Anyone else see the article “Protecting our Classic Engines,” in the Jaguar Journal.
It reads like an advertisement meant to look like a legit article. Oil additives have always been snake oil to me, but is this one credible?
JJ published it because of the engineering pedigree of the author. His article is his own view and JJ does not endorse or detract from what he wrote. Caveat emptor. The product is not advertised in JJ so there is no finacial issue either way.
Peter Crespin
Editor, Jaguar Journal.
OA scholastic essay on the mysteries of ZDDP: I maintain—based on a fair few miles of using modern “low” concentrations of ZDDP oil, but in only a few engine types—that given the relatively frequent changes of oil our toys get, and relatively low valve spring pressures the XK has, it (the whole nattering of how modern oils will KILL our engines!!) is yet another example of overthought.
Have you read the article?
I just read it. He does claim that his product addresses the wear problem, but the main problem solved is one that I didn’t even know exists. I wonder if he has an affiliation?
I’ve read it as well. In many places it reads more like a press release by the manufacturer. That’s not a complaint, just an observation on my part.
The product receives a lot of positive comments on the aviation web sites and is FAA approved, but that approval simply stated the FAA saw no harm in it’s usage. Continental, a manufacturer of light aircraft engines started studying the product in 2014 but I haven’t found their conclusions in the internet.
Personally I’m wary of oil additives. I also wondered about a possible affiliation.
1 Like
oil additives…beneficial or snake oil…a topic endlessly discussed here and on other auto forums: science does improve products over time, but sometimes the science is later found to be wrong. Commercial motor oils of today have lots of additives already in the formulations, and there is a variety of formulations for sale, and are much different than motor oils of long ago, just as is your telephone, microwave, TV, a new car. So we might say, well the oil companies with all their research and engineering have already put in the additives we need: but for what car, what engine, what type of iron, alloy, steel, and pressures? Now we come to flat tappet cams…Are the formulations of oils commonly found today suitable for a cam/tappet configuration used in the 1950s, and now seldom found in modern engines. Lots of research can be found on the web…some correct, some not. But to simply say " I won’t use additives" does not take into account the questions/conditions cited. I have formed my opinion by reading a lot: anyone is free to do the same. Nick
"I’ve read it as well. In many places it reads more like a press release by the manufacturer. "
From memory, he explicitly states that what follows come from the inventor, That tells you to watch out for hypet.
The product receives a lot of positive comments on the aviation web sites and is FAA approved, but that approval simply stated the FAA saw no harm in it’s usage.
I took FAA to be an unbiased evaluation. I didn’t realize a mere lack of damage could achieve certification.
Personally I’m wary of oil additives. I also wondered about a possible affiliation.
I agree on additives.
The product isn’t advertised in JJ and as I’m no Tribologist I didn’t feel able to actxas judge, jury & executioner. Hence I decided to let readers react and comment after reading the piece. Thanks for reader comments…
Pete
No, apparently the FAA asks for test data and then makes a ruling on acceptability. .
From CamGuard’s website:
There is no such thing as an FAA-approved oil additive.
ASL Camguard has been “accepted” by the FAA Engine & Propeller Directorate for normally aspirated engines. What that “acceptance” means is that the FAA wrote ASL a letter saying that they are persuaded that Camguard “does no harm” when used in normally aspirated engines.
ASL has requested such “acceptance” from the FAA Engine & Propeller Directorate for turbocharged engines, but the FAA has indicated that they will require ALT to submit the results of endurance tests that ASL anticipates will take them at least two years to complete. Thus, do not expect FAA type acceptance any time soon.
There is no regulatory requirement that an oil additive be FAA “accepted.” People have been using Marvel Mystery Oil in aircraft engines for five decades (at least) and I’ve yet to hear of one of them being busted. I actually used a little in one of my engines years ago (the statute of limitations has run) when I detected some valve lifter clatter. The lifter clatter cleared up. NOTE: This is NOT an endorsement of MMO!!! I do not use it and do not recommend it except in abnormal circumstances
I’m the engineer that wrote the article. I have no affiation with the CamGuard the company that produces and markets the CamGuard. It may sound like a advertisement. I felt it was product so good that it warranted introducing to Jaguar owners especial collectors that don’t drive their cars. Use it in my E-Type as well as my wife’s XK. I’m so pleased with the product I plan on continuing to use it from now on. i did notice that CamBuard had the CamGuard Automotive on sale for around $11+dollars.
Dick Russ
Aerospace Engineer
1 Like
John,
Thank you for pointing this out. This is very different from the impression left by reading the JJ article, which implies that the FAA affirms that the product does what the manufacture [sic] says it will do. One of the wonderful things about this forum is the depth of expertise of its members, and the extent to which they are willing to share their knowledge - thank you again John. Of course this doesn’t mean that the product isn’t great - it just means that we shouldn’t depend on an FAA “approval” to verify its effectiveness.
-David
Sooo—.being from Missouri, metaphorically—-how is using this additive better than just using s high-grade, properly ZDDPed oil?
In the JJ article Dick describes his ‘Personal Experience’ in which use of the product eliminated a rattling cam noise that he was getting for 30 seconds after start-up from cold. Okay, not a cure for death but if a product eliminated a worrisome noise I can see how the user would become a fan.
Anecdotal evidence is likely as good as it gets so very much 'YMMV".
I did look at the company site and see that they offer a version for aviation, automotive, marine, HD Diesel and small engines - I did not read further to see how these differ.
Good morning and a wish for a great thanksgiving.With respect to the zinc and phosphorus content in CamGuard vs regular oil with high
ZDDP it may not be a bit better. But according to the chemist it has a higher content than even racing oils with ZDDP. Now regarding why it is better for our engines is certainly a question debate. Again based on information from the Chemist CamGuard has a proprietary ingredient that bonds to the ferrous parts providing a coating that prevents corrosion.
The primary reason I wanted to test CamGuard in my e-type engine was really to see if it would reduce the cam/tappet clatter. If it didn’t work as I hoped at least I felt I was protecting my engine. Most regular oil we use have a propensity to be hydroscopic to a certain degree and with many of our cars that are not driven regularly the residual oil on the components inside the engine can’t prevent corrosion. I have seen this many times especially in the aircraft engines. But now back to your initial question. I have had this clattering from the time it was rebuilt. Probably not a problem since I drive the E-Type almost every day. It was just the initial startup noise that bothered me.
Ever since I started using the CamGuard Automotive additive my engine is no longer rattling on cold start. I have always used Brad Penn racing oil which is high in ZDDP content but never has my engine run as quiet as it has with CamGuard. Other than what I read about CamGuard I new very little about the product. But after using it for the last 2500 miles I for one am a believer and will continue to use it. In fact they have it on sale and I plan on ordering a few bottles just to have when I change oil. I have no affiliation with the company at all. I just feel they have a great product and wanted to share this with all of our Jaguar friends.If you ever want top talk about Jaguars or just to say hello, keep me in mind.Dick
Appreciate that, Dick!
You and yours have a great Toikey Day!!
As a degreed engineer myself, it seems like a slippery slope JJ is getting themselves into publishing that article about an oil additive of all things. Aside from the manufacturer’s claim (try Zmax’s claims for how much you can trust that!), the author has a whopping 1 anecdotal example to make a claim that it’s a great product that we should all buy. And it’s not clear if there were other variables at play that could have explained the change in the engine noise. Hardly scientific by any measure. What if changing motor oils would have had the same result on that one engine? Should they publish an article on that motor oil next month?
But whatever. If JJ indirectly wants to endorse products with little scientific backing, that’s up to them.
1 Like
I remember an old tale about putting something in an engine to reduce mechanical clatter. Sawdust, as I recall. Don’t think it was intended as a long term fix. The only thing guaranteed to reduce metallic noise that cannot be adjusted out, is a rebuild. All else is the already mentioned snake oil.
1 Like
You know what, I wish I had not even have written the article. I just thought owners would like to know what is available to possibly help in keeping their collector car engines in good condition. CamGuard has sold their product to hundreds of aircraft owners that feel it is a great product. I have to assume they have done the same with the CamGuard Automotive. BRG, I could care less if you don’t think it was a scientific test. It was never meant to be. I had tried different oils that didn’t help one bit and found that this product worked in my engine and I just wanted to share it with others
.
PS; Jaguar Journal didn’t indorse the product. Peter published it because I’m sure he felt others my like to know about something on the market that might be helpful.
Dick, Im glad it helped: this is a tough crowd, when it comes to oul additives (this writer, included).
I’ve heard it alll about oil additives, from STP (WORST. THING. EVER, to use in an engine), to Marvel Mystery Oil, to you name it.
I must agree with the one poster: if something rattles on start-up, with a good engine, something is fundamentally wrong with the engine.
This website is likely the best, WRT to oils.
I agree. My engine rattled on startup for several seconds when I switched to 5W-50 synthetic. Switching back to 20-50 synthetic (or not) stopped it. But it is not a “good” engine, rather a worn one.