Valvoline SynPower officially kicks Mobil 1s A$$

[Firebirdjones]

I see you use a dry amsoil filter with the prefilter. I assume this is the washable filter without needing oil???

How does it fair without the prefilter?? I'm not a fan of those prefilters, just don't like the looks of them and can't have something like that hanging on a restored musclecar.

I've always had goodluck with K&N since the mid 80's, as long as it's cleaned and oiled on a regular basis. Mainly use them on the carbed cars but I haven't had any MAF problems on the 4th gens either as others have complained about.

Not sure Amsoil would make the filters I would need for the various applications I have anyway to make the switch. But I would like to do some testing of my own.

[Sarge]

Hey I'm not trying to get anybody to change anything...just pointing out the facts of KN poor filtration. Poor filtration equals more/excessive engine wear. I myself had a very hard time embracing radial tires versus bias ply...but I finally got there....the damn radials looked flat to me and that caused me grief ...so I understand your loyality to KN...I used them myself for many many years.....
I have the pre filter for water prevention......on occasion I get water through the intakes in the hood when raining and the pre filter is water repellent and works very well....and for the record that is a AEM DryFlow under the Amsoil pre filter...

[Firebirdjones]

Hey I'm not trying to get anybody to change anything...just pointing out the facts of KN poor filtration. Poor filtration equals more/excessive engine wear. I myself had a very hard time embracing radial tires versus bias ply...but I finally got there....the damn radials looked flat to me and that caused me grief ...so I understand your loyality to KN...I used them myself for many many years.....
I have the pre filter for water prevention......on occasion I get water through the intakes in the hood when raining and the pre filter is water repellent and works very well....and for the record that is a AEM DryFlow under the Amsoil pre filter...

Is that AEM dryflow a reusable/washable filter?? I'd have to see if they have applications for the older cars.

[Sarge]

Yes....just match any KN filter size....

[CompSyn]

why the concern in zinc??i heard one of my friends talking to me the other day who uses and oil with a high zinc content for his 64 fairlane with a soild lifter cam ...so whats the story with zinc just out of curiosity??

It may be correct that the lowered levels of zinc and phosphorus (ZnDDP) in modern day motor oils and the perceived detrimental effects of such have been blown out of proportion by many within the high performance automotive hobby. Much of this controversy stems back to around 2005 when the American Petroleum Institute (API) introduced the latest SM classification which reduced ZnDDP levels to around 800ppm. Other newsworthy items of that time frame include technological advances in aftermarket flat-tappet camshafts with fast-rate-of-lift lobe profiles which required heavier valve spring pressures. Another notable issue of that time was a lack a quality flat-tappet lifters that resulted in cheap poor quality offshore lifters being introduced into the U.S. market.

So when people began reporting flat-tappet camshaft failures, pandemonium set in and with no real proof of what could be causing the issue, the conclusion was made by many that the new SM rated oil was to blame. Conversely, API claims that SM rated motor oil is backwards compatible with all pervious API classifications. However some asserted that the camshafts used in API (SM) testing sequences were of “atypical” hardness when compared to most flat-tappet camshafts found on the market. Further it is interesting to note that the Sequence IVA Test (ASTM D 6891), which is part of the current API (SM) battery of tests is performed on a Nissan 2.4 liter test fixture. Valve spring pressures on the Nissan engine may be for the most part less than those seen on a typical modified American V8 engines. Could it be that modified non-OEM engines were not taken into account during API (SM) tests?

For many, their minds were made up that motor oils with ZnDDP levels in the 800ppm range of SM rated oils would undoubtedly lead to flat tappet camshaft failure. For those, the rule of thumb when using a flat-tappet camshaft is to use a motor oil with 1200ppm ZnDDP, an amount commonly found in diesel motor oil. And for some hot rodders that commonly live by the phrase, “more is always better” there was an instant niche for eager marketers with aftermarket ZnDDP additives. Heck! If 1200ppm ZnDDP commonly found in diesel oil is good, then adding a ZnDDP additive on top of that should make for an indestructible motor oil. Some say not so as the higher detergent levels found in diesel oils renders aftermarket ZnDDP additives useless. Note that a ZnDDP additive that is properly formulated and blended by the oil company is not the same as dumping an aftermarket ZnDDP additive in to your crankcase.

As a result of these controversies, it may be that oil companies found themselves cornered by angry consumers who were convinced that the new SM rated oils were the cause of their camshaft woes which resulted in special high ZnDDP motor oil formulas. It could also be that modified high performance engines were not properly taken into account during API (SM) testing. Regardless of the exact cause, today we see many oil companies marketing “High Zinc Formula” motor oils, Amsoil included, to satisfy this niche.

For comparison, Valvoline SynPower 5W-30 API (SM) has a Zinc content of 850ppm, and Phosphorus content of 760ppm.

Cited: Valvoline SynPower Product Data Sheet pdf.


To error on the side of caution, I’d personally follow this Technical Service Bulletin from Amsoil regarding Flat Tappet Camshafts. Those of you using roller lifters found in modern day engines, there's no need to be concerned about high zinc motor oil formulas.

Flat Tappet Cams

Issues:

Engine oils contain anti-wear additives and the most common anti-wear chemistry is zinc dialkyldithiophosphate (ZnDDP), which contains a combination of zinc and phosphorus. In 2005, in an effort to guarantee catalytic converter performance in new vehicles, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and International Lubricants Standards Approval Committee (ILSAC) instituted API SM and IL-SAC GF-4 quality standards which reduced the maximum limit for phosphorus to 0.085% and 0.080% respectively. Both API SM and ILSAC GF-4 specifications also contain a minimum phosphorus content of .065% and .060%.

Previously, API SL/ILSAC GF-3 oils were restricted to 0.10% phosphorus level, so a concern arose that oils containing lower levels of zinc/phosphorus could provide insufficient protection in high pressure areas of flat tappets and camshaft lobes found in many older cars and high-performance engines.

Technical Discussion:

Proper assembly lubes and oil additives should be used during the break-in phase for all new or rebuilt engines with flat tappets. These additives provide the extra protection required at the point of contact during break-in to help the flat tappet face to properly mate with the cam lobe. Once the break-in phase is completed, these additives should not be used because of other engine life issues created by long term use of these materials. AMSOIL does not provide break-in assembly lubricants, but one of the common products is GM E.O.S., which is an assembly lubricant and is not, as stated by GM, an engine oil additive. AMSOIL does not recommend using any engine oil additives with AMSOIL engine lubricants.

High-performance modified engines benefit from oils with superior film strength and anti-wear properties. The flat tappet/camshaft lobe interface is the one area in an engine that has extreme contact load. This load increases significantly where non-stock, high-pressure valve springs are employed so the use of properly formulated engine lubricants is extremely important to reduce wear and extend flat tappet/camshaft life. In these applications, AMSOIL recommends motor oils containing high levels of zinc/phosphorus for superior protection.



AMSOIL AMO, ARO, HDD, TRO, and AHR all contain high levels of zinc/phosphorus maximizing flat tappet/camshaft life in stock and modified applications.

AMSOIL 10W-40 (AMO) and 20W-50 (ARO) are premium synthetic formulations which are recommended for API SL (gasoline)/CI-4 Plus (heavy-duty, on-road diesel) specified applications. They are an outstanding choice where high zinc containing protection is required in late model hot rods requiring extra camshaft protection.

AMSOIL (HDD) is a 5W-30 weight combination diesel/gasoline oil with a higher starting TBN to handle the significant stresses from high soot loading and acid generation in modern diesel engines. HDD contains the high phosphorus and zinc required for long life.

AMSOIL 20W-50 (TRO) is a premium synthetic racing oil with superior film strength and anti-wear protection for gasoline engines. It is an excellent choice for street or race cars, hot rods, trucks or boats. TRO is the preferred choice for highly modified, high horsepower engines requiring the extra protection required by flat tappet camshaft engines.

AMSOIL (AHR) is a super heavy SAE 60 weight racing oil de-signed for alcohol and nitro burning race engines where viscosity loss associated with fuel dilution is a concern. AHR includes a high dose of zinc containing anti-wear chemistry that race engines require.

Amsoil TSB Cited HERE

Note: AMSOIL Dominator® Synthetic 15W-50 Racing Oil (RD50) supersedes 20W-50 (TRO).

For more on the topic of Flat-Tappet camshafts and zinc content in motor oil, check out the link below:

Hot Rod Magazine article, Flat Tappet Cam Tech, Righting the Wrongs

CompSyn

[BADBLUE02]

There's some good information in this thread. How do the lower levels of zinc and phosphorus effect todays cars with aftermarket high lift cams, and heavier valve springs?

[CompSyn]

There's some good information in this thread. How do the lower levels of zinc and phosphorus effect todays cars with aftermarket high lift cams, and heavier valve springs?

Todays cars use roller lifters so lower zinc and phosphorous motor oils have no adverse affects on engine components. And in cases where there may be piston ring blow-by or valve seal leaks could actually prove to be harmful if using high zinc and phosphorous motor oils as they are known to attack emission system components.

Only in older vehicles with flat tappet lifters, particularly high lift camshafts with heavy valve spring loads, is where one may want to use higher levels of zinc and phosphorous.

CompSyn

[CompSyn]

Not sure Amsoil would make the filters I would need for the various applications I have anyway to make the switch. But I would like to do some testing of my own.

Amsoil Ea Nanofiber conical style air induction filters

AMSOIL universal air induction filters


Click HERE for photos, measurements and K&N air filter interchange compatibility on conical filters.

Amsoil Ea Nanofiber air filters for carbureted engines

Amsoil carbureted air filters

Amsoil Ea Nanofiber air filters for OE replacement


Amsoil OE replacement air filters

Also check out this LS1.com/Amsoil Ea Air Filter post

[CompSyn]

Here is some starter reading for you...but I encourage anybody to search/read/challenge any and all testing....but I find these informative in a general sense.....obviously I do my own testing ( as above reflects) and your own testing will carry more weight.....but you can start here....
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/airfilter/airtest3.htm
http://www.roadkill.com/~davet/moto/air.filters.html

http://www.performancemotoroil.com/A...r_Filters.html

Note that the Amsoil air filters used in the two tests Sarge pointed out are of the old foam construction Amsoil used to sell a few years back. Amsoil now sells the Ea/Donaldson Endurance type synthetic nanofiber air filters which are a improved design. The new design lasts 100,000-miles or 4-years and is cleanable by low pressure air or shop-vac.

Outdated tests below:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/airfilter/airtest3.htm

http://www.roadkill.com/~davet/moto/air.filters.html

CompSyn

[Bearcat]

Yaay Amsoil air filters !



.

[Vexzer]

Problem with the "oil me" air filters for MAF EFI systems is oil residue transferring to the mass airflow sensor hotwire.

[karpetcm]

So which is the oil i would need meaning amsoil for my 01Z28 with 70,000 miles. Im looking for the best protection and wanting to put amsoil only. Do they also have a drop in filter for my Z28 ?

[Bearcat]

So which is the oil i would need meaning amsoil for my 01Z28 with 70,000 miles. Im looking for the best protection and wanting to put amsoil only. Do they also have a drop in filter for my Z28 ?

Yes Amsoil has a drop in filter for your Z28.
Product Code: EAA83-EA

http://www.amsoil.com/catalog.aspx?code=EAA83-EA



.

[CompSyn]

So which is the oil i would need meaning amsoil for my 01Z28 with 70,000 miles. Im looking for the best protection and wanting to put amsoil only. Do they also have a drop in filter for my Z28 ?

Here’s a tip that will save you some coin.

Sign up for the Amsoil Preferred Customer membership.

Doing so makes the price for the Amsoil drop in filter, Product Code: EAA83-EA, $36.15 rather than the retail price of $47.45.

Click HERE for information on the Amsoil Preferred Customer membership.

CompSyn

[CompSyn]

Most of the oil you buy off the shelf today only has about 850 ppm of zinc. Since I read about the cutbacks at the oil company a couple of years ago, I started sending the oil out for UOA's. Most came back with bad wear numbers for copper (170-180 ppm). These included both M1 and Valvoline. The latest test was on Quaker State Q 10-30. I was suprised the copper number was down to 79ppm. Still high, but better. I spoke with a rep at QS and was told they have a "secret" ingredient they won't reveal to the public. This time around I'm trying M1 5-40 diesel. The zinc and phos. numbers are supposed to be around 1400 ppm each.

Diesel boys often report elevated levels of copper in their UOAs. They generally link it to copper leaching out of the copper lines of motor oil coolers. Similar occurrences might happen in gasoline engines as well.

"Abnormal wear, which can indicate a problem, usually only involves elevated levels of one or two metals. Detection of elevated levels of a wear metal is best performed by comparing the levels in the used oil sample to the levels in previous oil samples from the same engine. Engine components containing copper and lead can become chemically active with a change in the additive chemicals in the oil that is often accompanied by switching to a different brand of oil. This often results in dramatically increased levels, often ten times, of copper or lead in used oil. Increased levels from this source is not reason for excessive concern. These components will become passive after a few oil changes with different oil. Wear metal levels will then slowly decline back into the normal range for the engine."

Cited HERE

This seems to support the thought of waiting for a second oil change interval, perhaps a third, to do a UOA when switching between oil brands. It just gives time for the theoretical pH balance inside the engine to balance out and give a more meaningful UOA report.

CompSyn

[Bearcat]

Here’s a tip that will save you some coin.

Sign up for the Amsoil Preferred Customer membership.

Doing so makes the price for the Amsoil drop in filter, Product Code: EAA83-EA, $36.15 rather than the retail price of $47.45.

Click HERE for information on the Amsoil Preferred Customer membership.

CompSyn

I have the EA filter on my Firebird already.

I wanted one for my 2004 Nissan 2.4 liter Frontier worktruck but I
didn't see an EA for it.

I did however see an EA filter for my 1992 Toyota Truck 2.4 liter.


.

.

[CompSyn]

I have the EA filter on my Firebird already.

I wanted one for my 2004 Nissan 2.4 liter Frontier worktruck but I
didn't see an EA for it.

I did however see an EA filter for my 1992 Toyota Truck 2.4 liter.

Yes, they don't have one for your Nissan yet. But stay tuned and keep checking in, they're coming out with new applications all the time.

[nhraformula]

Over the years there has been an overabundance of engine oil myths. Here are some facts you may want to pass along to customers to help debunk the fiction behind these myths.

The Pennsylvania Crude Myth -- This myth is based on a misapplication of truth. In 1859, the first commercially successful oil well was drilled in Titusville, Pennsylvania.
A myth got started before World War II claiming that the only good oils were those made from pure Pennsylvania crude oil. At the time, only minimal refining was used to make engine oil from crude oil. Under these refining conditions, Pennsylvania crude oil made better engine oil than Texas crude or California crude. Today, with modern refining methods, almost any crude can be made into good engine oil.

Other engine oil myths are based on the notion that the new and the unfamiliar are somehow "bad."

The Detergent Oil Myth -- The next myth to appear is that modern detergent engine oils are bad for older engines. This one got started after World War II, when the government no longer needed all of the available detergent oil for the war effort, and detergent oil hit the market as “heavy-duty” oil.

Many pre-war cars had been driven way past their normal life, their engines were full of sludge and deposits, and the piston rings were completely worn out. Massive piston deposits were the only thing standing between merely high oil consumption and horrendous oil consumption. After a thorough purge by the new detergent oil, increased oil consumption was a possible consequence.
If detergent oils had been available to the public during the war, preventing the massive deposit buildup from occurring in the first place, this myth never would have started. Amazingly, there are still a few people today, 60 years later, who believe that they need to use non-detergent oil in their older cars. Apparently, it takes many years for an oil myth to die.

The Synthetic Oil Myth -- Then there is the myth that new engine break-in will not occur with synthetic oils. This one was apparently started by an aircraft engine manufacturer who put out a bulletin that said so. The fact is that Mobil 1 synthetic oil has been the factory-fill for many thousands of engines. Clearly, they have broken in quite well, and that should put this one to rest.

The Starburst Oil Myth -- The latest myth promoted by the antique and collector car press says that new Starburst/ API SM engine oils (called Starburst for the shape of the symbol on the container) are bad for older engines because the amount of anti-wear additive in them has been reduced. The anti-wear additive being discussed is zinc dithiophosphate (ZDP).

Before debunking this myth, we need to look at the history of ZDP usage. For over 60 years, ZDP has been used as an additive in engine oils to provide wear protection and oxidation stability.

ZDP was first added to engine oil to control copper/lead bearing corrosion. Oils with a phosphorus level in the 0.03% range passed a corrosion test introduced in 1942.

In the mid-1950s, when the use of high-lift camshafts increased the potential for scuffing and wear, the phosphorus level contributed by ZDP was increased to the 0.08% range.

In addition, the industry developed a battery of oil tests (called sequences), two of which were valve-train scuffing and wear tests.

A higher level of ZDP was good for flat-tappet valve-train scuffing and wear, but it turned out that more was not better. Although break-in scuffing was reduced by using more phosphorus, longer-term wear increased when phosphorus rose above 0.14%. And, at about 0.20% phosphorus, the ZDP started attacking the grain boundaries in the iron, resulting in camshaft spalling.

By the 1970s, increased antioxidancy was needed to protect the oil in high-load engines, which otherwise could thicken to a point where the engine could no longer pump it. Because ZDP was an inexpensive and effective antioxidant, it was used to place the phosphorus level in the 0.10% range.

However, phosphorus is a poison for exhaust catalysts. So, ZDP levels have been reduced over the last 10-15 years. It's now down to a maximum of 0.08% for Starburst oils. This was supported by the introduction of modern ashless antioxidants that contain no phosphorus.

Enough history. Let's get back to the myth that Starburst oils are no good for older engines. The argument put forth is that while these oils work perfectly well in modern, gasoline engines equipped with roller camshafts, they will cause catastrophic wear in older engines equipped with flat-tappet camshafts.

The facts say otherwise.

Backward compatability was of great importance when the Starburst oil standards were developed by a group of experts from the OEMs, oil companies, and oil additive companies. In addition, multiple oil and additive companies ran no-harm tests on older engines with the new oils; and no problems were uncovered.

The new Starburst specification contains two valve-train wear tests. All Starburst oil formulations must pass these two tests.

- Sequence IVA tests for camshaft scuffing and wear using a single overhead camshaft engine with slider finger (not roller) followers.

- Sequence IIIG evaluates cam and lifter wear using a V6 engine with a flat-tappet system, similar to those used in the 1980s.

Those who hold onto the myth are ignoring the fact that the new Starburst oils contain about the same percentage of ZDP as the oils that solved the camshaft scuffing and wear issues back in the 1950s. (True, they do contain less ZDP than the oils that solved the oil thickening issues in the 1960s, but that's because they now contain high levels of ashless antioxidants not commercially available in the 1960s.)
Despite the pains taken in developing special flat-tappet camshaft wear tests that these new oils must pass and the fact that the ZDP level of these new oils is comparable to the level found necessary to protect flat-tappet camshafts in the past, there will still be those who want to believe the myth that new oils will wear out older engines.
Like other myths before it, history teaches us that it will probably take 60 or 70 years for this one to die also.

Special thanks to GM's Techlink
- Thanks to Bob Olree – GM Powertrain Fuels and Lubricants Group

Theres one more myth,
Thats the one where they claim that Synthetic oil will make an engine last longer.
Above statement from a number of companies can not be conclusively proven.

[CompSyn]

Theres one more myth,
Thats the one where they claim that Synthetic oil will make an engine last longer.
Above statement from a number of companies can not be conclusively proven.

409,000-Mile Oil Drain Interval Mack Engine Teardown

CompSyn

[nhraformula]

409,000-Mile Oil Drain Interval Mack Engine Teardown

CompSyn

considering conventional oil was not used to see how far it can go, the results are a little slanted