|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> The Cafe >> Who wants some Math Homework? /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1446553641 Message started by Dave on 11/03/15 at 04:27:21 |
|
Title: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/03/15 at 04:27:21 Until recently, Rotella T had 1,250 ppm of ZDDP, and this met our standard for no less then 1,200 ppm of ZDDP we felt was necessary for the camshaft and rocker arms to have long term durability in the Savage. Boule'tard made up a mix table for folks wanting to supplement the ZDDP levels by using Redline ZDDP additive, and the chart is on this page. http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1345080430 We recently learned that Rotella T has dropped the ZDDP level down to 1,100 ppm, and this is below the 1,200 ppm threshold that we believe is acceptable (1,200 - 1,400 ppm is the recommended range). I have done some investigation and found that the Redline ZDDP has a total of 74,500 ppm per oz., so we need someone to calculate how much ZDDP should be added to each gallon of Rotella T to up the concentration of the Rotella T to the 1,200-1,400 range. The blend table doesn't need to go above or below that range for our use. Anybody up to the task of doing the math and making a table for the forum? Specifics I found for the 16oz. (453.6 gram) bottle are: TOTAL ZDDP CONTENT - 33.8 GRAMS, PHOSPHORUS CONTENT - 7.8 GRAMS, ZINC CONTENT - 9.4 GRAMS, SULFUR CONTENT - 16.6 GRAMS. http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1345080430 |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/03/15 at 05:29:15 Everybody please remember that Boule did the table based off of bumping the entire gallon bottle of Rotella T. Fl.Oz. ppm for Redline ppm if adding ZDDPlus or Eastwood ZDDP Booster 0.000 1200 0.125 1271 1320 0.250 1290 1389 0.375 1309 1458 0.500 1329 1526 0.625 1348 1595 0.750 1367 1663 0.875 1387 1731 1.000 1406 1799 1.125 1425 1867 Making the math approximate and simple, it takes an ounce of Redline Booster to raise the ZDDP in the entire gallon jug by right at 200 points. That is a half ounce per 100 points. Since we are now starting 100 points off the old starting point, add approximately a extra half an ounce per gallon makes us right again. This approximation method gives a ~ check point~ to the table subtraction method for fixing the table. ======================================== I think the easiest and most accurate way to fix the table is to add in the 000 line at the top of the chart as shown and then to subtract 100 points from each of the PPM numbers for Redline and from the PPM for Eastwood. This accurately reflects the reduction in the starting point PPM. And it is an easy to do correction method if it changes again in the future. This way the top line will reflect the current reality at adding no booster and getting 1100 PPM as the result of adding nothing. Adding this line keeps us real. The remainder of the chart as altered would be about as accurate as the original chart. The result would be this using the subtract 100 from the PPM method: Fl.Oz. ppm for Redline ppm if adding ZDDPlus or Eastwood ZDDP Booster 0.000 1100 1100 ......... ........ ........ 0.125 1171 1220 0.250 1190 1289 0.375 1209 1358 0.500 1229 1426 0.625 1248 1495 0.750 1267 1563 0.875 1287 1531 1.000 1306 1699 1.125 1325 1767 1.250 1344 1835 1.375 1363 1.500 1383 1.625 1402 1.750 1421 1.875 1440 2.000 1459 2.125 1477 2.250 1496 2.375 1515 2.500 1534 2.625 1553 2.750 1571 2.875 1590 3.000 1609 3.125 1627 3.250 1646 3.375 1664 3.500 1683 3.625 1701 3.750 1720 3.875 1738 4.000 1756 4.125 1774 4.250 1792 4.375 1810 (going past 1800 is thought to be counter-productive) |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by DesertRat on 11/03/15 at 05:35:17 Tocris Dilution Calculator -Calculate the dilution required to prepare any stock solution http://www.tocris.com/dilutionCalculator.php this one has "oz" calculation selections: http://www.endmemo.com/bio/dilution.php |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by prechermike on 11/03/15 at 06:05:52 2E0D0507040D0D0413610 wrote:
add approximately a extra half an ounce per gallon makes us right again Is that the final answer? Make it easy for an old guy like me. :-[ |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/03/15 at 06:17:19 You want a REAL dirt easy method? I've got a quick and dirty one that I use for my Redline Booster. Put your oil in the sump to the level you use. Add a sloppy ounce of booster. Go take a trip somewhere to mix it up good and get it plated all over the guts good. This blasts you up past 1400 ppm and says that over the life of the oil charge (even the long long potential life of a Rot Syn oil charge) you don't ever need to worry about ZDDP depletion since you started up that high. A 16 oz bottle of booster can last you years and years and years if you keep it in a cool place inside the AC'd house. If you keep your booster in the hot garage, check the bottom of the bottle and shake it up periodically to keep the ZDDP from coming out of solution. I have wasted (ruined) more Redline from poor "hot" storage than I have ever actually used ....... |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Serowbot on 11/03/15 at 07:39:10 Somebody call Shell, and tell them millions of bikers are P'O'd... >:(... |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/03/15 at 08:13:04 Dave, here is the complete table for USA production Shell Rotella Triple Protection, all fixed up. Everybody please remember that Boule did this table based off of bumping the entire gallon bottle of Rotella T. Fl.Oz. ppm for Redline ppm if adding ZDDPlus or Eastwood ZDDP Booster 0.000 1100 1100 ......... ........ ........ 0.125 1171 1220 0.250 1190 1289 0.375 1209 1358 0.500 1229 1426 (people now question what going past 1400 actually gets you) 0.625 1248 1495 0.750 1267 1563 0.875 1287 1531 1.000 1306 1699 1.125 1325 1767 1.250 1344 1835 1.375 1363 1.500 1383 1.625 1402 (people now question what going past 1400 actually gets you) 1.750 1421 1.875 1440 2.000 1459 (adding an ounce per Savage sump puts you here -- a little off into the max zone) 2.125 1477 2.250 1496 2.375 1515 2.500 1534 2.625 1553 2.750 1571 2.875 1590 3.000 1609 3.125 1627 3.250 1646 3.375 1664 3.500 1683 3.625 1701 3.750 1720 3.875 1738 4.000 1756 4.125 1774 4.250 1792 4.375 1810 (going past 1800 is thought to be counter-productive) |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by verslagen1 on 11/03/15 at 08:14:52 How fast is zddp used in an average engine? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/03/15 at 08:40:15 01222A282B22222B3C4E0 wrote:
I read the info in the following link, and I believe that there can be too much ZDDP, and I am not mixing over 1,400 ppm as a result: QUOTE FROM LINKED ARTICLE: And keep in mind for comparison with the oils below, that earlier oil industry testing has found that above 1,400 ppm, ZDDP INCREASED long term wear, even though break-in wear was reduced. And it was also found that ZDDP above 2,000 ppm, started attacking the grain boundaries in the iron, resulting in camshaft spalling. So, no matter what zinc fans might “believe”, there is such a thing as "too much of a good thing". http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=35836 I might try keeping my Redline in the fridge or freezer, as mine settles out in my garage that is insulated and kept between 55-80 all year long. I did find that if I put the bottom in my ultrasonic cleaner with the heater on and warm up the Redline and then shake the bottle - I can get the yellowish goo off the bottom of the bottle again. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/03/15 at 08:43:00 How fast is zddp used in an average engine? Not very fast. Go on Bob's and look at VOA vs UOA results that folks post on the same sump of oil. Even truckers (who stretch things FAR further than we do) keep right at 1,000 ppm at the end of their oil change intervals. The US military SELECTIVELY ADD ZDDP to used oil sitting in the crankcase unless it has high silicone or extreme acidity problems or other issues that cannot be fixed. They do NOT change the oil unless they have to. The military TESTS each individual machine and decides what to add to the sump. So do most commercial fleets now-a-days. I dare say my one year change interval is more than generous as far as keeping silicates down and ZDDP levels up. :) Dave will like that my "add a sloppy ounce to a sump" comes out around 1450 ppm, certainly not a grotesquely excessive overcharge of ZDDP by anybody's guesstimation. I can make the sloppy ounce be on the short side, you know, if I want to. I don't measure all that accurately using a Pepto Bismol cup anyway. I also am a side stand oil window kind of guy, so I use two and a quarter to two and a half quarts of oil. Dave, if you think the article is correct, truncate the table accordingly. Boule wrote it to the highest historical numbers ever used in racing oils, which was 1800 PPM, but oils are better than they used to be and there ARE new things in the oils intended to help things out which do not go away just because we bump the ZDDP numbers some. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/03/15 at 09:22:02 BTW, my experiment to see if dino Rot T stopped the mild warm up clutch slipping that had started with Rot Syn T6? So far the answer is yes ...... and my weep is reduced as well. Ambient temp is less than mid summer was and the Rot T dino is a bit thicker (15w vs 5 w) on the start viscosity, so this may all be natural to the season and the start weight, plus the entire charge of oil is new and has not sheared any at all to speak of yet. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/03/15 at 18:29:41 If I'm reading the chart correctly then no added ZDDP will get you 1100 ppm with Rotella T. Adding 3/8 oz. (0.375) of Redline booster will extend it to 1200 ppm. Correct? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/03/15 at 18:53:28 Yes. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Art Webb on 11/03/15 at 19:18:40 1 full oz nets you 1306, I think that's a very happy medium between 1250 and 1400 sp .25oz fer quart, since I went and bought some quarts so I'd be able to carry 1 with me in the saddlebag |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 11/03/15 at 20:47:34 Ok have a dorm sized fridge in the shop. I keep all kindsa stuff in there. The contact cement doesn't dry out, the caulk and other sealants seem to last a lot longer. You might try buying some gallons of oil change and dosing them? Maybe give them a shake once in awhile? I had no idea ZDDP went bad. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by stinger on 11/04/15 at 03:21:12 Not the best at math. Therefore I only use Castrol 20-50wt automobile oil all four seasons of the year. 56,000 plus miles on my 650 and not one repair ever to the engine. Not one! In fact my header pipe is as shiny chrome today as it was the day I bought it new off the show room floor. No oil leaks and runs like a clock. I don't need no Rotella or ZDDP! I did change the cam chain at 30,000 because I thought it was required. After it was apart I realized it is still in great shape and might reuse it again someday. I don't ride hard but I do ride pretty fast. I just checked the tensioner and it is still within limits. I probably will do the Versy this winter tho just to be safe. Am I the only one here that uses auto oil and 20-50? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/04/15 at 05:22:55 Dave, you will need to replace the table in the tech section. If your research confirms that PPM numbers over 1400 are more and more counterproductive, then you should truncate the table as Boule's old 1800 PPM top end is a very old racing oil spec. I think Redline goes up that high in their tables, but they are dealing with drag racers and stuff like that. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Art Webb on 11/04/15 at 08:57:52 4F4855525B594E3C0 wrote:
Rotella is auto oil and diesel oil and moto oil and genny oil on the Honda Rebel forum a lot of folks use Castrol from 10-40 to 20-50 (castrol above 10-30 is not 'energy conserving') and are happy as larks with it one fella has over 100k on his rebel with Castrol We choose Rotella for the ZDDP, which experience of some members suggests out engines need This brings up a question someone else has mentioned before: What if the damaged engines weren't because of a lack of ZDDP? what if the real culprit was something else? (low idle speed comes immediately to mind) what if Castrol has something in it that does the same thing? Hmmmmm |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/04/15 at 09:25:37 Art: The failure caused by low idle speed, and lack of ZDDP appear to cause 2 seperate modes of failure. The low idle speed kills the cam bearings and doesn't seem to do much damage to the cam or rockers. I guess the low speed doesn't overstress the cam lobes or rockers. The lack of ZDDP doesn't do anything to the cam bearings and they stay smooth and shiny - but it causes the cam lobes and rocker to wear too fast. If someone had a low idle speed and oil without enough ZDDP - I suppose they could damage the bearings and wear out the cam lobes and rocker simultaneously. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Art Webb on 11/04/15 at 10:20:49 ok that makes it curious that stinger is getting along fine with Castrol, doesn't it? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/04/15 at 10:43:55 786B6D6E7C7B7B190 wrote:
I dunno....most folks formulate 20W-50 with high doses of ZDDP as it is not an oil approved or listed for use in modern fuel injected engines.....you won't ever see the "Energy Saving Star" on a bottle of 20W-50. Most stuff that uses 20W-50 is vintage or race oriented. Somebody needs to find out if the Castrol 20W-50 has friction modifiers and how much ZDDP is in it. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Gus on 11/04/15 at 13:14:24 NO! 5A5D40474E4C5B290 wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 11/04/15 at 15:07:20 No? Kinda need to elaborate.. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by prechermike on 11/05/15 at 08:37:28 Checked at Advance Auto Parts, they didn't have any redline stuff, they did have this from Lucas, is that the same stuff, or at least OK? http://shop.advanceautoparts.com/wcsstore/CVWEB/staticproductimage//N2049/large/7660006_lco_10063_pri_larg.jpg |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/05/15 at 08:57:24 NO Lucas. Not approved for wet clutch use at all by the mgf. Contains TONS of friction modifiers and the Lucas base oil contains bad polymers as well. We've checked Lucas before and found only bad news, and we have also had newbies come on board after using the stuff and contaminating their clutches VERY BADLY. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/05/15 at 09:02:34 The only good supplements we have found require internet ordering. Try Amazon, they have the approved stuff. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/05/15 at 10:20:38 If someone want to say Castrol oil is good stuff, please refine your statement down to WHICH CASTROL product you are talking about. Castrol is like Kendal now-a-days, just a brand name that is currently owned by British Petroleum (BP) who trots it out occasionally to try to sell something to the American big engine muscle car owners. Castrol oil built by Castrol Inc. back in the day was a high ZDDP oil, like many others of the era. It was refined from Pennsylvanian crude and it was a good oil back then. This is NOT what you are getting today -- it is a BP standard formulated oil in a Castrol jug. Castrol Edge seems to have somewhat better specs that most of the Castrols lately, but it isn't consistent year to year and it gets weaker every time the general car specs change. Pick which one you want to contest, and let's be about it -- been a year at least since we did a Castrol lookie-see. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by prechermike on 11/05/15 at 10:43:47 06252D2F2C25252C3B490 wrote:
Thanks Oldfeller. But just to make sure I am ordering the right stuff, this is it, right? Redline Engine Oil Breakin Additive 81403 http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NTUwWDU1MA==/z/lwQAAOSwNSxVQonf/$_35.JPG?set_id=880000500F |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 11/05/15 at 10:50:15 5857405D565E0B56555D0B390 wrote:
[/quote] NO, what? You use 20-50? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Tocsik on 11/05/15 at 10:55:42 Is the new chart settled? Also, what date/lot# did the ZDDP level drop from 1200 to 1100? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by stewmills on 11/05/15 at 11:13:21 555740464D4057484C4E40250 wrote:
Yep, that's the stuff you want. Ordered it myself last year. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by prechermike on 11/05/15 at 11:18:36 303726342E2A2F2F30430 wrote:
Yep, that's the stuff you want. Ordered it myself last year. [/quote] Thanks Stew! As soon as my $ comes in, I'm ordering some too. Today is payday! Yahoo! |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/05/15 at 12:39:04 340F0313090B600 wrote:
Good question. Dave has got to decide whether he's going to truncate the table or not and then he's got to post it in the original thread. He's likely waiting to see if anybody's got any "hell no" comments and he'll likely wait for the discussion to die down before he does that. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/05/15 at 17:42:00 Actually I am just really swamped at work......and haven't got around to doing anything with fixing the original post. (I also hate to see the work that Boule'tard did go away..........I miss having him around) |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/05/15 at 17:44:18 Prechermike, that's the stuff. I checked nearly every auto parts store around here and no one sells Redline products. You have to order it online. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Art Webb on 11/05/15 at 20:07:30 0B2820222128282136440 wrote:
regardless who made it, oil with friction modifiers is always labeled 'energy conserving, so as far as wet clutch approved, castrol from 10w40 up is ok as to ZDDP I don't know, that was sort of my point, stinger has 50+k miles on a savage with Castrol I dunno if it's regular GTX he's using, but almost EVERYONE at Honda Rebel forum uses GTX at 10w40 or above, and zero clutch issues they also eyball the label for the 'energy conserving' label, just in case last I checked, the 10w40 GTX is still not energy conserving And Rebels do not have roller valvetrains, before anyone asks |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/06/15 at 04:29:22 Art, you are proposing generalities based upon another brand of bike's forum chat. Rebel 250s are small displacement high revving twin engines and Harleys are big air cooled twins with large running tolerances. We don't let the 20w50 Harley Oil Lovers association get away with that, so neither can you with your buzzing 250 Honda Rebel oil. Break it down and say exactly which Castrol oil are you proposing for the Savage. We can't oil war your oil unless you tell us which one it is ...... there are at least 3 Castrols out there you know, Racing, Edge and normal GTX for cars. And no, not every jug containing low levels of friction modifiers is labeled "energy conserving" (we wish that was true). Technically, all the energy star oils have to be -w30 or less weight oils to use the star symbol. And BTW, moly oil as an additive is now creeping into most all full synthetics now, even the ones used in motorcycles with wet clutches. ;D |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/06/15 at 04:54:27 Here is the link to the list oil recommendations page in Tech Section. Dave has been working on it, you can tell because it is at the top of the listing in Tech Section. http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1344471565/1#1 |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Art Webb on 11/06/15 at 09:53:57 77545C5E5D54545D4A380 wrote:
which is why I said 'I dunno what version of Castrol stinger is using' all I stated was that Castrol GTX 10w40 is wet clutch safe, and so is GTX20w50 YO STINGER, WHAT TYPE O CASTROL YOU USING! C'mon buddy, you gotta back your statements up with details ENQUIRING MINDS WANNA KNOW WHACCHOO USIN, PERZACKLY |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/06/15 at 10:39:58 GTX dino Castrol are SN car oils, so it will be a very short conversation. I am finding many more different types of Castro oil, especially internationally. BP Castrol does both dino and synthetic and blended and has a different sub-brand name for each item. There are a great many different formulations and associated sub-brand names for Castrol 10w40. And I am getting the impression these sub-brands don't hang around for more than a year so, so they don't get into Bob's database consistently. http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o191/mklinuxdude/VOA/e69397-001.jpg REMEMBER, THE GRAY COLUMN IS WHAT IT IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE and the white column is what is actually there. 716 phosphorus and and 813 zinc ..... not so hot. And Edge is supposed to be the good stuff synthetic but it looks like it's just a standard wimpy SN car oil, nothing special at all. http://msdspds.castrol.com/bpglis/FusionPDS.nsf/Files/A9EED664E7A92C4E80257EC60063BBB1/$File/BPXE-A2ZRG9.pdf And when talking about Castrol GTX 10w40 dino oil, just look at what Castrol says it is. "Sludge resistant" SN car oil ....... "Due to continual product research and development, the information contained herein is based on products purchased and subject to change without notification. Typical properties may vary slightly." |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by springman on 11/06/15 at 16:50:19 Ok guys. I did the math. Based on Rotella now being at 1100 ppm and red line being at 74,500 ppm, 0.2 ounce of red line added to 1 gallon of rotella will give you 1207.8 ppm. 0.5 ounce of red line added to 1 gallon of rotella will give you 1382.4 ppm. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/06/15 at 19:13:34 Using Boule'tard's chart, I've been using 2 ozs. of Redline to achieve 1559 ppm of ZDDP. Someone post the math for how you guys are figuring this out. By MY math (which I'm sure is wrong) I'm getting 2229 ppm with 2 ozs. :o 128 ozs (1 gallon) of Rotella = 1100 ppm 0.2 ozs of Redline with 74,500 ppm of ZDDP [ (128 * 1100) + (0.2 * 74500) ] / (128 + 0.2) = 2229.231 :-? :-/ |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/07/15 at 00:48:27 Kris, you've got to figure out how much ZDDP by weight is in each amount of booster base oil vs the weight of the oil itself (yup, the base oil weight that you also have to know by weight). Then do the same exact thing for the amount of Rotella oil you are using. Nothing is done by volume, it is all done by weight. Then you total the two ZDDP weights. then divide that number by the weights of the two base oils totaled together, then multiply that resulting very small fractional number by 1,000,000 to get your ZDDP PPM number for that mixture. It isn't that easy to do. And you begin to get a feel why Boule said to do your mixing to the full virgin gallon jug, as he had to have something to hold still for his figuring which was done on a complex formula spreadsheet. Boule did the spreadsheet and the table correctly, we all reality checked at the time using our various methods. The table was in line with the factory recommendations from Redline and Eastwood, differing only in that it starts up high because our Rotella base oils were already up high in ZDDP already. Gotta watch that Redline factory recommended mix ratio stuff that is on the bottle and on their web page, it assumes you are starting out using Walmart normal very very very wimpy car oils. (and some of you are ....... Castrol GTX indeed) :P |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/07/15 at 07:51:24 OF, I have a thing for numbers. Can you send me the spreadsheet (or post it here)? Or would the formula be easier to type on this message board? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/07/15 at 09:11:09 http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1344471408/58 At post #58 Boule said it was easy, just ratios and volunteered to do it and post it. I took him up on it, just like I am doing to you right now. Read and enjoy, lots of old list players rang in on this one with Boule being the brash newbie in the group. Tell us about what you find out in your investigations ....... :) I'd read the whole thing from the beginning, and Boule attached his spreadsheet as a zip file to the blend table so folks could see where his numbers came from. ;D if you can get the zip file to read, that would be very helpful I would think ...... |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Tocsik on 11/07/15 at 10:10:15 0320282A292020293E4C0 wrote:
Looks like you need to change the extension: ".. I will attach the spreadsheet to this post (open office format, oops the forum will not let me attach a file with extension ods. Change the extension from zip to ods or xls. It is not really a zip file) so anyone can check my math or expand it out to Mountain Dew "extreme" zinc concentrations beyond 2500ppm. " |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/07/15 at 10:22:44 Dave, please change the file reference on Boule's spreadsheet in the Tech Section so folks don't have to go through this again. It isn't a zip file, it is a full folder full of stuff including Boule's two baseball practice schedules that he keeps. AND 3 copies of the same .obd spreadsheet (Boule only used Open Office products back when he did this). I have attached an .xls microsoft friendly version of the file to this post so you can lay hands upon it. AHA !!!! I see why boule renamed the file, our site text box won't take a spreadsheet format. So it is attached as a fraudulent .zip file, just copy it to your desktop and rename it .xls |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Art Webb on 11/07/15 at 10:34:10 7D5E5654575E5E5740320 wrote:
I never said GTX was special, I said it was WET CLUTCH SAFE, period the chart you posted for edge is interesting, showing Moly (bad stuff for wet clutches) at fairly high rates, but it's Edge, which I never mentioned again, my purpose here is this Stinger has a Savage he uses CASTROL (we don't know what kind yet) he has 56000 miles on his savage he has had no issues are we sure a lack of ZDDP at high levels is what has cause the failures we are attributing to it we seem to have some empirical evidence that might not be the case charts are not an argument that stands against empirical evidence Also as I noted Rebels share something in common with our Savages no roller valvetrain the lack of a roller valvetrain is what we have assumed to be what causes the need for ZDDP the Rebel lacks a roller valvetrain it apparently is OK without high levels of ZDDP, so why isn't a Savage a redline of 6800 RPM and a redline of 8100 RPM are not significantly different the number of cylinders is irrelevant we have a Savage running some type of Castrol for over half the mileage the highest mileage savage on the board has attained with high ZDDP oil, why has the valvetrain not been destroyed? Dismissing the issue is easy, but doesn't cast any light on the answers we should be examining this, not dismissing it on the basis of an assumption |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/07/15 at 10:58:58 Examine away ..... you will find that standard Castrol GTX (all weights) is now a SN dino car oil, and specs exactly what the sorry Edge stuff did as it turns out it too is a standard SN car oil. Nobody does VOAs on Castrol GTX as Castrol says up front what it is ..... a "sludge resistant" SN dino car oil. Art, you need to click on the links provided in these discussions and READ what they say. Now, Stinger and his high mileage bike. We have done this already, with both Stinger and WD. Here is what we found last time around the Stinger/WD barn. He used different brands of oils at different times. Both like Harley weight oil because that is what they have always used. Some of his oil changes (I guess you could say most of them) were done a long time ago --- back when all oils all had significant amounts of ZDDP in them. Thus he got what everybody got back then, adequate ZDDP to keep his valve train happy. Now he's not getting that, but since the name on the jug stayed the same he considers it all good to him. I think he's in error about that lately, but it is his bike, now isn't it? Next, Stinger has been around this barn before and isn't likely to want to go do it again. He just tosses out a Billish sort of statement and leaves. WD's Savage bikes have all died electrically and been replaced (except maybe one, the one up on the cinderblocks). If you want to play Stinger for him, that's fine ---- but you are the one making big assumptions about an oil and a situation that you can't even put a bottle type and a weight to. Castrol is just a brand name, one that has been moved around all over the place by British Petroleum, who owns it now. And, having been around the Stinger barn before, I can say he's had his bike a while and puts a lot of miles on it and he changes his oil regularly. Good for Stinger. Most of his Castrol used in his bike was probably built by Castrol Company using domestic American crude oil as the base stock. There is a wide range between optimum and adequate --- if you keep any sort of oil in your bike and change it normally, you will get normal performance and normal life. Do you want your Savage to need a major rebuild around 60,000 miles? I think most of us might could use some new rings about then, but replacing the cam and tappets doesn't have to be. Good levels of ZDDP cuts down on ring and cylinder wear too, BTW. Savage Rob and some of the old guys have had to rebuild their engines totally and replace their cams and tappets at normal mileages using normal car oils from back in the day -- we try to do better than that now days. ;) |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/07/15 at 12:30:35 A while back a member tried to compare the valve train of a small Honda engine to our Savage. When someone posted the valve spring rates for both bikes, it was obvious the little engine had valve springs with a lot less tension on them, and I suspect the same it true for the Rebel. When your valves are small enough for a 125cc piston....the valves are lighter and the springs don't need to be as strong as they are for a 650cc piston. And I suspect the same may be true for those hundreds of thousands of Honda 50cc, 65cc, 70cc, 90cc, 100cc, 125cc, etc. that all share that same design that Honda started in the 60's. Like Oldfeller said....until recently they were running oil with high levels of ZDDP. And it is not just us Savage owners that are having problems....anyone with an old flat tappet cam in their tractor, sports car, muscle car, etc. have been experience cam/lifter/rocker problems.....and all of them need to be sure to use an oil with adequate ZDDP to fix the problem. The ZDDP issue and cure has been adapted to our use - but we did not invent the issue and the cure - it is a common problem among folks who still operate vintage machinery. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/07/15 at 15:38:24 Boule's blend table is all numbers and no formulas. Here's a link to a formula: http://www.nitemareperformance.150m.com/ZDDP.html |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by springman on 11/07/15 at 16:40:48 75,400 parts of zddp in one ounce of red line 128 x 1100 = 140,800 parts of zddp in one gallon of rotella 128 x 1200 = 153,600 parts of zddp desired in one gallon of rotella 153,600 - 140,800 = 12,800 parts of zddp needed to add to one gallon of rotella 12,800 / 75,400 = 0.1697 the fraction of an ounce of rotella that contains the 12,800 part of zddp needed to add to the gallon of rotella to achieve 1200 ppm of zddp. So 0.2 or 1/5 of an ounce gets you pretty darn close, or 1217.8 to be exact. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/07/15 at 16:54:34 File dropper permits you to share a file in its natural format --- let's see if it can handle Boule's baby. You will have to pick the one you want and download it. Yes, there are formulas behind the numbers, but the list won't let them show (doesn't handle the spreadsheet format at all). http://www.filedropper.com/blendtable .ods format for Open Office or Libre Office (what Boule wrote it in) http://www.filedropper.com/blendtable_1 .xls format for MS Office lovers everywhere Let's see if this one rings the bell. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by springman on 11/07/15 at 16:57:15 Hello Kris. After looking at my last post I looked at yours again and your formula is correct, you made a mistake in your math is all. Do the math again and you will see the answer to your formula is 1214.5 ppm. I said red line was 75,400 ppm instead of 74,500. Regardless, our indicated formulas are correct. We just need to plug in the correct numbers and do the math correctly. Actually Kris, your formula is exact, mine is close. You accounted for the volume of the 0.2 ounce added to the 128 ounces. I did not. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/07/15 at 17:08:46 Guys, you are adding and subtracting and manipulating PPMs like they are an interchangeable concrete thing. They are not. PPM (parts per million) means a ratio of one item to another item divided by a million and you don't add ratios to another ratio and subtract them. PPM is defined and always created by comparing the weights of the zinc (the heaviest part of ZDDP) to the carrier oil weight. It isn't volume and it certainly isn't ratio vs ratio. It is weight to weight, divided by 1,000,000. Nobody said this was easy ....... |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by springman on 11/07/15 at 17:17:03 Hey Oldfeller. I was wondering how long it would take you. Yeah I'm chuckling ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by springman on 11/07/15 at 17:20:46 You are right OF. I am just making the assumption that the weight of the oil in the red line solution and the weight of the rotella oil are close enough to make my calculation reasonably accurate. ;D ;D ;D Yep, what is reasonably accurate. In case you are wondering, this is the 3rd weekend in a row that is has rained here and I am going nuts. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/07/15 at 17:20:55 I was contemplating my eyelids after getting all tuckered out sucking all the rugs in my house and washing the cars. Us old retired people do that on Saturday afternoons, you know. Nap, that is. Whenever the mood strikes, snooze. Momma sez if I am going to be retired soon I'd better get used to being a house hubby because the first one retired has to do all the housework. See if Filedropper can give you the functioning Boule spreadsheet with an extension that works with your favorite spreadsheet software. http://www.filedropper.com/blendtable .ods format for Open Office or Libre Office (what Boule wrote it in) http://www.filedropper.com/blendtable_1 .xls format for MS Office lovers everywhere |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/07/15 at 18:27:33 AND ..... while you are oggling them spreadsheets, oggle this a little bit. 2013 was the time frame this comparison was done. Gotta like that Delo 400 LE for its raw specs, but then got to toss it out because of the VERY High 117 ppm moly content. NAPA gets the next nod, for good specs and no moly. Next down the list is Walmart Supertech, which has a smidge of moly, but nothing like the Delo 400 LE has. Rotella T triple protect come next, but it is weak compared to the winners above it. http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/HDEO%20SUMMARY.html |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by springman on 11/07/15 at 18:49:30 OK, done. It appears my calculations were pretty darn close. There are 33.8 grams of zddp in a 16 ounce bottle of redline. Based on the info provided on the forum of redline having a zddp ppm of 74500 I extrapolated that one kilo of redline solvent (no additives yet) is equal 1.0527 liters. By the way this means that one gallon of redline solvent weighs 7.5993 lbs and I used this also as the weight of the rotella solvent (no additives). With this info I was able to calculate that there is 3954.976 milligrams of zddp in one gallon of rotella at 1100 ppm. From there I was able to calculate that we need 4314.516 milligrams of zddp to reach 1200 ppm. So 4314.519 - 3954.976 = 359.5432 milligrams of zddp that we need to add to the gallon of rotella to achieve 1200 ppm. 2112.5 (the number of milligrams of zddp in an ounce of redline) times 0.170198 = 359.5432 (the amount we need to add to achieve 1200 ppm) Sorry I was not more clear, I have numbers scattered all over a spread sheet. Anyway, Kris's and my original calculations were actually correct. 8-) |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/07/15 at 19:13:58 359.5432 milligrams is 0.0127 ounce by weight. Seems sorta short and light, don't it ?? Plus, it is a weight --- not a measured liquid volume of Redline booster. Somethings still missing, I think. My brain, certainly, but some math something or other isn't clicking for this yet. ============================= There are 33.8 grams of zddp in a 16 ounce bottle of redline, that's 33800 milligrams per 16 oz or 33800/16 = 2112.5 milligrams ZDDP per ounce. If we only need to be adding 359.5 milligrams of ZDDP to get it right, then that is only 0.170 liquid ounces of Redline. Ouch, my calculator is acting wonky again ---- it bit me. ============================= So, have you looked at the guts of Boule's spreadsheet yet? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by springman on 11/07/15 at 19:40:37 No, have not looked at Boule's spreadsheet. Those calculations are correct though. I have to go run an errand. I'll try to clarify/explain the calculations later. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/07/15 at 20:13:48 Just so they wind up in liquid ounce type measures you can measure with a Pepto Bismol quarter ounce graduated cup, then all will be well ...... |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by springman on 11/07/15 at 21:37:06 I'm glad this topic was brought up as I need to do an oil change and will now add zddp to my rotella. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/08/15 at 08:29:35 Here's a link to a table I made. Let me know if anything needs to be changed or modified. The labels should be self-explanatory. http://www.filedropper.com/redlineboostertable |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/08/15 at 09:01:01 Hmmm, my numbers differ significantly from Boule's! :-? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/08/15 at 09:30:48 Yup, but the Boule table lines up with the general recommendations from the Redline folks, adjusted for the higher PPM in the base oil that we like to use. They say 16 oz of Redline can treat up to 12 quarts of oil (3/4 oz per quart) and our bike holds two quarts so that would be 1.5 oz of Redline to do a Savage sump using the very vague Redline instructions. Going to the Boule table (after being adjusted for the 1100 ppm in Rot T dino) says the same thing, dropping you in right up at the max end of our 1383-1402 ppm desired spec range. Boule had to contact the Redline folks and ask them how they got there and they gave him the specific gravity calculation math that you see in the table (hidden inside the spreadsheet) and provided the constants for Redline booster and motor oil. Fl.Oz. ppm for Redline ppm if adding ZDDPlus or Eastwood ZDDP Booster 0.000 1100 1100 ......... ........ ........ 0.125 1171 1220 0.250 1190 1289 0.375 1209 1358 0.500 1229 1426 0.625 1248 1495 0.750 1267 1563 0.875 1287 1531 1.000 1306 1699 1.125 1325 1767 1.250 1344 1835 1.375 1363 1.500 1383 1.625 1402 Me, I regularly used to do an ounce per sump and it is maybe a little bit wimpy now, maybe. I might have to do an ounce and a half now days since the oil got wimpy on us. I shoot for 1400 as a minimum as that is as light a dose as was ever used in performance cam land ..... When I was first breaking in my cam, it was THREE ounces per sump as the cam guys insisted on getting 1800 ppm at a minimum during the first 500 miles, or else no warranty. But remember, I have a revver engine and I do run it up until the valves float fairly often on them zippy mountain trips. 1400 makes me feel cuddly enough. If your goal is only 1200-1250 ppm I think a half ounce per sump would do it, or an ounce per gallon jug if you wanted to do a pre-mix. But those that mix higher use more. ============================ If you are really being consumed by the question -- do your mix according to your method and send it off to Blackstone Labs for a VOA analysis. And remember on that VOA, Redline puts back in the sulfur content that was needed by the hot cam cars, back before EPA got their fingers into the pie. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/08/15 at 09:44:05 10333B393A33333A2D5F0 wrote:
Yeah, I've read that about you a few dozen times! ;D Following Boule's table, I've been using 2 ozs/gal. I'm started to get really worried about using too much and causing irreversible damage to my engine. According to Boule, that's about 1559 ppm. All the numbers that I'm getting are putting 2 ozs of Redline at over 2000 ppm! :o Convinve me I'm not killing my engine! I think I'll dilute the premixed half gallon that I have left with a virgin half gallon of Rotella to drop the ZDDP down to a more tolerable range! |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Art Webb on 11/08/15 at 10:05:31 OF if you meant this link http://msdspds.castrol.com/bpglis/FusionPDS.nsf/Files/A9EED664E7A92C4E80257EC60063BBB1/$File/BPXE-A2ZRG9.pdf I read it, it's worthless, tells you nothing about the oil, might as well be ad copy You made a point to point out the 'sludge resistant' part, so? castrol has been 'sludge resistant' as long as it's been made again, it's being used successfully in wet clutch engines, so that's not an issue the issue is the ZDDP But are we sure it's the real issue? I get what Dave said about higher spring pressures, but there's a saying in scientific circles Correlation doesn't equal causation so the simple fact that Savages and other vintage vehicles run without ZDDP have had valve failures doesn't prove the lack of ZDDP is the cause of said failure So, how are we sure the issue is ZDDP? has anyone done actual research into it? I am sticking with Rotella, never fear that, I've been using it with great success in motos since I first heard of it many moons ago It just brings the question up do we have ant actual data that proves the ZDDP is the saving grace, here? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/08/15 at 10:25:58 Kris, No, I think for normal around town in a stock engine an ounce and a half per gallon is plenty high enough. For you, an ounce per gallon might be about right. Fact is, if you are using Rot T dino and changing the oil every season you are getting plenty of ZDDP to replenish what your engine is using up (and you are dumping out used oil that is still spec'd better than what goes into SN cars brand new from the bottle). Also remember back in the day ALL CARS got 1400-1600 ppm of ZDDP and performance cars started out getting race oils that were 1800 ppm and on up there. People saying anything over 1800 is "getting counterproductive" are perhaps getting a little bit over anxious. If this were true, Royal Purple and Redline Performance Racing oil would be sued out of business as they have over 2,000 ppm in them all the time. I can understand folks saying that as you go up between 1400 and 1800 nobody can prove it does anything useful, because once you are coated you stay coated until something happens to cause the oil film to break down and a metal to metal dragging event occurs. If this happens, having lots of reserve ZDDP to re-coat the touch area quickly is a vital sort of good thing ..... Saying ZDDP can cause damage is sorta out there in my thinking, and I have never seen it quoted from SAE or other major sources of automotive knowledge. I know the hot performance cam people want 1800 and up in the oil you use during break in AND they want you to pre-coat all the parts with a ZDDP break in paste which is pure ZDDP. I have read that ZDDP and detergents do compete for bare metallic surfaces and that increasing detergents to very high levels can rob power from racing engines. But I have never heard of ZDDP robbing power per se or actually doing harm to metal, ever, in any mix ratio that is used today. "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". This quote from GM is sometimes referred to by the folks saying too much ZDDP can harm stuff --- but what is referred to in the quote was old mechanically mixed powders type ZDP and specifically the evil was done by the chemically uncombined phosphorous. Phosphorous is now limited and chemically combined and controlled in all ZDDP formulations that we talk about today to amounts way less than .20 PERCENT (2,000 ppm) so I don't see where it can get loose to be harmful to any grain boundaries in our Savages. I think it is far easier to see damage that was caused by a LACK of ZDDP than anything coming from too much of it. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/08/15 at 10:50:55 Art, http://papers.sae.org/2007-01-1990/ There are lots and lots of information about ZDDP from tons of sources, but SAE is pretty much the defining resource. Historically, ZDDP is the MOST EFFECTIVE anti-wear ingredient ever found. If you read this, understand they are talking about 2007's improvement in the chemically combined NON_VOLATILE phosphorous in modern zinc dialkyldithiophosphate (ZDDP) not getting into the grain boundaries of steels and not getting loose to kill catalytic converters and oxygen sensors like the old ZDP did. ZDDP was a 2x improvement over ZDP (yup, SAE says so). Still ZDDP was eventually found do long term bad things to decrease the service life of the cats and the sensors, so that is why ZDDP was phased out of the oils by SAE (and the roller cams and such were phased into cars because of the lowered levels of ZDDP adopted at the SAE SL oil spec change made them necessary). Ooops ..... you sorta forgot our 1987 designed Savages there, buddy. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/08/15 at 11:07:19 Oldfeller, so you're saying I should be good to use the remaining half gallon of premixed Redline/Rotella at next oil change without fear of camshaft spalling with too much ZDDP? I'll use it up and drop my additive level to 1 ounce in the next gallon bottle. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/08/15 at 11:23:58 "Too much" was in reference to ZDP and we don't use that stuff in anything any more. We now use ZDDP (zinc dialkyldithiophosphate = ZDDP) which chemically combines that evil phosphorous so it isn't running loose to attack grain boundaries. And if you look at the amounts, the phosphorous is always less than the zinc because that is the way the molecule is built. And if the old ZDP loose phosphorous available in the powder mix had to get all the way up to 2000 ppm, we don't ever get that high these days anyway and our phosphorous isn't loose anyway, it is locked into the zinc in a dialkyldithiophosphate molecule. Read the SAE reference I gave to ART, it goes into it in more detail. http://papers.sae.org/2007-01-1990/ If you are still worried about it, pour in half from the old mixed bottle and half from the virgin bottle into the sump of your bike at next oil change, making a mix that is what you are going to go to next anyway. Using a quart of each, you will have enough to do you two sump loads in that fashion. Me, I'm going to stick with 2 ounces per gallon jug, or one ounce per sump. That's around 1459 ppm which is up a bit initially, but is OK to me as when I go to add some oil later due to use it will come on down accordingly. Remember, I don't premix my jugs, I dope the sump loads separately as I like to KNOW it is all ratio'd out correctly at the time the sump gets hot that first time. The thought of all the goodie being settled to the bottom of the jug after a year of sitting, well that doesn't sit well with me. :D |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/08/15 at 11:44:02 Thanks OF! That puts my mind at ease. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by rl153 on 11/08/15 at 15:24:46 I haven't read this whole post ,but if you don't mind I want to ask, I add 1 fluid oz of redline to 2 1/2 quarts of rotella T6 at my oil change.Is there a problem with that? Seems to run good. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/08/15 at 16:20:55 No, that's fine. One ounce in a sump of T-6 parks you right up at 1400 ppm which is a good place to be. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by rl153 on 11/08/15 at 17:50:26 Thanks,i appreciate that. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by DesertRat on 11/08/15 at 18:46:43 Why don't we call this Oil Wars II ? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/08/15 at 20:37:25 That's what I did (except I added 2 ozs. to a gallon - same ratio as yours). You really want half of that. Add 1/2 oz. to 2-1/2 qts (or 1 oz. to a gallon). |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/09/15 at 04:01:42 Sorry I have not replied to this thread much....I had a big project due last week, and I had a big annual party at my house on Saturday, and I spent all day Friday smoking 3 Turkeys and a Brisket.....it took 11 hours! I still believe that 1,200 - 1,400 ppm is the range we should be shooting for. Back in the days when Boule'tard made the list the Rotella T had 1,250 ppm in the bottle, and that was enough to keep the Savage cam and rocker happy. I would used to add 1 oz. per gallon of Rotella to bump the ppm up to 1,400. Now that the Rotella T is listed as 1,100 ppm, the 1 oz. of Redline ZDDP booster added to a gallon of oil will get me a ZDDP rating of 1,306 ppm - which is in an acceptable range. If I wanted to get back to the 1,400 ppm I would need to use 1.625 oz. of Redline....which is not really a convenient dose to measure. Chances are I am just going to use about 1.5 oz. as best I can measure that....and get a 1,383 ppm rating. (Or as Oldfeller suggested.....1 oz. into the crankcase with each oil change). I am still of the opinion that for long term durability - we should not be using any more than 1,400 ppm of ZDDP. I will post the updated chart in the Technical Section soon.....Monday mornings are busy here at work and when the others show up in about an hour, I will be really busy. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/09/15 at 04:09:02 172E352F6C6D5C0 wrote:
1 oz. to the gallon will result in a ZDDP ratio of 1,306 ppm - which is in the acceptable range. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/09/15 at 06:33:56 664751475056704356220 wrote:
Real oil wars generally need a conflicting point of view -- everyone here agrees on what we want to do, we are just digesting a change in the environment that nobody had expected to have happen. It snuck up on us, so to speak. What slapped us in the face this time is a new HDEO standard that is under development as we speak, one that will wag our little dog pretty strongly once it finally jells, since it controls all our favorite HDEO oils. http://www.hddeo.com/articles/pc-11a-vs-pc-11b?utm_source=home&utm_medium=pc-11-block&utm_campaign=pc-11a-vs-pc-11b "PC-11A is designed as a broad fit for existing trucks, and requires higher levels of protection and performance for end users than what was established by API CJ-4. While lubricants classified under PC-11A are backwards compatible, this category nevertheless represents a major step up for performance, and will require significant investment to meet the new requirements. PC-11A lubricants will correlate with familiar kinematic viscosity grades as defined within API CJ-4, such as 15W-40, 10W-30, 5W-30, and so on. Once final, PC-11A is expected to be called API CK-4 in keeping with traditional nomenclature of the category. PC-11B reflects the increasing adoption of lower viscosity lubricants in modern engine hardware, and will standardize these advanced products while maintaining protection and durability. These lubricants will mostly correspond with the kinematic viscosities 10W-30 and 5W-30, but will be referenced by their lower HTHS viscosity, to be distinguished from PC-11A." http://www.hddeo.com/GF-6A-Specification But I think we have a methodology worked out now that can handle these changes when its fruits all ripen and begin to drop all around us. We will need to start looking at the jugs as we buy as the certification class we want is the older products class (older engines) which are CI-4 and CJ-4 class oils. If we can't find this, we need to be prepared to bump up one of the more modern class of PC-11A oils. Or CK-4 oils, if they indeed name it that way. Politically Correct = PC, this will help you to remember there is a sea change coming. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/09/15 at 08:54:42 OK....maybe this is the post that will throw this into an "oil war". My "second choice" oil has been Brad Penn oil. The only thing that keeps it from being my "first choice" is the cost and the difficulty in buying it. I can get it somewhat local - it is about an hour round trip to the engine machine shop that carries it in Cincinnati. The cost is just about $ 7.00 a quart for the motorcycle oil. This morning I contacted Brad Penn to find out exactly what the ZDDP oil level is for their motorcycle oil. The Tech department contacted me and we had a nice discussion about the needs of the Savage and what it must have to survive. The good news is that the Brad Penn Motorcycle oil provides not less than 1,260 ppm ZDDP and will protect our cams and rockers, and it is wet clutch safe. It is also JASO approved for motorcycle use. I explained that the Brad Penn was not on our approved list of oils on the forum - mostly because it cannot be obtained at the local auto parts store, motorcycle dealer or Big Box store. He did explain that most of the oil they sell goes through Summit Racing, Jegs, Amazon and the specialty machine and racing shops. I discussed the Rotella T with him and the new lowered 1,100 ppm ZDDP level. He was sympathetic and stated that it is his believe that all vintage equipment should be operated with the type of oil that was being used when the equipment was built - and that if the original equipment needed a high level of ZDDP we should still be using that oil. He also stated that the HDEO oils have nearly twice the detergent package that a gasoline engine oil would - and that these extra detergents are not necessary in a gasoline engine. A diesel engine puts a lot of soot/ash in the oil and the detergents are needed in those engines - however the extra detergents take up space that would have been occupied by a lubricating molecule, and in the HDEO there are twice as many oil molecules displaced. And when I mentioned that we used Redline ZDDP additive to supplement the current ZDDP level - he commented that they don't recommend adding anything to the oil package, as it changes the character and design of the oil "package" and it does not always improve the oil. It is better to buy the right oil and use it as it was blended. So, I am still convinced that Shell Rotella oil is a good affordable oil, that bumping up the ZDDP level a little bit most likely won't hurt anything and doesn't cost much, and that I am likely never to suffer an engine failure resulting from inadequate lubrication in our large lawn mower engine that is used in the Savage. Are there better oils for the Savage....probably YES. Do you need them....probably NO. Is there a suitable oil that is cheaper to buy...probably NO. Are their other oils as easy to find as Rotella T......depends on where you live and what your local specialty store carry....you will not find anything at the big box stores. Should this oil be included in the Tech Section as a recommended oil....probably not unless it becomes more convenient to buy. http://www.penngrade1.com/Products/Motor-Oils.aspx http://www.summitracing.com/parts/bpo-009-7156/overview/ |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/09/15 at 09:56:35 http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/HDEO%20SUMMARY.html Dave, If you are looking to lower the detergents and keep the ZDDP up high, look at the NAPA HDEO listed here -- I will stop by the NAPA store and see if it is still a joint rated CI-4, CJ-4 rated oil or if it got modernized in the last 2 years. If it is still this way, we wouldn't have to do anything to it. No bumping needed. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/09/15 at 10:10:00 7251595B585151584F3D0 wrote:
Why would the NAPA HDEO have less detergent than the other HDEO oils? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Art Webb on 11/09/15 at 10:18:04 at the risk of a dumb question, has anyone researched single weight oils? I mean, that's what was being used when the really old engines were built (I recall many arguments between auto enthusiasts in my younger days, over weather multi vis was really a good thing) I just wonder if maybe they didn't screw those oils up Maybe I should just look it up myself ;D BITOG, here I come well that was a waste of time, can't find the fool charts there |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/09/15 at 10:43:53 152E2334252932342F272A35460 wrote:
Why would the NAPA HDEO have less detergent than the other HDEO oils?[/quote] Because it used to honor the old CI-4 spec completely and only gave lip service to CJ-4. However, upon checking it both on line and at the local NAPA it now only specs at 1100 ppm of ZDDP so I guess the pending spec. changes have gotten to it too. I guess I'll bump Walmart Supertech Universal oil as my next purchase, but I will check it before I buy it. I hate it when oils change standards. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Kris01 on 11/09/15 at 18:46:37 Is there any way to tell a 1250 ppm bottle from an 1100 ppm bottle of Rotella? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by springman on 11/09/15 at 20:19:08 Hey OF. Besides zinc at a minimum of 1200 ppm, what else should we be looking for or looking to avoid? Also, when did rotella triple drop down to 1100 ppm zinc? PQIA has it at 1200 ppm as of december 2014. They also have rotella t6 at 1300 ppm on that date. Have there been any changes to the t6? Take a looky here. http://www.pqiamerica.com/June%202014/consolidated%20HDEO%202015.html |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/10/15 at 06:08:55 http://www.pqiamerica.com/June%202014/consolidated%20HDEO%202015.html Thank you, Springman, for finding the new HDEO listing, that makes the search much easier, being able to see what all the current offerings are really like. However, in scanning the chart I see the increased use of other "energy star" types of things as the ZDDP goes down yet again. Look down the chart for titanium and boron compounds as they are apparently subbing them in for moly (all of which are trying to replace ZDDP as the caps get lower and lower on phosphorus). This is sad to say, but this new HDEO listing reminds me of a listing of SL car oils from 3 years ago ...... ============================ Since there are no acceptable oils any more we are going to have to bump from this point forward. We are now trying to AVOID the old energy star compounds like Moly as much as possible in picking our oils. We don't know about Boron compounds for slippage yet, but we do note that Rotella Triple Protect dino has gone away from Moly (in the Rot Dino anyway) to the Boron compounds. http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=729116 Have to keep an eye on it, but so far in my bike the Boron compounds being used do slip less than the Moly compounds used to before. I for one am going to bump Rot dino, as it lacks the known bad moly issues. I also note that use of moly in full syn T-6 is now up to 68 ppm and that should be a warning point if folks start to see any warm up clutch slippage using T-6. Age of your clutch is a factor, mine is well abused from a lot of mountain trips and if the warm up slippage returns it will require attention at next cover off (for whatever reason I have to take the cover off). |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by springman on 11/10/15 at 09:41:55 Thanks Old Feller. My clutch is relatively new so I will proceed with my oil change using T6 for the winter and will go back to rotella triple in the spring or summer. On that site they also had the info for the Wal-mart universal oil and it looked like a good candidate for bumping with zddp. Also, I do not know the price of it yet, but it looks like the Pennzoil Ultra would be great for the cars. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by verslagen1 on 11/10/15 at 10:14:01 I cannot recommend changing from 1 brand to another or 1 type of oil to another often. The rings on the '96 which I used for the oil tests wore out shortly thereafter. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by vincesingleton on 11/10/15 at 10:54:18 2004 ls650 Questions...if i get it, shell rotella t triple protection oil 5w 40 is now deemed better than suzuki brand due to additive evolvements. Do i need some kind of additive on top? I have a gallon of 15w 40 hd diesel engine oil on hand...would that be an acceptable, better or totally unacceptable substitute? Dont want mech failures ... should i just continue with suzuki oil? |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/10/15 at 13:32:22 46595E535543595E575C55445F5E300 wrote:
Nobody on this forum ever recommended that you use Suzuki oil! Not sure what kind of diesel oil you have - but at the moment the Shell Rotella T or T-6 is the oil we recommend. And until lately you didn't need to bump the ZDDP level up at all - but the ZDDP level has been dropped to 1,100 ppm....so we recommend you add 1 oz. of Redline ZDDP additive to each new oil change. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by rl153 on 11/10/15 at 15:25:34 I just changed my oil last month ,and used T6 . Is T6 considered not as desireable now ,and should I switch to the triple dino, or is it worse to switch from synthetic back to dino,than to keep running the T6? Thanks! |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/10/15 at 18:57:14 Use up the T-6 oil you have and dial back in then as we will know better answers by then. Odd are your T-6 is slightly older stuff anyway, which had less of the moly and the boron in it. My concerns are based off a much abused clutch that is only showing MINOR warm up slippage, but warm up slippage is something that has come up occasionally for years now from people who were using energy star laden car oils. In reviewing the HDEO list current today, the ZDDP is down to the 1,100 PPM level and the moly and boron are up to the 44-69 PPM level (or higher in some cases if you add them together). Seriously, 4 years ago a listing of SL grade car oils looked a lot like this list of HDEO's just taken this year, seriously. I used to say that moly was staging a come back driven by the reduction of ZDDP (they have to have something to give long life characteristics to the oil if they can't use ZDDP). Now, having reviewed the latest shift I would say the use of moly and boron are up again as the ZDDP goes down again. Boron is like moly, except perhaps a bit more effective as a slippery stuff. Both are used to coat jacketed rifle bullets for greater speed and less cleaning (and I have set ups to apply both to my jacketed bullets). Putting some of such stuffs in my clutch isn't the best of ideas ....... AS YOU LOOK FOR A BUMPABLE OIL, look for something that LACKS the bad stuff and count on having to bump it to put back enough of the good stuff. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/11/15 at 07:41:54 Can you buy CI-4 oil still, today? Yes. https://www.avepetroleum.com/product-details.php?prodId=32 http://https://www.avepetroleum.com/admin/prod_images/ALL_SPEC_CJ-4_PLUS.png That's $10.49 a GALLON (shipping is extra). Property 15W40 Premium Viscosity, cSt @ 40°C 120.38 Viscosity, cSt @ 100°C 15.55 Viscosity Index 135 Viscosity, CCS cP @ -20°C 6811 Calcium, %wt. .3290 Nitrogen, Wt. (%) .093 Phosphorous, Wt. (%) .1270 Sulfur, Wt. (%) .486 Zinc. Wt. (%) .1420 Sulfated Ash, wt% 1.37 Total Base Number 0.8740 Specific Gravity 20077 For this oil, you get the lowered detergency and the full .1420 count of ZDDP and old full load of Sulfur that used to define a good HDEO motor oil. This stuff would kill an oxygen sensor or a cat converter in short order. But it would make a Savage happy. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by ls650v on 11/11/15 at 09:12:34 This is a quote from a ZDDPlus tech brief: The most common way to indirectly measure the ZDDP content is to use one of several ASTM test methods to measure the phosphorus and zinc content. Zinc can often be added to oils as an acid neutralizing agent, so zinc is not a reliable indicator of ZDDP. Since phosphorus is found in oils predominantly in the form of ZDDP, we use it as the measurement criteria for ZDDP. http://zddplus.com/2013/11/zddplustm-tech-brief-7-oil-additive-dosing-and-dilution/ |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Oldfeller on 11/11/15 at 09:49:14 The newly imposed limits in all of the new specs are measured on the evil component, which is the phosphorous. If you get the idea that each manufacturer does the calculations slightly differently, you are correct. We use the Redline calculation methodology since most of us bump with Redline Booster. If you bump with ZDDP plus, feel free to use the SuzukiSavage.Com bump chart which is correct for that product and the Eastwood sister product, or you can use the ZDDP plus recommendations scaled back to two quarts. But, please remember our list bump chart assumes you use dino Rotella Triple Protection with its higher start point as your bump base oil and the ZDDP bottle recommendations all assume you are starting with car oil. Bumping Rotella Triple Protection dino using the ZDDP bottle recommendations results in an over-bump. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Art Webb on 11/11/15 at 10:20:25 McAfee gave me a 'risky behaviour warning' on that site lol so this oil would be the shiz straight from the bucket, at a good price point (depending on shipping costs) but what about settling out? I'd hate to have to shake that whole fool drum up lol |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by verslagen1 on 11/11/15 at 10:32:03 Just as interesting... http://zddplus.com/2013/11/zddplustm-tech-brief-6-diesel-oil-use-in-classic-and-high-performance-gasoline-engines/ |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Art Webb on 11/11/15 at 10:54:19 Ford's 4.6 V8 did not fare well with thicker oils in Taxi service in our fleet, the cam chains wore prematurely using the correct oil weight seemed to fix this issue, or at least the issue didn't occur when correct oil was used |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by prechermike on 11/11/15 at 12:48:44 102B2631202C37312A222F30430 wrote:
Thanks Dave, I didn't read all seven pages of the post, I don't like math that much. But this is the info I needed. When this thread is done and locked, it would be nice if this info was easy to find. Just my $0.02 worth. And I do appreciate all those who "research" and "argue" these things out. But that stiff is beyond me. |
|
Title: Re: Who wants some Math Homework? Post by Dave on 11/11/15 at 12:54:57 606275737875627D797B75100 wrote:
Thanks Dave, I didn't read all seven pages of the post, I don't like math that much. But this is the info I needed. When this thread is done and locked, it would be nice if this info was easy to find. Just my $0.02 worth. And I do appreciate all those who "research" and "argue" these things out. But that stiff is beyond me.[/quote] Mike: The information will be in the Tech Thread....when I get off my butt and post it there. I just have been so busy at work it is hard to find the time....yesterday I got here to work at 5:30 AM....and didn't start home until 8:00 PM. :o |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |