So you've been unable to find a legit result showing less than 1000 ppm zinc for a major oil brand?

Josh

 

The article I posted is legit - as legit as your sources anyway - lmao.

The other thing to keep in mind is the range I mention is for diesel oils in general. All I have been intereseted lately in is API certified CI and CJ oils. Non- CI and CJ specs will be different ................... and we already proved that formulations change over time. Seemingly the recent trend is the increased zinc numbers - even in "crap" Delo.

Here is a source for more VOA - hard to read, but the Mystik CI-4 oil was VERY low - 799. Is it a MAJOR brand - who cares, blah, blah, blah.

 

That's fine, your own links to Delo proved your original link wrong and I am ok with that.

Therefore no diesel oil below 1000 zinc.

Josh

 

I think something entirely different is being proved by your posts - LMAO.

The TDR article has received a lot of repsect and acceptance. You - not so much.

As mentioned in post #13 - there is no doubt formulations change over time. UOA can be a good thing to do periodically because of the potential changes by the formulators!

Again - It is silly to cast doubts on the validity of the TDR post. Now. it is easy to imagine that the formulations have changed over time. Also, look at the link w/ the Mystik results (but how can one prove they are legit - lol).

 

Oh really? LOL

Josh

 

VOA of Delvac 1300

Delvac 1300 Super 15w40 - Bob Is The Oil Guy

Josh

 

I'll throw my 2 cents into the ring here;

I have never seen the reason for an oil additive in ANY engine I have been associated with over the last 30 some years, including the two 6.0's (one currently).

The only advantage I have ever seen an oil additive do is make some money for the people selling it,as it dilutes the oil manufacturers additive package making it less effective, and there could also be conflicting chemistry's in two different additive packages actually decreasing the oils life-span.

 

I agree. Oil Additive = Snake Oil.

Josh

 

ZDDP is an extreme pressure additive. If the stiction issue is polishing of the bores of the spool valves, my gut tells me that extreme pressure is not the issue that is causing the failure, so ZDDP won't help. ZDDP was really required in the days of flat tappet camshafts and mechanical injection pumps, it's no longer a panacea additive.

Brian

 

I agree to a point - RR01 - your chemistry statement was the point of post #10 - asking how much zinc is enough, too little, or too much. the statement was made that all current diesel oils contain plenty of zinc. I have yet to see a basis for that statement. Not saying it is true or untrue, but whoever says there is plenty should have a basis for such a statement. I have great respect for the oil formulations, but on the flip-side, there is no doubt that the oil companies are also trying to keep the cost as low as possible. Then you have our wonderful government that causes all sorts of unfortunate compromises to be required.

Definitely the chemistry in oil formulations is far more complex than most people think. The dispersant technology is just one aspect of it, but it is an important one if people are just going to throw in ash forming components (like ZDDP is).

However, IMO, there is little doubt that some have obtained temporary relief from stiction issues with additives. I don't EVEN want to call the hundreds of "forum posters" liars (those that say they have been helped by RevX or Archoil) - I will leave that to others.

Thinking we can add a small bottle of additive and (by trial and error) improve on the overall oil formulations that have been researched to the hilt is certainly silly. However, not all additives are snake oil either (the zinc in the oils we buy gets there by an addive, probably ZDDP, put in by the formulator). It depends on what the objective is. For an oil manufacturer to change an oil formulation to address Ford 6.0L stiction (and yes Ford unfortunately invented that term and apparently the condition) does not make any sense. So, could there be additives that help - certainly. Could some be found that are cheaper than Rev-x - probably. Then the real question comes up - has it caused issues with other aspects of the oils performance.

 

Hi Bismic - I learned about ZDDP in a hurry when normal current spec automotive oils suddenly stopped having it in any relevant quantity about 6 years ago. I was running race engines will flat tappet camshafts and there was a sudden spate of people wiping lobes. It happened to us, and I talked to Dema Elgin, of Elgin Cams, who happened to be the guy I bought my cams from. He clued me in to the ZDDP issue, said anything around 1000 - 1200 was fine, don't add more ( the ash issue you referred to, took me another couple of years to figure that out) and told me to run Delo 400 or Rotella 15W40 in my race engines. Do we need it in our 6.0 PSD's? I don't know - our issues are more viscosity loss through shearing, which ZDDP does absolutely nothing for. Quality base stock and viscosity modifiers handle that. Based on what I know, using ZDDP levels as the basis for choosing an oil for the 6.0 is a red herring - not relevant to the application. What may be relevant is that current diesel oils are undergoing the same sort of major transformation that automotive oils went through some time ago. Ash is suddenly a big issue in modern engines (which ours no longer is) due to emission control equipment, particulate filters, etc. So additive packages are changing radically, elements like ZDDP are disappearing and being replaced with new additives that don't form as much ash when they burn. They are by and large better oils for it, and I will continue to use Rotella brand, trusting and hoping that it will continue to do the job for me. I ain't a petroleum lubrication engineer, so I have to take this on faith.

Brian

 

MC5C - thanks for the information. I had read somewhere that 1500 ppm was good, but never documented it. Good to know the "Ballpark"!!! That being said, some oils have up to 1800 (just saw a Valvoline PBE post that mentioned levels that high). Kind of interesting for sure! Sometimes you wonder how much is marketing hype.

 

I would wonder what running an additive to band-aid injectors does for the long term reliability of the engine.

Does Run6.0Run use an additive? Someone running Rev-X for 10,000 miles doesn't mean a whole much compared to another that runs 200,000 with no additive whatsoever.

The 6.0 engines with lifter failures or HPOP failures... relevence of additive versus no additive?

Those are the questions that need to be asked.

As for "stiction" Ford and Navistar updated the strategies to include injector cycling aka Buzzing and later induction heating for a reason. Otherwise if an additive like Rev-X was the solution then I would bet Motorcraft would also have a Rev-X clone of their own.

And also keep in mind International/ Navistar stopped their updates with the Buzz flash.

Josh

 

LOL - those questions have been asked for years .......... and who has ever stated that it was anything BUT a bandaid!!??

Lots of people need the temporary bandaid for financial reasons. As far as running 500k+ miles as a data point (like your run6.0run benchmark) - that is ridiculous. It just doesn't apply to most folks. I would bet that lots of people are at 200k that have used Rev-X. Why not start a poll - thats better than just arguing about it.

IMO the only practical way to find out is for people to try it and report the results.

 

Most all "band-aids are the same....I used Sea Foam - successfully and it is MUCH cheaper. Longest I've EVER used a band-aid for too..... two years and counting. Ummm, played right into MArk's hand.