• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Z D D P

I guess I'll just keep using the "racing oils", Penn Grade, Lucas, VR1 or others. I have never really trusted the additives. Lubricant design does make a difference. I learned that with my 1st Dana 60. The standard gear oil needed the "skunk oil" additive to keep it from clunking. I presume engine oils are also designed for certain applications. My HP motors will get the racing oil designed for a solid flat tappet cam as long is I'm using a SFT cam.
 
Last edited:
What is the significance of the 51,545 psi. It is measuring exactly what? Film strength of the lubricant or ???. Unbounded or unqualified numbers mean nothing....."breath taking" or 44% of what? Who preformed the test of the Edelbrock additive that "significantly" reduced the wear prevention capabilities, against which ASTM or API standards? Please provide the link or documentation so I can compare myself.....
BOB RENTON
Read the article, it's quite informative.
 
That is what Dwayne Porter told me. He said that after reading tech articles and scientific studies, the "cure in a can" additives can cancel each other out, leaving you worse off than before. Rick Ehrenberg also agrees. They both said that this is delicate chemistry that a backyard guy with no testing equipment has no way of determining the actual outcome of blindly mixing these complex formulas.
Research and find an oil weight with the additive package you feel will do the job and run that oil straight with no snake oil. Best practice. Most stockish rebuilds quality HDEO C-rated oil, radical or race buids race type oil.
 
Read the article, it's quite informative.
Swell....but who is Don Terrill? Seems that the person performing the "tests" likes Lucas Oil Products or Brad Penn oil.......but I still did not see any reference to the ASTM or API specs the tests were run against. There are numerous references to "actual real world test data" but no reference to the standard that was used. Almost like saying: how high is up? You can believe what ever method or what ever data you prefer.....i'll continue to use what works for me.....
BOB RENTON
 
Swell....but who is Don Terrill? Seems that the person performing the "tests" likes Lucas Oil Products or Brad Penn oil.......but I still did not see any reference to the ASTM or API specs the tests were run against. There are numerous references to "actual real world test data" but no reference to the standard that was used. Almost like saying: how high is up? You can believe what ever method or what ever data you prefer.....i'll continue to use what works for me.....
BOB RENTON

Actually Brad doesn’t show up on the list until 20th and the #1 Lucas is only suitable for short term racing and not for street use. So I don’t see your point that he is trying to promote one over the next. Not trying to tell anyone what to do, I just thought it was a good article.
 
Swell....but who is Don Terrill? Seems that the person performing the "tests" likes Lucas Oil Products or Brad Penn oil.......but I still did not see any reference to the ASTM or API specs the tests were run against. There are numerous references to "actual real world test data" but no reference to the standard that was used. Almost like saying: how high is up? You can believe what ever method or what ever data you prefer.....i'll continue to use what works for me.....
BOB RENTON
I gotta agree with you Bob.
30 years of real testing using the additive, 0 burned down lobes.
Still trying to figure out where all this new doomsday info is "Driven" from.
 
Actually Brad doesn’t show up on the list until 20th and the #1 Lucas is only suitable for short term racing and not for street use. So I don’t see your point that he is trying to promote one over the next. Not trying to tell anyone what to do, I just thought it was a good article.
My question remains.....who is Ron Terrill and what are his qualifations to reiterate the entire comparison.....does he work for the oil companies or ASTM or API or just someone just stirring to pot to see what happens. Where/what are the comparison methodologies? Posting "results" or undocumented comparisons, to me, is of no value. "I'M FROM MISSOURI.....SHOW ME" ......
BOB RENTON
 
So... just to throw a little gas on this oil debate.... a Cummins 5.9 diesel uses a solid flat tappet, not roller. Now, I'm not sure of spring pressure, lift etc... but I've got 275k+ on mine and only use Rotella T6. The taxi cab fleets in Las Vegas only used Rotella T6 diesel oil in the 4.6 SOHC engines in the cabs for over 500k miles. I've pulled a few valve covers on those in junkyards and they look amazing. I run Rotella T6 in my turbo 4.6 DOHC jet boat, all 3 quads, all 3 motorcycles, and my stroked 496. All the quads are solid flat tappet, 1 motorcycle a '79 GS750 is flat tappet, other 2 motorcycles are roller, 1 solid and 1 hydraulic. 496 is hydraulic roller. Now I don't think I have ever hear of a Cummins diesel wiping a cam lobe using Rotella T6.
 
I would think spring pressures are pretty safe on a diesel
 
For me, the guy his method is fairly simple.
He has access to the equipment to perform a selection of tests that provide consistent results so an "apple to apple" comparison can be made between different brands and types of oil.
The "Load carrying capacity/film strength" provided for each test indicates how much force in PSI is required to shear the oil film, and at that point metal-to-metal contact will occur.
It does not matter at all if you want to relate this to a flat tappet lifter, piston ring or connecting rod bearing, the theory remains same of simple math between Force (pounds) and Area (sq. inch) and does not require any form of API or ASTM standardization.
These standarizations are guidelines based on certain specifics, if you made modifications to your engine you can be already outside those specs and any API or ASTM standard means nothing.
(as example, you running bigger/smaller bearing clearances, higher valve spring pressures, drilled out oil channels with bigger oil pump, etc are things that alter the minimum requirements compared to the stock engine the API or ASTM spec was provided for.)

As an example, you want to use an oil that has a film strength of 80,000 psi and you wonder if this will protect your cam and lifters.
As example, the actual contact area between the cam and tappet is 0.01 sq. inch and you are using valve springs with 600 lbs spring pressure at full lift.
80,000 psi x 0.01 sq.inch = 800 lbs
This means you can apply 800 lbs of force on that area between cam and lifter before the oil film loses the capability to prevent metal to metal contact.
The allowable load of 800lbs is higher than the load caused by the valve spring (600lbs) so the oil film will remain intact.
In that same example but using an oil with only 50,000 psi film strength, you see the force is only 500 lbs, there will be metal to metal contact as this oil is unable to provide sufficient film strength against the valve spring pressure of 600 lbs.

Don't consider the 50,000 psi oil in above example as bad, it just does not suit the above application.
That oil would do just fine on a stock rebuild engine with 300 lbs valve spring pressure.
But this is purely based on the valve spring pressure example, if that same engine has a high compression with high cylinder pressures it still might not be sufficient for your connecting rod bearings.
Yes, that is hard to judge as not every load can be calculated as easy.


This calculation can be done on any engine part that is protected by an oil film, if you know the Force and Area.
A main or connecting rod bearing, drive gears or a piston ring will be covered in the same manner as above example.
Though it is not really as simple as above as there are more forces involved, resistance/friction factors and variables as temperature, oil life/condition, oil contamination (solid particles/water/fuel) that will have an effect on it all.
But it is obvious that the higher the number (film strength) the higher the level of protection is against metal to metal contact.
If your engine suffers from any other issues (mechanical/combustion/tolerance issues), or your oil is contaminated with water or fuel, not even the best oil will protect your engine and failure cannot be blamed to the oil quality obviously.
ZDDP is there to ensure that IF the oil film is sheared both metal parts are covered with Zinc which will sacrifice itself and provide protection against the metal parts contacting and must be seen as a backup system only.
Therefore you will see that the better oils (with high film shear) do not have to have the highest amount of ZDDP as well.
ZDDP will, like most oil additives, reduce in quantity (ppm) over time during use and with that reduce the protection which gives the need for the oil changes.
All the additives content goes down during use, as is viscosity, increase of contamination and other factors that all together need to be considered when oil requires replacement.
For example, your ZDDP level might still be high, but the viscosity has dropped below standards which will force an oil change regardless.

The film strength of a particular oil film, or its exact contents of ZDDP or any other additive, is never provided by the maker for obvious reasons.
The tests done by this guy provide a clearer view on exactly that, for additives (dopes) contents in PPM you can send a new oil sample to a lab and have it tested for whatever you want and they will tell you.
As some guys do, you can send another sample after you have run the oil for 5000 miles / 2 races / 5 pulls or whatever you do with your car and see what is remaining of those parameters you are interested about to determine when an oil change becomes necessary. (based on low ppm, viscosity, water contamination, fuel contamination, particle count as example)
 
Research and find an oil weight with the additive package you feel will do the job and run that oil straight with no snake oil. Best practice. Most stockish rebuilds quality HDEO C-rated oil, radical or race buids race type oil.
Dwayne Porter suggested that I use DRIVEN in a 20w50 weight.
 
For me, the guy his method is fairly simple.
He has access to the equipment to perform a selection of tests that provide consistent results so an "apple to apple" comparison can be made between different brands and types of oil.
The "Load carrying capacity/film strength" provided for each test indicates how much force in PSI is required to shear the oil film, and at that point metal-to-metal contact will occur.
It does not matter at all if you want to relate this to a flat tappet lifter, piston ring or connecting rod bearing, the theory remains same of simple math between Force (pounds) and Area (sq. inch) and does not require any form of API or ASTM standardization.
These standarizations are guidelines based on certain specifics, if you made modifications to your engine you can be already outside those specs and any API or ASTM standard means nothing.
(as example, you running bigger/smaller bearing clearances, higher valve spring pressures, drilled out oil channels with bigger oil pump, etc are things that alter the minimum requirements compared to the stock engine the API or ASTM spec was provided for.)

As an example, you want to use an oil that has a film strength of 80,000 psi and you wonder if this will protect your cam and lifters.
As example, the actual contact area between the cam and tappet is 0.01 sq. inch and you are using valve springs with 600 lbs spring pressure at full lift.
80,000 psi x 0.01 sq.inch = 800 lbs
This means you can apply 800 lbs of force on that area between cam and lifter before the oil film loses the capability to prevent metal to metal contact.
The allowable load of 800lbs is higher than the load caused by the valve spring (600lbs) so the oil film will remain intact.
In that same example but using an oil with only 50,000 psi film strength, you see the force is only 500 lbs, there will be metal to metal contact as this oil is unable to provide sufficient film strength against the valve spring pressure of 600 lbs.

Don't consider the 50,000 psi oil in above example as bad, it just does not suit the above application.
That oil would do just fine on a stock rebuild engine with 300 lbs valve spring pressure.
But this is purely based on the valve spring pressure example, if that same engine has a high compression with high cylinder pressures it still might not be sufficient for your connecting rod bearings.
Yes, that is hard to judge as not every load can be calculated as easy.


This calculation can be done on any engine part that is protected by an oil film, if you know the Force and Area.
A main or connecting rod bearing, drive gears or a piston ring will be covered in the same manner as above example.
Though it is not really as simple as above as there are more forces involved, resistance/friction factors and variables as temperature, oil life/condition, oil contamination (solid particles/water/fuel) that will have an effect on it all.
But it is obvious that the higher the number (film strength) the higher the level of protection is against metal to metal contact.
If your engine suffers from any other issues (mechanical/combustion/tolerance issues), or your oil is contaminated with water or fuel, not even the best oil will protect your engine and failure cannot be blamed to the oil quality obviously.
ZDDP is there to ensure that IF the oil film is sheared both metal parts are covered with Zinc which will sacrifice itself and provide protection against the metal parts contacting and must be seen as a backup system only.
Therefore you will see that the better oils (with high film shear) do not have to have the highest amount of ZDDP as well.
ZDDP will, like most oil additives, reduce in quantity (ppm) over time during use and with that reduce the protection which gives the need for the oil changes.
All the additives content goes down during use, as is viscosity, increase of contamination and other factors that all together need to be considered when oil requires replacement.
For example, your ZDDP level might still be high, but the viscosity has dropped below standards which will force an oil change regardless.

The film strength of a particular oil film, or its exact contents of ZDDP or any other additive, is never provided by the maker for obvious reasons.
The tests done by this guy provide a clearer view on exactly that, for additives (dopes) contents in PPM you can send a new oil sample to a lab and have it tested for whatever you want and they will tell you.
As some guys do, you can send another sample after you have run the oil for 5000 miles / 2 races / 5 pulls or whatever you do with your car and see what is remaining of those parameters you are interested about to determine when an oil change becomes necessary. (based on low ppm, viscosity, water contamination, fuel contamination, particle count as example)
Thank you for your comments. I'm well aware of the issues you note. I'm also aware of the testing differences and their standards. Quoting numbers without any references as to how the results were achieved, to me, are meaningless. Your opinions are exactly that: opinions. But so are mine. If these opinions differ, all well and good....and we all know about the expression dealing with opinions.....and leave it go at that.
BOB RENTON
 
Thank you for your comments. I'm well aware of the issues you note. I'm also aware of the testing differences and their standards. Quoting numbers without any references as to how the results were achieved, to me, are meaningless. Your opinions are exactly that: opinions. But so are mine. If these opinions differ, all well and good....and we all know about the expression dealing with opinions.....and leave it go at that.
IF you read the article, you will find he provided some details of his procedures.
That he does not provide all details is your pain and simply invalidates thing without any further process, but you should understand a good cook does not put his recipe online.
The details the writer provides regarding getting to these film strength numbers is simple basics between Force and Area, there is nothing else to know about that.
Yes there are tons of variables that cannot be calculated in due to the unknown, but his testing clearly shows difference between types of oils in regards to film strength which was tested under controlled cirumstances with repetitive results.
The higher the number, the higher the wear protection. There is nothing else to know about that oil specification.

I'm also aware of the testing differences and their standards.
If you are aware, you would also know that these standards do not provide the numbers the writer has provided and cannot be used to run a comparison between the standards and his findings.
So for what reason one would ask for API or ASTM in this case? It will not result in apple-to-apple comparison by any means. His consistent testing does make this right comparison.
As he stated, which i fully agree with, you can make your own decision about his testing and in what to believe or continue to fall for the skilled marketing performance of lubricant manufacturers.
Nobody states what oil brand/type you need to use, you are free to do so.

I find this testing more reliable than a guy saying "i used this oil and additive for 15 years and never had a problem" type of comment.
It's all good he shares his experience, and someone with a very similar build can follow and be just as happy as him.
But that guy that does run a much higher valve spring pressure or much tighter bearing clearances will destroy his engine during break-in and wonders why, and that is because he followed someone's experience based on an opinion based on no actual facts.
You claim the facts of this guy his research (which are only partially provided for obvious reasons) but are doing the same type of "i have been using this or that and worked for me over the last 15 years" behavior with the chance of providing a completely wrong lubricant recommendation to a guy who is oblivious of the engine difference between yours and his.
 
Dwayne Porter suggested that I use DRIVEN in a 20w50 weight.
F198641850.jpg
Specifically engineered for the protection of flat-tappet cams. Tons of phosphorus.
The ZDDP count is well over 1200ppm in the stuff. I swear by it.
I'll also use VR1 for the same reasons in a pinch.
 
Dwayne Porter suggested that I use DRIVEN in a 20w50 weight.
Surprised he suggested a 20w50 weight oil

What weight oil where you using earlier with the Valvoline VR1 ?
 
I have used 10w30 and 10w40. He thought that with as hot as it gets here, the thicker oil might help.
 
I have used 10w30 and 10w40. He thought that with as hot as it gets here, the thicker oil might help.
The stuff I indicated above comes in 15W-50, amongst other weights. No mention of 20W-50 for it on their website?
 
I did a quick search on oil testing and found it really doesn't cost much to have your oil tested. One lab was less than the cost of an oil change.
 
Auto Transport Service
Back
Top