540 RAT

Of course I've always known that my carefully generated “motor oil wear protection capability data” was completely accurate, but now my data has been validated and backed-up by a total of FOUR other independent Industry sources. They are as follows:

1. Well known and respected Engineer and Tech Author David Vizard, whose own test data, largely based on real world engine dyno testing, has concluded that more zinc in motor oil can be damaging, more zinc does NOT provide today's best wear protection, and that using zinc as the primary anti-wear component, is outdated technology.

2. The GM Oil Report titled, "Oil Myths from GM Techlink", concluded that high levels of zinc are damaging and that more zinc does NOT provide more wear protection.

3. A motor oil research article written by Ed Hackett titled, "More than you ever wanted to know about Motor Oil", concluded that more zinc does NOT provide more wear protection, it only provides longer wear protection.

4. This from the Brad Penn Oil Company:
There is such a thing as too much ZDDP. ZDDP is surface aggressive, and too much can be a detriment. ZDDP fights for the surface, blocking other additive performance. Acids generated due to excessive ZDDP contact will “tie-up” detergents thus encouraging corrosive wear. ZDDP effectiveness plateaus, more does NOT translate into more protection. Only so much is utilized. We don’t need to saturate our oil with ZDDP.

Those who are familiar with my test data, know that my test results came up with the exact same results stated by all four of those independent sources. So, this is an example where motor oil “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load” using oil testing equipment, engine dyno testing, Motor Oil Industry testing, and proper motor oil research using only the facts, from a total of five (including my own) independent sources, all converged to agree and come to the same exact conclusion. Back-up validation proof, doesn't get any better than this.

So, with all those sources in total agreement, that should provide more than enough proof to anyone who questioned my test data, that my data is absolutely correct. And that questioning any one of those sources, questions them all, and questions Physics and Chemistry that determined all those identical results. And no sensible person would try to argue against Physics and Chemistry. Because that is a battle no man can win.


**************************

Now, getting to the purpose of this write-up, a NASCAR engine supplier out of North Carolina, was so impressed with the motor oil “Wear Protection Capability Testing” I perform, that they sent me 3 NASCAR Racing Oils they use, for testing. I considered that quite an endorsement, that these guys valued my testing efforts enough to include me, in some of what they do. They have been seeing some wear issues, and wanted to see if I could shed any light on that by testing their oil. They came to the right place.

The NASCAR oils they sent me were:

0W Mobil 1 Racing Oil (this was out of a 55 gallon drum)

0W30 Mobil 1 Racing Oil (this was out of a normal quart bottle)

0W50 Mobil 1 Racing Oil (this was out of a 55 gallon drum)

In addition to performing my normal “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load”, I also sent all 3 oils to the Professional Lab, ALS Tribology in Sparks, Nevada for them to perform component quantity and viscosity testing. The test results from the lab are:


0W Mobil 1 Racing Oil synthetic (lab tested 2013)
Silicon = 7 ppm (anti-foaming agent in new oil, but in used oil, certain gasket materials and dirt can also add to this number)

Boron = 74 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Magnesium = 14 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Calcium = 1938 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Barium = 0 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Zinc = 1952 ppm (anti-wear)

Phos = 1671 ppm (anti-wear)

Moly = 1743 ppm (anti-wear)

Potassium = 4 ppm (anti-freeze corrosion inhibitor)

Sodium = 1 ppm (anti-freeze corrosion inhibitor)

TBN = 8.2 (Total Base Number is an acid neutralizer to prevent corrosion. Most gasoline engine motor oils start with TBN around 8 or 9)

Viscosity (cSt at 100*C) = 6.1, and cSt (centistokes) in general terms, represents an oil’s thickness.



0W30 Mobil 1 Racing Oil synthetic (lab tested 2013)
Silicon = 17 ppm (anti-foaming agent in new oil, but in used oil, certain gasket materials and dirt can also add to this number)

Boron = 67 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Magnesium = 13 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Calcium = 1823 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Barium = 10 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Zinc = 1693 ppm (anti-wear)

Phos = 1667 ppm (anti-wear)

Moly = 1326 ppm (anti-wear)

Potassium = 4 ppm (anti-freeze corrosion inhibitor)

Sodium = 1 ppm (anti-freeze corrosion inhibitor)

TBN = 8.0 (Total Base Number is an acid neutralizer to prevent corrosion. Most gasoline engine motor oils start with TBN around 8 or 9)

Viscosity (cSt at 100*C) = 11.3 (cSt range for SAE 30 is 9.3 to 12.4) And cSt (centistokes) in general terms, represents an oil’s thickness.



0W50 Mobil 1 Racing Oil synthetic (lab tested 2013)
Silicon = 8 ppm (anti-foaming agent in new oil, but in used oil, certain gasket materials and dirt can also add to this number)

Boron = 74 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Magnesium = 212 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Calcium = 1694 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Barium = 0 ppm (detergent/dispersant, anti-deposit buildup/anti-sludge)

Zinc = 1676 ppm (anti-wear)

Phos = 1637 ppm (anti-wear)

Moly = 1263 ppm (anti-wear)

Potassium = 4 ppm (anti-freeze corrosion inhibitor)

Sodium = 0 ppm (anti-freeze corrosion inhibitor)

TBN = 8.4 (Total Base Number is an acid neutralizer to prevent corrosion. Most gasoline engine motor oils start with TBN around 8 or 9)

Viscosity (cSt at 100*C) = 17.6, cSt range for SAE 50 is 16.3 to 21.8, and cSt (centistokes) in general terms, represents an oil’s thickness.


*****************************


After I performed my “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load”, you can see below how those 3 NASCAR oils ranked regarding “Wear Protection Capability”, just among other Mobil 1 oils I’ve tested, as well as among other oils I’ve tested that had “Racing Oil” in their name. And they are all ranked in the order of their “Wear Protection Capability” values.

Wear protection reference categories are:

• Over 90,000 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

The HIGHER the psi value, the BETTER the Wear Protection.



1. 10W30 Lucas Racing Only synthetic = 106,505 psi
zinc = 2642 ppm
phosphorus = 3489 ppm
moly = 1764 ppm
calcium = 2,929 ppm


2. 5W30 Mobil 1, API SN synthetic, street oil = 105,875 psi
zinc = 801 ppm
phosphorus = 842 ppm
moly = 112 ppm
calcium = 799 ppm


3. 10W30 Valvoline NSL (Not Street Legal) Conventional Racing Oil = 103,846 psi
zinc = 1669 ppm
phosphorus = 1518 ppm
moly = 784 ppm
calcium = 1,607 ppm


4. 10W30 Valvoline VR1 Conventional Racing Oil (silver bottle) = 103,505 psi
zinc = 1472 ppm
phosphorus = 1544 ppm
moly = 3 ppm
calcium = 2,707 ppm


5. 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


6. 10W30 Amsoil Dominator Racing Oil synthetic = 97,118 psi
zinc = 1613 ppm
phos = 1394 ppm
moly = 0 ppm


7. 30 wt Red Line Race Oil synthetic = 96,470 psi
zinc = 2207 ppm
phos = 2052 ppm
moly = 1235 ppm


8. 0W20 Mobil 1 Advanced Fuel Economy, API SN synthetic, street oil = 96,364 psi
zinc = 742 ppm
phos = 677 ppm
moly = 81 ppm

9. 10W30 Joe Gibbs XP3 NASCAR Racing Oil synthetic = 95,543 psi
zinc = 743 ppm
phos = 802 ppm
moly = 1125 ppm


10. 5W30 Maxima RS530 Synthetic Racing Oil = 91,162 psi
zinc = 2162 ppm
phos = 2294 ppm
moly = 181 ppm

11. 20W50 LAT Synthetic Racing Oil, API SM = 87,930 psi
zinc = TBD
phos = TBD
moly = TBD

12. 5W30 Mobil 1 Extended Performance 15,000 mile, API SN synthetic, street oil = 83,263 psi
zinc = 890 ppm
phos = 819 ppm
moly = 104 ppm

13. 5W30 LAT Synthetic Racing Oil, API SM = 81,800 psi
zinc = 1784 ppm
phos = 1539 ppm
moly = 598 ppm

14. 5W30 Royal Purple XPR (Extreme Performance Racing) synthetic = 74,860 psi
zinc = 1421 ppm
phos = 1338 ppm
moly = 204 ppm

15. 0W50 Mobil 1 Racing Oil = 73,811 psi
zinc = 1676 ppm
phos = 1637 ppm
moly = 1263 ppm
Onset of thermal breakdown = 270*F

16. 0W30 Mobil 1 Racing Oil = 71,923 psi
zinc = 1693 ppm
phos = 1667 ppm
moly = 1326 ppm
Onset of thermal breakdown = 280*F

17. 15W50 Mobil 1, API SN synthetic, street oil = 70,235 psi
zinc = 1,133 ppm
phos = 1,168 ppm
moly = 83 ppm

18. 5W30 Klotz Estorlin Racing Oil, API SL synthetic = 64,175 psi
zinc = 1765 ppm
phos = 2468 ppm
moly = 339 ppm

19. 0W20 Klotz Estorlin Racing Oil, API SL synthetic = 60,941 psi
zinc = TBD
phos = TBD
moly = TBD

20. 10W40 Torco TR-1 Racing Oil with MPZ conventional = 59,905 psi
zinc = 1456 ppm
phos = 1150 ppm
moly = 227 ppm

21. 10W40 Summit Racing Premium Racing Oil, API SL = 59,483 psi
This oil is made for Summit by I.L.C.
zinc = TBD
phos = TBD
moly = TBD
NOTE: This oil line was discontinued in Spring 2013.

22. 0W20 LAT Synthetic Racing Oil, API SM = 57,228 psi
zinc = TBD
phos = TBD
moly = TBD

23. 0W Mobil 1 Racing Oil = 55,080 psi
zinc = 1952 ppm
phos = 1671 ppm
moly = 1743 ppm
Onset of thermal breakdown = 210*F, which was confirmed by repeated tests. This is the WORST/LOWEST onset of thermal breakdown point I’ve ever seen. So, this oil is STARTING TO FAIL even before getting hot enough to quickly boil off normal water condensation. And this is on top of its very poor wear protection capability. Mobil should be embarrassed to even offer this oil for sale.


So, as you can see, these Mobil 1 Racing Oils were poorly ranked at 15th, 16th and 23rd, out of these 23 oils above.

And if you look at my “Wear Protection Ranking List” of all 104 oils I’ve tested so far, you’ll see they rank 65th, 72nd and 99th.

The wind-up is that the 0W50 Mobil 1 Racing Oil and the 0W30 Mobil 1 Racing Oil only provide MODEST wear protection, while the 0W Mobil 1 Racing Oil only provides UNDESIRABLE wear protection. So, it is quite clear that these modest/poor performing motor oils are NOT a good choice for NASCAR small block endurance engines that make around 900HP, rev between 9,000 and 10,000 rpm, and do that for hundreds of miles. For applications like this, choosing an oil is just as important as choosing the engine components.

All 3 of these oils might look good on paper for wear protection, since the zinc, phos and moly are all substantial. However, this is yet another example of how looking at a Lab Test Print Out of an oil’s component quantities, shows you absolutely nothing regarding how well it can protect against wear. The ONLY way to determine the FACTS as to how well an oil can protect against wear, is to perform “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load”, which is precisely why I test oil that way.

You don’t just rely on an engine’s build sheet to guess its power/torque characteristics. You dyno test it and track test it, to find out how it really performs in operation. It’s the same thing with testing motor oil. You don’t just rely on an oil’s Lab Test Print Out, you need to test it dynamically at a representative operational temperature to find out what its wear protection capabilities really are.

The wear issues this NASCAR engine supplier was experiencing with these oils, is exactly what you would expect by looking at my “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load” test results, which showed that the oils were severely lacking in wear protection capability. Unfortunately, they had no way of knowing this before they started using these oils. But, if I had tested these oils BEFORE they started using them, I could have saved them time, money and grief.

An oil’s ability to protect against wear, is determined by its base oil and its additive package “as a whole”, NOT just by how much zinc is present. Using zinc as the primary anti-wear component, is outdated technology. The idea that you need a high level of zinc for a high level of wear protection, is simply an old MYTH that has been BUSTED. Many of today’s anti-wear components (they are often proprietary in nature, and are not specifically tested for, in a basic Lab Test) are not only equal to zinc, but they are BETTER than zinc.

Until I started performing Tribology Research, and setup my motor oil “Wear Protection Capability Ranking List”, there was no good way to know which oils provided good wear protection, and which oils didn’t. Previously, all we could do was guess, or use trial and error to determine which oil was good enough, and which oil was not. And even then, we had no way of knowing how various “good enough” oils compared among themselves. But now, we have documented wear test data available. So, all we have to do is look at the Ranking List, and choose an oil that provides the wear protection we are comfortable with for any given build. This is the 21st Century, and we no longer have to guess or use trial and error to decide on which oil to use.

Also, engines are best served by using oils that have excellent wear protection capability (no matter how much zinc is in them) during Break-In. If folks use these superior oils, and avoid traditional high zinc, low wear protection capability Break-In oils and avoid aftermarket zinc additives which actually REDUCE an oil’s wear protection capability, worries about flat tappet Break-In procedures could become a thing of the past.

The “Wear Protection” test data here DIRECTLY APPLIES to flat tappet lobe/lifter interfaces (no matter how wicked the engine), distributor gear/cam gear interfaces, mechanical fuel pump pushrod tip/cam eccentric interfaces, and all highly loaded engine interfaces.


BOTTOM LINE:
I have no doubt that this Professional NASCAR engine supplier is using good quality engine components, and that they are building their engines well, so all they need to do is select better oils, and their wear issues will go away. Fortunately, there are many, many far better oils available for them to choose from. Even 5W30 Mobil 1, API SN synthetic street oil, that is available at any Auto Parts Store, provides a whopping 47% MORE WEAR PROTECTION than the 0W30 Mobil 1 Racing Oil.

Of course, there can be friction reduction capability differences between street oil and Racing Oil. And keep in mind, that friction reduction and wear protection are two entirely different things, and often do not go hand in hand. If a particular Racing Oil does provide reduced friction, that can increase HP. But, you still have to finish, and you have to run strong to win. So, no matter what, your oil has to provide adequate wear protection to get the job done.

If I were choosing the oils for this NASCAR endurance engine application, as an Engineer, I’d only select oils from the OUTSTANDING wear protection category, which means oils that produce at least 90,000 psi capability in my testing. Any oil in that category would provide sufficient margin of safety to prevent any further wear issues.

***************


If you’d like to see my entire 104 motor oil “Wear Protection Ranking List”, along with additional motor oil tech info, here’s a link:

http://540ratblog.wordpress.com/

540 RAT
Member SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers)