Madduc
Enthusiast
Snipe...I think we all know what you have to offer.
Tom,X-Metal,Greg Good, Thank you all for your wealth of info!!
Tom,X-Metal,Greg Good, Thank you all for your wealth of info!!
Gentlemen, its unfortunate that this thread has to degrade away from the technical information many have been benefiting from in this thread. Please refrain from the insults especially if you don't have anything pertinent to add to this thread. Consider this a warning.
Thanks.
Not closed yet. Tom: Browsing through my Eastwood catalog today and found the following product from them: ZddPlus - ZDDP Oil Additive for Classic Cars
These guys seem to be concentrating on older, non-roller model lifter. Interesting. Just thought I'd post this since I never heard of ZDDP until studying under Tom here for the last few years.
Info:
"After 70+ years, the EPA mandated that all domestic oil producers remove ZDDP (Zinc Dialkyl Dithio Phosphate) from all conventional and synthetic motor oil. If your engine was designed before 1989 the non-roller lifters require ZDDP to avoid premature deterioration. ZDDP also alters bearing and journal surface characteristics to prevent metal to metal contact. Under extreme conditions like a high performance motor, ZDDP reduces the tendency of parts to scuff or gall under heavy loads. Simply add ZDDP-Plus to every 4-5 quart oil change and your motor will be protected from metal to metal contact. Add one 4 ounce bottle to a 4-5 quart oil change modifier to eliminate and metal-to-metal contact ."
FAQ:
Can it be used in conventional and synthetic oils? YES.
Will too much hurt the motor? No, do not exceed 8 oz, 2 bottles.
Can I use it in any motor? NO, 1989 and older.
Will it work in diesel? NO, it will have no effect in a diesel motor
Gentlemen, its unfortunate that this thread has to degrade away from the technical information many have been benefiting from in this thread. Please refrain from the insults especially if you don't have anything pertinent to add to this thread. Consider this a warning.
Thanks.
I'm not sure if their engines require 2800-3000ppm to live, but they have the attitude that there is no such as an oil that lubricates too well, so they tend to push limits on the AW package level. The way I understand it......and I'd be happy to hear your opinion on this.....is that some of the ZDDP is "used up" during the race, and the effective ZDDP level is lower at the finish of the race than at the start.
This particular team claims that their engines make the same power at the end of a 500 mile race as they did when fresh on the dyno, and they attribute a lot of that to the oil.
Salt to taste.
Gentlemen, its unfortunate that this thread has to degrade away from the technical information many have been benefiting from in this thread. Please refrain from the insults especially if you don't have anything pertinent to add to this thread. Consider this a warning.
Thanks.
That is absolutely true that it gets used up. Plus, ZDDP gets used up not just by being the primary anti-wear additive, but it is also an anti-oxidant. So if the oil runs very hot, to prevent it from turning stinky and dark, the ZDDP interferes with that chemical degradation. You'll get that sulfur smell again.
I think the thinking (I speek English well, huh?) that more is better is not 100% right. I believe (intuition) that as long as there is "some" that is effective, you have enough. Then it becomes more a matter of how long a time it lasts. (If you want to use new, low ZDDP oils, do not risk overextending your oil drain interval.)
The risk with overtreating in a race engine is getting combustion chamber deposits that cause detonation. NASCAR good 'ol boys used to try aircraft engine oils because they had no organo-metallic additives, which helped control deposits when they were running as high a compression ratio as they could build. F1 engines are sensitive to fuel and oil related combustion chamber deposits because it only takes a little bit to upset the swirl and tumble they try to build into the process so the burn is complete at the ultra-high RPM. I've heard they can lose up to 10HP (out of 750-800) in their 18,000 RPM engines from this.
I wasn't saying *more is better*, but that one team wants enough AW package to start with so it still works at the end of the race.
The oil control on these engines is superb. You can pull the headers off and it is dry as a popcorn fart. They have ring seal down to a science. Normally the top ring seal is good enough so that on the dyno during a pull 2 cfm is all the blowby you get. A little bit is necessary to make the oil ring work anyway.
Tom or Greg, where would any of these oils be used? Such "strange" weights?
Your opinions of them?
Thanks
Q-Racing 17.5W35QT - Q-Racing Synthetic Oil
Q-Racing 0W5QT - Q-Racing Synthetic Oil
For those who need "more".
Q-Racing 0W5PL - Q-Racing Synthetic Oil
The ZDDP level is high, the detergent is present, but at a lower level. The patent indicates a mixture of PAO and ester base oils and has other comments about minimal dispersants. My takeaway is that it is formulated to be a robust "racing" oil but only for short intervals. You cannot tell from just the oil analysis how long a drain interval; just from a wild, wild, wild guess I would say half the normal length. But at least it is not zero detergent and zero dispersant.
[/FONT]
Mobil1 Extended Performance
Group III=highly refined mineral oils that technically match "synthetic" base oils and are marketed as "synthetics."
Group IV= polyalpha olefins, the original and classic synthetic base oil
Group V= all others, which includes the large family of esters
Less expensive synthetics will be using Group III. Mobil has historically used Group IV, although I hear now in not all their M1 products? Motul uses a large percentage of Group V and some oils will use small amounts of Group V blended with Group IV.
Exotic and expensive base oils like esters can claim they are more attracted to metal surfaces and therefore provide a form of friction or wear benefit that other base oils don't. In the real world this is hard to quantify because to be accurate, the "test" engine has to have been in a situation where the danger was imminent, the situation has to be repeated with different base oils, and the situation has to have a better result with the ester vs. the other oils. I am sure that someone will say their engine survived something with esters and failed with others... hopefully if the engine failed there were many changes made to avoid the problem, not just an oil change.
Motul uses a synthetic ester to a large percentage vs. the typical Group III or polyalphaolefin base oils as in more common synthetic formulations. Esters are polar and so have an affinity for metal surfaces. Therefore they exhibit somewhat better boundary lubrication performance, although I would describe that as more and more insurance against catastrophe, not a horsepower gain.
When we started tracking the SRT Vipers; there was a big problem with oil pressure loss in corners.
We were having engines fail from oil starvation. A fix was in the works, but in the meantime we used a racing oil (Motul 15w-50). This oil somehow protected the motors for short periods without oil pressure (An additive). I have used this oil in race engines ever since.
What makes this oil work so well? I have noticed that oil temperatures are lower and engines tend to make less mechanical noise when cold.
HISSSSS, I recently searched the forum for "Motul" since I am planning on running it this summer since i will be autoXing and Tracking![]()
From other Threads:
and from another:
also, this thread has some good info on Motul:
http://forums.viperclub.org/rt-10-g...aims-4x-better-protection-than-mobil-one.html
an excerpt:
(I Love the search function!, u should try it)