TOPIC:

T_Dub wrote:

Most modern oils are engineered to give as little wear as possible, under all conditions. I trust them.

From the article:

In a nutshell, whether in a direct or indirect manner, the EPA has told the oil makers to ignore older (i.e. flat tappet cam) engines and to make an oil that avoids converter damage (thereby reducing emissions) in late model cars, and the hell with the restoration and performance market. Marie Antoinette once told the French peasants to eat cake. The EPA has basically told car guys to fend for themselves.

If you lived in california, you would recognize the MO: the EPA wants to reduce air pollution by sending all cars older than five years to the scrapyard. Period. Modern oils are formulated to work OK with modern cars and modern catalytic converters and older bike engines and high perf cars got thrown under the bus.

bountyhunter wrote:

The truth is, the oil companies are being forced to eliminate ZDDP to supposedly increase the life of the cat converters in cars.

have never heard anyone make that claim,

Did I mis-read your post?
You mean I spent all that time trying to find something to support your statement and you disavow it?? Sheesh, well at least I learned something.


Always figured that anyone that would use Pennzoil or Quaker State had a screw loose somewhere

Although it was used as a representative sample of 80's engine oil, maybe because it was the only 20+ year old oil he could find?
Don't tell me you're disregarding published lab reports just because one of the oils tested was Pennzoil?

Find any other actual lab test reports?


Edit

I'm also leaning towards believing that it is not the EPA that has force the reduction of ZDDP, but the auto manufacturers themselves that have pressured the oil industry into doing it.
It's actually been done to meet the new API Specs.
Same thing has been going on in the diesel world for a long time.

Another edit:

Here's the url that will take you to the search page on the EPA site, just in case anyone wants to try and find some reference to ZDDP, Engine Oil Additives, or anything else that might apply.
Lot's of stuff there about waste oil.

nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.EXE?ZyActionL=Re...us&Client=EPA&Init=1

Been fun but I gotta go now

There are all sorts of ways to reduce wear, and the automotive industry as a whole has moved on to cat-friendly additives. High quality synthetic motorcycle oil will have all the anti wear characteristics you need, and also will be much more resistant to thermal breakdown. I read in one of my tribology texts that <u>all</u> of the anti wear additives cause more thermal breakdown with increasing additive content. So I wouldn't use too much, above 0.08% phosphorous is unnecessary from an anti-wear perspective, so any more than that is both pointless and may end up hurting you.

My opinion on the ZDDP thing is as follows. You can pay a bit more and get a good quality motorcycle oil, or you can cheap out and buy Rotella and some additives. A synthetic motorcycle oil will better protect your engine in the long run, as it has the necessary friction modifiers as well as a much much better base than the old dino oil.

www.epinions.com/content_2969477252

steell wrote:

bountyhunter wrote:

The truth is, the oil companies are being forced to eliminate ZDDP to supposedly increase the life of the cat converters in cars.

have never heard anyone make that claim,

Did I mis-read your post?
You mean I spent all that time trying to find something to support your statement and you disavow it?? Sheesh, well at least I learned something.


Always figured that anyone that would use Pennzoil or Quaker State had a screw loose somewhere

Although it was used as a representative sample of 80's engine oil, maybe because it was the only 20+ year old oil he could find?
Don't tell me you're disregarding published lab reports just because one of the oils tested was Pennzoil?

Find any other actual lab test reports?


Edit

I'm also leaning towards believing that it is not the EPA that has force the reduction of ZDDP, but the auto manufacturers themselves that have pressured the oil industry into doing it.
It's actually been done to meet the new API Specs.
Same thing has been going on in the diesel world for a long time.

Another edit:

Here's the url that will take you to the search page on the EPA site, just in case anyone wants to try and find some reference to ZDDP, Engine Oil Additives, or anything else that might apply.
Lot's of stuff there about waste oil.

nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.EXE?ZyActionL=Re...us&Client=EPA&Init=1

Been fun but I gotta go now

Yeah, and I have basically said everything I have to say on the subject. Whoever is forcing out ZDDP (it is the government ultimately) the bottom line is it is now functionally gone in the vast majority of oils and it will soon be a mere memory. New cars are designed to run new oils and they don't give a crap about old engines.

And when you listen to "oil experts" tell you that ZDDP isn't necessary, remember the oil makers basically replaced it with molybdendum disulphide (MOLY) as a friction reducer. Does MOLY ring a bell? It's the stuff in most of those bogus aftermarket additives which the oil companies have been saying were worthless for years. It's like the old Sat Night Live bit where the guy kept saying "Never mind what I said before, I didn't know what I was talking about" and says the opposite.

I don't know how much moly does but I know for a fact it doesn't bond to metal like ZDDP does and give start up protection before oil is up and covering. Period. It doesn't do it's job.

If you think ZDDP doesn't do anything for a flat tappet engine, don't use it. I notice no reply at all to my question: if ZDDP is unnecessary or worthless, why is Royal Purple putting in 1600 PPM in their best oil?

For the record, I have a 31 year old KZ with 85k miles on it (hard short trip city driving) with zero work on the bottom end. Still has good oil pressure. I'm not running without ZDDP because that's what it was designed for.

PLUMMEN wrote:

www.epinions.com/content_2969477252

I have to laugh when some "expert" pontificates how useless "additives" are. I always want to ask:

Then why do the oil companies put additive packages in their oils?

Oh... those are the GOOD additives...

You start putting MOLI or PTFE in a wet clutch engine and you will see how far you get. That's like when back when people thought that they would be so "hip" and started putting Arco Graphite in their bikes. There was a huge run on clutches at the dealers back then. When Slick-50 came out the same thing happened. If ZDDP was only a FAD and not a real problem than major oil companies that produce the most popular racing motor oils such as Lucas and Red Line would not be bothering with selling this additive. Jaguar dealerships would not be putting extra additives in the oil during oil changes if there was not a problem they would just be using these so called "premium" expensive oils. I worked in an engine shop for quite a few years and have seen what improper oil or improper brake-in can do to an engine. The first 5K miles are critical to an engine, after that almost anything can be run threw it. I am a firm believer in synthetic oils. Some people here say it makes their engines leak. These people run Natural oils. In that aspect of controversy I will stay completely neutral. The fact in that area is that all natural oils are the exact same base and do the exact same job, what makes them different is the additive package. So putting synthetic oils completely aside, what wakes one natural oil worth $1.25/qt and another $9.00/qt. explain that, if it is not the additive package? I doubt that this subject will be closed in the automotive industry for quite a while. But when all is said and done the other fact is that there is no car I can think of that has to contend with a wet clutch like we do. The wet clutch opens up another whole can of worms which we have to deal with. I am 100% convinced that this problem is real because if it was not there would not be such a ruckus about it in the vintage car sector. There is no one here who is forcing any one els to use any of the oils with ZDDP or extra ZDDP additives. Every bike owner can use what ever they wish and feels that will serve their purpose. This thread was started after I did some research, when a member here spoke with me about brand new wiped out cams that he bought from APE that APE would not stand behind. For a short time that was a hot topic here. Since I believed that the engine builder knew what they were doing and did not screw up his cams, and I also believed that Web-Cam who makes cams for APE did not build a faulty cam, I started looking for another culprit. The ZDDP culprit was found. Ultimately the bike is yours, you may use what ever oil or additives you choose. For those engineers to be and mechanics to be or HOT bike owners to be. There are quite a few of us here that have been engineers and mechanics and hot bike owners for decades. We are just attempting to share our experience and knowledge with you. You may take it or cast it aside. That is completely up to you. The young engineers that came to work for us learned very fast that half of what they learned from a book is just not practical and is only put there to test you in fact in how fast yo can learn and how quick you can adapt to real world experience. as the old saying goes; "live and Learn" At the end it is all up to the individual what they choose to use. After all it is your engine, and it is only money and sweat.

I agree with the fact tht true synthetics are superior. They operate much better at temperature extremes, they hold up better, but most important to bikes: they hold their viscosity across temp better with less need for the viscosity increasers that dino oils need. That means they will not suffer viscosity breakdown from shearing like the dino oils.

I used to be a lot mor jazzed about synthetics before I found out that it is legal (and commonly done) for oil makers to simply add refining steps to standard oils and then sell them as "fully synthetic", which they clearly are not. What I read indicates most oils sold as "full synthetic" are not true synthetics.

Hydrocracked (sometimes called Hydrowax)
These are petroleum oils that have been hydroisomerized, as it is commonly called. The most stringent level of petroleum oil refining. Much of the paraffin and impurities have been removed and its performance on any number of industry tests is substantially better than it's group two cousins (the regular oil petroleum oil used in automobiles).
Although it is not made from a synthesized, engineered molecule and as such is not a true synthetic oil, it does offer a portion of the benefits you would expect from a true synthetic and in fact is usually sold and marketed as a 100% synthetic product. Hydrowaxes are very cheap to produce, even cheaper than olefins, making them the cheapest of all the synthetics. As they are formulated from crude oil base stocks they aren't a true synthetic.

www.waynesgarage.com/docs/synthetic_oils.htm


As I recall, Amsoil and Rotella are still true synthetics (last I heard).


As for the ZDDP question: it is kind of amazing when you consider the decades of data showing how it reduces wear, and now you have oil makers basically saying "never mind, you don't really need it".

Are you kidding me?

And I will agree the new roller lifters might be OK with out it, but the stuff still reduces wear at cold start anyplace there is stress like main bearings, rod bearings, cylinder walls, etc. Makes me wonder if that's why you have some new cars specifying 0W-20 oil for their cars, to try to get the oil flowing faster.

Whatever, the only thing I know for sure is my bike was built when ZDDP was in the oil at much higher levels than 400ppm and that's how I am going to run it until it dies.

bountyhunter wrote:

Whatever, the only thing I know for sure is my bike was built when ZDDP was in the oil at much higher levels than 400ppm and that's how I am going to run it until it dies.

Than you have a problem; If you run ZDDP than your bike will never die.

bountyhunter wrote:

PLUMMEN wrote:

www.epinions.com/content_2969477252

I have to laugh when some "expert" pontificates how useless "additives" are. I always want to ask:

Then why do the oil companies put additive packages in their oils?

Oh... those are the GOOD additives...

thats just it theyre all opinions either way you look at it

Exactly right. These are our vintage bikes and we should have the right to choose what we feel is the best lubricant for them. We also have the right to be informed in changes in these lubricants in case the changes might affect these bikes adversely. The point is the choice and knowing about it. But it is a crying shame when someone spends a grand on head-work and cams and than has catastrophic failure with no recourse. Once a person is informed than it is up to each individual to make that choice. If you choose to use brand X or brand Y and everything works fine, that is all that counts. But if it do not than you were informed that brand Z should have been used, and it is on each individuals own shoulders. This thread is that information. Hopefully it will help someone to avoid any major heartache. ZDDP ROCKS. If you don't want to dance, than go sit this one out. Some guys like blonds and some guys like brunettes. some guys like them slender and some like them full figured. Either way the one that gives YOU the best performance is the best one.

My gripe is that the oil company's attitude about additives has been condescending and paternalistic: don't worry your little heads about the formula, our oil is perfect and you don't need to add any of that other stuff.

I'll be the first to admit that "other stuff" like Slick 50 and most additives are expensive crap. But, I think they went too far this time because they quietly took out most of an ingredient known to significantly reduce wear for at least 50 years. IMHO, every stinking can of oil should say how much ZDDP is in it so we know whether it is safe to use in a tappet engine. Period. Instead, we get BS. Why won't they put an ingredients list on the can? For example, "diesel formula" oils (which many people use for their high ZDDP levels) are not ideal for gas engines. They have higher concentrations of detergents and solvents to deal with the sooty diesels, and that is more than gas engines need. Might be nice if they would tell us what the "gas engine" oil formulae used to be and what's changed.


It may have not been obvious to anybody else, but their playing down of the value of ZDDP is probably to avoid lawsuits from poor schmucks who had expensive engines built up that got hosed by the new low zinc oil.