More on Thin Oils, A Used Oil Analysis

Were any of those 6 engines you have out for serious service valve guide related?

 

Mitch- The 456 and early 456Ms, along with some 355s, had bronze valve guides that wore prematurely. Early 550s were fitted with the same valve guides, but were not as affected because of a newer head design. Ferrari eventually replaced the inferior bronze alloy guides with sintered steel guides around the turn of the century, and these have caused no problems.

Research seems to indicate these guides wore prematurely because of uneven heating and shrinking from inadequate cooling in the cylinder heads. The very small size of the 6 mm valve stems and matching guides exacerbated this problem.

What else did you want to know and perhaps Brian can enlighten you?

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

Well, the gauntlet of challenge has been thrown; literally (Post #70 & 73).


I guess we might just see who is more confident (and possibily right, depending) of their understanding of oil.



"Interesting" is an understatement.

 

Sorry for the rooky question but any thought about Royal Purple oil for street use no track compare to Redline?

 

some did, some did not (wear)--mine is one of those that did not--that is it still has the bronze guides, lots of miles (57K), has had the literal snot run out of it (5K track miles), and still runs just fine.

Rifledriver seems to be replacing worn bronze valve guides with a different (higher) specification bronze valve guide (different thread on FC.)

I agree that the 6mm stems exacerbate the problem, and the higher than 348 RPMs exacerbate the problem. Some for these guide problems did show up in 348 challenge cars too late to change the 355 early production heads.

What is not known (to us) is if oil plays a part AND if how the driver treats the car while the oil is not-up-to-temp plays a part. In particular, if oil does play a part, is it the cold start viscosity (xxW)? the operating viscosity (-yy)? the HTHS viscosity? or some antiwear component (ZDDP)?

Is there anything a F355 driver can do to minimize his chance of been hit by valve guide issues?

When the guide were change from Bronze to sintered steel: were the oil seals also changed (i.e different part number)? was the operating clearance from stem to bore changed? Did the steel guides "make the problem disappear" or just "make the problem less likely"?

 

Depends on one's definition of "lower viscosity."

There is "free" HP in using a lower viscosity fluid, by reducing the torque needed to move the fluid throughout the engine. This can be as much as 10hp in small automotive engines and 40hp in a Cummins N14 diesel.
Are "thicker" oils responsible for reduced wear rates? Not necessarliy. It has more to do with the additive package. We engineers gotta stick together!
Hope this makes sense.

allthebest

 

We don't disagree that changing from 50 to 40 is probably frees up right around 5 to maybe 10 hp

We don’t disagree and I don't disagree with Dr. Haas that generally reducing the viscosity reduces wear all other things being equal.

......but these things aren't free, they come at a very price. The factory spec is chosen so that when the engine gets so hot the water starts to boil, the oil remains thick enough to protect the bearings. This makes an overheated engine a minor issue and not a catastrophic engine failure issue.

Who hasn’t had a car overheat at some point in their lives? I'm guessing the it was fine when it cooled down?

It’s a pretty common failure mode and the factory the engineers work hard to minimize the effects. (hint for Ali….no car’s cooling system will flow enough air when the car is parked or moving slowly to prevent overheating much off idle… and if I can boil the water I can blow the engine every time and it won’t take 10 minutes).

To Mitch’s point, if you are diligent about watching the oil temp you will be ok with thinner oil. I personally see it about the same as deciding to only wear your seatbelt when you are planning to crash.

 

Mitch- You know you can answer most of those questions yourself with five minutes in Ricambi's parts catalogs, but this should answer them. The other possibility that has nothing to do with lubrication is bad batches of poorly formulated bronze valve guides from one of Ferrari's suppliers. Thus the hit and miss of some failing and others not.

Brian has stated in other threads that he uses bronze and steel valve guides from suppliers other than Ferrari because their guides are of indifferent quality. Exactly what are you trying to prove?

Taz
Terry Phillips
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Ashona- Prepare for getting blasted. Become a sponsor if you want to advertise here and do it in an appropriate place.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

I lost a radiator on the interstate this summer. I saw the water temp rise towards red line on the water temp gauge. The oil temp stayed right down near the thermostatic lower limit (where it had been). But at least watching the gauges (water this time) saved me from potentially huge problems.

Also note: The F355 (and F360) are essentially oil cooled in the heads and water cooled in the block. The 5 valves (and associated ports) took up so much room in the head this was the only reasonable way out.

But all this talk of the main and rod bearings has me wondering about the cam tappets and the cam surfaces themselves. I would be surprised if these surfaces are not very close to danger along about the time the bearings are in danger (oil viscosity wise). The wiping friction up here does not have the hydrodynamic wedge to support the load like the journal bearings. These are also the points of failures in the flat tappet engine that are having so much trouble with SM oils and their lack of ZDDP. But, I guess these are easier to reach and change than the crankshaft itself once the spun bearing destroys the journal surface.

Thank you.

Rolling on the floor laughing out loud.

 

OMG!

Ciao,
George

 

This thread has been an education in oil and if nothing else has made me rethink the oil I use in my 328.

I have been using Mobile 0W-40 because I'm starting the car in cooler temps (~50F-60F). It typically takes around 15-20 minutes of idling to reach 140F and during normal use (highway driving, revs typically around 5000) the oil temp doesn't get above 200F. I've never seen it go above 210F.

Also, this oil has a Phosphorus level of 1000 PPM and a Zinc level of 1100 PPM.

It's cST @ 100C is 14 and HTHS @ 150C is 3.7.

Any thoughts on the use of this oil is encouraged and appreciated.

-F

 

That's what I use in my Merak SS. I as you, engage in spirited driving, but not tracking the car. This oil should be fine. Remember that the ZDDP only kicks in when temperatures reach a critical point as when the oil barrier has been compromized. Also, as with any other oil it is the additives package that wears out.

Ciao,
George

 

I have been around Fchat since 2004. In that time I have repeatedly declared that I have personally known of piston engines that exceeded 700,000 road miles on dino 15W45 motor oil. I have also declared witnessing several aircraft engines that had not been disassembled in over 40 years and that had accumulated over 3500 hours, far in excesses of the factories recommended TBO (time before overhaul) limit, on primarily dino 20W50.

I have not once seen anyone here claim to ever see an engine reach those limits on synthetic. And I have certainly never heard anyone make claims an engine reached those kind limits on lower viscosity oils, dino or otherwise.

At the end of the day its your engine. Its a proven fact an airplane engine will pull higher static RPM and produce more power with lower viscosity oil, as well as the same is also known in drag racing. Its also a proven fact that most run of the mill GM junk will reach warranty limits on the lightest oils they recommend. Whats not so well proven is how long those engines will run beyond normal limits. In aircraft it doesn't work out very well, simply because the power loading is much higher and continuous. A Cessna 150 puts out more continuous power than any Ferrari, even an Enzo. Run too low of viscosity oil and it has killed people. It works in drag racing because its only a 1/4 mile shot and they dont care because they will rebuild it for next weekend. It works out for the big factories because as long as most of the fleet makes it out of warranty, they dont care. Companies like Ferrari do care, IMHO, as do companies like Lamborghini, most motorcycle makers, heavy equipment engine makers, etc.. Its the big car companies that are being pressured to meet CAFE that push the low viscosity nonsense. No one else is doing it. IOW, there is more of a political and financial reason for GM to push OW weight oils in the Corvette, than trying to make the engine last forever. And that they can post a few more HP out of it doesnt hurt sales either.

I believe Brian is truthful that he has not witnessed any oil related failures in 30 years. The simple facts are that most people they never will. Ali probably never will either. He will sell the car off at 25K (or less) and never see it again. And he will never know if the engine made it to 60K miles, or 200K miles. And neither will Brian. By the time most Ferrari reach a point where they get disassembled, its for something unrelated. That, and no one ever knows the true mileage and most drive them very sedately.

I will continue to keep my oil viscosity on the upper end of the charts, instead of the lower end some want to strive for. In a sports car that means 20W50 or 10W60 from 40F and above, usually 15W45 through the winter, garaged or plugged in below zero. I've had a few of my own cars make it past 300K, and thats good enough for me. Doesn't mean I'm totally right, just that I am not totally wrong either. 1400 miles on an Enzo that never goes over 180F doesn't prove a thing IMHO.

 

Try 430,000 + on a Ford 4.9L inline 6 engine was never opened up in the 10 years I owned the vehicle since new. The new owner has put over 125,000 more on the engine and it is still running strong.

121,000 on a Ford 4.6L V8 and 114,000 on a Chevy 2.2L inline 4 All running on Mobile 1 I still have the Chevy and my V6 Ford Taurus with 80,000 on it are still running strong on Syn oils.

The fact of the matter is proper maintenance intervals goes a long way for engine longevity. This winter both the chevy and Ford will have 0W Mobile 1 in the sump to deal with the sub zero temps here in MT.

 

No offense, but 121K and 114K are nothing. I have 147K on my 97 Ford 5.4, and that does not impress me. 430K on a Ford inline 6 is somewhat impressive, but I have known of those particular engines reaching farther than that on plain old dino oil. You are correct, maintainance is the key, but what I am asking for is evidence of engines "surpassing" the mileages that have been witnessed with dino oils. On any given day out at the airport I could point at 3 or 4 aircraft with engines 40 plus years and 3500 plus hours that had never been out of the plane or had the jugs off. And at local Mercedes club get togethers, there are always a handful of cars that went over 500K, and a few past 700K, never been apart. But not a single one of those engines ever had a drop of synth in them. Show me a bunch of car engines that significantly surpassed those limits and I too will believe in the magic.

Thats not to say synth doesnt have some special properties, like allowing a diesel to turn over at zero and start, or keep a turbo from coking on shut down. But I have started diesels at zero without heating them and wont do it anymore, its just to hard on them. And turbo coking is pretty much alleviated by allowing the engine to idle a few minutes before shutdown, something you should be doing regardless.

 

Ali

Let's cut to the chase. I have run P 4/5 on very hot days at the track until the tires and brake pads wore out using the recommended oil.

I'm a member of a Private track and next summer will be happy to do it again on a hot day.

You want to join me and run your Enzo until the brake pads wear out and the oil temp gets close to red line for many, many laps on thin oil?

Afterwards we can send our oil off for comparison.

Feeling Lucky?

Cheers

 

Cue up the jeopardy tune......

 

I'm in! (But it is merely an F355.)
What track?

 

MMC. http://www.mmcmembers.com/news?news_next_page=7

You going to run 20W oil and not back off when your oil temp rises?

Hey no need to travel. I trust you and it will be interesting to see how oil tests.

You run a hard track day with 20W oil not backing off and I'll run a hard track day with 10-60 and we'll send in oil for analysis and post results.

 

No.

 

Art- Just to put this thing in perspective, we used synthetic oil in our F-111s because conventional oils could not survive in that environment. The oil was around $50/quart, but then each 18-25K lbst engine only used 8 quarts. That oil was unsuitable for automotive use and would eat conventional rubber seals (ask us how we know), but most of the development of synthetic oils was for aviation applications.

Here is a an interesting take on the development of synthetic oils and how they migrated to automotive use.

http://www.oil4kids.com/syn-hist.htm

One thing important to remember about oils is that the weight system we have for oils is completely misleading for synthetic oils.

A 15W-50 conventional oil is a 15 weight oil with viscosity enhancers to act like a 50 weight oil when hot, until those enhancers wear out. A 15W-50 synthetic oil is a 50 weight oil when hot that flows like a 15 weight oil when cold.

So fear of 5W-XX and 0W-XX synthetic oils is completely misplaced. The real oil weight is the second figure on synthetics, and the first figure on conventional oils.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

After a rod pops thru the block or oil pan the only oil that will be available will be what is cleaned up off the track with speedy dry .

Can you do an oil analysis on speedy-dry? Or do you just count the big chucks you pick up off the track?

 

20W -- no, but I would be willing to run a 10W-30 oil, and have in the midst of Texas summers. Might be fun.

 

The last three words in that sentance are redundant.