It's 2017, let's do the OIL thing, which one

I'll ask again - how is this a "flat tappet engine", as opposed to the hundreds of other double overhead cam engines on the market that ostensibly are not flat tappet engines? Does Shell recommend T6 for every single DOHC engine? Or did you ask specifically for which oil to use for a flat tappet engine?

I still suggest the term flat tappet engine, and the associated common wisdom that higher ZDDP is required for one, is in reference to older American OHV engines with flat lifters instead of roller lifters. I simply don't believe that all the modern European double overhead cam engines are "flat tappet engines" that require a special oil characteristic.

 

Gordon, are you referring to the one on the left that uses the pushrods? Seems like the same as the overhead cam where the cam lobe pushes the "flat" shims that sits on top of the bucket or am I completely wrong?
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Yes, that's exactly the source of my confusion and question. When people and oil companies are referring to flat tappet engines, it's those single cam overhead valve pushrod engines that they mean like in the diagram you posted. I don't believe that they are referring to the hundreds of modern double overhead cam engines with cams acting on shims or buckets, even though it would appear to be the same mechanics of motion.

NONE of the manufacturers of modern DOHC engines, however, refer to them as flat tappet engines, nor do any of them identify any need for higher ZDDP zing additive. When Shell etc recommend T6 or high ZDDP oils for flat tappet engines, they mean those OHV pushrod engines, not DOHC engines... that's my assumption, anyway. I'd love to hear from an expert about this! (I suppose if I get genuinely curious, I could go search on Bob Is The Oil Guy forums, and post if I can't find anything)

However, let's stick with Shell for a minute - from their website, subsidiary Pennzoil offers an oil selector tool, but it only goes back to the 1998 model year. However, a 1998 F355 uses direct cam on bucket valve actuation, exactly the same as a 308, so let's see if Pennzoil recommends a high ZDDP oil for that F355 "flat tappet engine" http://www.pennzoil.com/en_us/oil-selector.html#iframe=L3VzL2VuX1VTL2Jyb3dzZQ==

Nope, they say "Pennzoil Pennzoil Platinum Euro SAE 5W-40 Full Synthetic Motor Oil is recommended for your FERRARI (US)". The MSDS is not easy to find, but it should list the ZDDP or zinc content, and it should be well under 1,000 ppm if it meets SN spec.

 

Me too. For the exact same reason.

 

FWIW - and this seems to come up frequently - stating, for example, that 0W40 is "too thin" is incorrect. 0W40, the originally-recommended 10w40, and straight 40 are the SAME viscosity at operating temp. The 0 part just means that it is lower viscosity when the engine is cold...when it NEEDS to be lower viscosity to get the oil where to the moving parts quicker than straight 40...or 20W40...or 10W40..

YES, 0W40 will seep through bad gaskets/poor seals onto the garage floor easier than straight 40 or 20W40. But that's unrelated - fix the leaks!

 

I was using 10w-40, but since last year, I've switched to 20w-50.

 

For those that use Mobil 1, their semi-annual rebate offer is underway.

Even if you use another oil in your Ferrari this is a good deal for the daily driver. For several years I have been buying two 5 qt. jugs during each offer period for my DDs. I usually purchase at Meijers which has a $2 off on a 5qt. jug sometime during the 2 month rebate offer which gives a net cost of under $2.50 per quart. I does take 2 months to receive the rebate check but it well worth the 5 minutes it takes me to submit a rebate form online.

Just don't be an idiot and buy the oil at a big box auto parts store, they usually are 50% higher priced than Walmart or Meijers.

https://mobiloil.com/en/promotion/mobil-promotions/up-to-15-dollars-off-with-mobil-1-and-mobil-super

 

+1.

Ciao

 

I would avoid the not full synth oils inside the turbo cars: 208 turbo, "328" turbo, 288 GTO, F 40. It does the cracking and closes or reduces the oil passages to the turbocharger, destroying the turbocharger shaft. Other cars can have the old oil, of course.

Ciao

 

FWIW, and I've written this same thing on previous oil threads...

I was heavily involved in high performance and competition engine building for many years here's how we determined what weight oil an engine was to use:

First, it's important to realize that the most important thing is that you have adequate oil pressure to support the engine. Many tests have been carried out over the past 100 years that confirm the fact that 10PSI of oil pressure per 1000 RPM is all that is needed. More than that just wastes power pumping oil. ALSO...the higher the viscosity, the more power it takes to move the oil. AND...the lower the viscosity, the quicker the oil gets where it needs to go, especially on startup. SO...

All that is necessary is to determine what oil viscosity provides 10PSI per 1000RPM at any RPM in the engine in question. If, for example, 10 wt oil will do that, than that's all the viscosity necessary. If it takes 30 wt to do it, then 30 wt is correct, etc, etc, etc. Heavier viscosity oil than necessary does nothing useful for the engine except waste power.

0W/x oils will easily provide the necessary pressure when cold and, if they are the proper viscosity at normal operating temps/conditions, they are excellent.

I realize that doing this - adjusting oil viscosity by checking pressure - COULD very well result in a lower viscosity oil than the owners manual states, which would make many people uncomfortable. So I'm just providing this as info, NOT as a specific recommendation. The thing to consider re owners manuals...they are based on WORST CASE engine tolerances of a factory engine. As is well known, some factory 3x8 engines use a quart of oil in less than 1000 miles - which is considered acceptable by the factory. Others don't use that much in 2500+ The difference occurs because the oil burner's engine clearances are all on the wide limit of the tolerances and the other car's engine clearances are on the close side of the limit.

This occurs due to nothing more than good/bad luck with the individual parts that are at hand when the engine is assembled. Some engines are lucky, some are not. Most are in between.

The best thing to do is: WHATEVER you are comfortable with!

 

I have a 1974 Alfa Romeo Montreal that has Quad Cams which are Chain Driven. It is a 2.6 liter V8 and has "Flat Tappets". Meaning that the Camshaft lobes act directly on a Bucket that opens the Valves. No Pushrods. This all Alloy engine was developed around 1967 and was initially used in the Type 33 Sports car. I had marks on some of the Buckets running Engine Oil with Low to No Zinc content. I hope that using a ZDDP Oil it will remove this from happening in the future. The term " Flat Tappets" is meant to describe the Valve actuation, nothing more. Modern engines have Roller Rockers to minimize the Friction between the Camshaft Lobe and the top of the Valves / Buckets / Tappets.

 

BTW, I use a 10W40 non-synthetic Kendall Oil.

 

Which has a high ZDDP content, I think 0.16.

 

Well, not quite - a straight single viscosity oil will be MUCH thicker when cold than when hot, but a multi-grade oil is still thicker when cold than when hot. the xW- number means that the oil is equivalent to a 'x' viscosity oil when it's cold, and the -xx number means that the oil is equivalent to a 'xx' viscosity oil when it's hot. However, the thinner oil, when cold, is still more viscous than the thicker oil is when it's hot.

Want proof? Look up the MSDS sheets for some typical oils. Let's try Mobil1 0W40...

Viscosity, cSt (ASTM D445)
@ 40ºC 75
@ 100ºC 13.5

In other words, the viscosity of Mobil1 0W40 when "cold" (@40C!) is 75 centiStokes, while at 100C it's only 13.5 centiStokes - it's more than 5 times thicker, more viscous, at 40C than it is at 100C. Now, a straight 0 weight oil at 100C would probably only be 5 cSt at 100C (much too thin), and a straight 40 weight oil at 40C would probably 150 cSt (waaay too thick). That's why we use multigrades, to get a relatively thinner oil at cold (ambient) temps, and to get a relatively thicker oil at operating temps - but those are each relative to other oils at those same respective temps.

In all cases with multigrade oils, you will find that the cold viscosity is significantly higher than the hot viscosity... which means that no, a 0W40 will not leak more than a 20W40 or straight 40, because all of the cold 0W and 20W and cold 40 viscosities will be higher than the hot -40 viscosities, which will be very similar.

 

Hundreds of modern double overhead cam engines have the exact same valve actuation as your Alfa - for one easy example, the Mazda DOHC engine used in the Miata and many other Mazda models since 1990 are the same direct acting cam on shim/bucket - just like your Alfa, just like my 308... yet nobody is claiming that the Miata engine is a flat tappet engine that needs high ZDDP oil. There are many, many other modern DOHC engines with similar direct acting cams. BMW has made millions of direct acting DOHC engines, but doesn't require high ZDDP for all those "flat tappet" engines.

So I ask again, what makes a modern (ie designed within the last 30 or 40 years) DOHC engine with direct acting cam on shim/bucket different than the definitive flat tappet OHV engines of the old American V8s, such that no manufacturer specifies a high ZDDP requirement for a DOHC engine, it's always for those older OHV V8s?

Maybe it's just that the metallurgy on the old OHV V8 cams or the old flat face lifters was crappy and prone to premature wear, such that an additive was required... that isn't at all necessary on any engines built with modern materials?

 

FWIW, the term "Flat tappet engines" INITIALLY referred to engines with pushrods and non-roller tappets, as in virtually all classic US OHV v8s. It NEVER applied to OHC engines until the makers of additives realized that the profile of a push rod tappet and a OHC tappet looked similar and they, therefore, could sell more additives by referring to both as "Flat Tappet Engines.

(Old adage: never trust the claims from anybody who is trying to sell you something! Or, as President Reagan often said, "Trust but Verify," which he lifted from a Russian proverb)

Traditional OHV engines have far greater pressure on the working surfaces of the cam/lifter than OHC motors because the valve trains are much, Much, MUCH heavier than OHC valve trains. Therefore, in addition to the greater weight the cam must "lift," they must also have much greater valve spring pressure to control the heavier load. It is the greater pressure/added weight that creates a concern with wear, due to the lack of certain additives in modern oils to properly lubricate the interface.

It's worth noting that there are two well-known issues that have always caused abnormal camshaft wear - improper break in and poor quality camshafts. Famous makers of cams - including Crane, Comp cams, etc have had an issue with soft camshafts that wore rapidly. Several motorcycle manufacturers - OHV and OHC makers - have had the same issue with their suppliers.

Improper break-in of a new cam can destroy it in less than a thousand miles, as can installing a new cam with old lifters or reinstalling an old cam/lifters but with the lifters in a different location.

I would never dump any additive into my engine oil because I have NO idea what the result is chemically...and neither does anybody else. If I felt I needed more ZDDP, I'd buy oil that has added ZDDP.

As you can probably tell, I am not a believer in the need for additional ZDDP. Here's a good example why: A few months ago I installed a new higher-performance camshaft in a 1968 340 Mopar motor that we built over 52k miles ago. It's been running Mobil 1 since it was built - 10W30 at that time, 5W30 for the past several years. The cam/lifters (standard OHV valve setup, not a roller) at 50k miles could have passed for new ones as far as appearance and wear - there was literally no wear per micrometer measurements. Other than the first 30 minutes of operation to run-in the cam, there have never been any additives/special oil used in the engine - just 10W or 5W 30 Mobil 1 - and the car has seen every form of duty from long distance driving, to bumper/bumper street traffic to weekend dragstrip duty.

But, as I have noted earlier, do whatever YOU are comfortable doing with your car. I'm comfortable that modern oils do everything better than old oils; other folks are not.

NOTE, I am not claiming Mobil One is better than other oils, it's just what we ended up using. I am sure any other synthetic oil would do as well.

 

Mike996 and GordonC,
Thank you for chasing the clarification regarding the configuration of the 3x8 engine and its impact on oil specification. So much of past debaters has been general and it is nice to see specifics. If you can definitively sort this out, it lays to rest a lot of the debates.

Personally, I don't get much into worrying about this oil versus that, but your explanations are quite interesting.

 

+1 I've enjoyed reading this one.

 

Here in Europe almost all engines, since 40 years, are OHC or DOHC. None of them had rollers, they all had buckets againts cam lobes. Just now some start to have rollers. Nobody here ever worried about Zync, that's an "American" problem that I just learned here. So put the oil you want: that zync problem doesn't exhist on modern (1970-75+) European engines. Leaks are an engine problem, not an oil problem. Please forget about zync problem. You just have to change oil every one or two years due to acid corrosion, no more: buy the oil you want, our old cars just need fresh oil, whatever you want. It's completely useless (and even wrong in some way) to put inside racing oils, as we don't anymore use them as "racing" cars, I suppose.

Trust me: I don't sell oils like Shell Company, that just wants to sell you the most expensive oil they have and it isn't the best oils for your vintage Ferrari.

ciao

 

You left out an important element. Push rod motors for the most part depend on throw off from the rod bearings to lubricate cams and lifters. OHC motors for the most part are operating in an oil bath.


I have for 40 years heard of the 328 style of valve operation referred to as "Flat tappet". Nothing at all incorrect about it. OHC motors have flat tappets, rocker arms and roller rockers. All valid terminology and technically correct.


If I had a Colombo powered car or a Daytona/C4/Dino I would be concerned about ZDDP. They had cam wear issues. Later cars never did.

 

Well said. A number of their products used by Ferrari are not the best choices but then I suspect there are other reasons Ferrari suggests their use.

And the part about European motors not having rollers and all having buckets against lobes is wildly incorrect. All Ferrari motors prior to the 4 cams had rocker arms and most had rollers. All Mercedes OHC motors up until the 1980's had rocker arms, as I understand some still do. BMW used mostly rocker arms during the same period. Some Alfa Romeos even had rocker arms. Many Maserati race engines had rocker arms, I could go on but the point is nearly every European engine builder of OHC designs has used or does use rocker arms. It is more difficult to come up with one that did not.

 

Sorry Brian, but not to sound argumentative - in my Alfa engine the camshaft lobes act directly on the buckets that actuate the valves. No Rocker arms. In fact all the Overhead Cam Alfa engines are the same, 4 cylinder, 6 cylinder and V8. (Giulia, GTV, Montreal, etc.)

 

I am factory trained on a bunch of Alfa Romeos. I strongly suggest you review the valve train on the original 2.5 liter SOHC GTV6. They are not all the same.

 

In my life as an engine builder, "flat tappet engines" were strictly defined as OHV engines with pushrods and solid or hydraulic "tappets." OHC engines did not have "tappets," they had "cam followers." Some had bucket shims, some had the rocker arms directly impinging on the cam/valves with an adjustment on the valve end of the rocker. But they were not referred to as "flat tappet engines" and were not considered to have "Valve Tappets." BUT, most of my experience is with US OHV engines so if RifleD says the Ferrari Mechs referred to Ferrari motors as having "flat tappets," I certainly defer to his experience/expertise.

But regardless of the semantics involved, the fact remains that OHC engines, regardless of the type of actuation, have virtually no valve train (and lifter/cam) load compared to OHV engines for which the concern about additive lubricants originated.

 

LOLOL

Every year, around this time of year, this oil thread just makes my brain hurt at just what am I supposed to put in my precious Ferrari 328, but this year, I give up, I am going to do it differently

I am going to put one liter of each brand/type/viscosity oil that you guys are recommending.