Ultimate Motor Oil Thread or Why we hate CJ4/SM oils

[Nick Triesch]

OK, but why would the most famous sports car company in the world say that it is the best oil for our cars? (Mobil 1) New and old? They want their cars to run great and not break down. They race their cars. Just does not add up when folks say they would not use Moble 1 in their lawnmower when Porsche says that it is the best oil for their cars. Cars that come filled with Mobil 1...Corvette, AMG, SLR, Porsche. There must be a reason.

[Omegablueray]

Parts Heaven in the Bay Area like to suggest Kendall High Performance 20W50 and that's what I use. with the addition of some swepco oil additive.

Ray
________
85' Carrera

[69-912-swt]

I picked up a case of Brad Penn 15-40 last week in Orlando at a Speed Shop for $6.50 a quart.

[GaryR]

Originally Posted by Nick Triesch

Just does not add up when folks say they would not use Moble 1 in their lawnmower when Porsche says that it is the best oil for their cars.

I use Mobil One in my lawnmower AND my big-ass leafblower! Use M1 V-Twin in my race car too!

[brads911sc]

Just go you your local FLAPS and buy a case of VR1 20w50 and call it a day. Less than $5 a qt.

[HarryD]

Originally Posted by Nick Triesch

OK, but why would the most famous sports car company in the world say that it is the best oil for our cars? (Mobil 1) New and old? They want their cars to run great and not break down. They race their cars. Just does not add up when folks say they would not use Moble 1 in their lawnmower when Porsche says that it is the best oil for their cars. Cars that come filled with Mobil 1...Corvette, AMG, SLR, Porsche. There must be a reason.

Nick,

Actually, this kind of puzzles me as well.

First, let me say that I am not a lubrication engineer just a guy who reads a lot.

Why is ZDDP used:

The issue with Mobil 1 (and all newer SL, SM, and SN oils) and older cars has to do with the extreme wear on parts that see high metal to metal pressure. In older cars with flat tappets (such as our cars) this is where the rocker meets the camshaft. At this point there is a tremendous amount of pressure (SAE documented this many years ago) and most lubricants do not stay there but "ooze" away.

It was found that ZDDP (which provides zinc [Zn] and phosphorus [P]) binds with these surfaces and provides a temporary wear surface that absorbs this high pressure wearing force and protects the underlying metal by allowing itself to be worn away. The coating is rapidly renewed when the pressure is removed. When SAE did their studies they found you needed about 1000-1200 ppm of Zn and P to provide the necessary protection.

Is there an alternative to flat tappets?

Yes, roller tappets. If car makers use the more expensive roller tappets, this pressure goes down significantly and high levels of ZDDP are no longer needed to protect these engine parts. Since 1996, most cars have roller tappets since they help improve gas mileage and car makers want to get every last 0.1 mpg they can to meet CAFE standards.

Why does ZDDP level matter?

The P and, to a lesser extent, the Zn in ZDDP can poison a catalytic converter. This means that any ZDDP that gets into the exhaust will reduce the ability of the converter to do its job. Ultimately, the converter will stop working entirely.

US EPA requires car maker to warranty the vehicle emission system against failures. For older cars this warranty had to be good for 100,000 miles (I may have exact number wrong but it is something like that). If a part fails during this period, the car maker needs to replace it for free.

More recently, EPA has increased the warranty period to 150,000 miles. Since the car maker does not want to do any pedictable warranty repairs, and most cars since 1996 have roller tappets, reducing ZDDP will significantly reduce the risk of a warranty repair.

As a result of these changes, SAE agreed to lower the minimum levels of ZDDP in most oils to get the certification. One exception to the lower ZDDP are the 20W-50 oils do not need to meet this lower level to get the current certification. However, the current standards do not require the oil maker to use the higher levels and they only need to meet the minimum (lower) standard to get the certification.

Some oil makers know that the older car owners use these heavier oils, and produce an oil with higher levels of ZDDP.

Why not Mobil 1?

Mobil 1 is a very good oil and when it's formulation is correct, it is most excellent (as are most quality synthetic oils). For newer cars that have roller tappets, I see no reason why anyone object to using this product. This is why you see many car makers recommend the product for their newer vehicles.

What about Porsche recommendations?

All flat six engines from 1965 to (at least) 1989 have the exact same valve train design (i.e. flat tappets). When the Porsche classic department rebuilt the 911T for the PCA raffle, they filled it with Castrol Classic (a pre-SL formulation oil) NOT Mobil 1. One would think that they should know what is needed to ensure a long service life.

Porsche says any engine after 1984 does not need higher levels of ZDDP.

This does not square with the facts above. If they said after 1989, they may be correct.

Something is amiss.

[Nick Triesch]

Thank you Harry. It could be a goof on Mr Slauson's part. Or maybe People like Mr Slauson are so involved with the newer Porsche cars that they are just brushing our old P cars aside. At any rate, there are too many other car forums Dodge, Mopar, Chevy, Ford that agree with you. Thank you for all of the info. I'll stick to the VR-1 that I have been using. Nick

[GaryR]

Originally Posted by HarryD

Today, I finally got around to looking at my October 2011 Panorama. In the Tech Q&A section there was a question on what oil for my boxster. In the reply by Slauson, he states: "The recommened oil is Mobil 1 in a ll Porsche cars produced from 1984 and up.The two approved oils are 0W/40 and 5W/40. The oils with claimed higher ZDDP levles are not recommended, as they are a mix of standard and synthetic. These also tend to have higher viscosities. ... While ZDDP was first introduced in the '50's for camshaft to flat tappet design, it has been surpassed in general by synthetic oils..."

I guess all those engine builders who reported flat cams must be wrong

Any thoughts from the resident experts?

I also wonder what Ed Mayo and Chris Powell (the Panorama Tech Committee experts for 914's and 1965 to 1994 911's) have to say on the topic.

Since I have a 1973, I will continue to use Brad Penn and enjoy my ride.

Scott Slauson has for forgot more in the last 5 minutes than you or I will ever know about Porsche engines and what goes on inside of them. He is a Porsche Master mechanic, owner of Softronic, and genuine straight shooter. If he says A+A=X then as far as i'm concerned A+A=X... just like everything in this thread, believe it or not.

[HarryD]

Originally Posted by GaryR

Scott Slauson has for forgot more in the last 5 minutes than you or I will ever know about Porsche engines and what goes on inside of them. He is a Porsche Master mechanic, owner of Softronic, and genuine straight shooter.

Thanks for Mr Slauson's resume. It still makes me wonder why the break at 1984 (SC to Carrera) instead of when the 964's or 993's were introduced as those engines did have significant changes to their valve trains.

If he says A+A=X then as far as i'm concerned A+A=X... just like everything in this thread, believe it or not.

I think that is true of all of the PCA tech reps and I typically follow their recommendations as they certainly did not get to where they are by being dumb.

Perhaps I should write him and ask.

[mystro]

This oil thread is so funny. Micro anazizing oil to the extreme. I would bet your own blood work isn't given this much thought. I ran a 85 Carrera for 11 years of perfect health without any oil leaks. I cracked open a case of 10w-40 every 8k miles. It's not a complicated motor and it holds 12 quarts of the stuff.
I am running synthetic now in my 88 Carrera, only because its a step up from dyno and wasn't around with my earlier 911's.

[1990C4S]

Originally Posted by mystro

This oil thread is so funny. Micro anazizing oil to the extreme. I would bet your own blood work isn't given this much thought. I ran a 85 Carrera for 11 years of perfect health without any oil leaks. I cracked open a case of 10w-40 every 8k miles. It's not a complicated motor and it holds 12 quarts of the stuff.
I am running synthetic now in my 88 Carrera, only because its a step up from dyno and wasn't around with my earlier 911's.

a) I give my blood less thought because it it less important than the lubricant I add to my Porsche.

b) Lots of people run crappy oil in their car. But claiming that the absence of failures in a single car disproves the benefits of superior oils is illogical.

c) Complicated or uncomplicated, your engine has rotating and reciprocating parts, therefore lubrication is important. At least to some people.

[mystro]

Define "crappy oil"? Isn't crappy oil hard to find these days? Most name brand oils with the proper weight will fit the recomended requirements by Porsche.

[brads911sc]

I think that with your health, you can live until your 70 and eat lots of red meat, fried foods, smoke, drink lots of wiskey... or you can live until your 85 and eat less of above, more chicken, fish, dont smoke, maybe a glass of red and exercise... and youll probably feel better the entire time.
the reason we care is that a rebuild for an engine dead at 70 vs 85, is 15k... and why throw money down the drain.
You can get VR1, GT1 at just about any local FLAPS for less than $5... why would you pay $4 for Walmart brand oil? It makes no sense. You can buy Brad Penn Develiered for $6 from Amazon. Why would you pay $4 for walmart branded? You are saving $20 max once a year.
I have not drank the koolaide and am not obsessed. But 1x a year when Autozone is selling VR1 for $3 a qt i buy a few cases. Why not? We know it has the right amount of ZDDP and at that point its actually less than Walmart branded oil.
There is a reason that premium oil like Valvoline will guarantee your engine for 300k miles if you document that you use their oil... It really is superior... but even if its not.. its the same price.

If you can have Filet Minon for the same price as Flank Steak... your gonna choose the Flank?

To each his own.

Originally Posted by mystro

Define "crappy oil"? Isn't crappy oil hard to find these days? Most name brand oils with the proper weight will fit the recomended requirements by Porsche.

[mystro]

Agreed. My example of name brand oil is like , Vavoline, Kendol, Castrol, Mobile, Quaker State,etc... A lot of new owners will read threads like this and it might scare or confuses them. I am suggesting any name brand oil as mentioned with the correct weight will be fine. Some of my old timer PCA buddies that own several old Porsches have never used anything than regular old 10w-40 for 30 years on their cars without issue. Most have never even heard of Brad Penn and we live in Pa. I would say the most popular oil in our club is Mobile 1 with Castrol a close second. I myself, believe Royal Purple is the superior oil.

[RWebb]

I suggest you read thru this thread (I know it is long) for why flat tappet engines now need a specialty oil with adequate ZDDP levels, something that has changed recently.

[richardlw]

Basically a good summary Harry, with one exception

As a result of these changes, SAE agreed to lower the minimum levels of ZDDP in most oils to get the certification. One exception to the lower ZDDP are the 20W-50 oils do not need to meet this lower level to get the current certification. However, the current standards do not require the oil maker to use the higher levels and they only need to meet the minimum (lower) standard to get the certification.

The viscosity has nothing do do with the API ratings or directly with the Phosphorous content. Anything over 10W-30 cannot get ILSAC approval, so 15W-40, 20W-50, etc. are not ILSAC rated

[ant7]

I have read this thread with great interest and have refrained from offering my two pence worth untill now.
I was and still am of the assumption that the main issue as far as oil and engine wear is concerned relates mainly to the breakdown strength of the oil skin itself.
As far as i am aware the additives were put in older types of mineral oils to compensate for the lack of skin strength at severe points of pressure, ie, bearings and tappet to cam contact etc at extreme engine speeds and temperatures.
IMHO, Modern Synthetic oils have much better protection propeties for our engines ie, higher skin strength etc due to its molecular structure, so do we still need these extra additives ???
Also, Synthetic oils break down slower so engines stay cleaner, longer, hence protection is extended.
I have my flame suite on ready!
Anthony...

[mystro]

I agree.... There is so much speculation in this thread that is now taken as fact. Just cause someone is passionate about a particular subject doesn't mean they are correct. I have read the entire thread and still it looks like there is a major influence to sell a particular brand of oil.
I am active in a particular air cooled motorcycle forum for a long time and have read similar claims years ago when synthetic oil came on the scene. Now synthetic oil is the norm and the arguments against are rarely seen.

I guess my point is why wouldn't anyone use full synthetic oil. It's clearly superior over dyno or partial synthetic oil at this point of time.
If you have to have those particular additives i would recommend these two. Both are 100 percent synthetic and both fortified with a high level of zinc/phosphorus


Or



Royal Purple HPS Series motor oil is specifically formulated to maximize performance and meet the demands of high performance and modified engines. It is fortified with a high level of zinc/phosphorus anti-wear additive and Royal Purple’s proprietary SynerlecŪ additive technology. This unique blend enables HPS to outperform leading synthetics and conventional lubricants.

Check out the test video..
http://royalpurple.com/motor-oil-hps.html

Originally Posted by ant7

I have read this thread with great interest and have refrained from offering my two pence worth untill now.
I was and still am of the assumption that the main issue as far as oil and engine wear is concerned relates mainly to the breakdown strength of the oil skin itself.
As far as i am aware the additives were put in older types of mineral oils to compensate for the lack of skin strength at severe points of pressure, ie, bearings and tappet to cam contact etc at extreme engine speeds and temperatures.
IMHO, Modern Synthetic oils have much better protection propeties for our engines ie, higher skin strength etc due to its molecular structure, so do we still need these extra additives ???
Also, Synthetic oils break down slower so engines stay cleaner, longer, hence protection is extended.
I have my flame suite on ready!
Anthony...

[HarryD]

Originally Posted by richardlw

Basically a good summary Harry, with one exception


The viscosity has nothing do do with the API ratings or directly with the Phosphorous content. Anything over 10W-30 cannot get ILSAC approval, so 15W-40, 20W-50, etc. are not ILSAC rated

Richard,

Thanks for the clarification. I struggled with how to phrase that section. The point I am trying to make is that the heavier oils (ones over 10W-30) can have a SL/SM/SN certification stamp but also have the higher ZDDP Content that some of think is still needed.

Originally Posted by mystro

I agree.... There is so much speculation in this thread that is now taken as fact. Just cause someone is passionate about a particular subject doesn't mean they are correct. I have read the entire thread and still it looks like there is a major influence to sell a particular brand of oil.

mystro:

Some may be trying to sell a particular oil but others, to my best knowledge are not. I sell nothing, so I have no dog I this fight, just my (mis)informed opinion. Anyway, that is a decision for each of us to make.

I hear what you are saying about the synthetics and while it is true tha tthe lubricating film is better and the oils break down much slower, I do know that the synthetic oils prior to API SL had high levels of ZDDP and some continue in this vein. This, in my mind, is telling me that someone decided that ZDDP is still needed for highly stressed areas.

BTW, honest disagreement is never a flame war in my book.

[Reiver]

Oil threads are like political/religious discussions...lots of 'passion'.
The whole oil investigation thing began some years ago when flat tappet engine builders started destroying cams and tappets on break in.
Actually they started looking at the metalurgy suspecting someone was importing cheap steel or not hardening surfaces properly. This was a very hot topic on Hot Rod threads, SBC's, Large block radical cam motors.
Then it was discovered that un announced, oil companies had changed the make up of oil to stop plugging up/destroying expensive catalytic converters (ZDDP)...this was a non issue for modern roller tappet motors as they don't get smacked by the cam in the same manner.
The ZDDP, or lack of 1200 ppm and higher, was the additive protecting the cam lobes and tappet surfaces.
When oil with higher ZDDP was again used flat tappet rebuilds were no longer having cams/tappets destroyed.
It is not really a question of passion, it is a real issue that took awhile to figure out.
Once a motor is broken in (surfaces mated) using a modern low ZDDP oil will work, you will not have catasrophic failure but you will have accelerated wear.
Porsches, at least the earlier air cooled ones, have flat tappets and they will run fine (if broken in) on whatever oil you use but you will prematurly wear your valve train.
You need a good ZDDP oil if you want to maintain for the long haul.