Hey Guy's, What do you think about using oil additves such as Lucas Oil in a308 QV?? 1st can you....? 2nd should you? Is there anywhere to buy a maintenace manual.. ie; haynes or similar? Just to familiarize myself with general requirements and locations..
Redline makes an oil break in additive which comes highly recommended for completely overhauled or new engines. Helmut
break-in is a bit different....but I've never used anything. I wold consider something for break-in, I'll tsake a look.
You don't need additives and break in oil is to make money for break-in oil makers. Mobil 1 is the factory fill for a variety of new car engines, including Porsches which recommend a 15000 mi oil change. They don't use break in oil and you don't need to either. We built a ton of competition/high performance engines and we used Mobil 1 in the engines from the first start. And 10 minutes later on the dyno (or 30 minutes later at the strip) the engines were totally broken in. I am not pushing Mobil 1 per se, but the concept that you need break in oil and/or that synthetics should not be used initially is incorrect. But, like many things, folks do what they are comfortable with and if you want to use break in oil, what the heck!
right. pseudo scientific elixirs, marketed to target the less informed. when is it going to stop. some of these products are the most sacred of cows......which, may never be killed.
The CD I sent with the car's documents has the factory maintenance and parts manuals. There are no aftermarket service manuals for the 308, use FChat instead! Don't use synthetic oil in the car until you get the oil leaks fixed, unless you want big puddles..... Additives are unnecessary.
Agree, additives are complete rubbish, if additives worked then the oil folks would be putting them in already, the market would drive that (pardon the pun).
I am using the FCA even mentioned the problem in PH: http://www.eastwood.com/underhood-engine/zddp-oil-additive/zddp-plus-oil-additive-10-pack.html http://www.zddplus.com/ the lucas i used to use until I saw this http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/images/lucas/lucas.htm
Is that additive the best option for ZDDP replacement? I've been out of the loop for a while. I've been meaning to ask about ZDDP additives when I look at this thread...
Quoted from the GM technical site re the "need" for added ZDP: The Starburst Oil Myth -- The latest myth promoted by the antique and collector car press says that new Starburst/ API SM engine oils (called Starburst for the shape of the symbol on the container) are bad for older engines because the amount of anti-wear additive in them has been reduced. The anti-wear additive being discussed is zinc dithiophosphate (ZDP). Before debunking this myth, we need to look at the history of ZDP usage. For over 60 years, ZDP has been used as an additive in engine oils to provide wear protection and oxidation stability. ZDP was first added to engine oil to control copper/lead bearing corrosion. Oils with a phosphorus level in the 0.03% range passed a corrosion test introduced in 1942. In the mid-1950s, when the use of high-lift camshafts increased the potential for scuffing and wear, the phosphorus level contributed by ZDP was increased to the 0.08% range. In addition, the industry developed a battery of oil tests (called sequences), two of which were valve-train scuffing and wear tests. A higher level of ZDP was good for flat-tappet valve-train scuffing and wear, but it turned out that more was not better. Although break-in scuffing was reduced by using more phosphorus, longer-term wear increased when phosphorus rose above 0.14%. And, at about 0.20% phosphorus, the ZDP started attacking the grain boundaries in the iron, resulting in camshaft spalling. By the 1970s, increased antioxidancy was needed to protect the oil in high-load engines, which otherwise could thicken to a point where the engine could no longer pump it. Because ZDP was an inexpensive and effective antioxidant, it was used to place the phosphorus level in the 0.10% range. However, phosphorus is a poison for exhaust catalysts. So, ZDP levels have been reduced over the last 10-15 years. It's now down to a maximum of 0.08% for Starburst oils. This was supported by the introduction of modern ashless antioxidants that contain no phosphorus. Enough history. Let's get back to the myth that Starburst oils are no good for older engines. The argument put forth is that while these oils work perfectly well in modern, gasoline engines equipped with roller camshafts, they will cause catastrophic wear in older engines equipped with flat-tappet camshafts. The facts say otherwise. Backward compatability was of great importance when the Starburst oil standards were developed by a group of experts from the OEMs, oil companies, and oil additive companies. In addition, multiple oil and additive companies ran no-harm tests on older engines with the new oils; and no problems were uncovered. The new Starburst specification contains two valve-train wear tests. All Starburst oil formulations must pass these two tests. - Sequence IVA tests for camshaft scuffing and wear using a single overhead camshaft engine with slider finger (not roller) followers. - Sequence IIIG evaluates cam and lifter wear using a V6 engine with a flat-tappet system, similar to those used in the 1980s. Those who hold onto the myth are ignoring the fact that the new Starburst oils contain about the same percentage of ZDP as the oils that solved the camshaft scuffing and wear issues back in the 1950s. (True, they do contain less ZDP than the oils that solved the oil thickening issues in the 1960s, but that's because they now contain high levels of ashless antioxidants not commercially available in the 1960s.) Despite the pains taken in developing special flat-tappet camshaft wear tests that these new oils must pass and the fact that the ZDP level of these new oils is comparable to the level found necessary to protect flat-tappet camshafts in the past, there will still be those who want to believe the myth that new oils will wear out older engines. Like other myths before it, history teaches us that it will probably take 60 or 70 years for this one to die also. - Thanks to Bob Olree GM Powertrain Fuels and Lubricants Group
What you posted is a synopsis of an ASTM Research Report titled "Development of the Sequence IIIG Engine Oil Test". It's available from SAE but I found mine online in pdf. for free somewhere. Its 58 pages long.
Yes, I know it was an excerpt from a longer article but the section states the issue re ZDP and points out that research shows that there is no need for a ZDP product added to the oil. In fact, as noted in the article, too much can cause problems in other ways.
yup. just say no to additives. I also used to buy into the 'YOU MUST HAVE TONS OF ZDP IN YOUR OIL' until I learned a bit more about modern synthetic oils and starburst rating testing. I am now of the opinion that it is important to use an oil that meets or exceeds standards for other high-end manufacturers. Mercedes, BMW, Porsche, Ferrari all have tough standards. Once my engine is done, I am going with Shell Rotella T6 synthetic 5/40. It's a newer oil Shell just came out with a few months ago. Same base oil as in Shell Helix and is the same base oil used in Ferrari's F1 engines. Great stuff.
Wow, I've now done a complete loop and then spun out on the topic of ZDDP. When my friend first forwarded me the warning about Little British Cars destroying camshafts because of the evil emissions-driven oil formulation, I thought it to be reactionary paranoia. After years of hearing the same thing, you notice I just asked about it with the intent of adding some! Now, having read SAE papers 2004-01-2986 "How Much ZDP is Enough?" and 2004-01-2987 "Development of the Sequence IIIG Engine Oil Certification Test" I've spun out. Specific language in these papers shows a minimization of concern for antique engines. The first paper suggests that 0.08% phosphorus (in the form of ZDP) is adequate for both current and older engines and that lower levels (down to 0.05% or possibly 0.03%) may be acceptable for engines in the field with phosphated camshafts. This raises the questions: 1) What level of P is in YOUR oil? 2) Are the camshafts of the engine in question phosphated? The answer to #2 is likely "yes". #1 you can research and modify for yourself if needed. This is my current thought on what I'm going to start doing. No doubt there is more comprehensive literature available, but I didn't note reference in these papers to any new replacement for the EP function of ZDDP.
Carrol Shelby uses Z-Max in all of his cars. He wouldnt be saying that if it wasnt true! When my nephew was running stock cars anyone that ran Lucas oil additives were popping engines. He never ran the stuff, I built the engines and we ran non-synthetic oil.
Basically it all boils down to the fact that folks are going to do what they feel comfortable doing. Information on just about anything is available for consideration. To me the only thing that is important is that a person review the information and then make a decision based on it. But it is important that it be information, not advertising which, by design, is MIS-information. Of course, even reading the information, we are all subject to forming different opinions. I have seen no personal evidence that the difference in amount of ZDP in old vs new oils does makes any difference and I have been running "old" flat tappet cars for a long time and always switching to the latest oil designator. That personal experience plus the technical writing on the same subject makes me comfortable not worrying at all about the subject. But obviously others draw different conclusions. I guess if we didn't there wouldn't be much use in internet forums!
http://www.ferrariclubofamerica.org/fusetalk/messageview.cfm?catid=2&threadid=1938 I cant take a chance this is from a porsche rebuilder http://www.lnengineering.com/oil.html#Z14
Frankly I have a real problem with that paper. But I'll sum all my disagreements/objections up with one question: Would anybody REALLY follow his suggestion and use an old oil formulation, or Motorcycle oil, or Diesel oil in a new Porsche 911? If so what do you think would be Porsche's response to an engine warranty claim? (OK, sorry, that's two questions.)
