Full Size Jeep Network

I say Havoline Would be a downgrade from mobil 1 synthetic. But I have no first hand experience to back that up. But from what I understand it is a parafin base oil. And I can show you what that will do inside your engine.

If you make a change I would go to a 5w40 full synthetic diesel oil. Personally I like Dello, but I have run Valvoline, Mobil, Carquest, Napa, and Mag 1 with no complaints. I don't like Rotella, I have had problems with aeration when I run the engine at high rpm for long time. And it doesn't play nicely with other oils, will loose viscosity if you mix it with the wrong stuff.

5w40 will have better cold flow than a 10W30 and will offer better protection at temperature than a 10w30. It is really ideal if your motor is tight enough to run it. Which I believe yours is.

You say Havoline is paraffin based. What's the alternative? It's been a while but I seem to recall crude oil being asphaltic, paraffinic or napthenic base. Not sure what these have to due with the refined motor oil but paraffinic sounds better to me than asphaltic.

After 200k on my Dodge Diesel running Valvoline Premium Blue I had only a very thin black film on the inside of the valve cover when I removed it for a valve adjustment. Could be wiped off. No idea what the base stock Valvoline comes from but no caked on deposits.

I switched to Mobil 1 TDT and am very interested to see if it removes that film. My VW TDI with 350k that I've run the Mobil 1 in for the last 250k in looks like new inside.

I'm gonna link a site in a sec, but here are some tidbits:

Most major oil companies say to NEVER EVER add anything to their oils, because doing so will upset the oil’s carefully balanced additive package that was designed by their Chemical Engineers. I tested doing that very thing in several different oils, and found that adding zinc additives in every case, ruined the oils by SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCING their wear protection capability. That of course, is just the opposite of what people “think” they will be getting. So, those major oil Companies were absolutely correct about not adding anything to their oil. And people who insist on choosing an oil based on zinc level alone, are very likely shooting themselves in the foot, and ending up with far LESS wear protection than they THINK they have. It just depends on which particular oil they select. A number of popular traditional high zinc oils have proven to provide poor wear protection when actually put to the test.

I’ve also tested ZDDPlus zinc additive in 3 low zinc oils, and I’ve tested Edelbrock Zinc additive in 3 different low zinc oils. In each case, the recommended amount of additive was used. And in all 6 cases, these high zinc additives ruined the oils and made them WORSE than they were before the extra zinc was added, by SIGNIFICANTLY reducing their wear protection capabilities. These additives did the opposite of what was promised. That is not surprising, because most major Oil Companies say to never add anything to their oils, because doing that will ruin the oil by upsetting the carefully balanced additive package that their Chemical Engineers designed into them. And that is precisely what was seen when using these high zinc additives.

ZDDPlus” added to O’Reilly (house brand) 5W30, API SN, conventional = 56,728 psi
zinc = 2711 ppm (up 1848 ppm)
phos = 2172 ppm (up 1356 ppm)
moly = 2 ppm (up 2 ppm)
The amount of ZDDPlus added to the oil, was the exact amount the manufacturer called for on the bottle. And the resulting psi value here was 38% LOWER than this oil had BEFORE the ZDDPlus was added to it. Adding ZDDPlus SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED this oil’s wear prevention capability. Just the opposite of what was promised.
.
193. “ZDDPlus” added to Motorcraft 5W30, API SN, synthetic = 56,243 psi
zinc = 2955 ppm (up 1848 ppm)
phos = 2114 ppm (up 1356 ppm)
moly = 76 ppm (up 2 ppm)

The amount of ZDDPlus added to the oil, was the exact amount the manufacturer called for on the bottle. And the resulting psi value here was 12% LOWER than this oil had BEFORE the ZDDPlus was added to it. Adding ZDDPlus SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED this oil’s wear prevention capability. Just the opposite of what was promised.


Taken from here: (good reading, by the way of some really good oil performers as far as wear protection)

https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/0 ... t-ranking/

I'll save you a lot of headache and post the top ten:

The Wear Protection reference categories are:

.
• Over 105,000 psi = INCREDIBLE wear protection

.
• 90,000 to 105,000 psi = OUTSTANDING wear protection

.
• 75,000 to 90,000 psi = GOOD wear protection

.
• 60,000 to 75,000 psi = MODEST wear protection

.
• Below 60,000 psi = UNDESIRABLE wear protection

1. Prolong Engine Treatment added to 5W30 Pennzoil Ultra, API SN synthetic = 136,658 psi
This oil on its own WITHOUT the Prolong Engine Treatment added to it, has a wear protection capability of 92,569 psi. With the recommended amount of Prolong added per qt, its wear protection capability “WENT UP 48%”.
The data here provides information on wear protection capability, but does NOT provide any information as to how compatible this product’s chlorine may be with a given oil’s additive package. Chlorine and additive package incompatibility has a possible risk of creating damaging bearing corrosion problems. There have been legal issues with this product that you can Google for yourself. Contact Prolong’s maker for more information on compatibility, to find out if it is safe to use in your application. The test data on Prolong is included in my Ranking List for informational purposes only, because of requests I have received about testing this product. But, I do not endorse nor recommend its use. It is always best to simply choose a highly ranked oil in the first place, and avoid using any aftermarket additives at all.

2. Prolong Engine Treatment added to 5W30 Castrol GTX, API SN conventional = 130,366 psi
This oil on its own WITHOUT the Prolong Engine Treatment added to it, has a wear protection capability of 95,392 psi. -No longer available without ultraclean which drops its rank badly to 78,664 psi

3. 0W40 Mobil 1 “FS” European Car Formula, ACEA A3/B3, A3/B4, API SN, synthetic = 127,221 psi

4. 0W20 Quaker State Ultimate Durability, API SN, synthetic (gold bottle) = 124,393 psi

5. 5W30 Valvoline Full Synthetic High Mileage with MaxLife Technology, API SN, GM dexos 1 approved (silver bottle) = 123,470 psi

6. 5W30 Pentosin Pento Super Performance III, for gas and diesel engines, API S”M”, ACEA C3, synthetic, made in Germany = 122,711 psi

7. 5W20 Quaker State Ultimate Durability, API SN, GM dexos 1 approved, synthetic (gold bottle) = 121,396 psi

8. 0W30 Gulf Competition, High Performance Racing Engine Oil, ester-based synthetic = 119,789 psi

9. 5W30 Mobil 1, Advanced Full Synthetic, API SN, GM dexos 1 approved = 117,799 psi (This is the one I use in my LS1 engines)

10. Prolong Engine Treatment added to 5W30 Pennzoil, API SN conventional (yellow bottle) = 117,028 psi
This oil on its own WITHOUT the Prolong Engine Treatment added to it, has a wear protection capability of 76,989 psi.


Top conventional oils include: For my benefit when I switch next oil change....

5W30 Pennzoil High Mileage Vehicle, API SN, conventional = 102,402 psi
High Mileage oils are formulated for older engines with over 75,000 miles on them. And High Mileage oils include “Seal Swell” chemicals to help reduce oil leakage in those older engines.

5W30 Chevron Supreme, API SN conventional (blue bottle) = 100,011 psi

10W40 Pennzoil High Mileage Vehicle, API SN, conventional = 97,419 psi

20W50 Castrol GTX, API SN conventional = 96,514 psi

5W30 Havoline, API SN conventional = 95,098 psi

dodgerammit wrote:I'm gonna link a site in a sec, but here are some tidbits:

Most major oil companies say to NEVER EVER add anything to their oils, because doing so will upset the oil’s carefully balanced additive package that was designed by their Chemical Engineers. I tested doing that very thing in several different oils, and found that adding zinc additives in every case, ruined the oils by SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCING their wear protection capability. That of course, is just the opposite of what people “think” they will be getting. So, those major oil Companies were absolutely correct about not adding anything to their oil. And people who insist on choosing an oil based on zinc level alone, are very likely shooting themselves in the foot, and ending up with far LESS wear protection than they THINK they have. It just depends on which particular oil they select. A number of popular traditional high zinc oils have proven to provide poor wear protection when actually put to the test.

I’ve also tested ZDDPlus zinc additive in 3 low zinc oils, and I’ve tested Edelbrock Zinc additive in 3 different low zinc oils. In each case, the recommended amount of additive was used. And in all 6 cases, these high zinc additives ruined the oils and made them WORSE than they were before the extra zinc was added, by SIGNIFICANTLY reducing their wear protection capabilities. These additives did the opposite of what was promised. That is not surprising, because most major Oil Companies say to never add anything to their oils, because doing that will ruin the oil by upsetting the carefully balanced additive package that their Chemical Engineers designed into them. And that is precisely what was seen when using these high zinc additives.

ZDDPlus” added to O’Reilly (house brand) 5W30, API SN, conventional = 56,728 psi
zinc = 2711 ppm (up 1848 ppm)
phos = 2172 ppm (up 1356 ppm)
moly = 2 ppm (up 2 ppm)
The amount of ZDDPlus added to the oil, was the exact amount the manufacturer called for on the bottle. And the resulting psi value here was 38% LOWER than this oil had BEFORE the ZDDPlus was added to it. Adding ZDDPlus SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED this oil’s wear prevention capability. Just the opposite of what was promised.
.
193. “ZDDPlus” added to Motorcraft 5W30, API SN, synthetic = 56,243 psi
zinc = 2955 ppm (up 1848 ppm)
phos = 2114 ppm (up 1356 ppm)
moly = 76 ppm (up 2 ppm)

The amount of ZDDPlus added to the oil, was the exact amount the manufacturer called for on the bottle. And the resulting psi value here was 12% LOWER than this oil had BEFORE the ZDDPlus was added to it. Adding ZDDPlus SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED this oil’s wear prevention capability. Just the opposite of what was promised.


Taken from here: (good reading, by the way of some really good oil performers as far as wear protection)

https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/0 ... t-ranking/

I'll save you a lot of headache and post the top ten:

The Wear Protection reference categories are:

.
• Over 105,000 psi = INCREDIBLE wear protection

.
• 90,000 to 105,000 psi = OUTSTANDING wear protection

.
• 75,000 to 90,000 psi = GOOD wear protection

.
• 60,000 to 75,000 psi = MODEST wear protection

.
• Below 60,000 psi = UNDESIRABLE wear protection

1. Prolong Engine Treatment added to 5W30 Pennzoil Ultra, API SN synthetic = 136,658 psi
This oil on its own WITHOUT the Prolong Engine Treatment added to it, has a wear protection capability of 92,569 psi. With the recommended amount of Prolong added per qt, its wear protection capability “WENT UP 48%”.
The data here provides information on wear protection capability, but does NOT provide any information as to how compatible this product’s chlorine may be with a given oil’s additive package. Chlorine and additive package incompatibility has a possible risk of creating damaging bearing corrosion problems. There have been legal issues with this product that you can Google for yourself. Contact Prolong’s maker for more information on compatibility, to find out if it is safe to use in your application. The test data on Prolong is included in my Ranking List for informational purposes only, because of requests I have received about testing this product. But, I do not endorse nor recommend its use. It is always best to simply choose a highly ranked oil in the first place, and avoid using any aftermarket additives at all.

2. Prolong Engine Treatment added to 5W30 Castrol GTX, API SN conventional = 130,366 psi
This oil on its own WITHOUT the Prolong Engine Treatment added to it, has a wear protection capability of 95,392 psi. -No longer available without ultraclean which drops its rank badly to 78,664 psi

3. 0W40 Mobil 1 “FS” European Car Formula, ACEA A3/B3, A3/B4, API SN, synthetic = 127,221 psi

4. 0W20 Quaker State Ultimate Durability, API SN, synthetic (gold bottle) = 124,393 psi

5. 5W30 Valvoline Full Synthetic High Mileage with MaxLife Technology, API SN, GM dexos 1 approved (silver bottle) = 123,470 psi

6. 5W30 Pentosin Pento Super Performance III, for gas and diesel engines, API S”M”, ACEA C3, synthetic, made in Germany = 122,711 psi

7. 5W20 Quaker State Ultimate Durability, API SN, GM dexos 1 approved, synthetic (gold bottle) = 121,396 psi

8. 0W30 Gulf Competition, High Performance Racing Engine Oil, ester-based synthetic = 119,789 psi

9. 5W30 Mobil 1, Advanced Full Synthetic, API SN, GM dexos 1 approved = 117,799 psi (This is the one I use in my LS1 engines)

10. Prolong Engine Treatment added to 5W30 Pennzoil, API SN conventional (yellow bottle) = 117,028 psi
This oil on its own WITHOUT the Prolong Engine Treatment added to it, has a wear protection capability of 76,989 psi.


Top conventional oils include: For my benefit when I switch next oil change....

5W30 Pennzoil High Mileage Vehicle, API SN, conventional = 102,402 psi
High Mileage oils are formulated for older engines with over 75,000 miles on them. And High Mileage oils include “Seal Swell” chemicals to help reduce oil leakage in those older engines.

5W30 Chevron Supreme, API SN conventional (blue bottle) = 100,011 psi

10W40 Pennzoil High Mileage Vehicle, API SN, conventional = 97,419 psi

20W50 Castrol GTX, API SN conventional = 96,514 psi

5W30 Havoline, API SN conventional = 95,098 psi

Dodgerammit,

I am not a chemical engineer. But I know a good one. I am going to gave to disagree with you. He was one of those oil company chemical engineers. I don't know the exact history but he started making his own additive when the oil company's removed much of the additive packages to save money. And I know they are trying to save every dime. I trust his product with my life as I use it in my aircraft. And my vehicles. I am also pretty sure that oils have been changed as modern engines have been changed and it has not helped the older engines very much. Maybe our older design stuff needs oil that was designed for years ago. Maybe I can bring him in here. He does enjoy conversing about this and knows a lot more than I do guaranteed.

az chip wrote: Dodgerammit,

I am not a chemical engineer. But I know a good one. I am going to gave to disagree with you. He was one of those oil company chemical engineers. I don't know the exact history but he started making his own additive when the oil company's removed much of the additive packages to save money. And I know they are trying to save every dime. I trust his product with my life as I use it in my aircraft. And my vehicles. I am also pretty sure that oils have been changed as modern engines have been changed and it has not helped the older engines very much. Maybe our older design stuff needs oil that was designed for years ago. Maybe I can bring him in here. He does enjoy conversing about this and knows a lot more than I do guaranteed.

Dunno if you read the link or not.

You're not disagreeing with me. You are arguing against what this engineer has discovered in his test as far as ZDDP goes. Also, his tests seem to coincide with what Lumpskie just experienced as far as adding ZDDP.

That said, he has put other additives in with the oil and with some oils, it added protection. Some oils it did not and made them perform worse. This makes sense from a scientific standpoint (not a chemical engineer either). It depends on what additives were already in place and if what was added after the oil's makeup was finalized would react chemically in a positive or negative way.

I linked it for the results of the top performing oils. This guy was very thorough.

I do agree about newer engines being different than older engines. Especially in the tolerance dept. Newer engines are tighter spec'd than what we drive now, which is why I tend to run a slightly heavier weight in them (10W vs 5W).

Have you ever heard or read of Camguard in your research?

I've flown a bit left seat (actually a student pilot). Not heard of this till now. Reading about it, seems to indicate aviation oil isn't as good as auto stuff due to certain things that can't be in oil and larger tolerances. I do know airplanes consume oil normally.

I found this page: https://www.avweb.com/news/maint/oil_my ... 096-1.html when searching about cam guard. It also talks about zinc and antiwear compound deposits building up and causing pre-ignition.

Ed Kollin is the designer of Camguard and to whom I was referring.

Wow, this is great discussion. I've got my commercial pilot's license and I hadn't seen any of this material before. For my next oil change, I'm going to ditch the Lucas ZDDP additive and see how my oil pressure changes.

az chip, you use Camguard in your FSJ?

Great info guys, thank you for sharing.

Lumpskie wrote:Wow, this is great discussion. I've got my commercial pilot's license and I hadn't seen any of this material before. For my next oil change, I'm going to ditch the Lucas ZDDP additive and see how my oil pressure changes.

az chip, you use Camguard in your FSJ?

I do. Automotive Camguard.

Maybe I'll give it a try!

When I had my BMW M5 (E34 generation), I ran VR1™ RACING OIL. It was available at the local Advance or Napa, as I recall.

ProTouring442 wrote:When I had my BMW M5 (E34 generation), I ran VR1™ RACING OIL. It was available at the local Advance or Napa, as I recall.

Wow, I'd never heard of that oil. It says it has elevated zinc for older flat tappet engines. Looks like good stuff!

https://www.valvoline.com/our-products/ ... -motor-oil

Lumpskie wrote:

ProTouring442 wrote:When I had my BMW M5 (E34 generation), I ran VR1™ RACING OIL. It was available at the local Advance or Napa, as I recall.

Wow, I'd never heard of that oil. It says it has elevated zinc for older flat tappet engines. Looks like good stuff!

https://www.valvoline.com/our-products/ ... -motor-oil

You really need to quit worrying about zinc content. High zinc content actually increases long term wear. It doesn't deposit on the engine. It is simply part of the additives that are burned during operation.

For the test results in the Wear Protection Ranking List, the HIGHER the psi value, the BETTER the wear protection. And this applies to ALL engines, including ANY High Performance flat tappet engine.

That being said, the synthetic oil ranks up there:

42. 10W30 Valvoline VR1 Synthetic Racing Oil, API SL (black bottle) = 101,139 psi
zinc = 1180 ppm
phosphorus = 1112 ppm
moly = 162 ppm
calcium = 2,664 ppm
TBN = 7.4

What is interesting, is their conventional formula ranks higher in the test:
36. 10W30 Valvoline VR1 Conventional Racing Oil (silver bottle) = 103,505 psi
zinc = 1472 ppm
phosphorus = 1544 ppm
moly = 3 ppm
calcium = 2,707 ppm
TBN = 7.6

FWIW, I'd stay with the mobil 1. Here is their rank:
9. 5W30 Mobil 1, Advanced Full Synthetic, API SN, GM dexos 1 approved = 117,799 psi
zinc = TBD
phos = TBD
moly = TBD
This was the latest current version of this oil when tested at the end of 2015. This oil is used by a number of Auto Makers worldwide as factory fill oil in their High Performance cars. The psi value of this oil, which came from testing it at the normal operating test temperature of 230*F, put it in the INCREDIBLE Wear Protection Category.
However, I went on to also test this oil at the much higher temperature of 275*F. At that elevated temperature, any hotter and thinner oil is expected to experience a drop in Wear Protection Capability. And this oil did have a disappointing 36% drop in capability. At that reduced value down to 75,861 psi, this much hotter and thinner oil dropped down to the GOOD Wear Protection Category. You can avoid such a drop in capability by keeping the oil at a more reasonable cooler temperature.

Wow, I missed your point originally. I thought he was speaking just to zinc additives to an oil. But, when I went back and actually read the intro, it looks like zinc doesn't have the benefit I had assumed, even when it's included in the original oil formula. You'll have to forgive me, I've only had 5 minutes to look at the blog. I'll be sure to read more this weekend, as I have time. Thanks for putting up the data! I looks like I'll keep using my Mobile 1 supply, without adding the ZDDP.

What I gather from the post is this:

Zinc isn't bad. But it isn't great either. It is an additive found in all oils as a wear agent. However, too much of it can be really detrimental to an engine. Looks like about 1400ppm is the cut off for safety reasons unless you do frequent oil changes. ie: Racing only oils that are changed every 500 miles.

That being said, I'm looking at going to a different brand of oil myself in the waggy. I'll stick with conventional for the current state. Once I rebuild the motor, I'll probably go mobile 1 5w30. I'm still on the fence about switching to a lower weight due to my 360 having 150K miles on it. Nothing wrong with it right now, but I'll probably have it done between 175-200K.

Out of curiosity, ow many miles did yours have when you bought it? Mileage now?

Ah dang, I just went looking for some pictures of your waggy. Photobucket has really taken a toll on the boards.

Lumpskie wrote:Wow, I missed your point originally. I thought he was speaking just to zinc additives to an oil. But, when I went back and actually read the intro, it looks like zinc doesn't have the benefit I had assumed, even when it's included in the original oil formula. You'll have to forgive me, I've only had 5 minutes to look at the blog. I'll be sure to read more this weekend, as I have time. Thanks for putting up the data! I looks like I'll keep using my Mobile 1 supply, without adding the ZDDP.

Be careful about how you are reading this. I have no idea how this pertains to auto oil. Avweb is an aviation webpage. Aircraft oil is a different animal altogether from auto oil. I will try and get him in here or have him email me something I can post.

az chip wrote:

Lumpskie wrote:Wow, I missed your point originally. I thought he was speaking just to zinc additives to an oil. But, when I went back and actually read the intro, it looks like zinc doesn't have the benefit I had assumed, even when it's included in the original oil formula. You'll have to forgive me, I've only had 5 minutes to look at the blog. I'll be sure to read more this weekend, as I have time. Thanks for putting up the data! I looks like I'll keep using my Mobile 1 supply, without adding the ZDDP.

Be careful about how you are reading this. I have no idea how this pertains to auto oil. Avweb is an aviation webpage. Aircraft oil is a different animal altogether from auto oil. I will try and get him in here or have him email me something I can post.

The link I posted with the exhaustive comparisons is directly pertaining to auto oil and the amount of Zinc (and other things) in the additives. Aviation oil is very different. The camguard looks to benefit avoil in the moisture/condensation dept due to long periods of inactivity. I know it was supposed to be tested in the last couple of years by a major company, but have no luck finding those results yet.