Royal Purple oil
-
cannondale27
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm
Is mobil 1 SG rated? I havent seen that. I know Only some of the Amsoils are. The zinc will help a substandard cam survive is what I have been told. Wish we didnt have substandard cams/buckets but we do and its not just a few. I figure give them every chance of surviving possible including the all important sticky bucket fix. Call me lucky but only cam failure I ever had was from a broke valve whacking the cam. No wear even with the newer style cams. I like to stick with what I know works.
-
Canniboomer
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm
OOPS I'll post again sorry.
...no, what I am saying is that some great oils that are formulated lean on zinc-phophorus for the benefit of autos with catalytic converters -- are not recommended for our motors, and that would include Mobil 1 and Rotella T -- except for specialized newer oils like Mobil 1 4-stroke that still specifically say SG on the label....so you are sure If they have the higher phophorus content to meet SG, then it should still say so. I keep finding contradictory info that disputes most of the comments in this thread -- so until somebody proves otherwise, I'll look for "SG" on the label where 4-strokes are concerned. For modern autos, I suspect you can rely that the next API rating will indeed supercede the last rating. But for 4-strokes and some others?...hmmmn:
Here is some of that post:
Update: November 2008
New Motor Oils Are Bad for Older Engines with Flat Tappet Camshafts
The lobes on this 289 Ford Mustang flat tappet cam suffered excessive wear because the motor oil did not contain adequate levels of ZDDP anti-scuff additive.
If you are driving an older classic muscle car or hot rod that has an engine with a flat tappet camshaft*(aka Cannondales also), you should be aware of the fact that today's "SM" rated motor oils contain much lower levels of anti-scuff additive called "ZDDP" (Zinc Dialkyl Dithio Phosphate). The level of ZDDP in current motor oils has been reduced to no more than 0.08% phosphorus to extend the life of the catalytic converter. Phosphorus can contaminate the catalyst over time if the engine uses oil, causing an increase in tailpipe emissions.
The lower ZDDP content is not harmful to late model engines with roller lifters or followers because the loads are much lower on the camshaft lobes. But on pushrod engines with flat tappet cams, the level of ZDDP may be inadequate to prevent cam lobe and lifter wear. In some cases, cam failures have occurred in as little as a few thousand miles of driving! This is even more of a risk in engines if stiffer valve springs and/or higher lift rocker arms are used.
I would repeat the intention of C27's warnings earlier, and implore everyone to verify if the oil they are using still has the Zinc and Phosphorus of the earlier SG rating.
...no, what I am saying is that some great oils that are formulated lean on zinc-phophorus for the benefit of autos with catalytic converters -- are not recommended for our motors, and that would include Mobil 1 and Rotella T -- except for specialized newer oils like Mobil 1 4-stroke that still specifically say SG on the label....so you are sure If they have the higher phophorus content to meet SG, then it should still say so. I keep finding contradictory info that disputes most of the comments in this thread -- so until somebody proves otherwise, I'll look for "SG" on the label where 4-strokes are concerned. For modern autos, I suspect you can rely that the next API rating will indeed supercede the last rating. But for 4-strokes and some others?...hmmmn:
Here is some of that post:
Update: November 2008
New Motor Oils Are Bad for Older Engines with Flat Tappet Camshafts
The lobes on this 289 Ford Mustang flat tappet cam suffered excessive wear because the motor oil did not contain adequate levels of ZDDP anti-scuff additive.
If you are driving an older classic muscle car or hot rod that has an engine with a flat tappet camshaft*(aka Cannondales also), you should be aware of the fact that today's "SM" rated motor oils contain much lower levels of anti-scuff additive called "ZDDP" (Zinc Dialkyl Dithio Phosphate). The level of ZDDP in current motor oils has been reduced to no more than 0.08% phosphorus to extend the life of the catalytic converter. Phosphorus can contaminate the catalyst over time if the engine uses oil, causing an increase in tailpipe emissions.
The lower ZDDP content is not harmful to late model engines with roller lifters or followers because the loads are much lower on the camshaft lobes. But on pushrod engines with flat tappet cams, the level of ZDDP may be inadequate to prevent cam lobe and lifter wear. In some cases, cam failures have occurred in as little as a few thousand miles of driving! This is even more of a risk in engines if stiffer valve springs and/or higher lift rocker arms are used.
I would repeat the intention of C27's warnings earlier, and implore everyone to verify if the oil they are using still has the Zinc and Phosphorus of the earlier SG rating.
Ive been running SG oils and havent had any cam problems. First it was Bel-Ray EXP and now its Amsoil after talking with Tim and Steve.
Doug at Integral cams has my complete head right now and says everything looks great after lots of hard running.
Its just not worth it to skimp on oil. A few more dollars goes a long way and saves alot of money. Oil is oil in your moms Ford Taurus. Not in your new 4 stroke.
Doug at Integral cams has my complete head right now and says everything looks great after lots of hard running.
Its just not worth it to skimp on oil. A few more dollars goes a long way and saves alot of money. Oil is oil in your moms Ford Taurus. Not in your new 4 stroke.
I've been running Royal Purple it has an SL rating. I've always thought that if the oil has a higher letter/number rating then its safe for all previous ratings? Looking on Mobile's web it says this
"API ratings are backward compatible to previous generation ratings. This means that an API SM quality oil, which is the latest API rating, is recommended where API SL, SJ, SH, SG were originally required."
Tho I've never dropped a motor and it have good cams always bad. But scents I've been running RP I haven't dropped the motor yet. But when i do I'm expecting flat cams.
"API ratings are backward compatible to previous generation ratings. This means that an API SM quality oil, which is the latest API rating, is recommended where API SL, SJ, SH, SG were originally required."
Tho I've never dropped a motor and it have good cams always bad. But scents I've been running RP I haven't dropped the motor yet. But when i do I'm expecting flat cams.
The big fly in the ointment is that anybody can and does label an oil SG when in fact it is an SM, SJ or newer rating oil. It is completely legal when the API says: "Each gasoline engine category exceeds the performance properties of all previous categories and can be used in place of the lower one. For example, an SM oil can be used for any previous category."
Why, you ask would one want to label an SM oil SG? Simple.....marketing.
So, what I am saying is, if you really want to be sure you have an original SG formula with the full amount of zinc and Phosphorus and no friction modifiers; your going to have to depend on the manufactures claims.
So to reiterate, just because it says SG doesn't mean diddly.
Why, you ask would one want to label an SM oil SG? Simple.....marketing.
So, what I am saying is, if you really want to be sure you have an original SG formula with the full amount of zinc and Phosphorus and no friction modifiers; your going to have to depend on the manufactures claims.
So to reiterate, just because it says SG doesn't mean diddly.
-
cannondale27
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm
I respectively disagree. I find no evidence of that, in fact to the contrary. This following article is part of my basis: http://www.wingworldmag.com/archives/novem...lStandards.html
-
cannondale27
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm
QUOTE
requirements of an oil retailer who wishes to list an obsolete performance category on the container are that, (a.) the product must meet at least the specifications for that obsolete category and, (b.) the obsolete category must not appear inside the A.P.I. service symbol, or ????????????????doughnut.???????????????
If a oil manufacturer lies there really isnt anyway short of oil analyses to show that. Oil analyses will show the zinc. Its relatively cheap to have done if you are worried about Amsoil or any other manufacturer lying.
-
cannondale27
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm
QUOTE (cannondale27 @ Feb 8 2009, 02:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If a oil manufacturer lies there really isnt anyway short of oil analyses to show that.Oil analyses will show the zinc.Its relatively cheap to have done if you are worried about Amsoil or any other manufacturer lying.
I personally am not arguing about any particular oil. I am just trying to clarify the SG thing. It seems that the consensus is to just make sure it says SG on the bottle. I am saying that is just not good enough.
It is not lying to say an oil meets the SG rating when in fact it is an SM etc oil.
All current rated oils(SM, SL, SJ) do meet the requirements for an SG rated oil and so for a retailer to sell them as an SG only is doing it for market purposes instead of going to the trouble and expense of actually making the old formulation. It is completely legal and that my friend is the problem I am trying to bring to the surface but seems to be falling on deaf ears.