Which engine oil do you use ?

[Carboy0]

Hi, I had an interesting conversation at the NEC last Friday on the Duckhams stand. They have relaunched the Duckhams Q 20W-50 and it has 1,200 ppm ZDDP, which they believe is optimal.

I love this stuff and used it on all my classics until they stopped making it and now it’s back, it’s still green and still smells the same - I was sold . It’’s already in the Stag, oil pressure is a little better, but nothing else positive or negative so far.

Cost is about £30 a 4.5 litre can and if SOC has signed up as a classic car club, you can order online using the discount code and then postage is free.

No connection to Duckhams etc. etc.

[DJT]

Cost is about £30 a 4.5 litre can and if SOC has signed up as a classic car club, you can order online using the discount code and then postage is free.

Has the SOC signed up? Benefits like these need to be a part of membership.

[mike@thenook]

I’d go for that too when the VR1 runs out, I too always used it in every car I owned when it was available -

[Motorsport Micky]

It's worse than you think !

Review these comments from the TR Register where there is a detailed ( 2or 3 ) threads upon ZDDP oils and why many oil companies now make it difficult to find out what the Zinc content is.

From Peter Cobbold. (from memory a Chemist).
I think there's now another angle that we need to be aware of when reading labels on ZDDP concentration.
The 1100 to 1400 ppm Mick refers to in #8 is a measure of either the Zn or P concentration and NOT THE CONCENTRATION of ZDDP. Zn and P contribute roughly equally to the weight of the ZDDP molecule so which is used doesn't matter.

BUT a crafty seller wants to put a bigger ppm number on the label could easily use the mass of the whole ZDDP molecule. There are many different ZDDP molecular species varying in molecular mass from 400 to 2000.In any ZDDP molecule there are 1 Zinc and 2 Phosphorus with respective atomic weights of Zn=65 and P= 30. So if the whole ZDDP molecule weighs around 400, the Zn ( or P) contributes around 60-ish, or about 15%.
SO an oil with say 200ppm Zn ( rubbish for our engines) could be labelled as having 1400 ppm ZDPP. (as in the 1200 ppm ZDDP expressed by Duckhams). That "1400 ppm ZDDP" would be scientifically correct and legal labelling (as far as I know) But it is not the way the level has been expressed in the past which was as ppm Zn. You'd buy the 1400, yes? but not 200 ppm. Beware !!

WHAT to DO ? If the label says ZDDP as Zn ( or P) = 1100 to 1400 ppm region we are sure to be OK, and this is conventional labelling
If the label simply says ZDDP = 1100 to 1400 ppm ( or more!) we have no idea what the Zn or P content is, and the oil may be at least 7 times lower in ZDDP than we expect. That is b88ger all antiscuff. I would not buy that oil without supplier's lab (not a sales person) confirming the Zn or P ppm.

Apologies for the long-winded explanation - sometimes science does not reduce to commonsense explanations.

A lot of the posts above quoting ZDDP levels when what is actually meant is Zn or P ppm.

Peter

PS The recent report of a label stating 5000ppm alerted me to this label problem. If that were 5000ppm Zn then that's a extraordinarily high concentration that could damage bearig shells etc. BUT if it refers to 5000ppm ZDDP then the Zn is 15% of that or 700 ppm Not enough for us. Worse, if the ZDDP species were bigger the Zn could be even lower.

How it should be shown

Classic_Oils__Heritage_20w50_LW11.jpg

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CLASSIC-OILS-HERITAGE-20W-50-MINERAL-OIL-5-LITRES-HIGH-ZINC-MULTIGRADE/323144435799?_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIM.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20160908110712%26meid%3Dcd31541b350b44fda512c7b1e0ffc8c1%26pid%3D100677%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D30%26sd%3D252559237897%26itm%3D323144435799&_trksid=p2385738.c100677.m4598

£18 for 5 Litre...what's not to like ?


Try this TR Register link for ZDDP discussion and Duckhams. http://www.tr-register.co.uk/forums/...k/?hl=duckhams



Micky

[Guest]

If there is one bunch of old fogeys you could never take for any kind of valid comments it would be TR register.
I simply don't understand what all this sterile time wasting debate is all about.

The Stag engine is a thoroughly modern V8 design with shim adjusted bucket tappets and short stroke crank.
You can use any old oil in it without any worries, just like I do in my 24V Jaguar engines, which are also completely modern designs.
I have never ever seen a cam failure in any of them.
The reason they blow up is nothing whatsoever to do with oils.

The TR pushrod stuff is 1940s technology based on some old bangers from a bankrupt company of the early 50s with overloaded components, long crank stroke, and bad lubrication strategies built in.
They soldiered on using the same junk ideas, and making the same rubbish cars until the company went under.
(eg.The 1979 Triumph spitfire 1500!)

You cannot even remotely compare the 2 technologies and their relative strengths and weaknesses.

[dasadrew]

That's genuinely interesting Gareth (at least the bit about Stag & Oil ).

I had always thought that these different "special" additives were primarily relevant when yellow metals were used (bronze, phosphor bronze etc.) i.e. probably more in gearboxes?

Drew

[Carboy0]

I’ll bow to superior knowledge on engines and how important or otherwise ZDDP is or isn’t in Stag engines.

However, the conversation has piqued my interest and I checked out the Duckhams Q 20W-50 data sheet, which suggests that the 1200 ppm relates to the Zinc content.

https://www.duckhams.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/PDS-20W-50.pdf

It is a little sketchily worded so I have emailed Duckhams to confirm the exact spec. I’ll post here.

[Jeff]

Can’t beat Tesco multi grade!

[fussydave]

It's worse than you think !

Review these comments from the TR Register where there is a detailed ( 2or 3 ) threads upon ZDDP oils and why many oil companies now make it difficult to find out what the Zinc content is.

From Peter Cobbold. (from memory a Chemist).
I think there's now another angle that we need to be aware of when reading labels on ZDDP concentration.
The 1100 to 1400 ppm Mick refers to in #8 is a measure of either the Zn or P concentration and NOT THE CONCENTRATION of ZDDP. Zn and P contribute roughly equally to the weight of the ZDDP molecule so which is used doesn't matter.

BUT a crafty seller wants to put a bigger ppm number on the label could easily use the mass of the whole ZDDP molecule. There are many different ZDDP molecular species varying in molecular mass from 400 to 2000.In any ZDDP molecule there are 1 Zinc and 2 Phosphorus with respective atomic weights of Zn=65 and P= 30. So if the whole ZDDP molecule weighs around 400, the Zn ( or P) contributes around 60-ish, or about 15%.
SO an oil with say 200ppm Zn ( rubbish for our engines) could be labelled as having 1400 ppm ZDPP. (as in the 1200 ppm ZDDP expressed by Duckhams). That "1400 ppm ZDDP" would be scientifically correct and legal labelling (as far as I know) But it is not the way the level has been expressed in the past which was as ppm Zn. You'd buy the 1400, yes? but not 200 ppm. Beware !!

WHAT to DO ? If the label says ZDDP as Zn ( or P) = 1100 to 1400 ppm region we are sure to be OK, and this is conventional labelling
If the label simply says ZDDP = 1100 to 1400 ppm ( or more!) we have no idea what the Zn or P content is, and the oil may be at least 7 times lower in ZDDP than we expect. That is b88ger all antiscuff. I would not buy that oil without supplier's lab (not a sales person) confirming the Zn or P ppm.

Apologies for the long-winded explanation - sometimes science does not reduce to commonsense explanations.

A lot of the posts above quoting ZDDP levels when what is actually meant is Zn or P ppm.

Peter

PS The recent report of a label stating 5000ppm alerted me to this label problem. If that were 5000ppm Zn then that's a extraordinarily high concentration that could damage bearig shells etc. BUT if it refers to 5000ppm ZDDP then the Zn is 15% of that or 700 ppm Not enough for us. Worse, if the ZDDP species were bigger the Zn could be even lower.

How it should be shown

Classic_Oils__Heritage_20w50_LW11.jpg

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CLASSIC-OILS-HERITAGE-20W-50-MINERAL-OIL-5-LITRES-HIGH-ZINC-MULTIGRADE/323144435799?_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIM.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20160908110712%26meid%3Dcd31541b350b44fda512c7b1e0ffc8c1%26pid%3D100677%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D30%26sd%3D252559237897%26itm%3D323144435799&_trksid=p2385738.c100677.m4598

£18 for 5 Litre...what's not to like ?


Try this TR Register link for ZDDP discussion and Duckhams. http://www.tr-register.co.uk/forums/...k/?hl=duckhams



Micky

I posted about this oil once before and got lambasted for promoting snake oil. I have two cans of it ready to use. The guy who owns the company told me he had the oil blended to mimic VR1. I shall use it in the Stag.

Dave

[marshman]

[QUOTE=down_the_plug_hole;n755705

The TR pushrod stuff is 1940s technology based on some old bangers from a bankrupt company of the early 50s with overloaded components, long crank stroke, and bad lubrication strategies built in.
They soldiered on using the same junk ideas, and making the same rubbish cars until the company went under.
(eg.The 1979 Triumph spitfire 1500!)

[/QUOTE]

Gareth, I do hope you not are referring to my '55 Standard Vanguard or my collection of 1950's Standard 8 & 10's - old bangers indeed

I suspect you are though. In the day they were OK. The 2088cc Vanguard engine was great in its day and the little 803cc 8HP Standard 8 engine was OK to. I can get nearly 50MPG out of mine, gutless though at around 23 BHP. As with most/all things Triumph / BL they tried to save money and when they take a 803cc engine and "develop" it into a 1500cc "sports car" engine then you can expect problems. The crankshaft bearings didn't used to last that long in my twin carb 948cc engine. They did the same with the gearboxes, Tried to use essentially the same gearbox from the 23BHP "8" in the Dolomites and wondered why they kept breaking. So yes probably overstretched, overloaded and under developed, just like the old 2.5 turbo diesel in my Landy - developed/evolved from the 1950's 2 ltr petrol and diesels.

Sorry to wander off topic slightly! To bring it back I used to use Castrol GTX (Liquid |Engineering) in my '8' back in the early 1980's - along with Goodyear Grand Prix 'S' tyres - "A major contribution to road safety" according to the advert! - no not affected by adverts at all .....now

Roger

[marshman]

Can’t beat Tesco multi grade!

Don't think they do it any more, I did a search and could only come up with a "hypergrade" - must be better than "multigrade" I suppose

[Mark Serj]

I'm going to seriously consider fully synthetic...............duck and cover!!!

[marshman]

I'm going to seriously consider fully synthetic...............duck and cover!!!

Do you mean this?

[Mark Serj]

Quack!!

[Klaus Schlueter]

Not sure if Liqui-Moly is widely available in UK

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Liqui-Moly-Touring-High-20W-50/dp/B003JHNOUO/ref=sr_1_2?s=automotive&ie=UTF8&qid=1522127540&sr=1-2&keywords=liqui+moly+20w50

Liqui MolyTouring High Tech 20W-50 has a ZDDP content of between 1100 and 1200 according to the manufacturer
Liqui MolyTouring High Tech 15W-40 has a ZDDP content of 1000 according to the manufacturer

Drew

Drew, I checked the LM website and didn't find any ZDDP value. Did you contact LM?

https://pim.liqui-moly.de/pidoc/P000213/1250-TouringHighTech20W-50-29.0-de.pdf

Klaus