The date June 20, 2013 just above, is the date this Blog was first started, NOT the date of the information included. It is regularly updated with the latest information, as indicated by the date several paragraphs below.

NOTE: The motor oil wear protection test data included in this Blog, is from Engineering performance testing of many different motor oils, which shows how they compare relative to each other. The focus is on the motor oils themselves. Therefore, the resulting comparison data applies to ANY engine that uses the oils included here, no matter if the engine is used for racing, daily driving, grocery getting, watercraft, or any other activity

*****

I have no agenda here. I do not sell anything. I do not charge for viewing the Engineering Test Data found here in my Blog. I do not charge people for the oil tests I perform for them. I do not make even one penny off my Blog. I do not answer to a Board of Directors. I do not answer to Investors/Shareholders. I do not work for any Oil Company. I do not work for any aftermarket Additive Company. I do not accept sponsors. I do not accept Advertising (any Ads you come across on this Blog have nothing to do with me. They are put there by the Blog Service Provider, and I have no control over them). This allows me to be 100% UNBIASED and INDEPENDENT with no outside influence.

I operate this Blog in my spare time when I get the chance. I simply share my Engineering Test Data as a courtesy to other Gear Heads. I do not express an “opinion” about motor oil like most everyone else on the Internet does. I do not express a “theory” about motor oil like most everyone else on the Internet does. I merely post the FACTS that the Science of Physics and Chemistry proves to me. And my test data EXACTLY MATCHES real world experience. A number of examples are provided below in this Blog.

It does not matter to me how many minds I change. I do not have to convince anyone of anything. People are free to embrace my Engineering Test Data and make use of it for their own benefit, or they can ignore it and continue to only guess how motor oils truly perform. But, countless intelligent people all over the world have no trouble understanding the value of my breakthrough Test Data, that simply cannot be found anywhere else. So, I invite you to read through my entire Blog and decide for yourself, what you think of the Engineering Test Data included here.

*****

Before we get into motor oil tech, let’s briefly touch on a little background info. That way people will better understand who I am and where I’m coming from. Here are my credentials:

Mechanical Engineer

U.S. Patent Holder – For a mechanical device designed for Military Jet Aircraft. And two more Patents are pending, for breakthrough mechanical designs for both Military and Commercial aircraft.

Member SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers)

Member ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)

Lifelong Gear Head, Mechanic, Hotrodder, Drag Racer, and Engine Builder

I’m a working Professional Degreed Mechanical Engineer, and Mechanical Design Engineering is what I do for a living. A Mechanical Engineer is clearly the most qualified Engineer to test motor oil that was formulated by Chemical Engineers, for wear protection capability between mechanical components under load. But, as you will see below, the following write-up is not intended to be a chapter out of an Engineering textbook. And the intended audience is not other Engineers. There are no formulas, equations, charts or graphs. The intended audience includes Mechanics, Automotive Enthusiasts, Gear Heads, Hotrodders, Racers and Engine builders. So, it is written in normal everyday spoken language, rather than overly technical jargon. That way, it will be the easiest to follow and understand by the widest possible audience. And some key points will be “intentionally” reiterated from time to time as the information presented here progresses, to emphasize those points.

.

********************

.

** This Blog now has over 740,000 total “views” worldwide!! Approaching the incredible THREE QUARTERS OF A MILLION VIEWS milestone, clearly shows how popular this Blog has become all over the world. Intelligent people everywhere, understand the value of, and make good use of the FACTS about motor oil, that can only be found here. The test data here exactly matches real world experience, and a number of back-up examples are provided in the body of this Blog. The Engineering test data provided here, is generated by the Science of Physics and Chemistry that are involved in my testing. There is no opinion, no theory, no speculation, and no emotion involved in my Blog. Science is what provides the FACTS here, even if critics out there don’t like it. Science is the REAL DEAL, and it doesn’t care if people like it or not.

Those critics have tried to discredit my Engineering test data, but they have failed miserably, as you can see from the continual amazing growth and success of this Blog. They think they know more than what Science proves to us. Who do you think will win an argument against Science? Those critics are ignorant of the FACTS, and instead they make emotional outbursts, relying on false beliefs and opinion, to try and redirect people’s understanding about motor oil. But, all their failed efforts show just how wrong they are, and intelligent people simply ignore them. It is the critics’ loss, because they continue to believe and follow bad information, while the rest of us make use of, and benefit from, the FACTS. So, I have a question for those critics, “What have they ever written about motor oil that has been read nearly three quarters of a million times?”

.

This Blog’s view count typically increases by around 10,000 views per month. And occasionally, its view count on a single day, will surpass 1,000 views. The highest number of views on a single day took place on March 29, 2018 when 1,092 views were recorded. That replaced the earlier record from January 18, 2018 when 1,061 views were recorded. And on January 5, 2019, 1,048 views were recorded. Of course simply listing the number of views by itself, is not intended to indicate validation of the test data (validation is shown throughout the Blog). But, indicating the number of views does show that an enormous number of people worldwide recognize the value, understand the importance, and make use of the motor oil test data FACTS included here, that cannot be found anywhere else. And as a result, they are posting and sharing links to this Blog, all over the world.

.

!! THE INFO ON THIS BLOG WAS LAST UPDATED ON September 13, 2020 !!

.

• The view count above was updated. This Blog now has over 740,000 total “views” worldwide!! Approaching the incredible THREE QUARTERS OF A MILLION VIEWS milestone, clearly shows how popular this Blog has become all over the world. Intelligent people everywhere, understand the value of, and make good use of the FACTS about motor oil, that can only be found here. The test data here exactly matches real world experience, and a number of back-up examples are provided in the body of this Blog. The Engineering test data provided here, is generated by the Science of Physics and Chemistry that are involved in my testing. There is no opinion, no theory, no speculation, and no emotion involved in my Blog. Science is what provides the FACTS here.

• And previously on August 30th, 5W30 Tribodyn synthetic motor oil was added to the Wear Protection Ranking List. It currently ranks # 2 out of 240 motor oils tested so far.

.

.

*******************

.

NOTE: All oils used in the testing here, were purchased in the U.S.A., unless otherwise specified.

.

********************

.

HOW TO SEARCH ON THIS BLOG:

Press the F3 key, or press “ctrl F“. Type in what you are looking for, in the FIND window at the top, and it will show the number of matches found, at the top. It will highlight those matches in yellow, and will take you right to the first match.

.

*********************

.

A COMMENT ABOUT THE “Q & A” SECTION ABOVE:

In this Blog’s Q & A Section, people can contact me directly with their questions, and I will answer them as soon as I can. I have received and answered hundreds of questions.

I can see a view count of how many people read this Q & A section each day, which is often around one hundred people (however, the daily view count of the main body of this Blog itself, is many times higher than that). However, none of the daily view counts on this Blog, are visible to the general public.

And be aware that this Blog automatically blocks and deletes all nasty messages that contain certain key words. So, I cannot see what has been said in any nasty message. I can only see “how many” nasty messages were blocked and deleted.

So, if people want to contact me in the Q & A Section, they have to send normal decent questions or messages so that I can see them.

.

********************

.

QUICK REFERENCE INFO

Summary of engine types and basic motor oil recommendation:

– Plain bearing engines use high pressure oiling systems. These engines when well designed, do NOT require thick oil as long as they make sufficient HOT oil pressure with thinner oils. This recommendation is generally intended for Shop-Built or Home-Built Hot Rod and Racing engines, where the builders INCORRECTLY believe that they need to use thick motor oils. But, the fact is, those engines are MUCH better served with thinner motor oil. And it may require a high volume oil pump to achieve the proper balance between bearing clearances and HOT oil pressure. Thinner oil and a high volume oil pump is FAR SUPERIOR to thick oil and a standard volume oil pump. Modern factory engines already are designed for thinner oils, so those owners don’t need to do anything different from the viscosity those engines already call for.

– Ball bearing engines use low pressure oiling systems. And should use the viscosity recommended by the manufacturer. Thin oils may drop the already low oil pressure to an unacceptably low level.

– Water cooled engines are capable of controlling their oil temperatures under normal operating conditions, which can allow using thinner oils, if following the recommendations just above.

– Air cooled engines cannot control their oil temperature reliably, and should use an oil with a HOT viscosity rating of 50 or 60.

– All gasoline engines can use superior automotive gasoline engine oils, as long as an acceptable viscosity is used. And in the case of wet clutch motorcycles, as long as their clutches are in good condition.

– Diesel engines should use Diesel oil of the viscosity recommended by the manufacturer.

.

.

********************

.

SOCIAL MEDIA AND BOUNDARY LUBRICATION:

.

I should probably take a moment here to address an issue that some of you may have come across, and wondered about. A Social Media critic of this Blog, like all critics of this Blog that I’m aware of, is totally unqualified to be commenting about my Blog’s factual Engineering test data, which is determined by the Physics and Chemistry involved in the testing. However, this critic claims that “boundary lubrication” is all that matters, rather than my test data. For those not familiar with that, here is a definition:

.

“The regime known as “boundary lubrication” occurs when conventional hydrodynamic fluid film formulation due to fluid entrainment is insufficient to fully separate lubricated, rubbing surfaces. In such circumstances it is found that the surfaces often continue to be separated by a very thin protective film produced by adsorption or reaction of components of the lubricant on the solid surfaces. The precise nature and properties of boundary lubricating films have long been a subject of debate and research.”

.

This is the condition that is in effect just before the parts would seize, if that was not maintained. And this is where zinc or other extreme pressure anti-wear motor oil components would be in play. But, this critic is so laughably unaware, that he doesn’t even understand that my Engineering tests have absolutely, and automatically, always involved every oil’s boundary lubrication capability. Because boundary lubrication “IS” part of the motor oil testing I perform.

.

My testing determines each oil’s ultimate failure point, also called its maximum “film strength/load carrying capability/shear resistance value”, which takes place at the same time as the boundary lubrication reaches its limit. So, to put all this in simple terms, if you refer to my test results of each oil’s ultimate failure point, as the film strength limit, the load carrying capability limit, the shear resistance limit, or the boundary lubrication limit, they all effectively mean the same thing and represent the same psi value that I post in my Wear Protection Ranking List. And a debate about any practical difference between them, is just unnecessary silly semantics. But, this critic is so clueless, that he completely misses the point, that he is arguing “FOR” what my testing has been doing all along. He completely endorses my testing, while thinking he is arguing against it.

.

For the reasons just mentioned, I don’t bother talking about boundary lubrication itself, in this Blog. As I said above, this Blog is not intended to be a chapter out of an Engineering textbook. It is meant to provide useful information to the reader. So, what is truly important to us, is finding each oil’s actual ultimate failure point/maximum wear protection capability limit, which is precisely the information that my Engineering test data provides. That way, we know just how capable each oil is, which is what we compare. With that information, my Blog readers can make an informed buying decision, the next time they buy motor oil for their engine. Ask that critic what specific data he thinks he can provide, for you to take to the Auto Parts Store, and he won’t have an answer for you.

.

Another example of that critic having no idea what he is talking about, is his bogus claim that my test data could only apply to old school engines, such as traditional flat tappet engines, but not to new modern engines. He does not know that there are brand new, major brand name, modern state of the art engines, coming off the assembly line with dual overhead camshafts (DOHC), with lobes that push directly down on buckets which compress the valve springs. Not all brand new modern engines are fully roller type engines. So, those brand new engines, and old-school flat tappet engines, have the same exact type of cam lobe friction interface.

.

On top of that, he has no grasp of the statement, “Most engine wear takes place during cold start-up before oil flow reaches all the critical internal components”. This is an absolutely FACTUAL statement that I make from time to time. It definitely pertains to most all Hotrods and Race cars, that can often sit for weeks at a time, or even longer, no matter if the engine is OLD-SCHOOL or MODERN. Under that condition, most of the oil has drained off of critical internal engine components, and seeped out of oil passages.

That leaves those parts with only a questionable amount of an oil film remaining, to prevent wear during cold startup, while waiting for oil to start flowing again. And of course having an oil film from a highly ranked, excellent performing, low cold viscosity rated motor oil such as 0WXX or 5WXX, from my Wear Protection Ranking List, greatly helps to reduce wear during critical cold start-up conditions. And priming the engine with oil before firing it up, provides even better insurance against wear. Hotrodders and Racers are who this Blog was originally started for, and they still make up a huge portion of this Blogs readers. So, this is certainly worth repeating from time to time.

But, for daily drivers, there is little concern about cold start-up wear, because there is sufficient residual oil on critical components and in oil passages, from running the engine every day. And in addition to that, this critic doesn’t even know that once any engine is fired up and running with full oil flow, no matter if it is OLD-SCHOOL or MODERN, as long as it is run easy while being allowed to fully warm-up, which allows sufficient lubrication even with the reduced oil flow rate from the oil being cold and thick, there will be little to no wear taking place during that time. See my Tech Article, “23. Multi-viscosity motor oils are not exactly what some people think”, and “31. The Truth about Motor Oil Temperature and Wear Protection Capability”, for more details.

.

These are just a couple of examples showing that my test data does “in fact”, apply to both old-school and modern engines, no matter what that critic says. I invite you to compare my complete Blog to any nonsense he has spewed on Social Media. And then decide for yourself who is providing FACTUAL information, that you can actually make use of yourself, in any engine from mild to wild.

.

BOTTOM LINE:

My advice is, ignore any critics of my Blog, because they have always been wrong, and cannot be trusted. They are not Engineers, they don’t have Credentials, they don’t have in-depth real world experience with engines, and they have never done any testing themselves. So, they draw all kinds of incorrect conclusions and assumptions about motor oil, since they have no idea what they are doing. They read a few lame Internet articles, and they think they are experts. But, they are completely clueless that some technical information they read about motor oil, is so highly theoretical, that it isn’t even a factor in the real world. So, they don’t even know, what they don’t know.

If normal decent Blog readers have a legitimate question, they can ask me in the Q&A Section at the top of this Blog. And I’ll answer their question as soon as possible.

But, it is not my job to train critics how to be an arm-chair Engineer in a couple of paragraphs, when all they really want to do, is argue about everything. I don’t have time for that kind of nonsense. If critics cannot accept the information I share here, they are free to go back to just “guessing” how motor oils perform, and to drawing “incorrect” conclusions and assumptions about other technical aspects of motor oil. That will be their loss, not mine.

.

This Blog will provide you with the best, most complete, FACTUAL motor oil test data you will ever find anywhere. I challenge anyone, anywhere, to PROVE that my Engineering test data is wrong. Enough said. Now on with the Tech FACTS you came here for.

.

***************************

.

Here is a Testimonial that was sent to me in February 2019, from one of my Blog readers:

540 RAT,

About 14 months ago I picked your brain on some oil recommendations regarding a new hydraulic flat tappet cam for my small block Chevy. I promised I’d update you on my results. I used the 0W40 Mobil 1 European blend in my engine as recommended. I did the prelube of the engine etc as well as lubricated the new camshaft (Howard’s). I fired it up and never did the nonsensical 30 minutes of 2500 rpm to break the cam in, per your recommendation. I have 5000 miles on the motor and just tore it down to inspect it (I built a 383 to replace my small 327) and mic’d my cam lobes. Son of a b you were right! I was so nervous but never had a problem with the cam.

To be clear I had installed several cams in the past and was ignorant to the whole cam break in process. I grew up in a race shop and the engine builders there would put one together and throw it in a car and would go 200 laps at WOT. I never had a cam wiped and never was remotely concerned until seeing it online. Anyone reading this should consider using a high psi oil that 540 RAT tests and relax. To be fair, Howard’s parkerizes all cams and that’s supposed to help wear, but all cams prior to this cam were from Comp and Lunati and they were NOT parkerized.

Thanks for talking me off the ledge in 2017 lol. I needed some reassurance and you provided it. LISTEN TO THIS MAN!

Thanks again, M. P.

.

*******************

.

BRIEF TECH INTRO:

.

The absolute MOST important capability of any motor oil, is to PREVENT WEAR!!! And that capability is determined by its proprietary additive package formulation which includes the extreme pressure anti-wear components. Everything else a motor oil does, comes AFTER that. And everything else a motor oil does, is in “back-up support” of preventing wear. For example, preventing acid formation, ultimately prevents wear. Preventing deposit build-up, maintains oil flow and lubrication, preventing wear. Preventing sludge build-up, maintains oil flow and lubrication, preventing wear. Minimizing air bubbles/foam, keeps the oil mostly liquid oil which is required for proper lubrication, preventing wear, etc, etc. You get the idea.

Here are the two primary decisions you need to make regarding the motor oil you use in your engine, in their order of importance:

1. The NUMBER ONE most important decision is to select an oil from my Wear Protection Ranking List found below in the Blog, that provides the level of wear protection that you feel comfortable with for your particular engine. The higher the psi value, the better the wear protection. Racing engines and High Performance street engines that load their oil near its limit, especially traditional American flat tappet pushrod V-8 engines, are best protected with highly ranked oils. Ordinary low performance daily drivers that only lightly load their oil, can get by well enough with low ranked oils, if absolute maximum life out of the engine is not critical.

Regarding traditional American flat tappet pushrod V-8 engines specifically:

Stock or lightly modified versions of those engines are best protected by oils that provide 90,000 psi or higher film strength/load carrying capability/shear resistance.

Racing and High Performance street versions of those engines are best protected by oils that provide 100,000 psi or higher film strength/load carrying capability/shear resistance.

NOTE: There are synthetic oils on the market that perform very well, while other synthetics do not. There are conventional oils on the market that perform very well, while other conventional oils do not. My Wear Protection Ranking List shows you which oil is which.

2. The NUMBER TWO most important decision is to decide when to change the oil you are using, no matter what that oil may be. See Tech Article “25. Recommended Oil Change Interval – For Automobiles “AND” Motorcycles”, below in this Blog for all the details on that.

**********

Motor oil exists in “TWO” forms inside an engine, under which it needs to protect against wear. They are as follows:

1. “Liquid oil” which can be defined as oil thick enough to drip, run, pour or flow.

2. An “oil film” can be defined as a coating of oil too thin to drip, run, pour or flow.

An example of oil in “liquid” form, is in the rod and main bearing clearance, where the incompressible hydrodynamic liquid oil wedge is formed between the crankshaft journals and its bearing shells, as the oil is pulled in by the rotating crankshaft. Oil pressure does not keep the parts separated. Oil pressure serves only to supply oil to be pulled in between the parts.

The fact is, liquids cannot be compressed to allow metal to metal contact, so parts are kept separated and no wear or damage can take place. In liquid form, it does not matter what the oil’s viscosity is, what brand it is, how hot it is, nor how much it costs. Because in the incompressible liquid form, all motor oils provide the same unsurpassed wear protection.

A mere “film of oil”, is the last line of defense against metal to metal contact, and the subsequent wear and/or damage that can follow. An example of an oil film is between non-roller flat tappet lifters and cam lobes of traditional pushrod American V-8 engines, or in DOHC engines between the cam lobes and non-roller type followers they may use. But, it is most critical in pushrod engines which typically use large single intake and single exhaust valves with stiff valve springs, compared to DOHC engines which often use two smaller intake and two smaller exhaust valves with lighter and smaller valve springs. In these locations, no incompressible hydrodynamic liquid oil wedge can be formed because of the wide open parts configuration. And the oil present is simply pushed aside, leaving only a film of oil between the parts with a very thin, highly loaded “line contact” between the parts.

Since “all liquid oils” are incompressible and thus provide unsurpassed wear protection, there is nothing to test for comparisons between different oils in liquid form. My Engineering Tests evaluate the much more critical oil film strength/load carrying capability/shear resistance, which as mentioned above, is the last line of defense before metal to metal contact takes place.

No reliable comprehensive information had been available for this capability comparison, until I began my dynamic motor oil testing, under load, at a representative operating temperature. I perform those Engineering Wear Protection Tests to find out where the motor oil film strength, load carrying capability, shear resistance “limits” are for each individual motor oil. That’s what we compare. The higher the limit, given in PSI, the better the wear protection.

“Film strength, load carrying capability, shear resistance” performance is where motor oil wear protection capability VARIES WIDELY depending on a given oil’s proprietary formulation. And it is at the film strength level, where oils can be evaluated and compared, for those different wear protection capabilities. This is where good oils are separated from not so good oils.

Only dynamic wear testing under load, at a normal operating temperature, can reveal how the various motor oils truly compare regarding wear protection. So, that is precisely what I do to discover the facts. And that is why merely looking at an oil’s spec sheet is worthless. A spec sheet cannot show you an oil’s wear protection capability, because Engineering tests and real world experience have proven over and over again, that the zinc level does NOT matter. That is only a MYTH that has been repeated a million times until people just assume is true, which it is not. Only the psi value from my test data will actually show us how motor oils truly perform regarding wear protection.

My test data EXACTLY matches real world severe over-heating experience, real world Track experience, real world flat tappet break-in experience, and real world High Performance Street experience. Test data validation doesn’t get any better than this.

BOTTOM LINE:

THIS BLOG CONTAINS THE MOST COMPLETE, INDEPENDENT, UNBIASED, ACCURATE AND FACTUAL, BREAKTHROUGH MOTOR OIL WEAR PROTECTION CAPABILITY TEST DATA, THAT YOU WILL EVER FIND ANYWHERE. THE INFORMATION HERE IS PROVEN, AND TRUSTED WORLDWIDE. Many people have called it the “be-all, end-all” of motor oil information, which is absolutely true, because it is the real deal.

For all the motor oil comparison data, see my Wear Protection Ranking List below in this Blog.

But, there could be some confusion for people who do not actually read my entire Blog. My test data on wear protection is generally aimed at High Performance and Racing engines that are capable of pushing motor oils near their limits. So, knowing how capable various oils truly are, can be critical. It is of course also for people who simply want to know what oils will provide the best possible wear protection for their engines, even if they don’t technically push their motor oil near its limit.

However, for ordinary daily driver vehicles, the oil used is nowhere near as critical as it is for High Performance and Racing engines. So, a normal daily driver vehicle may operate just fine for the life of the engine on say a low performing 60,000 psi motor oil. But, a High Performance or Racing engine may require a high performing 90,000 psi or higher motor oil, to avoid wear and/or damage. It just depends on how much loading the engine puts on its motor oil.

NOTE: Read my Wear Protection Ranking List carefully regarding an oil you may be considering for your application. Because some Oil Companies make changes to their oil, making them worse than they were previously, apparently to maintain or increase profit margins. So, always look for the most recent test data on oils that have both older and newer data posted. In those cases, I always indicate which oils are older and no longer available. It may be that you can no longer safely use an oil that was just fine for your needs in the past.

And the better performing the oil, the higher the reserve wear protection capability, also called margin of safety, which means capability beyond what is actually required. If you have a problem at some point, say an engine component starts to fail, or the oil level gets low, or there is an overheating condition, or you increase the power level dramatically, etc, etc, then extra reserve wear protection capability could save your engine. So, people have to decide for themselves how much wear protection capability they feel comfortable with for any given engine build. And since you have to buy oil anyway, why not select a better performing motor oil while you are at it?

.

Additional motor oil technical info:

.

Oil is not the same temperature throughout a running engine, the highest oil temps will typically be found in the incompressible “liquid” oil wedge formed as the oil is pulled into the clearance of the rod and main bearings. That is because, the oil at those locations is being heavily loaded on the power stroke, while at the same time, being sheared. Oil at these locations can be 50* to 90* hotter than sump temperatures.

.

During the very brief time interval that oil is flowing through the rod and main bearings, most oils will momentarily reach and exceed their thermal breakdown points. And the cooler the oil starts out, the lower the max temp it reaches there. This is where oils with a higher onset of thermal breakdown point, offer some benefit. Because the less often an oil reaches its breakdown point, and the lower the max temp reached above that point, the longer its capability will remain near new oil level. This means that oils with higher onset of thermal breakdown points, can go longer between oil changes, with regard to thermal deterioration. However, oils with more modest thermal breakdown points can also be used without issue, as long as reasonable oil change intervals are followed, to stay ahead of any significant thermal deterioration.

.

The oil on the cylinder walls is not subjected to the burning combustion temperatures as some might think, because very nearly all oil has been scrapped off the cylinder walls by the oil rings, and is not present during combustion. If any significant amount of oil was still on the cylinder walls during combustion, the exhaust pipes would be blowing blue smoke.

.

When the piston is at TDC, the cylinder walls are coated with oil from all the oil spraying and flying around inside the crankcase. But, as the piston moves downward, the piston skirt scrapes off excess bulk oil, and the lower oil ring of a multi-piece oil ring, scrapes additional oil off the cylinder wall like a squeegee scraping water off a windshield. So, there is a layer of liquid oil between the piston skirt and the cylinder wall (its thickness depends on the piston to cylinder clearance), not just merely an oil film like you would see between a non-roller flat tappet lifter and its cam lobe. And any oil the lower oil ring doesn’t scrape off, the top oil ring of the multi-piece oil ring, will scrape off, directing it through the oil ring expander/spreader and through the oil holes in the piston.

.

Piston ring spring tension against the cylinder walls is NOT what seals the rings against combustion, like most people think. There is no possible way that a mere few pounds of ring spring tension alone, could keep the rings in proper contact with the cylinder walls during the high pressure of combustion. The fact is, rings are kept in contact with the cylinder walls during combustion primarily by the tremendous combustion pressure itself, which is typically well over 1,000 psi, depending on the particular engine. The rings’ spring tension does keep the rings in contact with the cylinder walls enough to direct the high combustion pressure through the ring side clearance above, and then on behind the rings’, to their inside diameter back clearance. And it is this force “behind the rings” that presses the rings out against the cylinder wall with enough force to seal the combustion pressure during the power stroke (some racing pistons have gas ports behind the rings just for this purpose). That is why proper ring side clearance and back clearance are very important, as is free ring movement in the pistons’ ring grooves. To ensure free ring movement and make sure that they don’t get gummed up and stuck in the piston ring groves, it is important to use quality fuel and to change the oil at reasonable intervals.

.

And remember, cylinder walls are in direct contact with the coolant on their outer surface. So, the cylinders are the most directly cooled parts of an engine, meaning the oil side of the cylinder walls are not anywhere near as hot as many people might think.

.

IDEAL OIL TEMPERATURE RANGE

.

An ideal oil sump temperature range is between 215*F and 250*F. If your sump temperature runs hotter than this range, you should add an oil cooler, or upgrade your oil cooler, if you already have one. This range is hot enough to quickly boil off the normal condensation that always forms during cold engine start-up, before that water dilutes the oil. And it is also hot enough to NOT promote the formation of sludge, like colder temperatures below the boiling point of water, can.

.

And that range is cool enough to do three things:

.

1. It is cool enough to keep the oil’s wear protection capability at the highest level achievable by that oil.

.

2. It is cool enough to provide critical cooling for engine components, which of course are directly oil cooled. Remember, engine components are only indirectly water cooled.

.

3. It is cool enough to keep most oils below their onset of thermal breakdown point.

.

But, motor oils do NOT stop working the instant they reach their onset of thermal breakdown point. However, it is not a good idea to run oil above its thermal breakdown point for extended periods of time. Because that will degrade its capability more and more as time/mileage goes on.

.

.

**************

.

In recent years there have been entirely too many wiped cam lobes and ruined lifter failures in traditional American flat tappet engines, even though a variety of well respected brand name parts were typically used. These failures involved people using various high zinc oils, various high zinc Break-In oils, various Diesel oils, and various oils with aftermarket zinc additives added to the oil. They believed that any high zinc oil concoction is all they needed for wear protection during flat tappet engine break-in and after break-in. But, all of those failures have proven over and over again, that their belief in high zinc was nothing more than a MYTH, just as my test data has shown.

.

A high level of zinc/phos is simply no guarantee of providing sufficient wear protection. And to make matters even worse, excessively high levels of zinc/phos can actually “cause” DAMAGE your engine, rather than “prevent” it. Motor Oil Industry testing has found that motor oils with more than 1,400 ppm ZDDP, INCREASED long-term wear. And it was also found that motor oils with more than 2,000 ppm ZDDP started attacking the grain boundaries in the iron, resulting in camshaft spalling (pitting and flaking). The ZDDP value is simply the average of the zinc and the phosphorus values, then rounded down to the nearest 100 ppm (parts per million).

.

From those failures where I was able to find out what specific oils were used, it turned out that those were oils I had already performed my Engineering Wear Protection Capability tests on. And all those oils had only provided poor wear protection capability, meaning that if they had looked at my test data before using those oils, they would have known in advance that their engines would be at significant risk of failure with those oils. And that is just what happened.

.

A number of people who have had those failures, and some had repeated failures, have contacted me, asking what they can do to prevent that failure in the future. I tell them to forget all that high zinc nonsense and look at my Wear Protection Ranking List. And to select any high ranking oil there, no matter how much zinc it has, because zinc quantity simply does NOT matter. The only thing that matters regarding wear protection, is the psi value each oil can produce in my testing. The higher the psi value, the better the wear protection. I recommend they use the SAME highly ranked oil for break-in and after break-in. It’s that simple.

.

WHEN PEOPLE HAVE TAKEN THAT ADVICE, NOT ONE PERSON HAS EVER COME BACK TO ME TO REPORT THAT MY RANKING LIST DID NOT WORK FOR THEM. Since my ranking list has worked in every case to prevent wiped flat tappet lobes and lifters, it can also work for you to provide the best possible wear protection for your engine. My test data is the real deal, it exactly matches real world experience, and it is the best and most complete motor oil comparison data you will ever find anywhere.

.

And for those people who have been able to use various high zinc oils without having trouble with their flat tappet engines, that only means that the oil they used had enough wear protection capability for the loads their engines saw at that time. It does not mean they were necessarily using a great oil. And it does not provide any information about how much reserve wear protection capability their oil provided, nor how their oil compares to other oils on the market.

.

But, there are some high zinc oils that do provide excellent wear protection. And you can see which ones they are, by looking at my ranking list below.

.

**********

.

LOOKING AT PETROLEUM QUALITY INSTITUTE OF AMERICA (PQIA) INFORMATION, OR SENDING OIL SAMPLES TO TYPICAL MOTOR OIL LABS LIKE “ALS TRIBOLOGY” OR “BLACKSTONE LABS” IS NOT SUFFICIENT

What many people don’t understand is, that looking at PQIA information, or sending oil samples in to a typical motor oil lab, does NOT tell us everything we need to know about how well a motor oil performs. Some people think that if they look at PQIA on-line, or get a lab printout of their motor oil, that they know everything they need to know. But, that is simply NOT true. Here’s why.

PQIA information might be interesting to look at, but it doesn’t really provide any truly significant or meaningful information beyond what the API certifications of “reputable brands”, already tells us. The wind-up is that API has already done all that for you by granting the appropriate certification to various oils. If an oil’s performance was far enough off to be a problem, it would not meet the requirements for the specific API certification it was being considered for. So, all the end user has to do is look at the bottle of a “reputable brand” for the certification the oil has, and to change the oil at reasonable intervals, which for most street driven vehicles is ideally 5,000 miles. Doing that will provide an engine with the protection it needs in terms of acid neutralization and deposit and/or sludge build-up prevention. But, looking at PQIA, will NOT give you any information at all, about how well a given motor oil can provide wear protection, which is THE most important thing any motor oil does.

Motor oil lab printouts will only provide information such as the amount of metals, the amount of contaminants, the amount of additive package components in the oil, and its viscosity rating in centistokes (cSt) at 100*C (212*F). And the cost for this test is usually around $30.00 US per sample sent in.

According to a Royal Purple Motor Oil Engineer I spoke with a few years ago, he said only people outside of the Motor Oil Industry, use the unprofessional terminology of calling new oil lab tests, virgin oil analysis (VOA), and used oil lab tests, used oil analysis (UOA). The VOA and UOA references are commonly used on Internet Forum discussions about motor oil, even though they are not legitimate names. Even so, in order for the most people to follow along, I’ll continue to use that wrong terminology for a moment here.

For a VOA, you will NOT get any information on absolutely THE most important thing any motor oil does for your engine, and that is PREVENT WEAR. Everything else a motor oil does for your engine, comes AFTER that. There is not one thing in that lab printout that will tell you how good that oil is at preventing wear. And looking at the zinc and phosphorus levels is completely worthless, because as you will see below, those levels DO NOT predict an oil’s wear protection capability, even though countless people have been brainwashed to believe it does. Therefore, you still have no idea if that oil is any good at performing job number one for your engine. So, you are left with guessing, believing Advertising hype, or Internet chatter, as to which oil you should choose for your engine. In other words, you wasted $30.00 for the lab test, plus the cost of shipping, and your time, all for nothing.

If you have a lab printout from when an oil was brand new, and then you get a UOA of that exact same oil, you can compare those two printouts to see how the oil has changed during that particular change interval. There is definitely some value to that, for indications of engine health, how much of the factory additive package has been depleted, etc. But, it still doesn’t provide any meaningful direct information about how that motor oil compares to other motor oils in terms of wear protection. And if you do see extra metal quantity in the used oil that might be of concern, it is too late, because you are looking at results after the fact. Wear and/or damage has already begun. That is like closing the barn door after the horse already got out. And you still wouldn’t know if the extra metal is because of a poor choice of motor oils or because of a mechanical problem.

So, you need something FAR BETTER than looking at PQIA info or motor oil lab printouts for selecting the best motor oil for your engine, if you are interested in the best possible wear protection for it.

—————

That something FAR BETTER, is the independent and unbiased Engineering testing I perform at a representative OPERATING OIL TEMPERATURE to establish motor oil wear protection capability.

Motor oils are derived from base oil stocks, which is a generic oil base that is modified with an additive package to produce a lubricant with the desired properties. A base stock oil with no additive package would perform quite poorly. Base oil stocks are classified by the API (American Petroleum Institute) and fall into one of the categories below:

.

• Group I and II – are conventional mineral oils derived from crude oil.

.

• Group III – is a highly refined conventional mineral oil made through a process called hydrocracking. This group of oil is allowed to be called a synthetic oil in North America.

.

• Group IV – are true synthetic oils, known as PAO (Polyalphaolefin).

.

• Group V – are synthetic base stocks other than PAO’s, which include esters and other compounds.

.

People on Internet discussions argue endlessly over the merits or lack thereof, of these oil Groups, to try and determine which oil type is best to use. But, they don’t even understand that the base oil does NOT determine an oil’s wear protection capability. An oil’s wear protection capability is determined by its proprietary additive package, which is what contains the extreme pressure anti-wear components. So, with my Engineering tests, you can bypass all that debate, and go directly to the results of how oils you find on Auto Parts Store shelves, actually perform when put to the test. My testing is a dynamic friction test under load, similar to how an engine dyno test is a dynamic HP/Torque test under load. Both tests show how their subjects truly perform in the real world, no matter what Brand names are involved, no matter what outrageous claims may have been made, and no matter what their spec sheets say.

The resulting breakthrough data used in the Wear Protection Ranking List is NOT my opinion, and it is NOT my theory. The data is the result of the Physics and Chemistry involved in the testing. I am only the messenger. The Science is what tells us how these oils perform. And no one can argue with Physics and Chemistry.

You can see my entire 240 motor oil “Wear Protection Ranking List”, which EXACTLY matches real world severe over-heating experience, real world Track experience, real world flat tappet break-in experience, and real world High Performance Street experience (test data validation doesn’t get any better than this), along with additional motor oil tech FACTS, that CANNOT be found anywhere else, by reading below.

.

**************

.

BLOG TABLE OF CONTENTS:

Section 1 – Motor Oil “Wear Protection” Ranking List – which is determined by each oil’s film strength/load carrying capability/shear resistance psi value, that results from being subjected to a dynamic friction test under load, at a representative operating temperature. The vast majority of the oils tested here, were tested just as they come, right out of the bottle. But, there are also some oils tested with aftermarket additives put in them. These additive tests were for informational purposes only, and are not generally recommended. Because aftermarket additives can ruin an oil’s carefully formulated original additive package, aside from what it may or may not do for its wear protection capability. It is always best to choose a good performing oil in the first place, that does not need any help.

Section 2 – Motor Oil Viscosity Selection

Section 3 – Motor Oil Thermal Breakdown Test Data

Section 4 – Motor Oil component quantity Lab Test results – includes the amount of zinc, phosphorus, detergent, acid neutralizer and more

Section 5 – Reserved for future Motor Oil Test Data

Section 6 – Detailed Motor Oil and Mechanical Tech Articles

NOTE: Some of the motor oil Articles were written before the most recently tested motor oils were added to the Wear Protection Ranking List in Section 1. The articles included are:

1. I-Beam vs H-Beam – which Connecting Rod is Best?

2. Rod Bolt Strength – what do we Really need?

3. Solid Roller Lifters – Bushings vs Needles, which is Best?

4. Camshaft Overlap vs LSA (Lobe Separation Angle)

5. Leak Down Test vs Compression Test, which is Best?

6. Can you really suck the Oil Pan dry?

7. Dynamic Compression Ratio (DCR) vs Static Compression Ratio (SCR)

8. 0W40 vs 5W30 vs 0W30

9. Aftermarket Zinc Additives – Do they Work?

10. Break-In Oils – Do we Really need them?

11. Can you always count on high zinc motor oil?

12. Diesel Oil – Is it the right choice for High Performance gasoline engines?

13. Do comparable zinc levels provide comparable wear protection?

14. Does Prolong Engine Treatment actually work?

15. Test Data on the newest Pennzoils made from Natural Gas

16. High Temp Motor Oil Wear Testing – Myth vs Reality

17. Do HTHS (High-Temperature/High-Shear) values provide any useful information about wear protection capability?

18. Engineering Test Data on High Mileage Motor Oils

19. Engine Dyno HP vs Chassis Dyno HP

20. Std Volume oil pumps vs High Volume oil pumps – Is there really a HP difference?

21. Points Ignition vs Electronic Ignition

22. How to choose your own Camshaft

23. Multi-viscosity motor oils are not exactly what some people think

24. Air conditioning isn’t just for cooling your vehicle

25. Recommended Oil Change Interval – For Automobiles “AND” Motorcycles, including Motor Oil Age Info

26. Failure Data from a Bushing type Solid Roller Lifter

27. Maximum Safe Redline

28. Eight 0W20 Oils Tested and Compared

29. Eliminating BMW M3/M5 Rod Bearing Failures

30. Five Lightweight Diesel Oils Tested and Compared

31. The Truth about Motor Oil Temperature and Wear Protection Capability

32. V-8 Head/Intake Alignment Procedure

33. Can Wet Clutch Motorcycles use “FAR SUPERIOR” Automotive Motor Oils?

34. How well do Traditional Heavy Duty Diesel oils perform, when they have the latest CK-4 certification?

35. PISTON TO CYLINDER CLEARANCE IS “NOT” WHAT MANY PEOPLE THINK IT IS

36. Is Motor Oil Viscosity Index (VI) Useful Information?

37. Air Cooled Engines – Oil Viscosity Recommendation

38. The meaning of API SN “PLUS”, and GM dexos1-“Gen 2”, AND Problems with “Direct Injection Only” Engines

39. Which Motor Oil is best, 5W30 or 10W30?

40. Can the sound of a Failing Wheel Bearing, actually be SOMETHING ELSE?”

41. Why do some OEM’s call for super thick motor oil in only “Certain” versions of a particular engine?

42. Should a MAF (Mass Air Flow) Sensor screen be left in or taken out?

43. Keeping the Battery properly charged in Modern Computer Controlled Vehicles that sit much of the time

44. Which Motor Oil is best, 5W20 or 5W30?

45. Is it harmful to only occasionally run an engine, due to residual oil runoff causing excessive cold start-up wear?

46. Are Auto Manufacturer Advertised HP numbers accurate?

47. Can vehicles that call for 87 octane regular gasoline, benefit from switching to higher octane premium?

48. Can street vehicle performance be increased by switching to a low restriction K&N air filter?

49. 35 Oil Filters cut open, from 21 different Brands, compared and evaluated for manufacturer commonality, quality of design, quality of construction, and ranked from Best to Worst

50. What is the “BEST” way to warm-up a stone-cold engine? Plus, what is the “BEST” way to help prevent engine sludge?

51. The most common form of Severe/Extreme Engine Operation that most people aren’t aware of

52. General Motor Oil Selection Recommendations for Various Applications

53. Are vehicles that call for 0W16 Motor Oil, well protected with such thin oil?

.

.

***********

.

TYPICAL GEAR HEAD MINDSET vs ENGINEER MINDSET

A typical Gear Head’s mindset regarding new flat tappet engine Break-In is, “What I’ve been doing works, so I don’t want to change anything”. An Engineer’s mindset is, “No matter what you’ve been doing, let’s see if we can move forward and improve things, making them “better” than they were before”.

An example of this regarding motor oil is, a typical Gear Head has been using some high zinc oil, or some oil with an aftermarket zinc additive also poured in. And with that, he “thinks” he has made a good oil selection. But, using oil like that, knowing nothing more than the zinc level, requires a careful and elaborate break-in procedure, if there is any hope of not wiping any lobes in a flat tappet engine. He’s managed to get by with this, so he thinks he has it all figured out.

But, when his motor oil concoction is put through Engineering Wear Protection Testing, the results often show it to be a low performer regarding film strength load carrying capability, no matter how much zinc is present. As a result, that oil ranks rather low on my Wear Protection Ranking List, and means that it provided only a very low Margin of Safety. With this being the case, the engine was at significant risk of failure. So, he has essentially been playing Russian Roulette with his engine, without even knowing it.

For those not familiar with the term, Margin of Safety refers to how much capability your motor oil provides, vs how much capability you actually need to prevent wear and/or damage/failure. The higher the Margin of Safety, the more reserve wear protection capability you have available, and the safer your engine is.

The careful and elaborate flat tappet break-in procedures that Gear Heads typically use, is nothing more than a crutch to try and prevent wiped lobes with low performing motor oils. A fair number of people have been lucky enough to get away with this, while some others have been wiping lobes. And wiped flat tappet lobes have been all too common over the past few years, even though name brand, highly respected parts are being used. It can be a hit or miss situation, regarding wiping lobes or not wiping lobes. But, it doesn’t have to be this way, if better performing oils are chosen.

And keep in mind that so-called Break-Oils with their typical low wear protection capability are absolutely NOT required for proper break-in and ring sealing. That has been proven over the past couple of decades by numerous Factories using highly ranked 5W30 Mobil 1 synthetic oil in their brand new performance vehicles. They break-in and seal their rings just fine, and of course come with a warranty.

Being an Engineer with clear improvement in mind to solve the iffy situation of wiping lobes or not wiping lobes, I recommend switching to different motor oils that rank far higher on my Wear Protection Ranking List, no matter how much zinc they have. The only thing that truly matters is an oil’s film strength load carrying capability, NOT merely how much zinc it has. Using much higher ranking motor oils with their much higher wear protection capability, means that special break-in procedures ARE NOT REQUIRED. And an engine will be far safer due to the better motor oils providing a much higher Margin of Safety.

The Engineering mindset that resulted in the Wear Protection Ranking List, is the whole point of this Blog. So now, we no longer have to guess which oil is best. We have the data available at our finger tips to show us how various motor oils compare head to head, regarding wear protection capability.

And since you have to buy motor oil anyway, why not use this Engineering Wear Protection Test Data to help you select a high performing motor oil with excellent wear protection? The engine you save may be your own.

.

.

=================================

.

SECTION 1- MOTOR OIL “WEAR PROTECTION” RANKING LIST.

.

THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT thing a motor oil does for your engine, is prevent wear. Everything else it does for your engine, comes AFTER that. But, I have found that there is a tremendous amount of misinformation and misunderstanding about motor oil. The worst of all is that a lot of people, even those at Cam Companies, blindly accept the MYTH about needing high levels of zinc in motor oil in order to have sufficient wear protection. But, that line of thinking is NOT based on technical fact, and is simply FALSE. So, at the beginning of 2012, I began Tribology Research using motor oil “Wear Testing” equipment, to explore the facts regarding the wear prevention capabilities of motor oil. For those not familiar with the terminology, Tribology means the study of friction, lubrication, and wear between moving surfaces.

.

I’m a total perfectionist when it comes to technical issues. And those who know me personally, know that I would never jeopardize my reputation or my integrity, by posting test data that would turn the Hobby/Industry on its ear, unless I was absolutely sure about the data I put out there. Of course I’ve always known my carefully generated data is completely accurate. And to make that clear to the world, you will see below that my test data EXACTLY matches real world severe over-heating experience, real world race track experience, real world flat tappet break-in experience, and real world High Performance street experience.

.

OIL TEST DATA AND SEVERE OVER-HEATING EXPERIENCE ARE IDENTICAL

I received the following feedback from one of my Oil Test Data Blog readers:

Hi RAT, I want to share a real world experience about one of the oils you have tested.

About a year ago, my son was driving our old 1999 Toyota Camry, with 230,000 miles on it at the time, in heat of summer. And you know how young kids are today, they don’t know very much about how to look after cars. So, he drives about 45 miles to his destination, and parks it.

By this time, because of a leak from the water pump, most of the coolant is gone. But, because he shuts the engine off and walks away without noticing the leak, the engine cools off. The next day when he wants to drive home, there is no coolant left in engine. But, he doesn’t know that, so he starts it up and drives away. After driving about 30 miles on the freeway, it overheats so much that the engine stalls. That’s when I get the call!

After I towed the car home, I filled radiator and noticed the leak from water pump, and the head gasket was leaking into the combustion chamber. So, I knew it had over-heated really bad, TWICE. I expected that the pistons and valves must have been damaged due to the extreme heat. But, after I took the head off, the valves and cylinder walls looked in surprisingly good shape. After I put it back together, it ran as good as before. And it now has 244,000 miles on it.

I then knew, the oil that was in it at the time, played very important role, and had prevented the pistons from being damaged. BUT, that oil wasn’t in your ranking list at the time. So, I always wondered where that oil would it rank if ever tested?

Guess what? Now that you have tested that oil, it ranked near the very top of the Ranking List. It is 5W30 Valvoline MaxLife High Mileage (red bottle).

So if anyone doesn’t want to believe in your oil test ranking, I have to tell them they better believe it. I am positive that it was the high wear protection capability of that motor oil that kept the engine from further damage!!

His experience shows precisely what I’ve talked about, when I have said that having extra reserve wear protection capability from highly ranked oils, may well save your engine when bad things happen.

.

OIL TEST DATA AND RACE TRACK EXPERIENCE ARE IDENTICAL

A June 2018 Testimonial regarding Amsoil 5W30 Signature Series, was sent by a Blog reader from Greece, which proved ONCE AGAIN that my motor oil Engineering Test Data “EXACTLY MATCHES” real world racing experience, as I have always said. It also proves ONCE AGAIN, that all my critics are DEAD WRONG, and have no idea what they are talking about, regarding motor oil and its performance capabilities. If you want the FACTS about motor oil, you need to read this Blog.

For reference, at the time of this writing Amsoil 5W30 Signature Series, produced 134,352 psi, and is ranked 2nd for oils “just as they come, right out of the bottle” (only Amsoil 0W20 Signature Series, was able to slightly beat it), out of 233 oils tested so far. And Amsoil 10W30 Dominator Racing oil, produced a far lower 97,118psi, is ranked 65th. The higher the psi value an oil can produce, the better the wear protection. Here is what he said in his Testimonial:

****

Hi (again) 540 Rat,

I ‘ve seen several times, as a Rally spectator ‘n’ fan, a Skoda Fabia S2000 participating in Greek Rally Championship, sponsored by Amsoil, and after reading your blog, the question “which specific Amsoil do they use, in a N/A 1,996 cc = 121c.in. racing motor running up to 9500r.p.m. and approx. 300hp…” emerged. So, I took myself to the service park with the intention to ask team engineers about that. In fact, I didn’t need to do so, because I saw them in an oil change using Amsoil 5W30 Signature Series oil, instead of Amsoil Dominator Racing oil. I found that this was kind-a-weird, so I decided to ask them “why so”.

Chief engineer told me that every time they need to rebuild the engine, they measure accurately, all geometric parameters such as clearances, ring’s width, cams heights etc. in order to replace if something was out of specs, and after 3800 racing kms (2000+miles), they decided to use Amsoil 5W30 Signature Series oil, because all mentioned components’ wear was close to non-measurable from one to the next rebuild procedure.

In fact, that’s -in my opinion- another proof that your data are “online” with real world’s facts. Of course, a high pressure oil pump and FIA approved oil cooler are provided. But apart from these, it’s still a highly stressed engine, revving most of its lifespan between 6,000 and 9,500 rpm, “feeding” via gearbox all 4 wheels.

The question remains: why not use Amsoil Dominator Racing oil…

(To mention rally team’s name, in order to avoid “suspicious minds” from “bad thoughts”: “Cabilis Performance”)

Keep doing great things,

E.C.

Greece

My final comment about this Testimonial: Amsoil Signature Series oil has performed far better than Amsoil Dominator Racing oil, in my Engineering tests. So, the obvious choice is their Signature Series oil, if you want the absolute best wear protection. Perhaps this Race Team has been reading my Blog.

**********

Here’s another example of my Engineering Test Data and Racing experience being identical

.

An oval track dirt racer (his class is extremely competitive, so he asked that his name be left out) on the SpeedTalk Forum runs a 7200 rpm, solid flat tappet, 358ci Small Block Chevy motor, with valve spring pressures of about 160 on the seat and 400 open, that are shimmed to .060” from coil bind. The rules and the combination of parts, were causing him to experience repeated cam failures while using high zinc, semi-synthetic 10W30 Brad Penn, Penn Grade 1 motor oil. Lab Report Data from testing performed by Professional Lab, “ALS Tribology” in Sparks, Nevada, showed that this oil contains 1557 ppm zinc, 1651 ppm phosphorus, and 3 ppm moly. In spite of this being a high zinc oil, that most folks would “assume” provides excellent wear protection, he experienced wiped lobe cam failure about every 22 to 25 races.

.

A race consists of one 8 lap (a lap is typically 3/8 mile) heat race and one 20 lap feature race, plus any caution laps. If you add it all up, 25 races only total about 281 miles at the point of cam failure. So, that is a perfect example of what I’ve been saying all along about high zinc levels being absolutely NO GUARANTEE of adequate wear protection. And my test data on this 10W30 Brad Penn, Penn Grade 1 motor oil, shows that it produces a wear protection capability of only 71,206 psi, which puts it in the MODERATE wear protection category, and it ranks a very disappointing 182nd out of 233 oils tested so far. That means of course that there are 181 different oils I’ve tested that provide better wear protection.

.

So, my test data ACCURATELY PREDICTED EXACTLY what he experienced during racing. And that is, that this oil does not provide high enough wear protection capability to provide a sufficient margin of safety for this engine’s operating conditions. Looking at my “Wear Protection Ranking List” and choosing a much higher ranked oil, would have prevented all those cam failures. Repeatedly suffering cam failures in motors with so little time on them, may have been considered by some folks to be a normal consumption of parts back in the ‘60’s or ‘70’s. But, in the 21st Century that we live in now, by any measure, that is for sure premature failure. We no longer have to accept that as the cost of doing business, because we can do far better now.

.

So, he switched to the super micro polished billet lifters from PPPC and the cam life went up to 40 races, which was an improvement since he could now go 450 miles between failures. But, that was still clearly unacceptable. Then later on, he started using “Oil Extreme Concentrate” as an additive to the 10W30 Brad Penn, and he’s never lost a lobe on a cam since. Adding the “Oil Extreme Concentrate” completely eliminated his premature wiped lobe cam failures. At the time of this writing, the motor had gone 70+ Races without issue, and was still doing fine. This “Oil Extreme Concentrate” is one additive that actually works as advertised, and makes low ranked oils far better than they were to begin with. And that is PRECISELY WHAT MY MOTOR OIL TEST DATA PREDICTED as well.

.

Here’s how. I also added “Oil Extreme Concentrate” to 10W30 Brad Penn, Penn Grade 1 semi-synthetic, as part of my motor oil “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load” research. And with 2.0 OZ of “Oil Extreme Concentrate” added per qt, which is the amount intended for racing, its wear protection capability shot up by a BREATH TAKING 56%, to an amazing 111,061psi, which puts it in the INCREDIBLE wear protection category, and now ranks it a jaw dropping 26th out of 233 oils tested so far. So, it moved up a whopping 156 ranking positions, just by adding the “Oil Extreme Concentrate”. This totally accounts for the reason all his cam lobe failures were eliminated.

.

In addition to this, a NASCAR team sent me three high zinc synthetic Mobil 1 Racing Oils for testing, because they were having wear problems when using these oils (more on that below). Lab Report Data from testing performed on these oils by Professional Lab, “ALS Tribology” in Sparks, Nevada, showed that on average, these oils contained 1774 ppm zinc, 1658 ppm phosphorus, and 1444 ppm moly. And because these were all high zinc oils, most folks would “assume” that they’d provide sufficient wear protection. However, the results of my testing showed that these oils only provided POOR WEAR PROTECTION CAPABILITY. So, they were NOT a good choice for their racing application, which confirmed why they had wear problems. This is yet another perfect example of what I’ve been saying about high zinc levels being NO GUARENTEE of adequate wear protection. And this example clearly showed once again that my test data EXACTLY MATCHED what this race team had experienced on the track.

.

So, these examples PROVE once and for all, that my test data EXACTLY MATCHES REAL WORLD RACE TRACK EXPERIENCE, and that my test data is the spot on REAL DEAL, just as I’ve said all along. This completely confirms that my test results WILL ACCURATELY PREDICT what we can expect from motor oils in running engines on the track or on the street, EVEN if those oils are high zinc oils. So, that should be more than enough proof to satisfy anyone who was skeptical of how well my test data compares to the real world. And if anyone thinks my data comes from flawed methodology, they are not paying attention, and need to reread everything again more carefully.

.

OIL TEST DATA AND WIPED LOBE AT BREAK-IN EXPERIENCE ARE IDENTICAL

.

A guy on the Corvette Forum, whose name I will leave out, built a replica 454, flat tappet LS6 BBC engine for a 1970 Corvette, using a Crane Cams blueprint LS6 cam and Crane solid lifters. He used Brad Penn Break-In oil, then after initial break-in, he changed the oil to Brad Penn 10W40. Then after about 100 miles he heard a tapping noise. After looking into it, he found a wiped cam lobe and ruined lifter. There were metal particles throughout the entire engine, causing devastation which had damaged the rod and main bearings, the oil pump, and the crankshaft, thus requiring another very costly and time consuming total rebuild.

.

He has built many engines over the years, always using Crane Cams solid or hydraulic cams and never had a failure. So, he’s an experienced engine builder, used parts from Crane Cams, a reputable Industry Leader, and used oil with plenty of zinc. Problem is, he is among those who think any oil is fine, as long as it has plenty of zinc in it. However, my Engineering tests of the Brad Penn, Penn Grade 1, Break-In oil, shows that it produces a film strength load carrying capacity of only 56,020 psi, which ranks it 223rd out of 233 oils tested so far, and puts it in the UNDESIRABLE wear protection category, even though it’s high in zinc. And my Engineering tests of the 10W40 Brad Penn, Penn Grade 1, shows that it produces a film strength load carrying capacity of only 57,864 psi, which ranks it 219th out of 233 oils tested so far, and also puts it in the UNDESIRABLE wear protection category, even though it has a high zinc level. That of course means that 222 other oils provide better wear protection than his Break-In oil, and 218 other oils provide better wear protection than his after break-in oil.

.

So, this is another example where my test data accurately predicted that using these particular high zinc oils, that provided such low wear protection capability, would put a flat tappet engine at extreme risk of failure during and after break-in. And of course very expensive engine failure is exactly what happened. Selecting a highly ranked oil from my Wear Protection Ranking List, no matter how much zinc is in it, would have provided the engine with far better wear protection. With so many other excellent performing motor oils on the market, it makes no sense to choose oils that are ranked so low on my list, even if they do have a lot of zinc in them. Because high zinc levels are absolutely no guarantee of sufficient wear protection. The line of thinking that you always need a high zinc level, is nothing more than a total MYTH.

.

OIL TEST DATA AND HIGH PERFORMANCE STREET EXPERIENCE ARE IDENTICAL

.

And here is one example of a flat tappet High Performance Street Hotrod engine operating just fine with low zinc oils, just as my Test Data predicts. A buddy built a 500 HP, flat tappet, solid lifter, 383ci small block Chevy for his ’69 Corvette several years ago. He asked me what oil he should use to break it in and to use later on as well. He wanted to use a conventional oil at that time, that was affordable, and readily available. So, I suggested he use conventional low zinc 5W30 Castrol GTX, API SN, that provided 95,392 psi in my testing (this was an earlier version which has since been replaced), which put it in the OUTSTANDING wear protection category.

He used that oil from day one with no elaborate break-in procedure at all. He just drove the car. It is his only car, so it is his daily driver, which he always drives like he stole it. And he has never had any issue with his cam or lifters. Then maybe a year or so ago he decided he wanted to switch to a synthetic oil that was affordable and readily available, so I suggested he go with low zinc synthetic 5W30 Mobil 1, API SN, that provided 105,875 psi in my testing, which put it in the INCREDIBLE wear protection category.

He has used that oil ever since and still has not had any issue at all with his cam or lifters. He has tens of thousands of hard Hotrod miles on that cam and lifter combo, which is far more miles than most weekend only Hotrods will ever see, and he has never suffered one bit from not using a high zinc oil. So, this is yet another example of the fact that high zinc oils are NOT needed for sufficient wear protection, even in flat tappet engines, and not even for break-in. The only thing that matters, is an oil’s film strength load carrying capacity. And that is precisely the data my Motor Oil Testing ranks.

.

.

MORE PROOF THAT MODERN LOW ZINC OILS THAT PRODUCED HIGH PSI VALUES IN MY MOTOR OIL ENGINEERING TEST, WORK GREAT IN TRADITIONAL FLAT TAPPET ENGINES, JUST AS PREDICTED

.

From K. N., February 2020

Hi 540Rat,

I’m a long time reader of your blog, and have commented here occasionally. Anyways, just to provide some more “correlation” with your test data, I now have 11,500 miles on my new cam, and have used Mobil 1 0w-40 European formula FS the entire time (except for the first 200 miles on Castrol GTX 10w-30). The cam has .450 lift, around 270 degrees duration, valve springs are set at 120lbs closed and around 270lbs open, with titanium retainers. Hydraulic flat tappet lifters and stout pushrods, and is a daily driven 1963 Corvair Spyder. Peak boost that I’ve seen with it so far is around 22psi, and have taken it up to 6,000 rpm numerous times now. I figure that if I was going to have ruined another cam for oil reasons I would have done it by now, because I haven’t been exactly nice to it… and in fact, it runs like a watch, smooth and quiet like its supposed to be. No oil leaks, minimal oil consumption, and the oil stays nice and clean. The oil viscosity has turned out to be nearly perfect for my purposes, having run it year round.

.

===============

.

Hi K,

It’s good to hear from you again. Thanks for your feedback, I appreciate that. It’s nice to know how well your classic flat tappet Corvair engine is doing with one of my Highly Ranked modern low zinc oils. That’s yet another example of my Engineering Test Data exactly predicting and matching real world experience. And proves once again, just like I’ve said all along, that high zinc oils are not required for flat tappet cams. The only thing that matters, is the psi value a motor oil can produce in my Engineering motor oil torture test.

And I’m glad to hear that you find my Blog interesting and useful enough to be long time reader. That’s why I do all this.

Thanks again,

540 RAT

.

.

PROOF YET AGAIN THAT MODERN HIGHLY RANKED LOW ZINC SYNTHETIC OIL CAN BE USED JUST FINE FOR BREAK-IN

.

From B. B. February 2020

I just built a 489 cubic inch all forged Big Block Chevy engine. I used synthetic 5W30 Quaker State Ultimate Durability (QSUD) oil for break-in and it’s running great. It’s in my jet boat.

Thank you for your time.

=============

Hi there,

I’m glad to hear that your new Big Block Chevy engine broke-in just fine with modern low zinc synthetic 5W30 Quaker State Ultimate Durability oil, that is highly ranked on my Wear Protection Ranking List, just like I said it would. I appreciate your feedback, thanks.

That should give the “high zinc break-in oil” guys a shock, to see even more additional proof that they were WRONG all along about needing high zinc break-in oil.

Take care,

540 RAT

.

*****************

Not only does my oil testing methodology and the resulting data match up EXACTLY with real world severe over-heating experience, real world race track experience, real world flat tappet break-in experience, and real world High Performance street experience, but it has also been endorsed by the following well respected Industry sources:

.

1. An Engineering Ph.D. who is the most highly respected Engineer, Car builder and Tech Guru on a popular Automotive Forum, asked me if he could include my Oil Testing Info in a list of Tech Papers written by well respected Industry authors, that he makes available to enthusiasts. And he told me, “I’m 100% on board with backing you with my endorsement on your testing: I run a Propulsion Testing Laboratory for a major Aerospace Company, so I’m in the testing business. Your methods and approach are in accordance with sound engineering testing methods, and are not arguable by intelligent people”. He also said this about my Oil Testing info, “This is excellent stuff, and I’ve already sent copies of this to my engineering colleagues”.

.

Then later, even though he had no direct connection to my oil testing, he received hate mail and threats for backing me. This behavior came from disrespectful people who are on the wrong side of the facts. They are high zinc level “believers”, even though the facts have proven over and over again that the whole idea of depending on high zinc levels for wear protection, is only an outdated myth. Sadly, discussing motor oil can become emotionally charged just like Religion and Politics. But, Engineering test data is NOT determined by emotion, it is determined by the facts that come out of the Physics and Chemistry involved. After this ordeal, he’d had enough, and asked that I no longer use his name in connection with my oil testing. Of course I respect his wishes and will no longer mention his name here. I feel bad that he was subjected to this totally uncalled for behavior. However, these shameful events will have no affect on my ongoing oil testing. For me, there is no emotion involved with the oil testing I perform. I simply report the results exactly the way they came out, good or bad.

.

2. A NASCAR engine supplier out of North Carolina (they did not want their name associated with any Internet motor oil arguments that may come up, so they asked that their name be left out, which I honored) was so impressed with the motor oil “Wear Protection Capability Testing” I perform, that they sent me 3 NASCAR Racing Oils they use, for testing. They valued my testing efforts enough to include me in what they do, which is quite an endorsement, considering the Professional level of Racing they are involved in. They had been seeing some wear issues with those oils, and wanted to see if I could shed any light on that by testing them. I did test those oils for them, and the test results showed that those oils did not provide acceptable wear protection capability, which accounted for the wear problems they were having. So, they have selected other oils to use, and their wear problems have gone away. If I had tested those oils before they started using them, I could have saved them time, money and grief.

.

3. The “Oil Extreme” Oil Company was so impressed with the detail and accuracy of my oil testing, that they wanted to hire me to perform product development research testing for them. That was clearly a major endorsement of the testing I perform. But, I declined taking any money from them, because I won’t be tied to any Oil Company by money. That way I can maintain my independent and unbiased status. I report the test results just how they come out, good or bad. And there is no way I’d allow any Oil Company to influence anything I report. I did however, agree to perform testing for them for free, along with other testing I perform. And those results will be posted along with other test results.

.

In addition to that, my oil test data has also been validated and backed-up by a total of FOUR other independent Industry sources. They are as follows:

.

1. Well known and respected Engineer and Tech Author David Vizard, whose own test data, largely based on real world engine dyno testing, has concluded that more zinc in motor oil can be damaging, more zinc does NOT provide today’s best wear protection, and that using zinc as the primary anti-wear component, is outdated technology.

.

2. The GM Oil Report titled, “Oil Myths from GM Techlink”, concluded that high levels of zinc are damaging and that more zinc does NOT provide more wear protection.

.

3. A motor oil research article written by Ed Hackett titled, “More than you ever wanted to know about Motor Oil”, concluded that more zinc does NOT provide more wear protection, it only provides longer wear protection.

.

4. This from the Brad Penn Oil Company:

There is such a thing as too much ZDDP. ZDDP is surface aggressive, and too much can be a detriment. ZDDP fights for the surface, blocking other additive performance. Acids generated due to excessive ZDDP contact will “tie-up” detergents thus encouraging corrosive wear. ZDDP effectiveness plateaus, more does NOT translate into more protection. Only so much is utilized. We don’t need to saturate our oil with ZDDP.

.

Those who are familiar with my test data, know that my test results came up with the exact same results stated by all four of those independent sources. So, this is an example where motor oil “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load” using oil testing equipment, engine dyno testing, Motor Oil Industry testing, and proper motor oil research using only the facts, from a total of five (including my own) independent sources, all converged to agree and come to the same exact conclusion. Back-up validation proof, doesn’t get any better than this.

.

So, with all those sources in total agreement, that should provide more than enough proof to anyone, that my data is absolutely correct, and that it DOES NOT come from flawed methodology, as some have said simply because they didn’t like or didn’t understand the results. The fact is, scientific test data is not determined by emotion, it is determined by the facts that are a result of the Physics and Chemistry involved. And anyone questioning any one of those sources, questions them all, as well as the Physics and Chemistry that determined all those identical results. And no sensible person would try to argue against Physics and Chemistry. Because that is a battle no man can win.

.

******************

.

Of course, many folks, including Enthusiasts, Hotrodders, Racers, Builders, Cam Companies, etc, have always been conditioned to believe that high zinc levels in motor oil are a must for sufficient wear protection in High Performance engines. And of course there are a number of oils available that say something along the lines of “Extra Zinc for Extra Protection”. So, a lot of those folks just cannot bring themselves to accept the fact that high zinc levels are NOT what they are cracked up to be. They feel compelled to believe the claims on those bottles of oil and the Marketing/Advertising claims made by the Oil Companies that provide those high zinc oils.

.

But, people need to consider the following. Those Oil Companies are in business to make money. That’s it. So, they put a product on the market that they feel there is a demand for, and will make them money. As a result, they will say “ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING”, to move that product, which will help their bottom line. So, high zinc loving people need to stop and consider that for a moment. The Oil Companies have a vested interest in telling people what they want to hear, so they will buy their oil. Therefore, they don’t hesitate to make misleading claims and false advertising. When it comes to motor oil, there is no such thing as truth in advertising.

.

Oil Company claims about the benefit of high zinc levels in motor oil is NOT based on actual fact. Extra zinc cannot physically provide extra wear protection, because zinc simply DOES NOT work that way. Zinc is used up a little at a time as it is sacrificed to help protect against wear. More zinc will take longer to become depleted, simply because there is more there to use up. It’s the same idea as more gas in your tank will take longer to run out, but more gas in your tank cannot physically make more HP.

.

These high zinc motor oil producing Oil Companies NEVER provide any test data to prove that their high zinc oils always provide better wear protection than ordinary modern low zinc street oils. They can’t do it, because it’s NOT TRUE. So, high zinc believers are only embracing smoke and mirrors, nothing else. And actual dynamic motor oil friction tests under load, PROVE that the need for high zinc levels is simply NOT TRUE. That is why I started testing motor oil, so that I could separate the facts from the fiction.

.

Motor Oil Company Advertising claims are only hype and hot air, but actual test data is the real thing. If I test a modern low zinc API certified oil against a high zinc oil, and the modern API certified low zinc oil clearly outperforms the high zinc oil in terms of wear protection, how can the high zinc lovers honestly believe that the high zinc oil is better? How could that high zinc oil magically perform better in an engine, when it was worse in testing? And if I test two high zinc oils, and one does well and one does not, how can the high zinc lovers believe that all high zinc oils are always good?

.

So, high zinc lovers need to do a little soul searching and ask themselves why they want to believe something that does NOT stand-up to real world testing? Keep in mind that testing is so important and valuable, that multi-million dollar corporate decisions are made, based on test data. Not only that, but Racers test engine and chassis setups at the track all the time. And they believe what the test results tell them, because that’s the only way they have to know what really works and what doesn’t. So, it makes no sense to disregard oil testing, when virtually all other types of testing are taken as Gospel.

.

——

.

My Motor Oil Engineering Test Data is breakthrough information that can’t be found anywhere else, which finally allows us to directly compare the wear protection capability of various motor oils. Engineering Test Data drives the world, yet there are some high zinc loving critics who just can’t understand the value of this Engineering Test Data. So, they try to tear it down with the emotion that is often found in discussions of Religion or Politics. But, by them rejecting meaningful motor oil information, they are only hurting themselves.

In fact, it is quite clear that most of the time, they don’t even bother to read the information I provide. They just make negative comments right off the top, completely unaware of the information provided. Unfortunately for them, that is their loss, because they will have to continue selecting their oil based on the incorrect thinking that zinc level is all they need to know. And in doing so, they will more often than not, end up with far less wear protection than they think they have, which often results in wiped flat tappet lobes. Some people are their own worst enemies. However, for technically savvy folks who do grasp the value of my motor oil film strength/load carrying capability test data, FACTUAL information is included in the Blog below.

It is not a matter of agreeing with my data or not agreeing with it, because the data used to create my Wear Protection Ranking List is NOT my opinion, and it is NOT my theory. The data, as mentioned above, is the result of the Physics and Chemistry involved in the testing. I am only the messenger. The Science is what tells us how these oils perform. And no sensible person would try to argue against Physics and Chemistry. Science is absolute whether people like it or not, and emotion cannot change it.

So, think long and hard before believing anything critics say when they try to discredit my Motor Oil Engineering Test Data. There are always some who try, but fail in their attempt. They are not actually arguing with me, even if they think they are. They are actually arguing against the Science of Physics and Chemistry. Who do you think will win that battle? And ask them how they figure they know more than what the Science of Physics and Chemistry proves. Ask them what their qualifications are. Ask them what testing they have ever done.

They are typically high zinc lovers who just can’t accept the fact that what they’ve always believed about the need for high zinc oils, is only an Old Wives Tale MYTH. So, they get upset and go out of their way trying to undermine anything that goes against what they have been brainwashed to believe about high zinc oils. But, emotion does not determine the Engineering results of how good any particular oil is.

These naysayers cannot factually back-up anything they say. They think they are motor oil experts simply because they have done a bunch of Internet reading. They will sometimes make a big deal about what is in the base oil. They will sometimes provide links to lame Internet articles, which are often just a lab test of a single individual zinc component, showing what it did in that particular lab test. But, that is not any actual motor oil that you buy and pour into your engine. It may be somewhat interesting to read, but that type of test does not does not take into account the countless formula variations and synergistic effects found in the actual motor oils that are available on the market. Therefore, you are only looking at a single data point of a test that is not even what will end up in your engine. Or in other words, worthless information that many zinc lovers falsely believe, is the last word on motor oil. That is NOT how Engineering works. And lot of their lame Internet articles are nothing more than one author copying from the same worthless source material as other authors.

And if that isn’t bad enough, some information they throw out there as Gospel is only advertising hype from a motor oil’s bottle or website. As mentioned above, it is no secret that Motor Oil Companies are among the worst for false advertising. The absolute worst motor oils on the market, and the absolute best motor oils on the market, make the same claims about how wonderful they are. So, the claims made on motor oil bottles and websites would only be taken as truthful, by gullible people who are not Technically savvy.

Then these naysayers will also sometimes use the oil recommendations from Cam Companies as support for their position on what oil to use. Problem is, just because Cam Companies sell cams, does not mean they know the first thing about motor oil. They are simply staffed by people who are also brainwashed to believe that any high zinc oil will provide all the wear protection necessary for flat tappet cams. But, the proof that they are clueless about motor oil, is the fact that even the leading Cam Companies still have flat tappet lobes getting wiped, when people use the oils they recommend. And those oils are typically the oils that have tested very poorly in my Motor Oil Engineering Wear Protection Testing. On top of that, Cam Companies often do not even employ Degreed Mechanical Engineers. So, it comes as no surprise that they supply bad information as to what oils to use. Wiped flat tappet lobes continue to happen over and over again, when people use high zinc oils that produce poor results in my testing. It’s time to take notice of that.

The people who recommend poor performing motor oils, believe if they haven’t lost a lobe while using a certain oil, that it must be great oil. But, they just don’t know, what they don’t know. That only means the oil they used provided “enough” protection for the particular application that didn’t fail. But, that does not tell them anything about how much extra protection they had beyond that. So, their “opinion” of that oil is not a good technical evaluation of its capability. That would be like them telling you that an engine making 750 HP, is good as long as it has rods in it that can withstand 751 HP. Yeah, it might not throw a rod, or maybe it will. But, no technically savvy person would want to run a margin of safety that close.

It’s the same idea with the oil you choose to run. Don’t run an oil with a margin of safety that close. My Motor Oil Engineering Test Data, allows us see how different oils truly compare to each other, so we can run a substantial margin of safety to provide the best possible wear protection for our engines. So, before you consider following the bad advice others give about the oil they only “think” is good, read the real world facts about motor oil in this Oil Test Data Blog, then decide for yourself who is providing factual motor oil information that you can actually use to your advantage.

People who want the facts about which motor oils are good and which are not so good, want to see unbiased and independent test data. And that is exactly what my motor oil film strength/load carrying capability data provides. I back-up everything I say with that hard Engineering test data that exactly matches real world experience. It matches real world experience because my test data is the real deal, which accurately predicts what we can expect from the oils we buy. I test the actual motor oils that we buy and pour into our engines. So, my test data comes entirely from real “on-the-market” motor oils, which is what truly matters.

——

.

It’s been said that I’m the motor oil Police, because I discover and expose false motor oil claims and misleading motor oil advertising, with my test results that show the FACTS. I don’t sell motor oil, so it doesn’t make any difference to me, what oil people choose to run. But, people need to understand that some high zinc oils do provide very good wear protection, while many other high zinc oils do not. And without looking at the test data, you cannot tell which is which, until perhaps it’s too late. In fact, MANY WIPED FLAT TAPPET LOBES COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED, INCLUDING DURING BREAK-IN, if people had not blindly believed the MYTH that all high zinc oils provide all the wear protection they need. Because nothing could be further from the truth.

.

So, the folks who choose to use only high zinc oils NO MATTER WHAT the test result FACTS show us, are only fooling themselves. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But, ignoring the FACTS is their loss, and depending on the particular oil they choose, they are likely NOT getting the wear protection they THINK they are. If you value your engine, wouldn’t you prefer to choose the motor oil that can REALLY provide the best wear protection, based on test data FACTS, rather than the old incorrect high zinc MYTH? Don’t believe what the high zinc lovers say, because they are only trying to justify what they “believe”, even though they have NO PROOF what so ever, to backup what they say. On the other hand, I backup everything I say. So, read the FACTS, then make your own decision.

.

******************************

.

I was very dissatisfied with the ASTM test procedures I reviewed. Some called for testing at 100*F (NOT 100*C), which is way too COLD and is therefore NOT representative of real world temperatures experienced by a running engine, where it spends 99% of its life. Other ASTM tests called for testing at 150*C (302*F), which is way too HOT, and is also NOT representative of real world oil temperatures experienced by a running engine, where it spends 99% of its life. In addition to that, every oil I’ve ever tested for the onset of thermal breakdown, would already be at or beyond the threshold of thermal breakdown at 302*F.

An ideal oil sump temperature range in a running engine is between 215*F and 250*F, though oil temps are not entirely uniform throughout the engine (more on that below). This range is hot enough to quickly boil off normal condensation rather than letting it evaporate over time, which can allow it to dilute the oil. And this range is also low enough to provide sufficient cooling for internal components, all of which are directly oil cooled, while at the same time staying below the onset of thermal breakdown in nearly all motor oils.

So, the Official ASTM test procedures I reviewed for my application, were COMPLETELY WORTHLESS for finding out the truth when it comes to wear protection capability of motor oil at representative oil temperatures where an engine spends 99% of its life. Being a perfectionist, I was not willing to accept sub-par test procedures. So, I developed my own test procedure using the real world temperature of 230*F, which “IS” representative of where engines typically spend 99% of their life.

And that temperature also works extremely well with my test equipment, and produces accurate and repeatable results which are essential for meaningful comparisons between different motor oils. My test procedure produces the most realistic and useful data you will ever find anywhere. And that is why I have numerous endorsements of my Engineering test procedure, as well as validation back-ups, including race track data, flat tappet break-in data, and High Performance street data, that exactly match my Engineering test data. BOTTOM LINE: My test data WILL ACCURATELY PREDICT what we can expect from a motor oil in a running engine.

However, I do occasionally come across someone criticizing my test data because my Engineering testing does not use an Industry Standard test temperature. So, let me be perfectly clear to those critics who don’t grasp what I said above. Industry Standard test temperatures of 100*F or 302*F are COMPELTELY WORTHLESS, because they do not represent real world temperatures where engines spend 99% of their life. My Engineering test temperature DOES represent real world temperatures where engines spend 99% of their life. And I challenge anyone, anywhere, no matter who they are, to PROVE that my Engineering test temperature of 230*F, is not a better representation of the temperatures inside a normal running engine, than those worthless Industry test temperatures.

.

Motor oil is not the same temperature everywhere inside a running engine. Typical main bearing oil temps can be 55*-90*F higher than sump temps. However, main bearing oil under running conditions is not just a film of oil, it is a liquid wedge of flowing oil (that is why the cooling benefits of better flowing thinner oil are important here to avoid driving up bearing temps. See the section on viscosity selection immediately following my “Wear Protection Ranking List” below). Liquid oil is not compressible, therefore it completely prevents metal to metal contact (more on that below). My testing focuses on oil film strength, which is what is critical, and is the last defense against metal to metal contact. Even so, I also tested a dozen different oils at 275*F to see how their wear protection capability at that higher temp, compared to the 230*F that I normally test at.

.

The oils tested at 275*F consisted of different brands, different viscosities, some low zinc modern API certified oils, some high zinc Racing/Performance oils, some synthetic, some conventional, some semi-synthetic, some with low levels of detergent and some with high levels of detergent. As expected, the wear protection capability psi values dropped as the oils got hotter and thinner. But for most of the oils, the drop was not enormous. And the average psi drop for the whole group of oils, was only about 12% from their 230* values. What was also of interest here, was how the ranking of these dozen oils might change relative to each other, as they got hotter. The result was that there was some shuffling of the ranking order within the top 10 oils, but all of the top ten oils were still in the top 10.

.

It was also quite clear by looking at these results, that high zinc levels, high detergent levels, and heavy viscosities did NOT play any particular roll in how well a motor oil does or does not provide wear protection. The only thing that matters is the base oil and its additive package “as a whole”, with the primary emphasis being on the additive package, since the additive package is what contains the extreme pressure anti-wear components.

.

In addition to the testing at 275*F, I also tested a couple of those oils at a much higher 325*F to see how their wear protection capability might change at that temp. It turned out that their load carrying capacity leveled off and stayed approximately the same between 275* and 325*, and their ranking relative to each other did not change. So, it is comforting to know that you don’t run into dangerously low wear protection if and when you end up with overheated oil at some point. But of course the oil will have already run into thermal breakdown and should be changed as soon as possible.

.

So, all this testing showed that the oil ranking positions did not change significantly even at higher temps. And that means that my “Wear Protection Ranking List” below, which was generated with oil temps at 230*F, is still representative of how the various oils compare to each other, even at the higher operating temperatures seen in certain locations of the engine.

.

METHODOLOGY

The details of the specific test equipment set-up I developed, as well as the details of the specific test procedure I developed, that provide the accuracy and repeatability that I demand, are Proprietary Intellectual Property. But, I can share the following:

The test methodology or test procedure I use at a representative operating oil temperature of 230*F, is a dynamic rubbing friction test under load, which generates a wear scar on a test specimen that is bathed in the oil being tested. This procedure, which is performed exactly the same for every motor oil tested, provides excellent repeatability, which