<VV> Wrong oil in rebuilt 110

[BobHelt at aol.com]

In a message dated 9/25/2007 12:47:16 PM US Mountain Standard Time,  
tonyu at roava.net writes:

Rotella  has  been reformulated and the additives (zinc, phosphor etc) 
needed  to keep lifters from scuffing cam lobes have been 
reduced.    It's now rated SM...  still OK if you spike it with some 
of the  additives available for protecting hard-contact points like 
flat tappet  cam lobes.    But running it straight will now work no 
better  than any other SM rated oil.



I apologize if this seems to come off wrong, but there seems to be a lot of  
confusion and misinformation concerning recent oil specifications.
 
For example, SM rated oil is NOT just ONE phosphorous (ZDDP) spec but it  has 
variable max  limits. These limits depend on several things. For  example if 
the SM is also rated as "energy conserving" as identified by the  Starburst on 
the front of the container, then the limit  of Phos is 0.08%.  But if those 
words are missing and there is no Starburst, (this depends on the  viscosity 
rating) then there is NO MAX amount of Phos spec'd. That means if  there is also 
an SL or even an SJ  shown with the SM (but no Starburst) ,  then the SM oil 
can have elevated amounts of Phos as might be in racing oils.  The Phos limit 
for SL is 0.10% and for SJ is 0.12%. But plain old SM without the  starburst 
could have any max amount of Phos (NO LIMIT!!!) per the SM  spec. 
 
But these are only the API specifications that the oil must meet (to  retain 
the API's authorization). There is no way to identify the actual content  
without constant and expensive lab testing.
 
Also BTW, the amount of zinc in any oil is NOT specified and is only  there 
as a result of the Phos being added via the ZDDP.
 
Regards,
Bob Helt 



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com