cenpeco oil

I had a conversation with an engineer with this company the other day at the behest of a Ferrari engine builder who happens to swear by this non-synthetic parrafin based oil for older Ferrari engines (he uses it in everything from Muira engines to 250s). Should anyone like to give him a call, shoot me a PM and I will let you know who I spoke with should anyone like to ask any specific questions.

This engineer and I spoke at lengths regarding why he believes a paraffin based oil (dino oil) should be used in our application. The thickening properties this oil has when it comes to bearing load (which can reach upwards of 10,000psi) happens to thicken and protect much quicker than that of synthetics. Also, their particular oil I suppose is a bit "old school" because their zinc content is a huge 2400 ppm and the phospherous content is 2200ppm which many believe to be fantastic lubricating properties that current oil regulations defer from using mostly due to its effect on catalytic converters. Also, dino oil in his studies sheds heat better than that of synthetics. The film strength of their 20/50 racing oil was also touted to be quite robust and is currently used in many racing applications. Their particular claim to fame is that of their success with tractor pulling (yes, tractor pulling). They manufactur synthetics and dino oil, but their most robust racing/performance application oil is their 20/50 racing juice.

Needless to say I may give this stuff a shot. I am currently using Shell's Rotella T synthetic 5w-40, but the new CJ-4 oil regulations no longer allow all that much zinc or phospherous to be used (cap is 1100-1200ppm IIR) which obviously concerns me regarding the wellness of my engine. SM regulations for zinc/phosph are yet even lower than that which was why I went for a deisel oil to begin with.

Should anyone know more about this oil or have anything constructive to add, I would love to hear it. I am in a situation right now where my engine is in utterly fantastic condition and I would very much like to keep it that way. If I sound like I am granting too much weight to zinc/phosph please let me know, otherwise I am going to continue to research oils which are rich in these particular properties and use them so long as they are available.

-john

 

"I am in a situation right now where my engine is in utterly fantastic condition and I would very much like to keep it that way. "

Use a current oil to do that, not an oil based on 1920's oil technology. Even owners of original Model Ts use current oils to keep their engines in top condition.

Paraffin based oils were known for the sludge they produced at higher temperatures; it's the reason that no current spec oils use it since engines run at a much higher temp than they did in the 30's. Competition engines commonly run at LOWER temps than a street engine does. The easiest job for engine oil is in racing engines, NOT street engines.

 

It's my understand that racing engines beat on oil far more than any street engine could. How can your claim be substantiated considering the increased stress level which racing engines are subject to on a regular basis compared to that of street engines?

 

I found this. It's an excellent summary and much easier than me trying to write for several pages!
http://motorcycleinfo.calsci.com/Oils1.html

It explains the ins and outs of motor oil. Read the entire article. All the info you need is all there including the myth of "racing oil" and some info re paraffin base stock. It's a motorcycle-oriented site but that's not an issue since it discusses oil in general.

I built competition and performance street engines for many years; we ended up using synthetic in all of them. We never used "racing oil," even in the racing engines. I would strongly recommend a current synthetic. In addition to all the existing data showing the superiority of syn oils for lubrication over a wide range of use/temps, we found that syns provided a HP increase - around 5-6 HP at 6000RPM. So what's not to like?

Consider that these "old" Ferrari 3x8 engines are made of exactly the same materials as current engines. There is no need for some "old" oil formulation and using it is NOT a recipe for long life. Mobil 1 is in my 328. However, it's your money, use whatever you want.

 

I have been using synthetic. Shell's Rotella T 5-40 previous generation formula contained larger amounts of zinc and phosphorous than other oils. Combined that with a very high VI and equally impressive HT/HS it made for an impressive oil. However, the latest formula of deisel and non-deisel oils have had zinc and phosphorous limits placed on them which raised an eyebrow for me. Older engines do no have roller cams as many modern engines do, but rather they have flat tappets. For cars without cat conv, I find a lot of value in using a lubricant with more zddp which has been explained to me on numerous occasions by an oil engineer with Shell, and was further validated by this engineer with Cenpeco. I would love to continue using the Shell synthetic product, but I am now being advised to proceed with caution due to the new formulation.

 

I certainly wouldn't argue about the well-known value of zinc and other additives as wear-inhibiters but one has only to look at the current oil-change specs for cars to see that manufacturers do not consider the lower levels to be an issue. Porsche, for example, factory fills with synthetic and recommends oil changes at 15,000 mile intervals. You can be sure Porsche is NOT interested in replacing engines due to faulty oiling so obviously their testing has determined that the current synthetics provide much better wear protection and therefore allow a much longer drain interval than older oils.

Again, it's worth noting that the various bearing and other metal material used in current car engines hasn't changed for 40 years so there is nothing "different" in these 3x8 engines compared to engines being produced today. Does the oil he is recommending meet current or recent API specs? If so, it would be fine but if it doesn't, I wouldn't put in a lawnmower!

Note that later gasoline engine API oil specs ALWAYS include the protection rating of earlier specs so the current API spec (SM) includes the capability of ALL earlier API spec oils.

http://www.aa1car.com/library/API_ratings.pdf

 

No it does not meet current API specs. I was advised by two different sources (sources not working or affiliated with cenpeco) that it does not meet API current specs due to the limits API placed on zinc and phosphorous levels. I don't want to personally play engineer with my engine, but it is difficult for me to dispute what other engineers have to say as well as dispute what owners of cars who have much more at stake (multi-million $ cars) have to say when this particular oil is recommended.

I am not trying to argue, but I am saying that those with a phd in chemical engineering who do this for a living and whose livelihoods are at stake are telling me to proceed with caution regarding SM rated oils in a flat-tappet engine. These are not hobbyists patronising me with mildly thought out conjecture. They specifically advised I locate an oil with high zinc and phosphorous content and the above mentioned oil happened to come up in conversation.

 

Hmmm... I'm concerned that the oil in question NEVER met any API specs that Ferrari (or anyone else) called for, regardless of the year of the car.

But if you are comfortable with their logic and recommendations and feel your car is better cared for by using the oil, that's all that matters.