G
Guest
·First, here’s a look at some background info, for those not familiar with me or my oil testing write-ups, or for those who are familiar but still may not be clear about it all. I'm a working Professional Degreed Engineer, as well as a U.S. Patent holder, who deals with Engineering technical matters for a living. I’m not just some guy who went to College to become an Engineer. I have also been wrenching on cars and motorcycles since I was a teenager. So, in addition to being an Engineer, I’m also a hands-on gear head and have been a Drag Racer, just like the rest of you.
THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT thing a motor oil does for your engine, is prevent wear. Everything else it does for your engine, comes AFTER that. So, at the beginning of 2012, I began Tribology Research using motor oil “Wear Testing” equipment, to get to the truth about the wear prevention capabilities of motor oil. And for those not familiar with the terminology, Tribology means the study of friction, lubrication, and wear between moving surfaces.
I'm a total perfectionist when it comes to technical issues. And those who know me personally, know that I would never jeopardize my reputation or my integrity, by posting data that would turn the Hobby/Industry on its ear, unless I was absolutely sure about the data I put out there. Of course I've always known my carefully generated data was completely accurate, but now my oil testing methodology and the resulting data have been endorsed by the following well respected sources:
1. Dr. Lars Grimsrud, who is the most highly respected Engineer, Car builder and Tech Guru on the Corvette C3 Forum. He told me, “I'm 100% on board with backing you with my endorsement on your testing: I run a Propulsion Testing Laboratory for a major Aerospace Company, so I'm in the testing business. Your methods and approach are in accordance with sound engineering testing methods, and are not arguable by intelligent people”. He also told me this about my Oil Testing info, “This is excellent stuff, and I've already sent copies of this to my engineering colleagues”. In addition to that, he now includes my Oil Testing Info in a list of Tech Papers written by well respected Industry authors, that he makes available to enthusiasts.
2. A NASCAR engine supplier out of North Carolina (they did not want their name associated with any Internet motor oil arguments that may come up, so they asked that their name be left out, which I honored) was so impressed with the motor oil “Wear Protection Capability Testing” I perform, that they sent me 3 NASCAR Racing Oils they use, for testing. They valued my testing efforts enough to include me in what they do, which is quite an endorsement, considering the Professional level of Racing they are involved in. They had been seeing some wear issues with those oils, and wanted to see if I could shed any light on that by testing them. I did test those oils for them, and the test results showed that those oils did not provide acceptable wear protection capability, which accounted for the wear problems they were having. So, they have selected other oils to use, and their wear problems have gone away. If I had tested those oils before they started using them, I could have saved them time, money and grief.
3. The “Oil Extreme” Oil Company was so impressed with the detail and accuracy of my oil testing, that they wanted to hire me to perform product development research testing for them. That was clearly a major endorsement of the testing I perform. But, I declined taking any money from them, because I won’t be tied to any Oil Company by money. That way I can maintain my independent and unbiased status. I report the test results just how they come out, good or bad. And there is no way I’d allow any Oil Company to influence anything I report. I did however, agree to perform testing for them for free, along with other testing I perform. And those results will be posted along with other test results.
My data has also been validated and backed-up by a total of FOUR other independent Industry sources. They are as follows:
1. Well known and respected Engineer and Tech Author David Vizard, whose own test data, largely based on real world engine dyno testing, has concluded that more zinc in motor oil can be damaging, more zinc does NOT provide today's best wear protection, and that using zinc as the primary anti-wear component, is outdated technology.
2. The GM Oil Report titled, "Oil Myths from GM Techlink", concluded that high levels of zinc are damaging and that more zinc does NOT provide more wear protection.
3. A motor oil research article written by Ed Hackett titled, "More than you ever wanted to know about Motor Oil", concluded that more zinc does NOT provide more wear protection, it only provides longer wear protection.
4. This from the Brad Penn Oil Company:
There is such a thing as too much ZDDP. ZDDP is surface aggressive, and too much can be a detriment. ZDDP fights for the surface, blocking other additive performance. Acids generated due to excessive ZDDP contact will “tie-up” detergents thus encouraging corrosive wear. ZDDP effectiveness plateaus, more does NOT translate into more protection. Only so much is utilized. We don’t need to saturate our oil with ZDDP.
Those who are familiar with my test data, know that my test results came up with the exact same results stated by all four of those independent sources. So, this is an example where motor oil “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load” using oil testing equipment, engine dyno testing, Motor Oil Industry testing, and proper motor oil research using only the facts, from a total of five (including my own) independent sources, all converged to agree and come to the same exact conclusion. Back-up validation proof, doesn't get any better than this.
So, with all those sources in total agreement, that should provide more than enough proof to anyone who questioned my test data, that my data is absolutely correct. And that questioning any one of those sources, questions them all, and questions the Physics and Chemistry that determined all those identical results. And no sensible person would try to argue against Physics and Chemistry. Because that is a battle no man can win.
************************
Of course, many folks have always been conditioned to believe that high zinc levels in motor oil are a must for sufficient wear protection in High Performance engines. And of course there are a number of oils available that say something along the lines of “Extra Zinc for Extra Protection”. So, a lot of those folks just cannot bring themselves to accept the fact that high zinc levels are NOT what they are cracked up to be. They feel compelled to believe the claims on those bottles of oil and the Marketing/Advertising claims made by the Oil Companies that provide those high zinc oils.
But, people need to consider the following. Those Oil Companies are in business to make money. That’s it. So, they put a product on the market that they feel there is a demand for, and will make them money. As a result, they will say “ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING”, to move that product, which will help their bottom line. So, high zinc loving people need to stop and consider that for a moment. The Oil Companies have a vested interest in telling people what they want to hear, so they will buy their oil. Misleading claims and false advertising are as old and the exchange of money. And every person alive has seen false advertising many, many times in their life.
Oil Company claims about the benefit of high zinc levels in motor oil, only amounts to fraudulent advertising, because that is NOT based on actual fact. Extra zinc cannot physically provide extra wear protection, because zinc simply DOES NOT work that way. Zinc is used up a little at a time as it is sacrificed to help protect against wear. More zinc will take longer to become depleted, simply because there is more there to use up. It’s the same idea as more gas in your tank will take longer to run out, but more gas in your tank cannot physically make more HP.
These high zinc motor oil producing Oil Companies NEVER provide any test data to prove that their high zinc oils provide better wear protection than ordinary modern street oils do. They can't do it, because it's NOT TRUE. So, high zinc believers are only embracing smoke and mirrors, nothing else. And the actual test results referenced above, PROVE that the need for high zinc levels is simply NOT TRUE. That is why I started testing motor oil, so that I could separate the facts from the fiction.
Motor Oil Company Advertising claims are only hype and hot air, but actual test data is the real thing. If I test a modern low zinc API certified oil against a high zinc oil, and the modern API certified low zinc out clearly outperforms the high zinc oil in terms of wear protection, how can the high zinc lovers honestly believe that the high zinc oil is better? How could that high zinc oil magically perform better in an engine, when it was worse in testing? And if I test two high zinc oils, and one does well and one does not, how can the high zinc lovers believe that all high zinc oils are always good?
So, high zinc lovers need to do a little soul searching and ask themselves why they want to believe something that does NOT stand-up to real world testing? Keep in mind that testing is so important and valuable, that multi-million dollar corporate decisions are made, based on test data. Not only that, but Racers test engine and chassis setups at the track all the time. And they believe what the test results tell them, because that's the only way they have to know what really works and what doesn't. So, it makes NO SENSE to disregard oil testing, when virtually all other types of testing are taken as Gospel.
It's been said that I'm the motor oil Police, because I discover and expose false motor oil claims and fraudulent motor oil advertising, with my test results that show the FACTS. I don't sell motor oil, so it doesn't make any difference to me, what oil people choose to run. But, people need to understand that some high zinc oils provide good wear protection, while many high zinc oils do not. And without looking at the test data, you cannot tell which is which, until perhaps its too late. In fact, many wiped flat tappet lobes COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED if people had not blindly believed that all high zinc oils provide all the wear protection they need. Because nothing could be further from the truth.
So, the folks who choose to use only high zinc oils NO MATTER WHAT the test result FACTS show us, are only fooling themselves. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But, ignoring the FACTS is their loss, and depending on the particular oil they choose, they are likely NOT getting the wear protection they THINK they are. If you value your engine, wouldn't you prefer to choose the motor oil that can REALLY provide the best wear protection, based on test data FACTS, rather than the old incorrect high zinc MYTH? Don't believe what the high zinc lovers say, because they are only trying to justify what they “believe”, even though they have NO PROOF what so ever, to backup what they say. On the other hand, I backup everything I say. So, read the FACTS, then make your own decision.
****************************
The motor oil “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load” I performed to generate my “Wear Protection Ranking List”, is worst case torture testing using oil testing equipment (and for the record, it is NOT a “One Armed Bandit” tester), which subjects the oil to far more severe loading than even the most wicked flat tappet race engine ever could. The testing is in other words, a rubbing friction test under load. And the test equipment is NOT intended to duplicate an engine’s internal components. On the contrary, the test equipment is specifically designed to cause an oil to reach its failure point, in order to determine what its capability limit it is. And every oil I test is brought to its failure point, that’s how it works. The difference in the failure points, is what we compare.
But, a running engine is designed to last indefinitely, and of course, they do not generally cause an oil to reach its failure point. So, due to the complete difference in design, the pressures in my test are completely different, and cannot be compared directly to an engine’s lobe/lifter interface pressure. That would be comparing apples to oranges, which makes no sense. My testing is so severe, that the oil fails at an earlier point. And that is why my test data psi values may appear lower than you might expect to see in some running engines. Keep in mind, I’m comparing OIL AGAINST OIL, and the procedure used is exactly the same for each oil tested. For better or worse, each oil stands on its own merit. And if oil A produces twice the psi value of oil B in my testing, then oil A will also offer twice the wear protection capability of oil B, in a running engine.
The “dynamic wear testing under load” I use, is intentionally designed to find the SPECIFIC LIMIT of each individual oil’s “Load carrying capacity/film strength”, at a representative operational temperature of 230*F. Or in other words, to determine each oil’s “wear protection capability” psi value, which can be compared to any other oil tested on the same equipment. The results that come out of my testing are NOT my opinion, and they are NOT my theory. They are the FACTS that come out of the Physics and Chemistry involved in the tests.
Performing “dynamic wear testing under load”, is the ONLY TYPE OF TESTING that will provide accurate data regarding an oil’s film strength. Dynamically testing motor oil under load, is the same concept as dynamically testing an engine under load on a dyno. That is the only way to truly find accurate performance data of a motor oil, or of an engine.
And obtaining accurate oil film strength data is ABSOLUTELY THE ONLY WAY to determine an oil’s wear protection capability, because an oil’s film strength is the last line of defense against metal to metal contact. In order to reach metal to metal contact, and subsequent wear or damage, you MUST penetrate the film strength of the oil. And oil thicker than a mere film becomes liquid oil. Of course liquids are NOT compressible, which is how hydraulics work. Since liquids cannot be compressed, ALL oils provide THE SAME wear protection when they are in liquid form, no matter if they cost $1.00 per quart or $20.00 per quart. So, oil film strength testing is the GOLD STANDARD for determining how capable an oil is at preventing wear, and how different oils directly compare to each other. In other words, the ONLY THING that separates one oil’s ability to prevent wear from another oil’s ability to prevent wear, is the difference in their individual film strength capabilities.
Continued below:
THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT thing a motor oil does for your engine, is prevent wear. Everything else it does for your engine, comes AFTER that. So, at the beginning of 2012, I began Tribology Research using motor oil “Wear Testing” equipment, to get to the truth about the wear prevention capabilities of motor oil. And for those not familiar with the terminology, Tribology means the study of friction, lubrication, and wear between moving surfaces.
I'm a total perfectionist when it comes to technical issues. And those who know me personally, know that I would never jeopardize my reputation or my integrity, by posting data that would turn the Hobby/Industry on its ear, unless I was absolutely sure about the data I put out there. Of course I've always known my carefully generated data was completely accurate, but now my oil testing methodology and the resulting data have been endorsed by the following well respected sources:
1. Dr. Lars Grimsrud, who is the most highly respected Engineer, Car builder and Tech Guru on the Corvette C3 Forum. He told me, “I'm 100% on board with backing you with my endorsement on your testing: I run a Propulsion Testing Laboratory for a major Aerospace Company, so I'm in the testing business. Your methods and approach are in accordance with sound engineering testing methods, and are not arguable by intelligent people”. He also told me this about my Oil Testing info, “This is excellent stuff, and I've already sent copies of this to my engineering colleagues”. In addition to that, he now includes my Oil Testing Info in a list of Tech Papers written by well respected Industry authors, that he makes available to enthusiasts.
2. A NASCAR engine supplier out of North Carolina (they did not want their name associated with any Internet motor oil arguments that may come up, so they asked that their name be left out, which I honored) was so impressed with the motor oil “Wear Protection Capability Testing” I perform, that they sent me 3 NASCAR Racing Oils they use, for testing. They valued my testing efforts enough to include me in what they do, which is quite an endorsement, considering the Professional level of Racing they are involved in. They had been seeing some wear issues with those oils, and wanted to see if I could shed any light on that by testing them. I did test those oils for them, and the test results showed that those oils did not provide acceptable wear protection capability, which accounted for the wear problems they were having. So, they have selected other oils to use, and their wear problems have gone away. If I had tested those oils before they started using them, I could have saved them time, money and grief.
3. The “Oil Extreme” Oil Company was so impressed with the detail and accuracy of my oil testing, that they wanted to hire me to perform product development research testing for them. That was clearly a major endorsement of the testing I perform. But, I declined taking any money from them, because I won’t be tied to any Oil Company by money. That way I can maintain my independent and unbiased status. I report the test results just how they come out, good or bad. And there is no way I’d allow any Oil Company to influence anything I report. I did however, agree to perform testing for them for free, along with other testing I perform. And those results will be posted along with other test results.
My data has also been validated and backed-up by a total of FOUR other independent Industry sources. They are as follows:
1. Well known and respected Engineer and Tech Author David Vizard, whose own test data, largely based on real world engine dyno testing, has concluded that more zinc in motor oil can be damaging, more zinc does NOT provide today's best wear protection, and that using zinc as the primary anti-wear component, is outdated technology.
2. The GM Oil Report titled, "Oil Myths from GM Techlink", concluded that high levels of zinc are damaging and that more zinc does NOT provide more wear protection.
3. A motor oil research article written by Ed Hackett titled, "More than you ever wanted to know about Motor Oil", concluded that more zinc does NOT provide more wear protection, it only provides longer wear protection.
4. This from the Brad Penn Oil Company:
There is such a thing as too much ZDDP. ZDDP is surface aggressive, and too much can be a detriment. ZDDP fights for the surface, blocking other additive performance. Acids generated due to excessive ZDDP contact will “tie-up” detergents thus encouraging corrosive wear. ZDDP effectiveness plateaus, more does NOT translate into more protection. Only so much is utilized. We don’t need to saturate our oil with ZDDP.
Those who are familiar with my test data, know that my test results came up with the exact same results stated by all four of those independent sources. So, this is an example where motor oil “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load” using oil testing equipment, engine dyno testing, Motor Oil Industry testing, and proper motor oil research using only the facts, from a total of five (including my own) independent sources, all converged to agree and come to the same exact conclusion. Back-up validation proof, doesn't get any better than this.
So, with all those sources in total agreement, that should provide more than enough proof to anyone who questioned my test data, that my data is absolutely correct. And that questioning any one of those sources, questions them all, and questions the Physics and Chemistry that determined all those identical results. And no sensible person would try to argue against Physics and Chemistry. Because that is a battle no man can win.
************************
Of course, many folks have always been conditioned to believe that high zinc levels in motor oil are a must for sufficient wear protection in High Performance engines. And of course there are a number of oils available that say something along the lines of “Extra Zinc for Extra Protection”. So, a lot of those folks just cannot bring themselves to accept the fact that high zinc levels are NOT what they are cracked up to be. They feel compelled to believe the claims on those bottles of oil and the Marketing/Advertising claims made by the Oil Companies that provide those high zinc oils.
But, people need to consider the following. Those Oil Companies are in business to make money. That’s it. So, they put a product on the market that they feel there is a demand for, and will make them money. As a result, they will say “ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING”, to move that product, which will help their bottom line. So, high zinc loving people need to stop and consider that for a moment. The Oil Companies have a vested interest in telling people what they want to hear, so they will buy their oil. Misleading claims and false advertising are as old and the exchange of money. And every person alive has seen false advertising many, many times in their life.
Oil Company claims about the benefit of high zinc levels in motor oil, only amounts to fraudulent advertising, because that is NOT based on actual fact. Extra zinc cannot physically provide extra wear protection, because zinc simply DOES NOT work that way. Zinc is used up a little at a time as it is sacrificed to help protect against wear. More zinc will take longer to become depleted, simply because there is more there to use up. It’s the same idea as more gas in your tank will take longer to run out, but more gas in your tank cannot physically make more HP.
These high zinc motor oil producing Oil Companies NEVER provide any test data to prove that their high zinc oils provide better wear protection than ordinary modern street oils do. They can't do it, because it's NOT TRUE. So, high zinc believers are only embracing smoke and mirrors, nothing else. And the actual test results referenced above, PROVE that the need for high zinc levels is simply NOT TRUE. That is why I started testing motor oil, so that I could separate the facts from the fiction.
Motor Oil Company Advertising claims are only hype and hot air, but actual test data is the real thing. If I test a modern low zinc API certified oil against a high zinc oil, and the modern API certified low zinc out clearly outperforms the high zinc oil in terms of wear protection, how can the high zinc lovers honestly believe that the high zinc oil is better? How could that high zinc oil magically perform better in an engine, when it was worse in testing? And if I test two high zinc oils, and one does well and one does not, how can the high zinc lovers believe that all high zinc oils are always good?
So, high zinc lovers need to do a little soul searching and ask themselves why they want to believe something that does NOT stand-up to real world testing? Keep in mind that testing is so important and valuable, that multi-million dollar corporate decisions are made, based on test data. Not only that, but Racers test engine and chassis setups at the track all the time. And they believe what the test results tell them, because that's the only way they have to know what really works and what doesn't. So, it makes NO SENSE to disregard oil testing, when virtually all other types of testing are taken as Gospel.
It's been said that I'm the motor oil Police, because I discover and expose false motor oil claims and fraudulent motor oil advertising, with my test results that show the FACTS. I don't sell motor oil, so it doesn't make any difference to me, what oil people choose to run. But, people need to understand that some high zinc oils provide good wear protection, while many high zinc oils do not. And without looking at the test data, you cannot tell which is which, until perhaps its too late. In fact, many wiped flat tappet lobes COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED if people had not blindly believed that all high zinc oils provide all the wear protection they need. Because nothing could be further from the truth.
So, the folks who choose to use only high zinc oils NO MATTER WHAT the test result FACTS show us, are only fooling themselves. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But, ignoring the FACTS is their loss, and depending on the particular oil they choose, they are likely NOT getting the wear protection they THINK they are. If you value your engine, wouldn't you prefer to choose the motor oil that can REALLY provide the best wear protection, based on test data FACTS, rather than the old incorrect high zinc MYTH? Don't believe what the high zinc lovers say, because they are only trying to justify what they “believe”, even though they have NO PROOF what so ever, to backup what they say. On the other hand, I backup everything I say. So, read the FACTS, then make your own decision.
****************************
The motor oil “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load” I performed to generate my “Wear Protection Ranking List”, is worst case torture testing using oil testing equipment (and for the record, it is NOT a “One Armed Bandit” tester), which subjects the oil to far more severe loading than even the most wicked flat tappet race engine ever could. The testing is in other words, a rubbing friction test under load. And the test equipment is NOT intended to duplicate an engine’s internal components. On the contrary, the test equipment is specifically designed to cause an oil to reach its failure point, in order to determine what its capability limit it is. And every oil I test is brought to its failure point, that’s how it works. The difference in the failure points, is what we compare.
But, a running engine is designed to last indefinitely, and of course, they do not generally cause an oil to reach its failure point. So, due to the complete difference in design, the pressures in my test are completely different, and cannot be compared directly to an engine’s lobe/lifter interface pressure. That would be comparing apples to oranges, which makes no sense. My testing is so severe, that the oil fails at an earlier point. And that is why my test data psi values may appear lower than you might expect to see in some running engines. Keep in mind, I’m comparing OIL AGAINST OIL, and the procedure used is exactly the same for each oil tested. For better or worse, each oil stands on its own merit. And if oil A produces twice the psi value of oil B in my testing, then oil A will also offer twice the wear protection capability of oil B, in a running engine.
The “dynamic wear testing under load” I use, is intentionally designed to find the SPECIFIC LIMIT of each individual oil’s “Load carrying capacity/film strength”, at a representative operational temperature of 230*F. Or in other words, to determine each oil’s “wear protection capability” psi value, which can be compared to any other oil tested on the same equipment. The results that come out of my testing are NOT my opinion, and they are NOT my theory. They are the FACTS that come out of the Physics and Chemistry involved in the tests.
Performing “dynamic wear testing under load”, is the ONLY TYPE OF TESTING that will provide accurate data regarding an oil’s film strength. Dynamically testing motor oil under load, is the same concept as dynamically testing an engine under load on a dyno. That is the only way to truly find accurate performance data of a motor oil, or of an engine.
And obtaining accurate oil film strength data is ABSOLUTELY THE ONLY WAY to determine an oil’s wear protection capability, because an oil’s film strength is the last line of defense against metal to metal contact. In order to reach metal to metal contact, and subsequent wear or damage, you MUST penetrate the film strength of the oil. And oil thicker than a mere film becomes liquid oil. Of course liquids are NOT compressible, which is how hydraulics work. Since liquids cannot be compressed, ALL oils provide THE SAME wear protection when they are in liquid form, no matter if they cost $1.00 per quart or $20.00 per quart. So, oil film strength testing is the GOLD STANDARD for determining how capable an oil is at preventing wear, and how different oils directly compare to each other. In other words, the ONLY THING that separates one oil’s ability to prevent wear from another oil’s ability to prevent wear, is the difference in their individual film strength capabilities.
Continued below:
