Synthetic oil for Flat Tappet cams

[540 RAT]

Also Rat, how are you converting from a "wear scar" to a psi number to rank these oils?

[/quote]

That psi value is determined by the testing "load" being applied (which of course, is the EXACT SAME for every oil tested), over the "area" of the wear scar that is created on the test specimen, as the test is being performed. So, the result is "pounds" of force being applied over the wear scar "area", which is in square inches. Or in other words, pounds per square inch, which of course is just shortened to "psi". The better an oil's wear protection capability, the smaller the wear scar will be on the test specimen, and the higher the resulting psi value will be.

540 RAT

[540 RAT]

Order a case of this and run what ever oil you want! Oil Extreme Concentrate additive. http://www.oilextreme.com/enter.html
I have run several flat tappet cammed small and big blocks with this and Mobil 1 with no failures.

As anyone who has been following various oil discussions knows, there is no shortage of technically weak people chiming in, who have nothing to add to the discussion other than nasty negative comments. Of course they never provide any real world oil test data to put up against mine for direct “wear protection capability” comparison. They just repeat what they’ve always been told, and cannot get past the fact that actual test data brings into question how good high zinc levels really are. And don’t forget, my testing showed:

10W30 Joe Gibbs XP3 NASCAR Racing Oil synthetic = 95,543 psi, which puts it in the outstanding wear protection category, even with very low levels of zinc.
zinc = 743 ppm
phos = 802 ppm

Is there a zinc lover out there who is prepared to say that Joe Gibbs NASCAR oil is no good?

In any case, there are far more people who are technically sharp enough to understand the value of testing motor oil “dynamically under load” like I do, just like we test engines on the dyno under load. I get plenty of feedback in person, from emails and from PM’s from folks asking me to ignore the naysayers and keep posting motor oil test data that they cannot find anywhere else. So, I will. And if the nasty guys don’ like it, they can close out and go to another discussion. But, it will be their loss, because they will not be learning what the new testing tells us about motor oil.

So, to that end, I’ve order some David Vizard endorsed 5W30 Oil Extreme motor oil, and some Oil Extreme Concentrate additive. Vizard himself says that using high levels of zinc in motor oil is outdated technology, which is precisely what my testing has shown. Now even Vizard and I are consistent in our findings. These oil products use what he calls the new calcium sulfonate extreme pressure technology. Yet another example on not needing high levels of zinc.

I’m not affiliated with this product in any way. But, I thought it sounded interesting, so I’ll send the motor oil in for Lab Testing to see how much of what all is in it. And of course I’ll put it through my “dynamic wear testing under load” process to see how it shapes up against all the other oils. If it is as good as it appears, my testing will absolutely show it.

And for the concentrate, I will add the recommended amount to a modern low zinc oil that I’ve recently tested. Then I’ll send a sample of that into the Lab to see how the component levels have changed. And I’ll also I’ll put it through my “dynamic wear testing under load” process to see how it shapes up against all the other oils after having been modified. In the past, adding zinc additives have ruined the oils by reducing their wear protection capability. So, it will be very interesting to see if this new calcium sulfonate extreme pressure technology performs better.
Here’s a link:

http://www.oilextreme.com/

For those who have no trouble understanding the value of this motor oil testing, and want to see how these products perform, stay tuned. In a month or two, I’ll post all the results.

540 RAT

[540 RAT]

Rat, run your 540 with flat tappets and your 5-30 SN oil and let us know how long it lasts...
until then, your one arm bandit test doesn't prove much.

My tester is NOT a one armed bandit.

540 RAT

[540 RAT]

[quote="mshred"
Bottom line:
DO NOT let those who don't know what they are talking about, confuse you.

540 RAT

Well, this part I believe. If you won't back up your "findings" with REAL WORLD data, i.e. breaking in and running aggressive, flat-tappet cams on that synthetic stuff, you've got NO business putting someone in the potential situation of wiping out an engine. What you've been doing is NOT cool.

My testing subjects a motor oil to far more severe loads than an actual engine ever can. Testing the oil in an engine will not show the subtle differences between various oils. It would only show that for a given combo, a certain oil may not cause a failure, but it will not show us the limit of that oil. So, testing in an actual engine would be a waste of time. What I'm doing is COOL, and provides motor oil comparison data that is not available anywher else.

540 RAT

[540 RAT]

RAT all due respect Sir, but i been asking you and others have in here, get yourself a flat tappett mule test motor and run your new synthetic oil in there. Lets see some results on the cam and lobe wear? What is so hard about that. Thats all we are asking. I want to believe you on these tests, but show me the proof. Lots of small block Chevy motors out there cheap, build a test stand, with guages, etc and test, and i mean test.

Rally, my testing subjects a motor oil to far more severe loads than an actual engine ever can. Testing the oil in a test mule will not show the subtle differences between various oils. It would only show that for a given combo, a certain oil may not cause a failure, but it will not show us the limit of that oil. The whole point of my testing is to find out what the capability/limits are of the various oils. So, testing in an actual engine would be a waste of time. That is why I do not use a test mule engine. All that matters is how the various oils compare to each other. Use an oil that you are familiar with as a starting point. Oils that peform better in my testing will provide more wear protection. And oils that perform worse, will provide less wear protection.

540 RAT

[GARY C]

Order a case of this and run what ever oil you want! Oil Extreme Concentrate additive. http://www.oilextreme.com/enter.html
I have run several flat tappet cammed small and big blocks with this and Mobil 1 with no failures.

As anyone who has been following various oil discussions knows, there is no shortage of technically weak people chiming in, who have nothing to add to the discussion other than nasty negative comments. Of course they never provide any real world oil test data to put up against mine for direct “wear protection capability” comparison. They just repeat what they’ve always been told, and cannot get past the fact that actual test data brings into question how good high zinc levels really are. And don’t forget, my testing showed:

10W30 Joe Gibbs XP3 NASCAR Racing Oil synthetic = 95,543 psi, which puts it in the outstanding wear protection category, even with very low levels of zinc.
zinc = 743 ppm
phos = 802 ppm

Is there a zinc lover out there who is prepared to say that Joe Gibbs NASCAR oil is no good?

In any case, there are far more people who are technically sharp enough to understand the value of testing motor oil “dynamically under load” like I do, just like we test engines on the dyno under load. I get plenty of feedback in person, from emails and from PM’s from folks asking me to ignore the naysayers and keep posting motor oil test data that they cannot find anywhere else. So, I will. And if the nasty guys don’ like it, they can close out and go to another discussion. But, it will be their loss, because they will not be learning what the new testing tells us about motor oil.

So, to that end, I’ve order some David Vizard endorsed 5W30 Oil Extreme motor oil, and some Oil Extreme Concentrate additive. Vizard himself says that using high levels of zinc in motor oil is outdated technology, which is precisely what my testing has shown. Now even Vizard and I are consistent in our findings. These oil products use what he calls the new calcium sulfonate extreme pressure technology. Yet another example on not needing high levels of zinc.

I’m not affiliated with this product in any way. But, I thought it sounded interesting, so I’ll send the motor oil in for Lab Testing to see how much of what all is in it. And of course I’ll put it through my “dynamic wear testing under load” process to see how it shapes up against all the other oils. If it is as good as it appears, my testing will absolutely show it.

And for the concentrate, I will add the recommended amount to a modern low zinc oil that I’ve recently tested. Then I’ll send a sample of that into the Lab to see how the component levels have changed. And I’ll also I’ll put it through my “dynamic wear testing under load” process to see how it shapes up against all the other oils after having been modified. In the past, adding zinc additives have ruined the oils by reducing their wear protection capability. So, it will be very interesting to see if this new calcium sulfonate extreme pressure technology performs better.
Here’s a link:

http://www.oilextreme.com/

For those who have no trouble understanding the value of this motor oil testing, and want to see how these products perform, stay tuned. In a month or two, I’ll post all the results.

540 RAT

My question is, lf Oil extreme fails your test or you going to blame oil extreme or your test procedures, This product has been tested and proven in real world engine test by engine builders with far more credibility than you and I will ever have.

I am talking many engines, many hours, many years,...not a brief couple of hours in a garage with some kind of test rig that does not match real world conditions.

Vizard himself says that using high levels of zinc in motor oil is outdated technology

BTW, where did he say this?

[cv67]

How bout everyone installs flat tappets on their dime and quit throwing rocks my god LOL.

[rally]

RAT all due respect Sir, but i been asking you and others have in here, get yourself a flat tappett mule test motor and run your new synthetic oil in there. Lets see some results on the cam and lobe wear? What is so hard about that. Thats all we are asking. I want to believe you on these tests, but show me the proof. Lots of small block Chevy motors out there cheap, build a test stand, with guages, etc and test, and i mean test.

Rally, my testing subjects a motor oil to far more severe loads than an actual engine ever can. Testing the oil in a test mule will not show the subtle differences between various oils. It would only show that for a given combo, a certain oil may not cause a failure, but it will not show us the limit of that oil. The whole point of my testing is to find out what the capability/limits are of the various oils. So, testing in an actual engine would be a waste of time. That is why I do not use a test mule engine. All that matters is how the various oils compare to each other. Use an oil that you are familiar with as a starting point. Oils that peform better in my testing will provide more wear protection. And oils that perform worse, will provide less wear protection.

540 RAT

RAT,
Can you guarantee me that i will not have a cam failure using this new synthetic oil you are pushing? So you are saying this new Ultra Pennz synthetic 5W30 will not ruin my flatt tappett cam and lifters? If i have a failure, what does that say about your tests? And would you ship me a new Comps Cam flat tappett cam and lifters if i did?

[dirtracr5]

RAT, please prove to us how your test loads an engine oil more than any part inside an engine possibly could. No more bs just facts please. I would be very interested in the load your one armed bandit generates vs a flat tappet camshaft with say 380lbs over the nose.

[Barry Burch]

540 Rat. 2000 dollars cash bet. My redline 5/30 against any wt pennsoil ultra
Idenical sbc engines on the dyno or street. Measured for cam wear. Well
are you fealing luckey?

[GARY C]

How bout everyone installs flat tappets on their dime and quit throwing rocks my god LOL.

I have used them most of my life with either zink additive or oil extreme and have never lost a single lobe!

[Olefud]

Synthetic oil and petroleum oil do, or at least did, have a different characteristic in boundary layer lube. When squeezed between two surfaces petroleum oil becomes significantly more viscose. At least early synthetic oil did not do so. The Cats on the artic oil line that synthetic oil was developed for has a problem with tappet failure due to this phenomenon. “Synthetic” oil is now allowed to have fairly high petroleum oil content. Perhaps this provides tappet protection.

[BrazilianZ28Camaro]

RAT540, do you really believe your test method correlate at some degree to what is happening into a running engine?

How can you know the way your "best" oil will behave into a engine at 8000 RPM, chemically, dynamically and thermally?

Oil companies with thousands of hours of oil development and highly trained professionals STILL do the final oil test running it hundreads of hours on engines against a dyno at varying loads. They will finally do oil tests for wear and evaluate the oil performance analysing the disassembled engine parts.

People who haven't acess to the procedure above generally evaluate their oils on engine teardowns, meaning the result of real world test under several conditions.

Remember, boundary lubrication is highly dependant of the surface micro finish. If you didn't monitored this on your test will show differences in readings.

[lorax]

Synthetic oil and petroleum oil do, or at least did, have a different characteristic in boundary layer lube. When squeezed between two surfaces petroleum oil becomes significantly more viscose. At least early synthetic oil did not do so. The Cats on the artic oil line that synthetic oil was developed for has a problem with tappet failure due to this phenomenon. “Synthetic” oil is now allowed to have fairly high petroleum oil content. Perhaps this provides tappet protection.

Then how do explain how some of the most agressive cam lobes live with oils that have ZERO conventional petro oil?
Where did you get the idea that synthetic oil was developed for Cats on the actic line?

[Warp Speed]

testing in an actual engine would be a waste of time.

Bwaaahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pretty much sums it up right there!!!!!!!!! LOL