ZDDP Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
1,663
Hello everyone, curious about something. Seems that allot of the oil companies out there that sell "race" oils and from folks that use them, that the extra ZDDP will decrease wear under extreme conditions. Check out these 2 links as an example, and look at the "4 ball test scar" size. If the extra ZDDP is supposed to reduce wear, why is there actually MORE wear? I am confused.

I will just use the 10/30 Street oil vs. "Race" oil as a comparo.

Street 10/30:

http://www.amsoil.com/storefront/atm.aspx

Race Oil 10/30:

http://www.amsoil.com/storefront/rd30.aspx

Im confused on this.
 
Those 2 tests are not the same. Check the test parameters listed. Notice the differences in weight force applied, temp, and rpms....the racing oil test was more severe, yet the wear was almost the same.
 
It is the same test, just different load and time. But you are right the "test" is a bit more brutal for the Racing Oil. I didn't notice that until closer look. Thanks for bringing that part up.
 
FWIW, Amsoil's wear scar tests are not what one should use to gauge a "racing oil" or any lubricant for that matter.....
 
I agree, all those ball bearing tests are bogus in my book. I just think the whole "race" oil hype really is just that, UNLESS your vehicle sees oil temps over 110C like all day long. Like in reacing. Over the counter Synthetics from M1, Penzoil, Valvoline, etc should be more than capable of withstanding up to 100C all day long with no issues. The Lack of ZDDP is really all that separated the 2 for street use. In that, most newer cars really don't need a ton of ZDDP anyway. In my Evo, there really isn't anywhere that a Race oil would really benefit me in day to day driving. It is true when I am on the dyno for hours at a time, the oil temps get around that 100C mark, but by that time, I usually turn the car off and let it cool down. When the oil temps drop we go back at it again. Then usually when I get home, I change the oil. Then I am good for another 3K. Am I right to assume this? I know many have their mind set because they try and justify the cost and exspense of their "race" oil. But in reality, driving with oil temps under 100C is it really needed? I think not. Arguements?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: AzFireGuy79
FWIW, Amsoil's wear scar tests are not what one should use to gauge a "racing oil" or any lubricant for that matter.....


Extremely misleading on their part.
 
Hi,
MrMeeks - You asked this;
"Could more ZDDP displace other anti-wear adds to cause more wear?"

More is not always best or better - and yes very high levels of ZDDP are indeed counterproductive. The research done by the JASO, API,ACEA and ILSAC at determining the correct levels is
relevant

At 24hr ADAC event at the Nurburgring in May most lubricants used were available "off the shelf". Two major lubricant suppliers were even experimenting with new very low viscosity lubricants - these performed very well indeed
 
so when does one think they need more ZDDP in their application? If your running an engine with flat tappets? Race applications? This is very confusing to me, because even under race conditions why would a vehicle need so much ZDDP? Are we assuming that the race car is at WOT for hours and hours and the oil film breaks over time and the ZDDP is there to save the day? Only racing I know like that is maybe NASCAR, but most other racing is not at WOT the WHOLE race. I understand that high quality Group 4/5 oils would be needed to survive the extreme temps, so is it possible to get the group 4/5 without all the ZDDP? I guess if that is the case, what we get over the counter is all one really would ever need. IMO. Seems the term "race" means something different to everybody. What racing is to me, vs. Jeff Gordon would be different.

My #1 question is, if you run lets say Redline in my Evo that is trubo charged. OEM oil is Mobil 1, at the time the car was new, Mobil 1 at the time was SL rated, so there was more ZDDP at the time. Probably around 1000 ZDDP there abouts. Now its in the 900 range. So does that mean, I should go look for an oil that meets what the car originally had in it? It does say in the manual SL or Higher. Which to me means the SM should be fine. If thats the case, then why do all the tuners I talk to want me to run a 20/50 oil? vs. the 10/30 it comes with? I doubt very much that the 10/30 would shear that badly, and I am never in the temp range to require a 20/50 EXCEPT when on the dyno, or possibly Solo II events, but even then its never above 100C, the dyno can see 100C though. For DD dutey though a 20/50? just sounds abserd and im the one thats the idiot in the Evo forums? I can see if your Evo has a built motor and custom specs set by someone, but if your running OEM stuff, then???

Any insight to this? Sorry if this seems repiticious, but I just am curous if using an oil like Redline would benefit me over Mobil 1 for daily use, dyno use, and the ocasional fun day at the track. Mind you, I am not looking for EDI's. Every 3K miles for me is fine. My arguement is, even with bolt on mods, and running more boost than stock, the Mobil 1 should hold up fine. Or is Redline the ticket? Will all that ZDDP in Redline cause deposits on my Turbo Journals? Or will all the ester in Redline keep it clean enough?
 
Last edited:
PDRM1921.jpg

PDRM1922.jpg

PDRM1924.jpg


http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1736078&page=17#top

RP-edge.jpg

RP-center.jpg

M1-Center.jpg

PDRM1950.jpg


http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1736078&page=24

M1 camshaft wear or lower levels of ZDDP? I personally think it's the latter, but you can draw your own conclusions.

I've been inside many of these 4.6s run on off the shelf M1, Motorcraft, etc and the M1 camshaft wear is typical of 4.6s that are run hard. The RP results are the exception and not the norm, it's just one data point but enough to raise an eyebrow. If this kind of difference is easily observable with powdered metal cam lobes riding on roller followers, what happens with shim & bucket/direct acting mechanical bucket valve-trains with SM ZDDP levels? Saaber1 has posted a lot of information on the effect of different oils on this type of valve-train.

Some pics here: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2084553
 
And just to clarify, I'm not making the argument that SM ZDDP levels are killing DAMB tappets left and right as that's obviously not the case, but only that they may be allowing more wear to occur than an oil with SL-levels (or slightly higher) of ZDDP.

I can't speak for others, but I tend to think many enthusiasts are looking for something more than just "good enough".
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny
To add to the fire, I started this thread in the oil additive section.


Using emission spectroscopy UOA that is proven to be inaccurate when detecting major/large particle wear as the "scientific method"?
crackmeup2.gif


I also doubt Aeroshell lacks anti-wear additives, it's probably just something that doesn't show up in the standard UOA while most motor oils seem to still rely on ZDDP as their primary anti-wear agent.
 
Originally Posted By: AzFireGuy79
FWIW, Amsoil's wear scar tests are not what one should use to gauge a "racing oil" or any lubricant for that matter.....


FWIW, it's not Amsoil's wear scar test, it's a standardized test as per American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM).

Quote:
ASTM Designation: D 4172

Standard Test Method for Wear Preventive Characteristics of Lubricating Fluid (Four-Ball Method)1

1. Scope
1.1 This test method covers a procedure for making a preliminary evaluation of the anti-wear properties of fluid lubricants in sliding contact by means of the Four-Ball Wear Test Machine. Evaluation of lubricating grease using the same machine is detailed in Test Method D 2266.

3. Terminology
3.1 Definitions:
3.1.1 lubricant, n—any material interposed between two surfaces that reduces the friction or wear between them.
3.1.2 wear, n damage to a solid surface, generally involving progressive loss of material due to relative motion between that surface and a contacting substance or surface.

5. Significance and Use
5.1 This test method can be used to determine the relative wear preventive properties of lubricating fluids in sliding contact under the prescribed test conditions. No attempt has been made to correlate this test with balls in rolling contact. The user of this test method should determine to his own satisfaction whether results of this test procedure correlate with field performance or other bench test machines.


Sliding contact = Flat Tappet Camshaft
 
Ben99GT

I've seen the Ford camshaft photos before, and after studying them for a while, it's not clear to me whether the debate should be about ZDDP or Synerlec. What's your view on this?
 
Originally Posted By: jaj
Ben99GT

I've seen the Ford camshaft photos before, and after studying them for a while, it's not clear to me whether the debate should be about ZDDP or Synerlec. What's your view on this?


From what I understand, Synerlec is a sulfurized ester with RP's claims revolving around Synerlec's polarity. It could be Synerlec, ZDDP, or the combination.
 
The Photos from the Mustang are impressive. That is WITH Roller Rockers? and it did that? Wow. The thing is, isn't the Royal Purpler 5/20 used in that motor for 70K miles an API approved oil from RP? If it is, and Im pretty sure it is, then its "energy conserving" meaning it is on the low ZDDP side as well.

With that noted, maybe its not the ZDDP but the whole anti wear package in Royal purple that is better? I used Royal Purple XPR 10/40 in my Evo and when I took the oil cap off and looked inside it looked like your M1 pics on your mustang. So who knows.

I am using a very aggressive cam shaft on my Evo along with some very stiff BC springs and retainers. Im on the fence now. I could try the RP 10/30 for my car, but it has the same ZDDP levels as the M1 from what I am told from RP. Around 900ppm. Its the XPR's that have High levels of ZDDP or the 20/50 street oil.

According to RP, using their oil will "smooth out" metal surfaces. So in essence, if you have cams that look like your M1 cams and you switch to RP it should clean it up? Or what?

My next oil change I was considering using Redline 5/30 that has a TON of moly and ZDDP for $9 a qt. Or go back to the RP XPR but in 5/30 trim and it runs $15 a qt. Or heck, even Amsoil Dominator 10/30 I can get for just under $10 per qt from a local dealer.

But we really don't know exactly what caused that wear. Is it the oil? The driving habits? Lack of ZDDP? the whole additive package in M1? Who knows.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top