CJ-4 and SM Service Classifications. HM oils are more about marketing than about engine protection.
 

FastSUV

Thread starter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
1,081
Location
oklahoma
 Originally Posted By: ericthepig
FastSUV, I think you'll find that all the HM oils will equally deal with your leak problem.
 Originally Posted By: addyguy
Moly IS more expensive to put in oil than ZDDP, which is a big part of the reason moly levels have dropped in oils in recent years. I like the idea of lots of moly in an oil, as I think high-moly oil 'generally' show lower wear amounts than others. Old Havoline, before Ds, used to have 300-500ppm of moly in it, and it showwed amazing results almost all the time.
Good pt - and Schaeffers is the king of Moly. But they don't have an HM offering.
Yeah, I had thought of using a HDMO but I wanted the seal additives. BUT leaks are not my only motivation for using a HM oil. I wanted the added protection of the better additives. My leaks on both vehicles are not bad and I am sure I'd use HM oil anyway even if I did not have those leaks but the fact that they get stopped or slowed is definitely a plus
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2008
Messages
25,050
Location
ON, Canada eh?
The ZDDP & Moly will not prevent cracked heads, it might help the Piston skirts a little but I think you would have to dump even more ZDDP in the oil that was in most oils from back in the 80's. It's a bad design in the newer engines, no amount of additives is going to fix it. ;\) You could run a slighly cooler thermostat. This will help the head from heating up in traffic. Not too cool or you could cause an CEL! I missed that it was an '01 in your post above.
 

FastSUV

Thread starter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
1,081
Location
oklahoma
 Originally Posted By: StevieC
The ZDDP & Moly will not prevent cracked heads, it might help the Piston skirts a little but I think you would have to dump even more ZDDP in the oil that was in most oils from back in the 80's. It's a bad design in the newer engines, no amount of additives is going to fix it. ;\) You could run a slighly cooler thermostat. This will help the head from heating up in traffic. Not too cool or you could cause an CEL! I missed that it was an '01 in your post above.
Well I know that it will not prevent cracked heads LOL. I just recall people on the Jeep board saying that is a common issue on these newer ones. Mine has electric fan & clutch fan & 180* stsat so it NEVER heats up thank goodness.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
1,648
Location
Little Rock, AR
 Originally Posted By: Ken2
HM oils are more about marketing than about engine protection.
I have years of real world evidence (on one car) that HM oils are more than just marketing. I had a vehicle that had significant smoke at start-up (valve guide seals) - HM oils reduce this to the pt that it was essentially undetectable - occassionally I would see a puff, otherwise no discernable smoke. Also, I went thru all the HMs - started w/ Maxlife (soon after it came out), then Castrol HM, then Wally ST HM, and M1 HM - all did pretty much equally well at eliminating the smoke. Car seemed to run the swoothest on M1 HM (yes, very subjective).
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
8,859
Location
Texas
 Originally Posted By: FastSUV
Yeah they are good motors except this is an '01 and these newer ones have a nasty habit of cracked heads & busted piston skirts especially so maybe not as good as they used to be?
There was one head casting used at the beginning of the 2000 production run that seems to have been a bit more prone to cracking. This was the first head with the bolt bosses to hold the coil-on-plug ignition rail, which is the reason there was a casting change. Apparently they also thinned out the casting, whether intentionally or or just through a problem at the foundry I don't know. IIRC, all of those heads were used up in 2000 except a very few have popped up in 2001s. Its been reported that they've also shown up in late production 1999s too. Look at the head casting number which is visible between cylinders 2&3 (or is it 3&4, I forget) right near the intake manifold runners. If it ends in "0331" its the suspect casting, if not don't worry at all.
 

FastSUV

Thread starter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
1,081
Location
oklahoma
 Originally Posted By: ericthepig
 Originally Posted By: Ken2
HM oils are more about marketing than about engine protection.
I have years of real world evidence (on one car) that HM oils are more than just marketing. I had a vehicle that had significant smoke at start-up (valve guide seals) - HM oils reduce this to the pt that it was essentially undetectable - occassionally I would see a puff, otherwise no discernable smoke. Also, I went thru all the HMs - started w/ Maxlife (soon after it came out), then Castrol HM, then Wally ST HM, and M1 HM - all did pretty much equally well at eliminating the smoke. Car seemed to run the swoothest on M1 HM (yes, very subjective).
Did you try Pennzoil HM?
 
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
63
Location
Western PA
Are high ZDDP numbers (>1000) of any benefit for newer engines that use roller cams rather than the old flat tappet cams?
 
Top