Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

using additives...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • using additives...

    Buried about 8000 words down in another thread is a discussion about my work on how much additives you need to add to your engine. http://sterkel.org/avanti It is peer reviewed work for another forum. Those in that forum know the background, but I do not think I mentioned it here.

    My bottom line:
    If you use CI-4/Plus oil with TBN>10, Zinc>0.12%, Calcium>0.20%, you are fine. You may have a viscosity issues north of the Mason-Dixon line during the winter and need to look for something <"15w-xx".

    I have documented in this forum several oils that easily meet these criteria, and are available, though not in big box and/or auto parts shops. I will not repost, as I am trying to break my bad habit of cross-posting.

    I am categorically anti- "adding additives" for many reasons.

    However, not really being an iconoclast, I do realize that people may not wish to mail order oil like I do, or have a convenient NAPA. In that case, and to be helpful, I have peer reviewed an approach to most-economically add additive products to zinc-deficient (for our engines) but otherwise excellent oils. I researched the current crop of additives, and found that most are 50 weight oil with little useful in them, or have deeply controversial inclusions. However, a few that may be helpful to "fix" otherwise excellent zinc-deficient oils. The VOA of each is documented. What is presented is the maximum number of ounces you need for each of the "fixing" additive products. I have also documented a sample of oils that for whatever reason, I have been recently interested in, including the Maxlife group.

    If you wish to play your own tribiologist. http://sterkel.org/avanti is one peer-reviewed approach.


    Terry, North Texas
    1963 Avanti R2, 63SR1065
    (in stage 1 resto "Project A")
    http://sterkel.org/avanti
    1985 Kubota L2202(Diesel)
    1999 Toyota rice burner
    1986 Ford 150 Long Bed

  • #2
    Thanks, Terry. For me, the NAPA CI-4 Universal Fleet Plus 15/40 oil is working out great! Readily available (for me), meets the standards I'm interested in, and inexpensive. I change the oil in my flat tappet engines mostly by months and not miles. Just did the 305 Chevy in the boat today.


    Dick Steinkamp
    Bellingham, WA

    Comment


    • #3
      quote:Originally posted by Dick Steinkamp

      Thanks, Terry. For me, the NAPA CI-4 Universal Fleet Plus 15/40 oil is working out great! Readily available (for me), meets the standards I'm interested in, and inexpensive. I change the oil in my flat tappet engines mostly by months and not miles. Just did the 305 Chevy in the boat today.


      only one suggestion, you are likely draining oil unnecessarily. The TBN of the CI-4/CI-4Plus oils is at least 10. TBN is a way of quickly looking at the remaining efficacy of the additive package, AND the remaining anti-oxidant capacity. The latter is your engine's protection from ethanol, water, some anti-freezes, sulfur and less common "rust" generators. Diesels have severe issues with these issues, and thus are hyper-protected by their oils. Bottom line, for our types of engines, there is no point in an OCI (oil change interval) in months. Just go for 3k - 5K miles, and you will not have an issue.

      More in the November Avanti Magazine (I hope)


      Terry, North Texas
      1963 Avanti R2, 63SR1065
      (in stage 1 resto "Project A")
      http://sterkel.org/avanti
      1985 Kubota L2202(Diesel)
      1999 Toyota rice burner
      1986 Ford 150 Long Bed

      Comment


      • #4
        Terry,

        Not trying to be an arse about anything & greatly appreciate the effort to help clarify such an emotionally-charged & confusing subject, but "peer review" doesn't mean squat to me.

        Can you define how you use the term "peer review"? Are your "peers" reviewing your data, your grammar, your methodology? Or, are they conducting independently verifiable tests reaching the same (or similar) conclusions?

        I'm not implying anything unsavory here, but the term "peer review" has been used unscrupulously in the past to lend legitimacy to many things. Oil testing & analysis is expensive and most organizations that can afford to do so, have an agenda. That's why I applaud the little folks who have the means to conduct independent research as it appears you are doing - and with an honest effort to help.

        Hope I haven't upset you, but also hope you can see where the concerns of a casual observer lie...

        Thanks

        Daddy always said, if yer gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough & I'm one tough sumbitch!
        -------------------
        Daddy always said, if yer gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough & I\'m one tough sumbiatch!

        Comment


        • #5
          I take on all agenda's. I have learned over the time who actually knows, who likes to write lots of vacuous stuff, who has degreed creds, who knows someone who knows someone who knows someone, et.al. I also float stuff to recent authors of juried journals. I have correspondence with three of these at the current time.

          Tests? Testing? the only place in this thread where this came up is in your post. I am not a big fan of UOA (used oil analysis), and only use VOA (virgin oil analysis) to validate PDS (product data sheets). I have used UOA, but quit and have been gathering info. This may become something worth exposing to my "all comers peer reviews."
          quote:Originally posted by Flat Ernie

          Terry,

          Not trying to be an arse about anything & greatly appreciate the effort to help clarify such an emotionally-charged & confusing subject, but "peer review" doesn't mean squat to me.

          Can you define how you use the term "peer review"? Are your "peers" reviewing your data, your grammar, your methodology? Or, are they conducting independently verifiable tests reaching the same (or similar) conclusions?

          I'm not implying anything unsavory here, but the term "peer review" has been used unscrupulously in the past to lend legitimacy to many things. Oil testing & analysis is expensive and most organizations that can afford to do so, have an agenda. That's why I applaud the little folks who have the means to conduct independent research as it appears you are doing - and with an honest effort to help.

          Hope I haven't upset you, but also hope you can see where the concerns of a casual observer lie...

          Thanks

          Daddy always said, if yer gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough & I'm one tough sumbitch!

          Terry, North Texas
          1963 Avanti R2, 63SR1065
          (in stage 1 resto "Project A")
          http://sterkel.org/avanti
          1985 Kubota L2202(Diesel)
          1999 Toyota rice burner
          1986 Ford 150 Long Bed

          Comment


          • #6
            Terry, thanks for all the good info. I may be a bit confused here but in one of your charts you indicate that CJ-4 Rotella has slightly more zinc than CI-4, yet I thought that they had removed or at least lowered the zinc in CJ-4. Am I reading this all wrong? Also, do you know of any issues with having too much zinc?

            Cork

            Comment


            • #7
              Terry,

              Not sure I'm any more clear on your use of 'peer review' - what are your peers reviewing?

              May I enquire as to who is conducting your testing for you? I think UOA is less reliable than VOA, but think it's more important to compare apples to apples (ie - all testing done one way).

              Thanks
              Ernie

              Daddy always said, if yer gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough & I'm one tough sumbitch!
              -------------------
              Daddy always said, if yer gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough & I\'m one tough sumbiatch!

              Comment


              • #8
                sounds like a typo! I will review and correct!
                score one for peer review! just kidding.
                [/quote]
                quote:Originally posted by cortica37

                Terry, thanks for all the good info. I may be a bit confused here but in one of your charts you indicate that CJ-4 Rotella has slightly more zinc than CI-4, yet I thought that they had removed or at least lowered the zinc in CJ-4. Am I reading this all wrong? Also, do you know of any issues with having too much zinc?

                Cork

                Terry, North Texas
                1963 Avanti R2, 63SR1065
                (in stage 1 resto "Project A")
                http://sterkel.org/avanti
                1985 Kubota L2202(Diesel)
                1999 Toyota rice burner
                1986 Ford 150 Long Bed

                Comment


                • #9
                  I am sorry that my response did not leave you happy.
                  As I am batting 000 on making people who hijack threads
                  with off topic (OT) issues, I will not be responding
                  to OT in the future






                  .
                  quote:Originally posted by Flat Ernie

                  Terry,

                  Not sure I'm any more clear on your use of 'peer review' - what are your peers reviewing?

                  May I enquire as to who is conducting your testing for you? I think UOA is less reliable than VOA, but think it's more important to compare apples to apples (ie - all testing done one way).

                  Thanks
                  Ernie

                  Daddy always said, if yer gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough & I'm one tough sumbitch!

                  Terry, North Texas
                  1963 Avanti R2, 63SR1065
                  (in stage 1 resto "Project A")
                  http://sterkel.org/avanti
                  1985 Kubota L2202(Diesel)
                  1999 Toyota rice burner
                  1986 Ford 150 Long Bed

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    quote:Originally posted by 63Avanti

                    this may help you with your issues.
                    http://groups.google.com/group/alt.a...a13861de425705
                    I see. So a legitimate question is replied to with what amounts to, "Go away, you're bothering me."

                    Puts it in perspective I suppose.

                    I wasn't asking you to prove your bonafides, merely what you mean by a specific term. Which you dubiously skirted with a lot of double-talk. Fine. So I asked who was doing your testing & get told to fark off.

                    No problem.

                    The challenge is that there's a new post, near daily, on the multitude of automotive boards I frequent regarding oil & ZDDP & whatever. I read them all with great interest hoping someone will do some actual testing & not merely repeat what's already posted all over the internet - which is suspect at best. Consequently, when someone comes along & purports to have 'proof' of something I'm merely curious what the 'proof' is so that I may make my own informed/uninformed decision.

                    Let me know if you want to troll anymore...

                    Daddy always said, if yer gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough & I'm one tough sumbitch!
                    -------------------
                    Daddy always said, if yer gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough & I\'m one tough sumbiatch!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      quote:Originally posted by 63Avanti

                      I am sorry that my response did not leave you happy.
                      As I am batting 000 on making people who hijack threads
                      with off topic (OT) issues, I will not be responding
                      to OT in the future
                      Interesting edit. Your second sentence isn't even grammatically correct & makes no sense. [?]

                      Regardless, now you want to call my asking for clarification, off-topic. Interesting & blatantly diversionary. [)]

                      You know, I've always heard you should be suspicious of someone who quickly accuses you of something dishonest. They could only be working from their own experience. [:0]

                      Seems appropos right about now...

                      To keep this on-topic - when can I expect to read about your research in a professional journal? Or will its publishing be limited to car-club newsletters? [B)]

                      Keep on trolling, brother, I'll bite every time. [}]



                      Daddy always said, if yer gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough & I'm one tough sumbitch!
                      -------------------
                      Daddy always said, if yer gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough & I\'m one tough sumbiatch!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X