Skip to main content

@dlearl476 posted:

FWIW, Rotella T2 has the 1100-1500 ppm zinc that most folks recommend for flat tappet engines, that’s why I picked it. It’s been a favorite of vintage motorcycle guys for ever. 

I would check that- Rotella has changed the last few years to keep up with the advances in diesel engine technology, one of them being the introduction of catalytic converters in some new trucks with the subsequent reduction of ZDDP in their oil formulations.  There have been other changes as well.

@ALB posted:

I would check that- Rotella has changed the last few years to keep up with the advances in diesel engine technology, one of them being the introduction of catalytic converters in some new trucks with the subsequent reduction of ZDDP in their oil formulations.  There have been other changes as well.

That's why they're up to T5 (or 6) now. T2 straight weight is still the spec it originally came in. It's actually specified for stationary diesel power plants, not vehicles. 

 I verified the the zinc level with the shell distributor before I decided to use it. 

Last edited by dlearl476
@dlearl476 posted:

That's why they're up to T5 (or 6) now. T2 straight weight is still the spec it originally came in. It's actually specified for stationary diesel power plants, not vehicles. 

 I verified the the zinc level with the shell distributor before I decided to use it. 

I lied. It's T1 I'm running. I noticed the jug yesterday when I was cleaning out the garage for some major mods. (Front discs, new clutch MC, redoing my cable operated thermostat flaps.). 

Day one did not go well. 

image

These were two of my Dellorto venturies. 

Attachments

Images (1)
  • image

  What in the hell happened?

I kept the Dell 45's when I sold the engine they were on (2300 drag motor) and put the Webers that were on the 2L in the Beck on it. The venturis were always way too big, so I went from 38's to 32's. The other two slid out just fine, but I had to pound those two out with a drift and hammer.

According to a metalugist I know on the Internet, the Zamak alloy the original venturis are made of are prone to swelling and crumbling if the alloy isn't made perfectly. That's the best explanation I've heard. 

The good news? I got them out without have to completely tear them down and have them machined.  The bad news, 2 of the venturis didn't survive the process.  

Last edited by dlearl476

They don’t look quite right for a fire in there.  
More like they were frozen in there and had to be removed with some force with a cold chisel. 
I wouldn’t know about excess force.  I am always gentle when working with mechanical things...

Before I had my starter and alternator rebuilt last year, I used to have to do that to my starter about every tenth start up. After the first time having to do it with a rock I found by the side of the road, I carried my biggest ball pien hammer in the door pocket  

 

So many of us have done that.  A friend in Beaufort, SC, bought the 37 Hudson from the movie "The Notebook" and had the exact same starter issue.  He bought a very nice 3# hammer at Sears and had a special place for it so he could grab it, get under the car and give the starter a good smack.

Worked every time but we eventually pulled the starter and had it rebuilt.  There was some carbon scoring on the armature in one spot and if that spot landed at the electrical brushes - she no go.

Last edited by Gordon Nichols
@DannyP posted:

I think it's embarrassing to have to pop start your car or hit the starter with a hammer.

Why not just get a new starter(IMI-101 gear-reduction unit works great even at 10:1 compression) and call it a day?

Agreed. The hammer just delays the obvious and the inevitable. I had to jimmy the starter one time on my old Ford truck to get it to engage. As soon as the truck started I drove to the parts store to get a new starter. I don't have time for playing starter roulette.

@dlearl476 posted:

I'm a big fan of Motul.

 I, too, fell down the Samba trans oil rabbit hole and subsequently gave away the gallon of Swepco I had left over from my 911. (I can't remember if it was 201 or 202, but several people suggested it was great for 901/915, not so much for VW axles) 

As part of my regular spring ritual last year, I drained and filled my trans with Valvoline or Castrol synthetic gear lube.  It shifted so poorly I thought my cable shifter had gone out of adjustment. I switched to whatever Motul is Dino (Gearbox300??) and it shifted like butter. And still is after however many miles I put on it last summer.  I'm not even going to change it this year unless I experience shifting issues. 

I tried the Motul "Gear Box" 80/90 mineral oil on @dlearl476's recommendation. It's marketed as an oil for "older, loud transmissions".

There's a lot to love here. My newly rebuilt transaxle has some Erco race gears in it, which are louder than stock VW. I was 100% happy with how the box shifted with the Swepco 201, but I wanted to see if the Motul would maintain the buttery smoothness of the Swepco and quiet it down just a smudge to keep it within the mission of becoming a GT, rather than a GS.

The cold viscosity is thicker than Swepco. It's a very dark/silvery oil, and clearly has a freak-load of molybdenum in it. Cold shifting (such as one can tell in the middle of summer) is quite acceptable. Hot shifting is very, very nice-- perhaps not quite as creamy-smooth as with the Swepco, but I'm not sure if there's a real difference or just a perception because I love the Swepco so much.

What I can say for sure is that the gear/bearing noise is definitely quieter. It's still clearly a older "performance car" design, but it's not overly loud. That's worth a lot in this application.

The oil comes in litre bottles rather than quarts, and has a really nice pull-out spout, so one doesn't need to pump the oil into the box. It's not hideously expensive. All in all, a really nice oil, as @dlearl476 recommended.  

Add Reply

Post Content
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×