Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Moderators: User administrators, Moderators
- 937carrera
- Registered user
- Posts: 3599
- Joined: 05 Apr 2015, 19:29
- 80-90 Mem No: 16333
- Location: N Yorks.
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Why would you need to flush the engine when you just cleaned and rebuilt it ?
Save your money and do what you have already wisely decided to do - an early oil change.
Save your money and do what you have already wisely decided to do - an early oil change.
1981 RHD 2.0 Aircooled Leisuredrive project, CU engine
1990 RHD 1.9 Auto Sleeper with DF/DG engine
1990 RHD 1.9 Auto Sleeper with DF/DG engine
- Ciaraneng
- Registered user
- Posts: 303
- Joined: 26 Aug 2018, 09:04
- 80-90 Mem No: 16696
- Location: Clonakilty, Co. Cork, Ireland
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Thanks guys. A guy in a motorfactors told me I should use some after running it in but I thought it sounded odd. Paul, I have bought some Millers 20W50 which contains high levels of ZDDP. I’ll see how the pressure goes when I change it...
1983 High Top 1.9 Petrol Early DG Engine
- itchyfeet
- Registered user
- Posts: 12427
- Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
- 80-90 Mem No: 12733
- Location: South Hampshire
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
I'm putting together a thread on ZDDP watch this space.
- itchyfeet
- Registered user
- Posts: 12427
- Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
- 80-90 Mem No: 12733
- Location: South Hampshire
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
itchyfeet wrote:I'm putting together a thread on ZDDP watch this space.
http://forum.club8090.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=168938" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- Ciaraneng
- Registered user
- Posts: 303
- Joined: 26 Aug 2018, 09:04
- 80-90 Mem No: 16696
- Location: Clonakilty, Co. Cork, Ireland
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Thanks Paul. Well done. Very comprehensive as always!
The Millers oil I purchased has a stated ZDDP level of 1130ppm so I'm just shy of the 1200-1300 range recommended by Marco. I may add a drop of CamShield to make up the difference.
The Millers oil I purchased has a stated ZDDP level of 1130ppm so I'm just shy of the 1200-1300 range recommended by Marco. I may add a drop of CamShield to make up the difference.
1983 High Top 1.9 Petrol Early DG Engine
- Ciaraneng
- Registered user
- Posts: 303
- Joined: 26 Aug 2018, 09:04
- 80-90 Mem No: 16696
- Location: Clonakilty, Co. Cork, Ireland
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
This oil has a stated ZDDP level of 1300 ppm but I can't comment on its quality as I have never heard of it.
1983 High Top 1.9 Petrol Early DG Engine
- 937carrera
- Registered user
- Posts: 3599
- Joined: 05 Apr 2015, 19:29
- 80-90 Mem No: 16333
- Location: N Yorks.
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Fuzz Townsend is a musician and the spanner man on Car SOS
1981 RHD 2.0 Aircooled Leisuredrive project, CU engine
1990 RHD 1.9 Auto Sleeper with DF/DG engine
1990 RHD 1.9 Auto Sleeper with DF/DG engine
- itchyfeet
- Registered user
- Posts: 12427
- Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
- 80-90 Mem No: 12733
- Location: South Hampshire
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Ciaraneng wrote:This oil has a stated ZDDP level of 1300 ppm but I can't comment on its quality as I have never heard of it.
Camshield website wrote: Approximately 2500 ppm Zinc for new cam/lifter break-in (add ½ ounce Cam-shield to each quart of engine oil, supplementing the cam lobe molybdenum break-in paste)
- Ciaraneng
- Registered user
- Posts: 303
- Joined: 26 Aug 2018, 09:04
- 80-90 Mem No: 16696
- Location: Clonakilty, Co. Cork, Ireland
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Thanks Paul. I used one full 3 Oz bottle of CamShield for the break-in 500 miles. So the ZDDP level should have been in the recommended range for a new cam.
I'll get a second bottle for this and subsequent oil changes to top up the level in the Millers Oil I will be using.
I'll get a second bottle for this and subsequent oil changes to top up the level in the Millers Oil I will be using.
1983 High Top 1.9 Petrol Early DG Engine
- itchyfeet
- Registered user
- Posts: 12427
- Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
- 80-90 Mem No: 12733
- Location: South Hampshire
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Ciaraneng wrote:Thanks Paul. I used one full 3 Oz bottle of CamShield for the break-in 500 miles. So the ZDDP level should have been in the recommended range for a new cam.
I'll get a second bottle for this and subsequent oil changes to top up the level in the Millers Oil I will be using.
Ah yes silly me I was forgetting this was the second oil change...as you were
- Ciaraneng
- Registered user
- Posts: 303
- Joined: 26 Aug 2018, 09:04
- 80-90 Mem No: 16696
- Location: Clonakilty, Co. Cork, Ireland
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Pretty happy with the Millers 20W50. It seems to perform well at high temperature. I am getting about 2.4 Bar at 80 Deg, 2000 rpm. That's up about 0.4Bar on the Halfords 20W50 Classic oil I used for the break-in.
1983 High Top 1.9 Petrol Early DG Engine
- itchyfeet
- Registered user
- Posts: 12427
- Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
- 80-90 Mem No: 12733
- Location: South Hampshire
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Ciaraneng wrote:Pretty happy with the Millers 20W50. It seems to perform well at high temperature. I am getting about 2.4 Bar at 80 Deg, 2000 rpm. That's up about 0.4Bar on the Halfords 20W50 Classic oil I used for the break-in.
I have found pressure quite hard to measure, I get different results depending upon my method and I'm not sure why.
A) Start and idle until to 80C raise to 2000rpm and take a reading.( Highest reading)
B) Start and idle until to 80C raise well above 2000rpm allow to fall to 2000rpm and take a reading.
C) After a run or after temperature has been allowed to go higher than 80C, with engine off measure temperture until it falls to 80C , start and measure.
B and C are lower than A
my theories:
1) the oil has a shift change in viscosity either by temperature or under increased pressure which has a hysteresis and so it's not consistent with different methods.
2) the measured oil in the sump is not linear to the oil temp in the gallery under the different conditions, i.e B and C have higher temps in the gallery which is where pressure is measured.
I'm not sure it matters but the method you use to test should be consistent and If you want to make yourself feel better yo can choose the best method.
- 937carrera
- Registered user
- Posts: 3599
- Joined: 05 Apr 2015, 19:29
- 80-90 Mem No: 16333
- Location: N Yorks.
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
I'm glad you are happy with the Millers product Ciaraneng, you know I rate their stuff. Morris Lubricants, another UK company do decent products too
That's what I would go for. I think of the oil in the sump as a heat sink or buffer. The oil going along the journals is at very much higher temperature that the sump oil due to pressure, if you have just revved the engine then you have just put more heat energy in the crank (more work for the same period of time), which will then be conducted to (removed by) the oil.
Option B is of course the mode in which the buzzer of doom goes off
I haven't figured out why A and C get different results
itchyfeet wrote: the measured oil in the sump is not linear to the oil temp in the gallery under the different conditions, i.e B and C have higher temps in the gallery which is where pressure is measured.
That's what I would go for. I think of the oil in the sump as a heat sink or buffer. The oil going along the journals is at very much higher temperature that the sump oil due to pressure, if you have just revved the engine then you have just put more heat energy in the crank (more work for the same period of time), which will then be conducted to (removed by) the oil.
Option B is of course the mode in which the buzzer of doom goes off
I haven't figured out why A and C get different results
1981 RHD 2.0 Aircooled Leisuredrive project, CU engine
1990 RHD 1.9 Auto Sleeper with DF/DG engine
1990 RHD 1.9 Auto Sleeper with DF/DG engine
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Right chaps,
Hopefully you won't mind me tagging on to this post.
I have a very similar set up as to the start of this post.
Originally a df engine. But at somepoint swapped for dg block and heads
However
Still running on df inlet manifold with solex pict 34 carb.
Further to some rotten coolant pipe issues (resolved)
Just had pre mot check and only an advisory to sort.
So now looking at the carb and inlet manifold and thinking....I bet that would work better with a dg manifold and a new carb ....or TWO carbs!
Absolute novice with carbs and dizzys but I should be able to at least fit it, and recruit a local legend to assist with any running issues.
Now a twin carb set up sounds like utopia. But rather expensive.....
But this post reports good gains from a dg IM and Carb.
So any further update, recommendations. Will attempt to post pics of engine bay.
Hopefully you won't mind me tagging on to this post.
I have a very similar set up as to the start of this post.
Originally a df engine. But at somepoint swapped for dg block and heads
However
Still running on df inlet manifold with solex pict 34 carb.
Further to some rotten coolant pipe issues (resolved)
Just had pre mot check and only an advisory to sort.
So now looking at the carb and inlet manifold and thinking....I bet that would work better with a dg manifold and a new carb ....or TWO carbs!
Absolute novice with carbs and dizzys but I should be able to at least fit it, and recruit a local legend to assist with any running issues.
Now a twin carb set up sounds like utopia. But rather expensive.....
But this post reports good gains from a dg IM and Carb.
So any further update, recommendations. Will attempt to post pics of engine bay.
Re: Rebuild Thread (Probably)
Boneyt25 wrote: ↑11 Apr 2023, 22:13 Right chaps,
Hopefully you won't mind me tagging on to this post.
I have a very similar set up as to the start of this post.
Originally a df engine. But at somepoint swapped for dg block and heads
However
Still running on df inlet manifold with solex pict 34 carb.
Further to some rotten coolant pipe issues (resolved)
Just had pre mot check and only an advisory to sort.
So now looking at the carb and inlet manifold and thinking....I bet that would work better with a dg manifold and a new carb ....or TWO carbs!
Absolute novice with carbs and dizzys but I should be able to at least fit it, and recruit a local legend to assist with any running issues.
Now a twin carb set up sounds like utopia. But rather expensive.....
But this post reports good gains from a dg IM and Carb.
So any further update, recommendations. Will attempt to post pics of engine bay.
I did this myself shortly after buying the van.
It's doable.
You need to consider coolant changes ( Solex doesn't use coolant to alter choke ) so that's a few new hoses, and thermostat housing.
Need throttle cable.
Inlet manifold, carb, and DG single vac dissy etc.
Here's the thread I recorded the journey:
viewtopic.php?t=147477
Oh.... Lastly, that all might change if you have early cooling system!!
'89 1.9 DG
“It's Easier to Fool People Than It Is to Convince Them That They Have Been Fooled.” ~ Mark Twain.
“It's Easier to Fool People Than It Is to Convince Them That They Have Been Fooled.” ~ Mark Twain.