What additives are best for timing chain life?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by ChevyMan2015
Originally Posted by 1JZ_E46
There was a good study published on this exact topic sometime last year. Moly was found to have a fairly significant (positive) impact. High amounts of ZDDP appeared to make things worse.

Found it: https://www.stle.org/images/pdf/STL...0Role%20Additive%20Chemistry%20Plays.pdf


What oil on the market has the most moly in it?


Redline, Motul (some offerings), Shaeffers, toyota oil, Amsoil SS, PUP 0w40, all high moly oils. There's a few others, enos i think is one of them. Or you can add lube guards biotech, oil soluble moly additive.
 
The reason I ask is that we bought the 07 fjcruiser. There have been some reports of chain problems with the engines.

But we don't know both sides of the story. Maybe they had over extended oci's?

I'm running Chevron supreme 10w30 in ours. It looks like a good oil on paper to me. I'm thinking of only using that oil in the fj. My other cars get what's on sale but they don't have over head cams like the Toyota does.
 
Originally Posted by Chris142
The reason I ask is that we bought the 07 fjcruiser. There have been some reports of chain problems with the engines.

But we don't know both sides of the story. Maybe they had over extended oci's?

I'm running Chevron supreme 10w30 in ours. It looks like a good oil on paper to me. I'm thinking of only using that oil in the fj. My other cars get what's on sale but they don't have over head cams like the Toyota does.



The cause is our gov't and their CAFE agenda, they care more about fuel economy then your timing chain, even if it is .01 mpg over the fleet that is America. Move up one grade viscosity, problem solved. Doesn't mean you wont have a timing chain fail, those are wear items, but your choosing to take your vehicle back to a time where timing chains weren't issues. Vehicles used to not be spec'd for 20 weight, and premature taming chain replacements were very rare.
 
Originally Posted by Donald
On the old engines with pushrods it was just a short trip up to the camshaft and back.


I think it's humorous that back in the day, and several times since, GM has been chided for stalwartly hanging on to the OHV, cam-in-block 2 valve engine configuration. First it was they couldn't make the same power, then it was they couldn't meet emissions, then they couldn't achieve the same mileage, but it was never that the design wasn't durable. Now, it appears they have hit all of the "you can't do this with an OHV" and the engine's simpler design is proving it was likely a good way to pursue all along. And I don't even own any GM LS/LT engines... but I did chuckle back in the day about all of the similarities between the first LS engines and the old Ford 302 Windsor design. Amazing what 20 years of technology can do for an engine, even when keeping it "simple"!
 
Originally Posted by burla

The cause is our gov't and their CAFE agenda, they care more about fuel economy then your timing chain, even if it is .01 mpg over the fleet that is America. Move up one grade viscosity, problem solved. Doesn't mean you wont have a timing chain fail, those are wear items, but your choosing to take your vehicle back to a time where timing chains weren't issues. Vehicles used to not be spec'd for 20 weight, and premature taming chain replacements were very rare.


01.gif
 
Originally Posted by burla
Originally Posted by Chris142
The reason I ask is that we bought the 07 fjcruiser. There have been some reports of chain problems with the engines.

But we don't know both sides of the story. Maybe they had over extended oci's?

I'm running Chevron supreme 10w30 in ours. It looks like a good oil on paper to me. I'm thinking of only using that oil in the fj. My other cars get what's on sale but they don't have over head cams like the Toyota does.



The cause is our gov't and their CAFE agenda, they care more about fuel economy then your timing chain, even if it is .01 mpg over the fleet that is America. Move up one grade viscosity, problem solved. Doesn't mean you wont have a timing chain fail, those are wear items, but your choosing to take your vehicle back to a time where timing chains weren't issues. Vehicles used to not be spec'd for 20 weight, and premature taming chain replacements were very rare.






Broken record.
 
Originally Posted by OilUzer
Moly.
haven't used Red Line yet but that's why I like it.
.
No s... Sherlock
smile.gif
I know that this is Moly... But which variation/version of it?

Which one is in a can of LM MoS2? Mo E/A? What does E/A stand for?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by KCJeep
Originally Posted by burla

The cause is our gov't and their CAFE agenda, they care more about fuel economy then your timing chain, even if it is .01 mpg over the fleet that is America. Move up one grade viscosity, problem solved. Doesn't mean you wont have a timing chain fail, those are wear items, but your choosing to take your vehicle back to a time where timing chains weren't issues. Vehicles used to not be spec'd for 20 weight, and premature taming chain replacements were very rare.


01.gif


Wrong info again. Where do you find TC failures are caused by 20wt oils? TC failures are mostly caused by deposit formations plugging oil ports that lube the guides and chains.

Low oil level or poorly maintained OCI with dino(produces deposits).
https://www.testingautos.com/car_care/when-does-the-timing-chain-need-to-be-replaced.html
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Kamele0N
Originally Posted by OilUzer
Moly.
haven't used Red Line yet but that's why I like it.
.
No s... Sherlock
smile.gif
I know that this is Moly... But which variation/version of it?

Which one is in a can of LM MoS2? Mo E/A? What does E/A stand for?


LM MoS2 is NOT soluble moly and will settle out throughout the engine. Doubt it will do anything for timing chain wear. I would stick to engine oils that are forulated with soluble moly rather than trying to add it in.
 
Originally Posted by badtlc
Originally Posted by Cujet
... It's my understanding that 30 viscosity was the thin enough to flow well into the links, and viscous enough to prevent metal to metal contact.
Sounds like the optimal viscosity, then.
So 40 can never be thin enough even in an engine or conditions that tends to run the oil hotter, and 20 can never be thick enough in an engine that tends to maintain cooler oil temperature? Sure ...
 
Originally Posted by tig1
Originally Posted by KCJeep
Originally Posted by burla

The cause is our gov't and their CAFE agenda, they care more about fuel economy then your timing chain, even if it is .01 mpg over the fleet that is America. Move up one grade viscosity, problem solved. Doesn't mean you wont have a timing chain fail, those are wear items, but your choosing to take your vehicle back to a time where timing chains weren't issues. Vehicles used to not be spec'd for 20 weight, and premature taming chain replacements were very rare.


01.gif


Wrong info again. Where do you find TC failures are caused by 20wt oils? TC failures are mostly caused by deposit formations plugging oil ports that lube the guides and chains.

Low oil level or poorly maintained OCI with dino(produces deposits).
https://www.testingautos.com/car_care/when-does-the-timing-chain-need-to-be-replaced.html


They are cause by oil going out of grade, which you can follow common sense and realize that is thin oil. I'll find some paper on it.
 
from the guys that fix them

I have a detailed histology on the gf-6 but it is not on this device, may take me some time. They say the low viscosity is killing this part of the testing for the gr-6 approval. Deposits are incredibly easy to solve, however the gov't's fuel economy goals make the timing chain wear problem the most troublesome for gr-6 oils getting approved.
 
Originally Posted by burla
Originally Posted by tig1
Originally Posted by KCJeep
Originally Posted by burla

The cause is our gov't and their CAFE agenda, they care more about fuel economy then your timing chain, even if it is .01 mpg over the fleet that is America. Move up one grade viscosity, problem solved. Doesn't mean you wont have a timing chain fail, those are wear items, but your choosing to take your vehicle back to a time where timing chains weren't issues. Vehicles used to not be spec'd for 20 weight, and premature taming chain replacements were very rare.


01.gif


Wrong info again. Where do you find TC failures are caused by 20wt oils? TC failures are mostly caused by deposit formations plugging oil ports that lube the guides and chains.

Low oil level or poorly maintained OCI with dino(produces deposits).
https://www.testingautos.com/car_care/when-does-the-timing-chain-need-to-be-replaced.html


They are cause by oil going out of grade, which you can follow common sense and realize that is thin oil. I'll find some paper on it.

However few UOAs show oil shearing to that point. Remember it's better for an oil to shear a bit that to oxidize (thicken) when deposits can begin to form.
 
Wow, so this problem is just going to drag on as the epic battle of the interests continues to rage.

My take on problematic modern chains:
Soot abrasives + inadequate viscosity = chain wear
GDI = more soot loading than PFI
TDGI = even more soot loading than GDI

Regulations have driven automakers to both GDI, higher power densities and perpetually slashed viscosities, compounding problems for soot wear issues IMO

Viscosity? A higher viscosity oil film that's harder to break given a standard torque load will for obvious reasons spend less time in a boundary state that enables the soot to micro-abrade and wear the chain link interface. The type of cyclic 'torque reversal' loading seen on chains is more of a hammering than a sliding or rubbing force, which brings into question the efficacy of some common solid-forming AW addtives also. Diesel engines have always had to deal with abrasive soot loading of the oil and have always specified higher viscosity oils. Coincidence?
 
I'd think timing chain failure would be due to a cheap crappy design and not the fault of the oil.
 
Originally Posted by PimTac
Originally Posted by burla
Originally Posted by Chris142
The reason I ask is that we bought the 07 fjcruiser. There have been some reports of chain problems with the engines.

But we don't know both sides of the story. Maybe they had over extended oci's?

I'm running Chevron supreme 10w30 in ours. It looks like a good oil on paper to me. I'm thinking of only using that oil in the fj. My other cars get what's on sale but they don't have over head cams like the Toyota does.



The cause is our gov't and their CAFE agenda, they care more about fuel economy then your timing chain, even if it is .01 mpg over the fleet that is America. Move up one grade viscosity, problem solved. Doesn't mean you wont have a timing chain fail, those are wear items, but your choosing to take your vehicle back to a time where timing chains weren't issues. Vehicles used to not be spec'd for 20 weight, and premature taming chain replacements were very rare.






Broken record.



ewe, LMAO.

What difference is it if that is the answer to the question. Call the question a broken record or better yet sit it out of you can't behave.
 
Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
I'd think timing chain failure would be due to a cheap crappy design and not the fault of the oil.


You'd think so but you have to ask yourself why all manufacturers would suddenly choose to cheap out on chains, what they expected to save by it and continue to do so after decades of witnessing the costs and PR nightmare of cheapening out on chains/design. It's definitely not a new problem, but yet it carries on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

FCD
At what point does Calcium inhibit Zddp?
Replies
5
Views
415
weasley
A
Oil with best anti-wear for Chevy 3.6 timing chain protection?
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
JTK
J
Newer Amsoil Extended Life 10W30 UOA
Replies
18
Views
2K
Brons2
Sweebation
Break in oil for 2005 LS2
Replies
15
Views
660
nascarnation
A
Timing chain rattle Audi A7 3.0tdi
Replies
8
Views
2K
vinu_neuro
Back
Top