67King

Been an interesting weekend, since you brought this up. We were at Indy, talking to several Grand Am teams, both on a "sales" call, as well as to learn more. Interesting because there was a mix of what is used there. The Rolex cars all use dogbox style transmissions, most from X-Trac, some from Emco. But hte Continental cars use factory style ones. There was a mix of what people use.

Anyway, we just got off the phone with a VERY well known transmission builder, not sure if I can use the name (will try to verify). A guy Karl uses, and a guy that some of the Grand Am teams suggested we talk to. That may become a moot point, because he is familiar with Millers, and may be intersted in becoming one of our dealers. Here's what he said:
- For a street car, you need the LS modifier, regardless.
- For a race car, he recommends AGAINST using it - just as you suggest, Scott. But as I'd said in a subsequent post to this, the issue is synchros. On a street car, it doesn't get hot enough to matter. But when you put enough heat into it, the synchros have a harder time grabbing with LS modifier, so he believes you'll be better off without the LS.
- As mentioned by an early post here, the 997 Cup transmissions (steel synchros) are especailly prone to issues. He indicated that they should still go withOUT the LS, but a lot more precaution needs to be taken until some heat is put into the gearbox.
- New Boxsters have some kind of carbon coating (I wasn't on the call, unfortunately, so I don't know the details) on the synchros, but they have a unique additive for LS applications that is slightly different. But again, this trans builder feels that for the track, the safest bet is to go withOUT the LS modifier.

One more caveat to this. Aftermarket diffs may behave differently. Some steel plate ones may not release well without the LD modifier. So in those cases, input from said diff manufacturer should be sought.

So Reader's Digest version is that per a well known and respected trans builder, going withOUT the LS modifier is probably a safer bet for race applications. This goes against what the oil manufacturer suggests - but as I indicated earlier, I would defer to the component builder's specifications. I would be inclined to say that dual purpose DE cars would probably go with the LS modifier. But that is my opinion based on how I see guys at DE driving their cars compared to full on race cars.

67King

Clark, thank you for the kind words. And you and Linda were indeed one of the first, possibly THE first, to sign-on. Can't tell you how happy we are to have some dealers on board carrying the Millers for us.

67King

Quick follow-up. We have now had several discussions with trans builders and aftermarket suppliers of (clutch type) differentials, and a meeting with the technical guys at Millers. The diff manufacturers were Guards and OS Geiken, which cover the range of few disks to many disks.

For a non-track car, the consensus is pretty unanimous - use the LS modfier. For a fully dedicated race car, the answer is not black-and-white. GENERALLY, the oil gets hot enough that LS modifier is not needed, and as a general rule, the diff manufacturers do not recommend LS modifier. The in between cars are much more grey. That would include cars with a stout trans oil cooler, and cars that are "dual purpose," or specifically, street cars that guys DE.

The failure mode for transaxles is as follows - the synchros can get too slick, and rather than sticking to the dogs and allowing the sleeve to slide over, they will continue to spin. On the other hand, the disks in the diff can stick when the car wants to have them slip, which will burn them up. Now, to clarify, this is NOT specific to Millers because of the NT. This is generally speaking.

RACE CARS Now, given more background info, how do Karl and I approach this on our cars? We are changing, and we'll be putting in the non-LS oil. First and foremost, if either the synchros or the disks in the diff fail during the race, the results will be different. If your synchros fail, you can't shift, and your race is pretty much done. If the disks fail, you lose your positive traction, but can finish the race. Also, if you are driving and notice the diff not releasing, you can add an LS modifier, or drain a liter and replace with a liter containing the LS modifier. If you still have problems, you can increase the blend. Again, if you've got a robust trans oil cooler, your temperatures may fall to the point where you will need to run an LS additive. We'd still recommend starting without it, and adding if it becomes necessary. But be aware that the cooler will change things.

STREET DRIVEN CARS Generally, there are two things that you need to consider. First, you will not be driving nearly as hard on the street, no matter how aggressive you are. You will not be able to get your temps up to the same levels. Second, you will be making more sharp turns, which will increase the importance of having the diff release quickly and easily. Therefore, street driven cars (with clutch type diff) should use the LS oil.

DE CARS This is really grey. If you have a fully dedicated track car that you trailer to the track, and drive as hard as the guys who race, I'd follow the same advice given to the race car guys. If, however, you either don't drive that hard, or drive your car to the track, you may want to follow the street car recommendation. I will say that my experience on the track at DE's is that warmed over cars aren't driven as hard as dedicated cars. You will know yourself, and I don't think that guys like the one portrayed in the "That's how I drive - flat out" skit are that common.

Based on all of the above info, we are in the process of changing our website. Unfortunately, that is done by an external guy and it isn't always updated as quickly as we'd like. And of course, if anyone has any specific questions, I would be more than happy to answer them.

Also, a quick reminder that while we sell directly, we would really like to see folks support our dealers:
Apex Performance (866)505-2739
Essex Parts (704)824-6030
LN Engineering (815)472-2939
Paragon Products (800)200-9366
Racer's Edge (865)862-5262
And now in Canada, Gabriel Maintenance Ltd. (905)688-3068

Duke

67King, I just read this article which might be of interest:
http://www.motoiq.com/magazine_artic...-a-bottle.aspx

Would you assume that the Miller Nano tech engine oils would produce similar results?

67King

Interesting. Not knowing anything about this stuff, I do see one difference. The nanotechnology they use they claim is ceramic. Millers is not. The smooth idle and turbo noise I would, to be frank, have to dismiss as placebo affect. Granted, I was not an NVH (noise, vibration, harshness) guy when I did engine development for an OEM, but the vibration would typically be either due to inertia or in non-OEM situations, air/fuel variations. The turbo noises are all airflow. If it gets quieter, it means you aren't moving as much air!

The NT in the oil works by attacking boundary condition friction. When oil is moving and flowing, and there is a film on the parts, you have viscous friction. Viscous friction isn't affected by additives, it really boils down to the viscosity of the oil. The boundary condition friction is when a part is in transition between film development and dry. In an engine, that occurs in the cylinders at TDC and BDC when the pistons change direction.

Having said that, we are seeing that Millers is doing better on an ASTM-4172 4 ball scar test, which is a function of load bearing capability. We are trying to get some data together to compare the Millers at lower viscosity to competition at higher viscosity. So far, we have shown that the Millers 5W40 is performing better than two competitors 50 weights.

But do we see power gains with the NT? Yeah, some pretty significant. Here are some curves from various sources. Again note that there are two components of friction - boundary and viscous. And not all 50 weight oils have the same viscosity (many don't even meet the conditions!!!). So that may be affecting the results a bit, and may explain why the gains are mid range, but not top end. http://performanceracingoils.com/dyn...ing-ezp-9.html

Luxter

I’ve been actually reading quite a bit about the nano oil technology lately and I am pleased that I just found this thread.
First, thank you 67King for sharing very valuable information. Much appreciated.
Would you recommend Millers NT technology fluids, both gear and engine lube, for daily driven 997 as an alternative to Joe Gibbs DT40 and/or Motul 300V or similar advanced lubricants?
And if so, which viscosities would be most suited for engine and transmission?
Please disregard price difference in your recommendation, let’s assume that all compared fluids cost about the same and require drain intervals at 5,000 miles.
My gear box (Aisin) is not equipped with LSD and I don’t track my car.
Many thanks in advance,
=L=

67King

I run the NT stuff in my 968, we've supplied it for a few odd cars that come through a shop a friend of ours owns, an E60 M5 (I think it was either a 2009 or 2010), etc. There is a caveat, though, related to ZDDP. The reason its use has been drastically curtailed is that it may cause long term damage to the catalytic converters. Having said that, the API certifications for reduced ZDDP (spec is actually for phosphorus) do not apply to 5W40 and higher viscosity oils. Additionally, most of the oil manufacturers, including Millers, still recommend the higher ZDDP racing oils for use in newer cars, as the effect is A) very long term and B) pretty negligible.

That said, the NT oils compare more to the XP line of Joe Gibbs oils. They are both racing oils, and priced accordingly. There are other lines of Millers Oils which compare more favorably to the DT line of Joe Gibbs oils. But, when compared to the XP line of Joe Gibbs stuff, the NT compares quite favorably. XP has a very minimal additive pack, and as a result, becomes acidic quite quickly and easily. This means it must be changed very frequently, as in every event type of frequently. The Millers NT is designed to be robust for a very long time. For example, and I hope to "publish" this as soon as Millers is done putting the finishing touches on it, Karl now has 6 events on his 996 with the same Millers Oil. Testing has been done on 5 of those events, with a total of 15 track hours. The oil has been holding up very, very well. TBN is still above 10. So again, this is a VERY robust oil.

Again, this is against the XP line. We haven't looked at the DT line, as our focus right now is the Motorsports market.

Motul 300V is a very good oil. Both Karl and I used to run it before we got into this business. It, like Millers, is designed with a robust additive pack to allow use at multiple events. It doesn't quite have as good a film thickness, or as low a coefficient of friction as does Millers, but it is much better than most of the other products out there. And of course, it lacks the NT, which is what makes the Millers so good at A) offering superior protection and B) freeing up a little bit of extra power.

We are looking at doing some lab level testing with different viscosities to determine if one can run a lower viscosity Millers due to the superior oil film and protection from the NT. But at present, we recommend following your existing strategy for viscosity. I would assume that 5W40 would be the viscosity for you, unless being in Canada would put you into a 0W30.

On the gear oil, the CRX 75W90 NT would be the way to go.

And if you are looking at picking up some, good news is that we've got a dealer in Canada, now, which would save you a substantial amount of shipping/duties/etc. Max is a fellow racer, as well.
http://performanceracingoils.com/aut...e50319ed69d414
Gabriel Maintenance Ltd.
Contact: Max Schoemer
112 Ormond Street
S. Thorold, Ont L2V 3Y7
e-mail : max.s@bellnet.ca
Phone # 905-688-3068

Luxter

Thank you 67King again for your time and effort.
Would you be able to answer the following questions:
What are target Zn and P levels for the CFS 5W-40 NT lubricant?
What is the starting TBN for the same oil?
Would you be able to post an UOA from any of the NT oils, preferably from your 968 if possible?


And last but not least, Millers recommends the CFS 10W-50 NT where 10W-40 is normally specified and CFS 5W-40 NT where 5W-30 is normally specified. It seems like Millers recommends one grade heavier oil than the manufacturer’s specifications. Would you be able to comment or expand on this subject as well?

Thank you for the Canadian contact, I already took steps to get in touch with Max.
Kind regards,
=L=

67King

ZDDP is 1250ppm, minimum. I'll do some digging and see how that breaks down into Zn and P.

The reaons Millers will recommend one grade heavier gets back to it being a motorsports application. If you read through all of the sheets, you'll see that they recommend 0W20 and 0W30 for qualifying, as well. So it is really more about the environment. Two reasons they'd recommend a notch higher - first is more fuel dilution from being WOT most of the time, and second is higher operating temperatures (so the cSt readings for a 10W50 in a road racing environment may be the same as a 5W40 in a street environment). Having said that, most of our 911 customers are using 5W40, including Karl's World Challenge 996.

I was careful to state that we recommend following your existing strategy for viscosity. While we believe that the NT will provide a level of protection that would correspond to a typical heavier weight oil, that is at this point speculation. And as Millers takes a conservative approach, favoring durability, testing to compare viscosities has not been a priority up to this point in time. But again, we do not recommend any deviation to what you do now for viscosity. I mentioned the 5W40 to you based on the assumption you were following Porshce's recommendation since this is a street car for you.

I'm waiting on approval for the oil test study that has been done, and I will post that up.

spare tire

I always thought that oils thin with heat and that is the reason for low oil pressure and engine damage with hot oil temps. Your second chart shows film thickness increasing up to 300 degrees F. Is there a laymans answer to this?

67King

Two things. Additives that make it multigrade are temperature triggered polymers, and they start "working" at elevated temperatures. If you read technical interpretations, you won't hear folks saying that oils "thin" at high temperatures, as they'll look from the operating temperature, and tell you that they keep from getting thicker as they cool down so they can flow at low temperatures. You can see in some of the oils that it starts out high, dips down, then builds back up.

There is also the factor here that this is largely measuring boundary lubrication, rather than hydrodynamic. So viscous friction, which is impacted by hydrodynamic, isn't really measured. A four ball rotating rig will be a better test for the impact of viscosity.

I will check again with Millers and make sure I am not missing something. I'm doing my best to educate myself, but as a distributor, I don't quite have as much visibility as the manufacturer to all of the testing.

Luxter

Thank you 67King, Very informative.
Looking forward to see the oil test study.
=L=

Duke

A general note about oils and weights. Something I lack from every oil manufacturer/supplier is a simple chart with oil temp and oil weight recommendations.
The general recommendation is to go with heavier oil for racing, but at the same time that will increase the oil temp a bit.
Plus when you're building a race engine all bets are off. I mean, with dry sump, a large volume of oil and a huge oil cooler you might very well never go beyond ~105 C / 221 F and in that scenario maybe a 5w/40 oil is a better choice than a 10w/60.

The "go with as heavy as you can" might be applicable when racing a stockish engine without upgraded coolers, but what would your recommendation be for the scenario above 67King?

67King

I would defer to the engine builder, to be honest. You have to remember that oil companies don't dictate specifications, they design to meet them. I understand what you are saying, but in reality, the right viscosity at any given temperature will be very different from engine to engine.

Having said that, even in the scenario you mentioned, it will depend on the application. If you are running a 24 hour enduro, I'd go with a 10W60, because over time, you will have fuel dilution, which will thin the oil. If you are doing DE's wiht 20 minute sessoins, you may go with 5W40. As mentioned earlier, if you are running professionally, and have a qualifying run to make, perhaps you run 0W20, then change to 5W40 for the race.

One rule of thumb some people follow is to run the thinnest oil you can run while still maintaining minimum specified oil pressure throughout the RPM range. And as an engine has more time on it, it may be necessary to increase the viscosity.

For the majority of people here, I'd say that older cars will run 10W50, and newer ones will run 5W40. If forced to dilleniate between old and new, I'd say OBDII (i.e. starting with 986 and 996).

Luxter

Hi 67king,
Any progress with test study that you mentioned?
Very curious about these oils.
Cheers,
Luke