Should I use break in oil or regular oil with zinc additive???

-
duster360

duster360

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Messages
3,825
Reaction score
308
Location
Alabama
Would my usual 10w40 oil with zinc additive be ok to use for breakin? Or should I use a breakin oil such as Brad Penn? After the 30 minute break in, when should I change the oil? Immediately or drive it a few miles or what?
 
run the brad penn break in oil. after break in of the cam i always drain the oil into a spotlessly clean drain pan and check for shavings. I then change the oil with another round of the break in oil. i run it for few hundred miles and then switch to the oil that i plan to use for rest of the engines life. I have had great luck with the brad penn oil. it cost me 70 bucks for an oil change but that is cheaper then tearing it down and rebuilding it
 
This is good oil, as well;

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/luc-10631-1

In my opinion, no conventional oil off of the shelf with today's detergent levels should ever be used in these cars.

I used to run Castrol GTX with ZDDP additive and I'm almost certain that it sheared the stock cam over time, after they recently ramped up the amount of detergents and dropped zinc and phosphate levels to nothing, within the last year and a half.

The problem with today's oils is that they are made for roller engines with aluminum bearings, rather than the softer tri metal bearings, they don't need the zinc and phosphate, because they are hard on catalytic converters.

They have put tons of detergents in the oils today, to compensate for lack of wear and tighter tolerances, to keep the oil surfaces that are tighter, clear of contaminants. This is also why new cars can go a lot longer than 3000 miles between changes.

The problem this poses on older designs like the LA, is that the higher levels of detergent will pull everything from from the oil surfaces, including any Zinc and Phosphate needed to help anti-shear and that aids in pressure support/ cushion.

So, if you buy new oil with higher levels of detergent and slap a ZDDP additive pack into it, its not going to create any formula that will work properly, because it's all going away with the added detergent that is already in the oil.

The original Kendall GT1 formula that has the right amount of metals and phosphate is still the exact formula for Brad Penn's Penn Grade 1.

The rep from Brad Penn that I spoke to, told me that he was seeing another problem with recent oils formulated for older cars, in that it was going the other way and too much zinc was being used, causing rust issues and caustic bearing deterioration, from the acidic properties. For what it's worth, phosphate is what you need for wear protection, zinc aids in oil longevity.

So, IMHO, it's not something that should be concocted without a lab to test it's levels. I don't have the chemistry set to play with my own oil, so I let them do it for me and just run what they make. Penn's formula hasn't changed since Kendall GT1 was around when these cars were new. Whenever I'm given the option, I go with what's steadfast.
 
70aarcuda said:
http://540ratblog.wordpress.com/
Click to expand...

There's so many problems with this article its hard to know where to start.

1) Author's name is not given. Zero credibility without that.

2) Forty some paragraphs of self promotion. The salient points could have been summarized in a couple. I did this... I did that... I AM THE GOD OF OIL TESTING... DO NOT EVEN THINK OF QUESTIONING MY FINDINGS. He uses scientific terminology in a highly un-scientific presentation.

3) His logic does not stand up to scrutiny.

The motor oil testing I performed to generate the “Wear Protection Ranking List”, is worst case torture testing using oil testing equipment (and for the record, it is NOT a “One Armed Bandit” tester), which subjects the oil to far more severe loading than even the most wicked flat tappet race engine ever could.The test equipment is NOT intended to duplicate an engine’s internal components. On the contrary, the test equipment is specifically designed to cause an oil to reach its failure point, in order to determine what its capability limit it is.
Click to expand...

But, a running engine is designed to last indefinitely, and of course, they do not generally cause an oil to reach its failure point. So, due to the complete difference in design, the pressures in my test are completely different, and cannot be compared directly to an engine’s lobe/lifter interface pressure. That would be comparing apples to oranges, which makes no sense. My testing is so severe, that the oil fails at an earlier point.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

And obtaining accurate oil film strength data is ABSOLUTELY THE ONLY WAY to determine an oil’s wear protection capability, because an oil’s film strength is the last line of defense against metal to metal contact.
Click to expand...


Thinner oil flows quicker at cold start-up to begin lubricating critical engine components much more quickly than thicker oil can. Most engine wear takes place during cold start-up before oil flow can reach all the components. So, quicker flowing thinner oil will help reduce start-up engine wear, which is actually reducing wear overall.
Click to expand...

Almost no description of his testing process is given other than to say its not much like an engine. I don't doubt that film strength is a critical element in determining wear protection, but there is little doubt that there are many other important characteristics.

The last paragraph points out just one of many more I could suggest. Viscosity is quite independent of film strength. There is a long list of other variables that cannot be taken into account with whatever test he is doing. One more example. He is apparently testing at 230 degrees. As he stated, most wear takes place before the engine gets there.

Its an interesting article, and I suspect there's a lot of truth in it, but his test, no matter how well designed, can only imply outcomes. Testing in engines, operated in real world conditions is the only real proof of anything.
 
70aarcuda Dam..someone actually read all that...
Click to expand...

LOL!

Must be my OCD. :eek:ops:

Marketers / promoters / aggressive salesmen kinda get me going.
 
It bored me and I quit reading his self promotion. Brad Penn breakin seems to be what most people use.
 
joe gibbs HR1?? Thats what I'm running in my dart, but, has a roller cam. I do have a 318 I'm getting ready to put on a run stand and break in the cam. Is the joe Gibbs HR1 high zinc good or should I still add a zinc additive???
 
nothingbutdarts said:
I always use Brad Penn break in oil, go 500 miles and use it once more for a 1,000mi. Just my .02
Click to expand...

This is what we use....... and have had great sucess so far. We purchase Brad Penn break in oil from our machine shop, these two guys have over 80 years machining experience, and are very helpful in answering any questions about all kinds of oil products. There are many different thoughts on this subject. Good luck!
 
After reading the opinions posted here I have decided to start out with the Brad Penn breakin oil. Not sure yet what to use after breakin though. If I should go back to my favorite oil ( Castol GTX ) or stick with an oil such as Brad Penn.
 
Thanks Idaho, I thought it sounded somewhat odd. He/she says they don't work for anyone but to go through all that work, they work for somebody. My bet would be whatever that one additive was. I would like to know more about5W30 Chevron Supreme, API SN conventional as it seemed to do well on his list for a normal oil.
 
duster360 said:
After reading the opinions posted here I have decided to start out with the Brad Penn breakin oil. Not sure yet what to use after breakin though. If I should go back to my favorite oil ( Castol GTX ) or stick with an oil such as Brad Penn.
Click to expand...

You should stick with an oil such as Brad Penn. I recommend conventional Valvoline VR1. It has proper ZDDP levels and can be had at Auto Zone, NAPA, and O'Reillys among others. Usually around $5-$6 a qrt.
 
Idaho said:
There's so many problems with this article its hard to know where to start.

1) Author's name is not given. Zero credibility without that.

2) Forty some paragraphs of self promotion. The salient points could have been summarized in a couple. I did this... I did that... I AM THE GOD OF OIL TESTING... DO NOT EVEN THINK OF QUESTIONING MY FINDINGS. He uses scientific terminology in a highly un-scientific presentation.

3) His logic does not stand up to scrutiny.











Almost no description of his testing process is given other than to say its not much like an engine. I don't doubt that film strength is a critical element in determining wear protection, but there is little doubt that there are many other important characteristics.

The last paragraph points out just one of many more I could suggest. Viscosity is quite independent of film strength. There is a long list of other variables that cannot be taken into account with whatever test he is doing. One more example. He is apparently testing at 230 degrees. As he stated, most wear takes place before the engine gets there.

Its an interesting article, and I suspect there's a lot of truth in it, but his test, no matter how well designed, can only imply outcomes. Testing in engines, operated in real world conditions is the only real proof of anything.
Click to expand...


+1

And now his flawed manifesto will be posted on every automotive forum in the world as the gospel truth for the next decade! I love the Internet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top