Answer to the Rotella Triple Protection issue???

A lot of people swear by 15w 40 Rotella oil for our old tractors, but when the Triple Protection formula came out and the Zinc went away, I heard a lot of concerns voiced on this forum about the lack of protection for flat tappet engines. I ran across a product in Advance Auto Parts today that would seem to be the answer. I would like your thoughts on it. It is called Engine Break-In Oil Additive - TB Zinc Plus and it is made by Lucas Oil.
Engine Break In Oil Additive TB Zinc Plus

I am not convinced about the tale of taking the zinc out making the oil not as good. Talk gets spread and catches on like wildfire. Same as when lead was tken out of gas. JMHO

Hi mrf1002u: I would like to know also since I have been using Rotella in all my older engines. This topic is a bit hard to get clear answers. Some don't even know why zinc was added decades ago. There are a few forums on various oil products so I guess it's time to check them out. If you read any thing worthwhile mrf1002u, put a link here, if you would. Thanks. ag

The zinc-phosphorus content (ZDDP) was not removed from USA and Canadian versions of Rotella T with the Starburth logo. It was just lowered from 1% to .08%.

Truth is this. The ZDDP package was used in most oils for 60 years. It was first used to prevent bearing corrosion. In the mid 1950s, more was added to protect high-lift camshafts in overhead valve engines. Raised to .08% content. It was also found that if too much was added, MORE wear occurred (over .14%). Shell Rotella used .1% up to 2009. Then dropped to .08% for USA and Canada. Some versions in Europe are still at 1%.

Engines without roller cams were tested at this level and passed all the wear 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.

Hi jdemaris: Thanks for posting. I've been lax in keeping up with ZDDP changes but now that Winter off season is almost here, I will catch up. The last Rotella motor oil I bought said: Triple Protection" which was a logo change on the container from what I had been buying... Even if Rotella was lowered 0.02% to 0.08, I still would like a backup source in the form of an additive I could quickly add. The big job in catching up is sorting out the B.S. to get at a reasonable answer. One of the websites I tend to check out has a low teck name: "Bob is the Oil man" dotcom. The other forums I have yet to read are the ones dealing with the classic muscle cars engines of my youth. From 1955 to about 1972. Anyone serious about their Corvettes from 327 fuel injected engines to the rare 396 and more common 427 6,400 RPM factory redline engines.. I will read a lot closer. They have a lot to loose with poor oil in those engines. I had, one at a time, 1-396 & 3-427's of those engines. All had factory 6,400 RPM Redline.( and they would go higher very quick) Wish I was young again. Shell best grade oil gave me the best results back then. Good high test gas was hard to find. (I think some stations cut their high test with regular to make more $$.)
Interesting topic. Many opinions. Thanks. Ag.

The oil specs are hard to keep up with. I get tired of all the basically, unannoucnced changes. But not much different with other things . . . like all the things Windows 7 won't do, as compared to XP.

In regard to 396s - I never considered them rare. Back in the 60s, 396s were all over the place. Chevelles, Camaros, Novas, even family Impala station-wagons. I had several 66 Chevelle SS's with 396s. I always wanted a 1965 Chevelle Z-16, but they're rare and very expensive. I can't imagine any stock 396s lasting very long if shifted at 6400 RPM. They were pretty much all done at 5000 RPM, unless modified. And, with all the torque they had, the RPMs weren't much of an isuse. Now, a 350 horse 327 SB was a high-revving screamer. From what I saw when they were current, the fastest 396 that was ever sold -stock - was in the 1966 Chevelle SS. I broke the frame on mine several times from power-shifting. Maybe the ladder-bars were part of that problem.
Around 1970, when GM changed the 396 slightly to the 402, it became a real dog. I had several. The 396 Camaros were also kind of doggy, when compared to the Chevelles.

Back in the late 60s, I had a 65 GTO I had just done a lot of work to. 389 Tri-power with headers, Muncie M21 four-speed, Isky cam, 4.33 Olds posi-rear, ladder-bars, etc. A friend of mine bought a family-owned Impala with a stock 396 and T400 auto-trans. Keep in mind this was a low-performance family car - NOT an SS. We ran a few street races as a joke -and he beat my GTO several times. That was kind of depressing.

As to Chevy and stock engines that revved (back in the day). When my best friend came home from Viet Nam, I went with him to the Chevy dealership to pick up his new Z28 Camaro with the 302 small-block. High-strung . . . yes. But that thing easily revved up past 6000 RPM and was unbelievable for a SB engine. But, I think they only made it for a year or two, and then used a 350 instead.

Hi jdemaris: I was refering to 396 in Corvettes... I am not sure but my old memory seems to recall only 1,500 Made for Corvettes. The factory built these with the following: Factory exaust headers, largest 4 barrel carb made, solid state ignition, higher compression pistons. (Close to 9:1 but don't quote me. had hard time finding high test gas) A different cam, solid lifters and I think extra springs added. Years later I've read where these engines were under rated at 425 hp. If I can locate a good reference book about the history of those 396s sold late in 1965 Corvettes, I'll post or email you. This Vet was rated for zero to 60 at 5 sec. I could get rubber going into 4th. 1st gear was all smoke from both tires to 45.. It's better to find a good reference book on Corvettes that tells the details of the 396 put into the late '65 Corvette. I bought it because it was a Corvette. I did not know it was a real HO engine. Your history with similar high performance engines sounds interesting too. We will have to swap pictures sometime. Take care. I had a 1958 Bonneville with factory 3 duces a few years before.. Take care.. ag.

Nobody in my group had the money for big-block Vettes, and can't say I ever saw one with a 396. I had a 54 with a 6 cylinder (Blue Flame Six). Sold it for $500. Kind of wish now I'd kept it.

I heard the same story about Chevy under-rating the early 396s. They were certainly higher then 9 to 1 compresion-ration, though. First ones had 11 to 1, along with solid-lifter cams (rated 425 horse). The next step down had 10.25 to 1 CR and hydraulic lifters. The mildest 396 (that had 9 to 1 CR) was rated 265 horsepower with a 2 barrel carb. Those were the ones found in family sedans and wagons.

Talk about Z16s. At my sister's wedding (Oct 1965), her husband's best man had a new Z16 Chevelle, they took it to get to their hidden car. Needless to say, very fast. By the time, I knew enough to want one, could not afford them. I think there were 199 coupes and 1 ragtop made. Most 396s in the family Impala were the 325 HP version.

Seemed to me that everytime the old question about what oil is best for the old 2cyl"s comes up on this forum, someone will usually reply that they have always used the Rotella and then shortly after that, someone will also mention that the formula changed when the new "Triple Protection" bottle came out and that there were good things missing now. I won"t pretend to know whether the formula changed or not, but since that seemed to be the consensus at the time and the contributors seemed to be "in the know", I assumed they were correct. That was the reason for the original post. This product specifically states that: "Lucas Engine Break-In Oil Additive TB Zinc-Plus protects camshaft lifters and valve train during break-in period of motors. It is excellent for flat
tappet camshafts during break-in or as an additive to any motor oil to prevent premature wear." It furthermore states: "Add one bottle with every oil change to increase the zinc content of your motor oil." This suggested to me that it was not designed to be exclusively for engine break in, but was also acceptable for everyday use. It does state that it is for racing engines, not passenger cars, but I believe this is to satisfy the EPA and I remember reading a suggestion that Zinc can cause catalytic convertor issues. Lucas seems to be a trusted brand by many, so I would assume it would be safe to use as advertised. The directions call for 1 bottle in every oil change. In a car this would be 4.5 to 5 quarts. Our tractors use 7.5 to 8 quarts so it would be further dilluted. So if in fact the zinc was only REDUCED when the TP formula was adopted, then this may be a way to regain that reduction in zinc, taking into account the larger volume of oil in a tractor. Just for discussions sake, the Technical Data Sheet states that: "Addition of 16 oz. to 4.5 quarts motor oil will achieve approximately 5,000 ppm of Zinc." Someone stated that more may be too much in this case, but I am curious if the research they quoted had an acceptable PPM number listed? That could make or break this "argument. I found another forum that suggested you "shoot for 1600 to 1700 PPM but that 2000 PPM might be overdoing it." If you follow this scool of thought, then maybe adding half of a bottle might be good for peace of mind. 8 ounces added to 7.5 or 8 quarts of Rotella should yield a PPM of about 1250. Not a bad option since this stuff isn"t cheap. My Advance Auto Parts was getting about $14 for a 16 oz. bottle. Here again, I am just trying to get feedback from others. As many times as the old oil question and concern has come up; I would have expected more replys that were "on topic". I bet old PatB would have had 2 cents to toss on the table! RIP Pat.