New motor oil wear problems on older engines

[mikegronholz]

Made a couple of calls this morning ... Talked to Castrol ... the recommendations (and they were fully aware of the flat tappet cam issues) were:

(1) Use the Castrol Syntec 20w-50 (http://www.castrol.com/castrol/genericarticle.do?categoryId=82915470&contentId=7032644) This is designed exclusively for "classic cars". The site says:\

Today's engines face different demands than those of yesteryear. Now classic car owners who are particular about what they put in their vintage vehicles can receive modern wear protection from a high–zinc formula specially engineered for classic engines.

Key Benefits *

• Contains increased zinc levels for extra engine wear prevention.
• Utilizes proprietary additives and base oils to reduce metal–on–metal contact of aging engine parts.
• Engineered to increase wear protection for classic cars with flat tappet camshafts.

(2) Use some of their motorcycle oils.

(3) Use Castrol GTX Diesel - it is, and will be, SL CI-4 rated for a while. Zinc is .13 and Ph is .11

They expressly said NOT to use any other Castrol GTX products including the high mileage formula.

 

[mikegronholz]

For those wanting dino ... some results I found floating around with the newest Rotella T15w40 CJ-4 Triple Protection stuff ...

Zinc: 1210 ppm
Phosphorus: 989 ppm
Boron: 35 ppm

Also, with the same oil, a Blackstone Report was as follows:

4000 miles on 1st oil change:
Z - 1742
Ph - 1338

5050 miles on 2nd oil change:
Z - 1612
Ph - 1294

7405 miles on 3rd oil change:
Z - 931
Ph - 1089

7029 miles on 4th oil change:
Z - 1253
Ph - 1076

So it looks like the CJ-4 Shell Rotella 15w40 is keep the levels up a bit. As you guys can probably tell, I'm getting all the info I can.

 

[sprngfldxj]

After reading this post,
Is there anyone that can give the info that I am sure everyone is looking for?
List the Oils that many of us have not been able to look into.
Can we have a list of the oils we should purchase with out bias to brands?

 

[mikegronholz]

After reading this post,
Is there anyone that can give the info that I am sure everyone is looking for?
List the Oils that many of us have not been able to look into.
Can we have a list of the oils we should purchase with out bias to brands?

I just listed 4 or 5:

- Castrol Syntec 20w-50 only (designed for flat tappet motors)
- Rotella 5w40 Synthetic
- Rotella 15w40 Triple Protection ... this is a dino oil (although SM rated, the Blackstone report I posted had good numbers)
- Castrol GTX Diesel ... still SL rated
- Castrol said any of the motorcycle oils are still high in z and p

 

[cygnus58]

Thanks for the Castrol post.
that is good news.
Not one but TWO new oil choices..
The Diesel 15w40 doesn't say SM in the specs.
(not that I would want it to)
http://www.castrol.com/liveassets/bp_internet/castrol/castrol_usa/STAGING/local_assets/downloads/p,q/pds_GTX_Diesel.pdf

 

[Ecomike]

My only attempt at switching to synthetic earlier this year was with Castrol Syntech 20W50 in the colder months, dec/jan. My engine immediately began to leak and weep oil all over the place. Even after replacing the oil filter adapter o'rings it was still using 1 quart every 200 to 500 miles, until I replaced the last 2 quarts it drank, with straight 50 wt exxon dyno oil. It never smoked at all, by I got it down to a slow weep at the new valve cover seal (cork) and new o'ring adapter seals. The front and rear mains were already new before I tried it. I think my CCV system was somehow drinking the stuff even after I stopped all the large external leaks (but it still weeped very slowly at the seal areas) but like I said replacing 2 quarts with 50WT Exxon dyno oil stoped the oil consumption entirely.

It is an 87 jeep, with 248,000 mile on the odometer, but I have only had it since 2004, so I do not know the true mileage or complete history on the engine. I do know it was not using 10W40 oil when I bought it, and it does not currently use 20W50 dyno oil. It uses maybe 1 quart in 3000 miles of 20W50 dyno in the summer months, Houston, 75-95 F ambient.

I am pretty sure I saw some Castrol Diesel with the CJ-4 spec on it already, so be careful and check the label for CI-4 only on the label of any Castrol (GTX) Diesel oil you buy.

Perhaps there are 2 different Castrol diesel oils, one GTX the other not GTX?

Excellent feed back and post on the Castrol guy's response!!!!!!

Shell has reduced the zinc content in the new Rotella T diesel oil, the one with the Triple protection label, it is now down to what SL rated oil was and they plan to reduce it further, soon. The old CI-4 desel oils had more zinc than the old SL gas rated oils had.

Also the third blackstone report just posted was already too low on zinc in the Rotella T oil. The 1970's SME report said 1200 ppm was the critical lower limit for zinc. Not the optimal, but the critical lower limit. That Blakstone report was down to 932 ppm already. Also the zinc does not disapear from the oil with use. The new oil and used oil tests for Zn in the oil should be the same, minus any test error limits. yes some zinc will plate on the iron, but the same amount should shear off in use making it zero net change after engine break in.

 

[cygnus58]

Yeah there is a Castrol Tech diesel, and GTX diesel.
(at least that's what the local Autozone has in stock..)

 

[mikegronholz]

My only attempt at switching to synthetic earlier this year was with Castrol Syntech 20W50 in the colder months, dec/jan. My engine immediately began to leak and weep oil all over the place. Even after replacing the oil filter adapter o'rings in was still using 1 quart every 200 to 500 miles, until I replaced the last 2 quarts it drank with straight 50 wt exxon dyno oil. It never smoked at all, by I got it down to slow weep at the new valve cover seal (cork) and new o'ring adapter seals. The front and rear mains were already new before I tried it. I think my CCV system was somehow drinking the stuff even after I stopped all the large external leaks (but it still weeped very slowly at the seal areas) but like I said 2 quarts of 50wt exxon dyno oil stoped the oil consumption entirely.

It is a 87 jeep, with 248,000 mile on the oddometer, but I have only had it since 2004, so I do not know the true mileage or complete history on the engine. I do know it was not using 10W40 oil when I bought it, and it does not currently use 20W50 dyno oil. It uses maybe 1 quart in 3000 miles of 20W50 dyno in the summer months, Housto, 75-95 F ambient.

I am pretty sure I saw some Castrol Diesel with the CJ-4 spec on it already, so be careful and check the label for CI-4 only on the label of Castrol Diesel oil.

Perhaps there are 2 different Castrol diesel oils, one GTX the other not GTX?

Excellent feed back and post on the Castrol guys response!!!!!!

Shell has reduced the zinc content in the new Rotella T diesel oil, the one with the Triple protection label, it is now down to what SL rated oil was and they plan to reduce it further, soon. The old CI-4 desel oils had more zinc than the old SL gas rated oils had.

Also the third blackstone report just posted was already too low on zinc in the Rotella T oil. The 1970's SME report said 1200 ppm was the critical lower limit for zinc. Not the optimal, but the critical lower limit. That Blakstone report was down to 932 ppm already. Also the zinc does not disapear from the oil with use. The new oil and used oil tests for Zn in the oil should be the same, minus any test error limits. yes some zinc will plate on the iron, but the same amount should shear off in use making it zero net change after engine break in.

For thought, the numbers posted were from a Cummins TD report ... and diesels do use\consume oil a little differently. Out of 4, there was one "bad" one from a flat tappet stand point. The other 3 are promissing. Also, my neighbor just emailed his Blackstone to me ... he is running Rotella Synthetic 5w-40 in his 383 stroker CJ ... Z was at 1612 adn Ph was at 1378 ... and over the last 5 changes, these are his lowest readings :yelclap:

so the Rotella Synthetic does seem to be a good chioce if you go synthetic.

I will offer this up as well, if i can get a few donations, i will purchase some of all oil I listed above and send them to black stone for analysis. Each report is $30 ... I'll buy the oil. Those i'd like to test are:

Rotella Synthetic
Rotella dino
Catrol GTX diesel
Castrol Syntec 20w50
Delo 400
Mobil Delvac

So that's like $175 in tests. if i can get half donated for the cause, i'd initiate it ASAP. PM me if you are interested.

 

[Ecomike]

For thought, the numbers posted were from a Cummins TD report ... and diesels do use\consume oil a little differently. Out of 4, there was one "bad" one from a flat tappet stand point. The other 3 are promissing. Also, my neighbor just emailed his Blackstone to me ... he is running Rotella Synthetic 5w-40 in his 383 stroker CJ ... Z was at 1612 adn Ph was at 1378 ... and over the last 5 changes, these are his lowest readings :yelclap:

so the Rotella Synthetic does seem to be a good chioce if you go synthetic.

I will offer this up as well, if i can get a few donations, i will purchase some of all oil I listed above and send them to black stone for analysis. Each report is $30 ... I'll buy the oil. Those i'd like to test are:

Rotella Synthetic
Rotella dino
Catrol GTX diesel
Castrol Syntec 20w50
Delo 400
Mobil Delvac

So that's like $175 in tests. if i can get half donated for the cause, i'd initiate it ASAP. PM me if you are interested.

You might want to clarify the oils list you plan to test, there is a 30W Rotella T, and a 15W40 Rotella T dino oil. Not sure about the synthetic is 10W30 or 15W40?

Also the Delo 400 and Mobil Delvac still have CI-4 and the newer CJ-4 on various store shelves, so you need state which one your going to test. I am assuming you would want to test the new stuff, CJ-4, since the old stuff is disapearing FAST!

 

[mikegronholz]

You might want to clarify the oils list, there is a 30W Rotella T, and a 15W40 Rotella T dino oil. Not sure about the syntheti is 10W30 or 15W40?

Also the Delo 400 and Mobil Delvac still have CI-4 abd the newer CJ-4 on various store shelves, so you need state which one your going to test. I am assuming you would want to test the new stuff, CJ-4 since the old stuff is disapearing FAST!

Yep ... all the newest stuff ... the Rotella dino would be the Triple prtection Stuff and the Rotella Synth only comes in 5w-40.

 

[bewilderedbeast]

I'm still wondering where this excess wear is supposed to be, and where it's going to show up.

 

[Ecomike]

Contact point betwen cam shaft lobes and lifters (tapets). The worst, most acelerated damage would start there.

 

[geeaea]

You guys perseverate on this way too much. If you've got higher spring rates and whatnot, then get worried. You also put too much weight in the numbers. None of you (probably- speculation) run your oil change out to the point of depleting the lower level of ZDDP that's in there. It decays on a per RPM basis.

This is obviously the cheapest way to achieve lower wear in flat tappet applications. Even SM must meet the Sequence III-G endurance test. http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/GasTests/IIIGtest/default.htm

 

[Ecomike]

You guys perseverate on this way too much. If you've got higher spring rates and whatnot, then get worried. You also put too much weight in the numbers. None of you (probably- speculation) run your oil change out to the point of depleting the lower level of ZDDP that's in there. It decays on a per RPM basis.

This is obviously the cheapest way to achieve lower wear in flat tappet applications. Even SM must meet the Sequence III-G endurance test. http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/GasTests/IIIGtest/default.htm

It is my understanding that the OEM Jeep 4.0 engines do run at higher spring pressures than the V-6 GM test engine (which has dual intake valves as well) used for the SM, Sequence III-G endurance tests. The SME published a report back in 1972 says the critical ZDDP concentration, lower limit for new oil was .12 %, or 1200 ppm. Also, the Sequence III-G test nevers goes over 1500 rpm as I recall.

I would have no problem running SM oils and synthetics in the newer engines that are designed for it, but I have no desire to experiment with new unknown formulas on my older engines, which by the way are still running.

 

[bewilderedbeast]

I'm still asking why this wear isn't showing on UOAs.

 

[Ecomike]

I'm still asking why this wear isn't showing on UOAs.

I'll take a shot at it. I have a jeep I bought with a blown engine. It ran out of oil on a long highway trip (had a large oil seal leak in the rear that the prior owner underestimated). It threw a rod through the side of the block, and severly gouged the rod bearing surface on the crank shaft.

If I did a UOA analysis on that engine's oil I doubt it would look much different that a near virgin engine oil (it was leaking that fast). Any metal that was worn off in the last minutes of engine failure would have been large filterable metal particles, or too heavy and would have fallen out in the oil pan. So to find them one would need to look in the oil pan sludge and the oil filter, not in the free flowing engine oil!

The UOA tests are only going to show disolved ionic metals that were corroded, and literal rusted off the engine parts by acidic byproducts formed in the oil, and some traces of sub-sub micron sized, suspend colloidal metal particles that are too small to settle out in the oil pan, or other nooks and crannys when the engine is turned off. Metal fines that are just barely too small to filter out in the oil filter will tend to settle out in the oil pan solids over time, over night for example unless they are extreemly fine colloidal sized particles. The only solid metals you might find in the circulating oil itself would likely be in 0.1 to 0.01 micron range and smaller as the courser particles should settle out in the sludge on the bottom of the pan or filter out in the oil filter.

The ZDDP is not there to stop acid byproduct corrosion, but to stop metal on metal wear by litteraly plating out a zinc phosphate molecule on areas that are getting too hot, and therefore are getting active enough (chemically) to react with the ZDDP molecule, so it attaches to high wear areas, allows more oil to stay in that hot spot as the oil attaches to the plated out ZDDP, and then eventually the zinc phosphate wears off that spot instead of base metal.

Therefore, I would not expect the metal loss from a lack of ZDDP to show up in UOA analysis. The UOA analysis should show up acid/water metal corosion (disolved metals) damage caused by depleted acid neutralizer additives in the oil!

 

[bewilderedbeast]

So where would expect to see the metal, in the filter, the bottom of the pan?

 

[geeaea]

Sequence IIIG Test Equipment and Procedure

The Sequence IIIG test uses a 1996/1997 231 CID (3,800 cc) Series II General Motors V-6 fuel-injected gasoline engine.


Using unleaded gasoline, the engine runs a 10-minute initial oil-leveling procedure followed by a 15-minute slow ramp up to speed and load conditions. The engine then operates at 125 bhp, 3,600 rpm, and 150 °C oil temperature for 100 hours, interrupted at 20-hour intervals for oil level checks.

I disagree with your take on UOA. Although some of it appears on target in nomenclature and concept, it's not proven out in practice. I can count the 4.0's that have wiped cams without taking my shoes off. The biggest wear item, it appears, is the timing chain which accounts for some of the Fe shedding that the engine is known for.

Most current UOA analysis techniques read to the 5um range.


ZDDP isn't the only AW agent out there.

 

[Ecomike]

Sequence IIIG Test Equipment and Procedure

The Sequence IIIG test uses a 1996/1997 231 CID (3,800 cc) Series II General Motors V-6 fuel-injected gasoline engine.


Using unleaded gasoline, the engine runs a 10-minute initial oil-leveling procedure followed by a 15-minute slow ramp up to speed and load conditions. The engine then operates at 125 bhp, 3,600 rpm, and 150 °C oil temperature for 100 hours, interrupted at 20-hour intervals for oil level checks.

I disagree with your take on UOA. Although some of it appears on target in nomenclature and concept, it's not proven out in practice. I can count the 4.0's that have wiped cams without taking my shoes off. The biggest wear item, it appears, is the timing chain which accounts for some of the Fe shedding that the engine is known for.

Most current UOA analysis techniques read to the 5um range.

Seems there is more than one sequence / test, each with a specific purpose. The one I was refering to is at 1,500 rpm and I quote "The Sequence IVA test evaluates a lubricant’s performance in preventing camshaft lobe wear in an overhead camshaft engine."
Also:

"The Sequence IVA test fixture is a KA24E Nissan 1994 2.4-liter, water-cooled, fuel-injected engine, 4-cylinder in-line, overhead camshaft with two intake valves, and one exhaust valve per cylinder.
The test is a 100-hour test of 100 hourly cycles. Each cycle consists of 2 operating modes or stages. Unleaded “Haltermann KA24E Green” fuel is used.


STAGE 1
STAGE 2

Time, minutes​

50
10

Engine Speed, rpm​

800 1,500

Engine Torque, N-m​

25 25

Oil Cylinder Head Temp, °C​

49 59

Coolant Temp, °C​

50 55
At the end of the test, each of the 12 cam lobes is measured at 7 locations using a surface profilometer, which measures maximum depth of wear. Measurements of wear on all 7 positions of each lobe are added, then all 12 lobe measurements are averaged for the wear result. This result is the primary evaluation for the test."

Please note here they are not depending on A UOA test only, but are also using a surface profilometer to measure wear depth on the cam lobes. Also they are not heating the oil to 150 C in this test, in fact the coolant is only 55 C in the hotest part of the test.

"At 100 hours, the used oil is evaluated for:

• Kinematic viscosity
• Fuel dilution
• Wear metals iron (Fe), and copper (Cu)

Sequence IVA Pass/Fail Criteria

Pass limit includes average cam wear of 120 μm maximum for API SL and ILSAC GF-3 and 90 μm maximum for API SM and ILSAC GF-4."

http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/GasTests/IVAtest/default.htm

Now I will agree the wear limit for the failure of the sequence IVA test is lower in the SM than the SL, but that does not mean the better quality SL spec oils will wear that much. It is once again a different engine they are testing which I have been lead to believe by many others has much lower presure springs and less cam lobe/lifter pressure than the Jeep 4.0 engines which were designed back in 1987.

You lost me with your last comment " Most current UOA analysis techniques read to the 5um range."

Are you refering to metal particle size or concentration or something else?

As far as I know they are using acid digestion (HCL & HNO3) to make a homogenous sample out of the oil & metal particle mix (oil sample) before doing a total metals analysis for each metal they test for, using something like an ICP AA or flame absorption AA unit, or one of the newer, fancier AAs that have come out in the last few years. What I was saying is most of the bulk metal worn off of the engine when something bad happens, like no oil at start up for a few seconds, ends up in the oil filter or sludge at the bottom of the oil pan and therefore will never show up in an oil sample and therefore not show up in the oil sample test, UOA.

I suspect the widespread OEM 4.0 Jeep cam/ lifter failures have not happened yet, because all the oils until just recently had enough ZDDP in them. That is why you can "count the failures with out taking your shoes off" as you put it.

Some of the newer SM formulations with ZDDP substitutes may eventually prove out to OK for our engines, but who wants to take that chance? It's just as likely that some of the new SM oil formulas will not do the job!

Oh and thanks for the post on SWRI and the test procedure, I had been looking for some of the more detailed stuff they have on their web site, but had not been able to find it "freely" posted. Nice link.

 

[geeaea]

You lost me with your last comment " Most current UOA analysis techniques read to the 5um range."

Are you refering to metal particle size or concentration or something else?

Most of your analytical machinery read up to 5um particles.


Perhaps you may be aware of DalessII, who did a filter test on JU. He was some banging researcher and got some lab to run tests for him free. His numbers were through the roof as far as wear metals. That lab "digested" the samples with acid and reduced everything (large particles small particles) to the true particle size for the test.

Most UOA labs can't/don't do that (none that I know of). The spectrography reads particles of 5um or lower. A "normal" UOA under digested criteria would have wear metals in the thousands in terms of ppm and would be totally variable based on the level of filtration. If you've ever seen particle counts on oil samples, you can see how a PureOne is going to give you a lower particle count than the standard lowball Fram. If you have bypass filtration, then you attenuate the larger particles even more. A sample drawn from such an engine, being digested, would show substantially less ppm (although still very high by UOA standards).

We used AA in my former job as an industrial waste treatment specialist. We would test for various elements. If we wanted "free" copper ..it was a straight sample. If we wanted "total" copper, it was digested. Throw a penny in my effluent going to the river.....no problem for the DEP/EPA. Digest that penny and I was committing a major environmental violation.


..but beyond all this, the oil blenders are taking care of those who still have flat tappet cams ..as much of a vanishing breed as we are. Right now I'm testing SM 5w-20 Pennzoil Platinum in my wife's 4.0. Now I've got a high volume aftermarket oil pump and have Mopar roller rockers ..but my lifters are still OEM as is the cam. My wear indicators are not out of line with my 2.5 4 banger using Rottella T synth 5w-40 which is an SL. Our spring rates are 200lbf (force) max ...not 200 lbs on the valve seats. Those playing hotrod with their SBC's out of the Jeg's catalog have to worry about breaking in and maintaining their aggressive cams.

Keep in mind that many of the advances in contemporary oils is in terms of deposit control. A well cared for engine, even to OEM recommendations, typically will have very low levels of deposits. Oils now have tremendous ability to keep stuff in suspension. Advances in base stock technology have radically reduced the need for viscosity index improvers that used to shear routinely in service. The reason that you see so many manufacturers going to 20 weight oils is because most of their engines were already running on them after 1500 miles or so due to polymer shearing. The trick was bringing a 5w-20 oil to market. Ford took care of that by seeking CAFE certification using them.

In the past, favorable Fe levels were only attainable with higher visc oils in this engine. Over the past few years many 30 weights have been shown to contain this inherent characteristic. This points to modern additive combinations being able to trump visc in many instances. I'd say that fuel dilution, due to injector imbalance, is more responsible for higher Fe levels in this engine than is due to the oil's anti-wear properties.