Phillips or Shell??

weirdjim

weirdjim

Ejection Handle Pulled
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
4,171
Location
Grass Valley, CA (KGOO)
Display Name
Display name:
weirdjim
Just to get a few opinions, in an old (1958 vintage) O-470L that wants to use single grade oil, what are the advantages/disadvantages of Phillips 100AD and Shell W100?

Thanks,

Jim
 
Phillips typically doesn't add anything to their oils. It's AD but won't have corrosion or Lycoming anti-scuff additives like Aeroshell's "plus" oils do. I don't know anything about Aeroshell's 100W without the plus. Probably similar to Phillips.
 
Last edited:
Phillips XC split weight with camguard is what goes into my IO520.

I also only use the camguard because my plane will sit for months at a time in the winter.
 
I've found Aeroshell with the additives
causes my old Continentals to leak like a seive.
Phillips doesn't.
Dave
 
The W 100 would be OK but don't use the W 100+ in TCM engines. It contains friction modifiers that will eventually make your starter drive slip.
 
weirdjim said:
I'm not arguing, just ignorant. Why would I put Camguard in an old Continental engine?

Jim
Click to expand...
cause I don't want more corrosion....and I want my seals to stay supple....and I'd like to think my rings will be cleaner. :D
 
James331 said:
Phillips XC split weight with camguard is what goes into my IO520.

I also only use the camguard because my plane will sit for months at a time in the winter.
Click to expand...

I have heard after about three weeks, the protection from Camguard is severely diminished.
 
You mean in corrosion tests the corrosion that would have started in hours started in 3 weeks? Yep. Read the test results on the Camguard website. 15-50SS is Aeroshell. 20-50SS is Exxon Elite. 20-50 is Phillips X/C. Straight weights are Aeroshell. It's right there for you to view. Click on the Tech Data tab.

http://aslcamguard.com/index.php/products/aviation#
 
weirdjim said:
I'm not arguing, just ignorant. Why would I put Camguard in an old Continental engine?

Jim
Click to expand...

It's probably a complete waste of money for anybody flying their airplane regularly.

I've never used Camguard, or any other additive other than the pixie dust (flooby dust? ©weirdjim :)) Shell mixes in their multigrade. Have owned airplanes with Lycomings only: O-320, IO-360, O-235 and now a pair of IO-540s. So far have never had to do anything internal to an engine; all the failures have been external accessories only. But I am in the minority when it comes to Camguard around my airport - I think the non-scientific Saturday cafe breakfast poll numbers run about 2:1 Camguard users to the infidel unbelievers like me.

Understand the concern if an engine has to sit idle for while (we have serious winters where I am), but I think in that circumstance it makes more sense to pickle the engine in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions than depend on an additive.
 
Last edited:
weirdjim said:
I'm not arguing, just ignorant. Why would I put Camguard in an old Continental engine?

Jim
Click to expand...

Because it's a expensive piece of hardware.

There was a test with rusted metal, think XC with cam guard made quite a diffrence over just XC, like others said if you're flying a lot, whatever, but if your plane sits sometimes, cam guard it good stuff.

I also don't see what the date on the engine has to do with jack, new or old conti, if she sits sometimes cam guard is a cheap insurance. Not sure if that was a knock on confidential, but most working planes are rocking continentals
 
Stewartb said:
You mean in corrosion tests the corrosion that would have started in hours started in 3 weeks? Yep. Read the test results on the Camguard website. 15-50SS is Aeroshell. 20-50SS is Exxon Elite. 20-50 is Phillips X/C. Straight weights are Aeroshell. It's right there for you to view. Click on the Tech Data tab.

http://aslcamguard.com/index.php/products/aviation#
Click to expand...


What point are you trying to make? That you saw the same thing I did or arguing that it's better to rust for 45 days vs 70? He said he uses Camguard when the plane sits for months. Either way, it's really not doing much in his case. That's what I'm saying.
 
I don't know about Camguard, but in automotive applications, additives are now sold for use in older vehicles with flat tappet cams. EPA required phase out or reduction of zinc dialkyldithiophosphates (zddp) in road motor oils due to poisoning of catalysts in catalytic converters. A number of high performance older road vehicles (read muscle cars) started experiencing cam failures as a result of using the newer oils without zddp. Zddp is a high pressure scuff guard. Not sure what the aero needs are for oils, but perhaps there's a similar benefit to Camguard. My employer works on newer and better replacements for zddp.
 
Camguard has products for automotive, diesel, marine and small engine as well as aviation.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
I don't know about Camguard, but in automotive applications, additives are now sold for use in older vehicles with flat tappet cams. EPA required phase out or reduction of zinc dialkyldithiophosphates (zddp) in road motor oils due to poisoning of catalysts in catalytic converters. A number of high performance older road vehicles (read muscle cars) started experiencing cam failures as a result of using the newer oils without zddp. Zddp is a high pressure scuff guard. Not sure what the aero needs are for oils, but perhaps there's a similar benefit to Camguard. My employer works on newer and better replacements for zddp.
Click to expand...

Personally, I believe there is little evidence that proves the lack of ZDDP is what has been causing automotive cams to fail. I won't skew the thread too much, but I have some theories on what has been going on in this area, and none of them are related to lube problems. Note that the only cams that seem to fail with regularity are the aftermarket cams...

Regarding the OP's question. I personally do not believe that there is going to be a measurable difference between Phillips straight 50wt oil and Shell straight 50wt. oil. Use whatever you feel comfortable with, there isn't going to be a measurable difference in how long the engine lasts that could be directly attributed to the oil used. The Shell W100 Plus and the Phillips Victory 100AW oils are different however and I would not be interested in using either in a Continental with the friction drive starter due to the Lycoming antiwear additive that is added to this oil.

Pretty much all the commercial operators I know are using Phillips products, mainly due to cost. Every one of them I know has engines running to TBO so even though it is cheaper than the Shell products it must provide adequate lubrication to do the job.
 
I dunno, I doubt I made it up, prolly heard it somewhere before? It just came to mind and I blurted it out. If I made it up, then I deserve royalties any time anyone else uses it. 1 AMU sounds about right as compensation.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
I dunno, I doubt I made it up, prolly heard it somewhere before? It just came to mind and I blurted it out. If I made it up, then I deserve royalties any time anyone else uses it. 1 AMU sounds about right as compensation.
Click to expand...

"Color me..." has been around since 1963. Not as common since kids traded coloring books for ipads. Found using Google.
 
I use Aeroshell W100 in an O-470L. 3000 smoh, leaks it out all over the place. I've been considering just using Rotella T since it is cheaper than water.
 
NoHeat said:
$57 Phillips 100 vs $79 Aeroshell 100, at Spruce, per case.

"Cheaper", yes. "Helluva lot cheaper", no.
Click to expand...
$22/case is a whole lot cheaper, but if that isn't good enough for you, remember I buy my oil by the 55 gallon drum. I save $300 buying Phillips over Shell.
 
XC20-50 + camguard in my IO-540. I've run oil analysis 3x since buying the plane a 1 year ago. I have to think camguard has played a role in easier starts, increased compressions, lower oil consumption, etc... all things that have developed since buying the plane.

My first oil analysis came back with pretty rough results. My insoluble # was very high and the report said my filter wasn't able to keep up (~30 hour change). Several metal #'s were high. A phone call to Blackstone and they asked if I'd used any additives. When I told the camguard they weren't surprised. Said the cleaning effects of the camguard would likely cause some "concerning" results but we should see the values decline over then next 2-3 oil changes... and the trend has been noted. Values on change #3 are normal. Went through annual a few weeks ago and my 1500 hours cylinders had compressions all ranging from 77-79. Previous 5 years annuals (3 diff shops) compressions were 70-73 every year.

I'm beating a dead horse here, but I'm tickled to death with XC20-50 + camguard in my bird. Engine is TBO and happy as can be!
 
arkvet said:
XC20-50 + camguard in my IO-540. I've run oil analysis 3x since buying the plane a 1 year ago. I have to think camguard has played a role in easier starts, increased compressions, lower oil consumption, etc... all things that have developed since buying the plane.

My first oil analysis came back with pretty rough results. My insoluble # was very high and the report said my filter wasn't able to keep up (~30 hour change). Several metal #'s were high. A phone call to Blackstone and they asked if I'd used any additives. When I told the camguard they weren't surprised. Said the cleaning effects of the camguard would likely cause some "concerning" results but we should see the values decline over then next 2-3 oil changes... and the trend has been noted. Values on change #3 are normal. Went through annual a few weeks ago and my 1500 hours cylinders had compressions all ranging from 77-79. Previous 5 years annuals (3 diff shops) compressions were 70-73 every year.

I'm beating a dead horse here, but I'm tickled to death with XC20-50 + camguard in my bird. Engine is TBO and happy as can be!
Click to expand...

I'm curious. How many hours did your airplane get flown in the last year and in the years prior?

John
 
arkvet said:
XC20-50 + camguard in my IO-540. I've run oil analysis 3x since buying the plane a 1 year ago. I have to think camguard has played a role in easier starts, increased compressions, lower oil consumption, etc... all things that have developed since buying the plane.

My first oil analysis came back with pretty rough results. My insoluble # was very high and the report said my filter wasn't able to keep up (~30 hour change). Several metal #'s were high. A phone call to Blackstone and they asked if I'd used any additives. When I told the camguard they weren't surprised. Said the cleaning effects of the camguard would likely cause some "concerning" results but we should see the values decline over then next 2-3 oil changes... and the trend has been noted. Values on change #3 are normal. Went through annual a few weeks ago and my 1500 hours cylinders had compressions all ranging from 77-79. Previous 5 years annuals (3 diff shops) compressions were 70-73 every year.

I'm beating a dead horse here, but I'm tickled to death with XC20-50 + camguard in my bird. Engine is TBO and happy as can be!
Click to expand...
I've had similar results on several planes I've owned...My Six and my current Bonanza.
 
jsstevens said:
I'm curious. How many hours did your airplane get flown in the last year and in the years prior?

John
Click to expand...

It was a regularly flown plane and rarely sat for more than a couple weeks at a time for pretty much the engines entire life. It was a MOH in 1998 and it's a 2000 hour engine. Going through the books it was a solid 100ish hour average annual usage over that time. The ONLY time it sat was 100% hangared the year leading up to my purchase. The pilot that owned the plane before me had died of a sudden heart attack the year prior and it had 3 hours on the tach since that time.
 
arkvet said:
It was a regularly flown plane and rarely sat for more than a couple weeks at a time for pretty much the engines entire life. It was a MOH in 1998 and it's a 2000 hour engine. Going through the books it was a solid 100ish hour average annual usage over that time. The ONLY time it sat was 100% hangared the year leading up to my purchase. The pilot that owned the plane before me had died of a sudden heart attack the year prior and it had 3 hours on the tach since that time.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the data.

So if we call your purchase year t, in year t-2 100 hours, t-1 3 hours, t 100 hours. So one year of mostly sitting. I have no idea about the metals, but that could easily explain the compression changes-camguard or no camguard.

Glad it's getting healthier, whatever the reason.

John
 
jsstevens said:
Thanks for the data.

So if we call your purchase year t, in year t-2 100 hours, t-1 3 hours, t 100 hours. So one year of mostly sitting. I have no idea about the metals, but that could easily explain the compression changes-camguard or no camguard.

Glad it's getting healthier, whatever the reason.

John
Click to expand...

I had to read the algebra a few times but in the end I do believe you've interpreted it correctly :).

I'm not sure what you mean by "explain the compression changes". When I bought the plane it had sat for ~ 1 year (T-1). I had the annual done at the time I bought it and those compressions were the 70-73 values as in the few years prior. The shop flew the plane for about 1 hour prior to the annual / oil change / etc.

Blackstone explained to me that the metals had been collecting over a longer period of time and the camguard likely brought them back into "circulation". The idea that the camguard helped with compressions comes from my own research of the product which suggests it should do just that.

I lightly mentioned the idea of a MOH at some point down the road to my mechanic at the annual a few weeks ago. He said I would be crazy to touch this engine with the power it's making. I have a JPI830 and also have a firm idea that all the cylinders have been staying happy.
 
Oh, and there was a very clean oil analysis done at the time of purchase annual too. Hard to take much from it since that oil had 3-4 hours on it.
 
arkvet said:
I had to read the algebra a few times but in the end I do believe you've interpreted it correctly :).

I'm not sure what you mean by "explain the compression changes". When I bought the plane it had sat for ~ 1 year (T-1). I had the annual done at the time I bought it and those compressions were the 70-73 values as in the few years prior. The shop flew the plane for about 1 hour prior to the annual / oil change / etc.

Blackstone explained to me that the metals had been collecting over a longer period of time and the camguard likely brought them back into "circulation". The idea that the camguard helped with compressions comes from my own research of the product which suggests it should do just that.

I lightly mentioned the idea of a MOH at some point down the road to my mechanic at the annual a few weeks ago. He said I would be crazy to touch this engine with the power it's making. I have a JPI830 and also have a firm idea that all the cylinders have been staying happy.
Click to expand...

Glad the algebra wasn't too confusing. What I missed from your earlier post was that the lower compressions were consistent with the years where it was being flown. I thought that was a one time event after a year of sitting. I can imagine ways the cam guard might help compression: slightly sticky valves, rings, etc.

John
 
sticky rings can cause compression loss....and higher than normal oil consumption. The camguard can have a "cleaning" effect to remove junk and free up those rings. With regards to the valves....na, not so much of an affect from Camguard, but usage can improve valve leakage.

That flushed out junk ends up in the oil analysis and looks bad at first....till a couple of oil changes. Then things begin to stabilize.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
sticky rings can cause compression loss....and higher than normal oil consumption. The camguard can have a "cleaning" effect to remove junk and free up those rings. With regards to the valves....na, not so much of an affect from Camguard, but usage can improve valve leakage.

That flushed out junk ends up in the oil analysis and looks bad at first....till a couple of oil changes. Then things begin to stabilize.
Click to expand...

In car engines, switching a high mileage engine to pure synthetic oil can have the same effect. Although we don't usually do oil analysis on them. But the amount of general crud that comes loose can be impressive. And scary.
 
OK, so it seems that the general consensus is that camguard isn't snake oil and may do some good in an engine that is gently used. What's the best deal (including shipping) for camguard these days?

Thanks,

Jim
 
weirdjim said:
OK, so it seems that the general consensus is that camguard isn't snake oil and may do some good in an engine that is gently used. What's the best deal (including shipping) for camguard these days?

Thanks,

Jim
Click to expand...
Got mine from Rick Witt at Leading Edge Aviation, Inc

He even does mail order.
 
weirdjim said:
OK, so it seems that the general consensus is that camguard isn't snake oil and may do some good in an engine that is gently used. What's the best deal (including shipping) for camguard these days?

Thanks,

Jim
Click to expand...

It's hard to find any sorts of real deals on, once shipping is included. We found that a local dealer carries it and it's within a couple of bucks of ordering it shipped so we gave up and just buy it locally to support them. The price difference is well into the noise level of overall operating cost. In ten years at our typical hours flown it'd add a few hundred bucks. Considering the cost of the overhaul that would be needed in those ten years, it's pocket change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top