Project farm testing a 70 yr old oil

[TC]

I'll wander off the reservation here and dive into this oil's history rather than its performance. 'Cause that's how I roll after four Sierra Nevada pale ales. I spend a lot of time delving into Americana and vintage items, Route 66 visits and history, etc, and will immodestly claim I've gotten pretty good at tracking the dates and history of obscure stuff using obscure means....which apparently now includes Quaker State oil.

The oversized "Q" on the can's label showed up in 1954 or 1955 and was still used in 1968 (with a red circle on the '68 lid). So we know it's not from the early 50s. The can mentions "more than 50 years of continuous research," whereas a 1954 ad leaves out "more," so the oil is post-1954. Searching the Intertubes with numerous phrases from the can's buttocks confirms a late 1950s or 1960s timeline, but it all seems to come together in Quaker State ads from 1963 and 64, which also feature the same can graphics as the video. So this can would appear to be from that period, ballpark 1963/64 or early 1960s. FYI, in 1964 Quaker State sold for 42/33 cents, regular and sale pricing at grocery stores, although my German Shepherd would have shoplifted it for free if I asked him, one bite-marked can at a time. This was the API "SC" rating era, which I believe meant Sludge Crunchy.

WAY OFF-TOPIC: If visiting a vintage desert or mountain homestead, the type where there's only a crumbling foundation left, look at broken bottle bases to date the homestead, the 1/2/3 o'clock position for soda and beer, and the 3/4/5/6 o'clock position for liquor bottles, a one or two digit date code. With numerous trash samples you can sometimes say, "People lived here from 1943 to 1971" or whatever, that precise. And "They were TOTAL alkies" if lots o' liquor bottles.

Now back to your regularly scheduled dog and cat videos...

 

[TC]

FYI, I came across an April 1954 Quaker State ad in Popular Mechanics that states, "Specifically designed for today's modern motors."

So if you can find it on EBay, you should feel free to use that vintage Quaker State in your 2020 Corvette Z51. That's probably as modern as it gets.

 

[TC]

More trivia... In the video it is suggested there's no API service rating or viscosity listed on the can, understandable since the top lid is rusted and unreadable. But the info is (or was) there, as is the case with all of the hundreds of vintage oil cans I've encountered along Route 66. There were never any mystery motor oils out there.

"SAE 30W" (or other weight, namely 10W) should be embossed into the center of the lid, verified in many EBay old Quaker State cans. The unreadable green "stripe" on the lid is actually font reading "QUAKER STATE MOTOR OIL -- Non-Detergent -- For Service (MM, MS, or ML)." If the font was red instead of green, it would likely read "QUAKER STATE HD -- SC" (red = detergent oil, confirming what Bebop367 said).

This oil wasn't Quaker State's premium oil -- that was their "Super Blend" 10W-30 "highly detergent" oil introduced in 1954. In 1963, an oil/filter change and lube with Super Blend cost $6.88.

This info applies to all vintage oils -- they were clearly embossed on the lid with viscosity, and usually with service rating(s) or intended use in painted font of some sort.

 

[Rmay635703]

Originally Posted by TC
More trivia... In the video it is suggested there's no API service rating or viscosity listed on the can, understandable since the top lid is rusted and unreadable.

"QUAKER STATE MOTOR OIL -- Non-Detergent -- For Service (MM, MS, or ML)." If the font was red instead of green, it would likely read "QUAKER STATE HD -- SC" (red = detergent oil, confirming what Bebop367 said)..


Odd, I always thought the "Severe" rated stuff MS
had some sort of add pack, it was just the ML stuff that was truly non-detergent mineral oil and rare even in the 60's

What was the difference between MS rated and ML rated oil?

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by Rmay635703
Odd, I always thought the "Severe" rated stuff MS
had some sort of add pack, it was just the ML stuff that was truly non-detergent mineral oil and rare even in the 60's

What was the difference between MS rated and ML rated oil?

This may help, especially page 30:

API Engine Oil Licensing

 

[TC]

As I suspected it might, my use of parentheses there (MM, MS or ML) was a bit confusing. In theory -- just speculation -- the lid may have included anywhere from zero to all three of the M's..? I didn't readily find an API "SC" era green lid Quaker State can to compare to, so I used info from the tops of late 1960s QS green cans in lieu of early 60s nomenclature. I assume they're similar in format, if not precise ratings.

In addition to kschachn's very helpful API document, I came across an excellent, comprehensive article on the top-secret decoding of vintage oil cans, written in the cool, groovy, boss and hip lingo that only the year 1969 could muster. (I had Austin Powers confirm that for me.) Search for "how to read an oil can popular mechanics 1969" in Google Books (look for the "Books" tab at the top of Google search results). It goes into detail on all the M's, but strangely avoids talking about James Bond's boss altogether. (Perhaps that's TOO top secret, even for 1969.)

I said that all vintage cans had viscosity and service ratings, but the uber-cool Blackstone EBay articles prove there's rare exceptions to that rule.

I had a mini revelation upon reading the 1954 Quaker State Super Blend ad, one that, for me, strangely didn't involve either squirrels or beer...or both. My assumption/belief was that motor oils up through the 1950s were unsophisticated Neanderthal lubes, with "modern" oils only coming about in the 1960s. The visual was mid/late 60s Mustangs, Camaros and Chargers = modern lubricants era, whereas any car resembling those in WWII flicks -- which includes most early 50s rides -- simply used now hopelessly obsolete lubes. But the new-for-1954 Super Blend appeared to have it all: 1) 10W/30 multi-viscosity, so no need for separate summer/winter oils; 2) "Highly detergent," per the ad; and 3) Likely some sort of reasonable zinc/phosphate/similar anti-wear package. (And don't forget the best part...the cool green dye!) In other words, a "modern" motor oil, readily available to the public a decade before I assumed it was, along with competitors' products. I know that the base stocks, additive packages, performance and longevity were all weak when compared to today's oils, but still "modern" nonetheless. I assume that, at least to some extent large or small, that whole midcentury Sludge Era came about in part due to some folks' stubborness in sticking with less expensive non-detergent oils.... because that's what Grandpa told them to use. (No, not smart Grandpa...the OTHER Grandpa.) To throw in some hyperbole, perhaps that 1954 Super Blend ad trumpets the "birth" of modern motor oil, just without all the messy goo and butt-slapping to turn the darn thing ON. Search for "life 1954 quaker state super blend" in Google Books. Include the words "dogs like beer" if you want, but admittedly that probably won't help your search.

One more jib-jab. Many of the 1950s Quaker State ads and cans included the line, "Go farther before you need to add a quart." No great revelation that vintage engines were often glorified oil sieves, but it's funny to think about just HOW true that was compared to today. Even my 2004 Range Rover with the factory BMW V8, 9.6 qt sump, NEVER needs oil, even if I go 10K miles. On the other hand, when I visit the Route 66 desert, rusty oil cans are EVERYWHERE. It's almost as if they ran on a 50/50 mix of gas and oil. Like those canvas "Desert water bags" drivers hung over their front bumper and grill, "Gotta stop to add oil" on a road trip is largely a thing of the past.

 

[Rmay635703]

Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by Rmay635703
Odd, I always thought the "Severe" rated stuff MS
had some sort of add pack, it was just the ML stuff that was truly non-detergent mineral oil and rare even in the 60's

What was the difference between MS rated and ML rated oil?

This may help, especially page 30:

API Engine Oil Licensing



Interesting
SA-SC were sometimes labeled non-detergent at least on that particular Penzoil can

 

[TC]

The skinny from that 1969 Popular Mechanics article:

Post WWII in the late 1940s the three industry oil ratings were "Regular, Premium, and Heavy Duty."

Beginning in the early 1950s the "M" system was introduced, still in effect in 1969.

MS - MOTOR SEVERE SERVICE
The default oil choice since the early 1960s. Short trips, stop & go driving, long idling. Standard additives included inhibitors, detergents, dispersants.

MM - MOTOR MODERATE SERVICE
None of the driving types above. Little or no detergents.

ML - MOTOR LIGHT SERVICE
Straight mineral oil with few or no additives. Obsolete and hard to find even by 1969.

To add some crazy into the mix, there were DIFFERING definitions of "MS." "Every auto company establishes their own MS requirement, not necessarily the same as the API 'MS' rating or mil spec." API MS oil did not need to meet automakers' MS (or other) requirements, which were warranty driven. (I like and respect all that. They were even more drunk than me! Props to them.)

The gold standard during that era was not MS since that meaning was a bit fuzzy, but "meets or exceeds carmakers' warranty requirements" or is of "carmaker MS quality" (more important than the API definition of MS). To have a car warranty honored, it was ALL about the carmaker's definition of MS, not API's. If a warranty was expired, a driver could switch from the carmaker's to API's definition of MS if they wanted -- it didn't matter much at that point since either was a high-performing oil.

Standard and premium oils had about a 15 cent price difference back then. The premium would get you multi-viscosity and/or "exceeds," rather than simply "meets," carmakers' requirements.

Sounds like they took what should have been a simple system and made it complicated and silly. I blame the 60s LSD for that. Their oil classifications double as an acid trip.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by TC
Sounds like they took what should have been a simple system and made it complicated and silly. I blame the 60s LSD for that. Their oil classifications double as an acid trip.

A perfect opportunity for the API to do better.

You know, not all of us took acid nor LSD back then, some of us paid attention in school instead.

 

[TC]

True dat on the eventual API opportunity to standardize. Much needed then!

But it seems that for a LONG time -- a decade at the least -- they opted for "acid trip" instead.

 

[bbhero]

Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by TC
Sounds like they took what should have been a simple system and made it complicated and silly. I blame the 60s LSD for that. Their oil classifications double as an acid trip.

A perfect opportunity for the API to do better.

You know, not all of us took acid nor LSD back then, some of us paid attention in school instead.



You sure you didn't get no trips kschachn