Lotus Elan and Lotus Elan Plus 2 Forums

They relaunched themselves at NEC last month.
https://www.duckhams.com

They were part of BP until 2011 and towards the end they were concentrating on Castrol and BP brands.

That's nice to see.

As a matter of fact, my next door neighbour at work is the grandaughter of Alexander Duckham, she is a lovely lady at the ripe old age of 81/82 (sorry, cannot remember exactly and didn't want to ask again). She invites us all round (all 4 of us, that is) for tea & homemade cakes once a year.


Good to see the oil again back on sale, I will tell her next time I see her.....she will be pleased to know.

I seem to remember that I think it was swallowed up in the seventies or eighties by BP.....


All the best

Adam

thx for the link ... just bought couple o' cans o' duckhams

I wonder who owns Duckhams now, and whether they are just marketing or actually formulating the oil?

The Halfords stuff is very green and very sticky. Maybe it is Duckhams in disguise? I mean, if it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck(hams), right?

'A group of entrepreneurs' bought the brand from BP.

If they're not oil experts, how can we trust the product?

(Rhetorical question, partially!)

The main front man Martin Gough seems to have e plenty of lubrication experience with Penrite and Millers amongst others.
I'll bet they are buying in though.
?1 limited company with 3 directors named at companies house with 1 shareholder.

JonB wrote:I wonder who owns Duckhams now, and whether they are just marketing or actually formulating the oil?

The Halfords stuff is very green and very sticky. Maybe it is Duckhams in disguise? I mean, if it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck(hams), right?

From checking the specs it doesn't look to be the same. Halfords classic (rebranded Comma classic) has a Viscosity Index of 120, while the new Duckhams has a VI of 135. Incidentally, Millers fully synthetic Classic Sport High performance has a VI of 133! According to the Duckhams site, the new oil is based on "hydrofinished mineral oil"... (Comma classic Viscosity@100C is 17.2 cSt, Millers/Duckhams both listed as 18.5 cSt)

draenog wrote:

JonB wrote:I wonder who owns Duckhams now, and whether they are just marketing or actually formulating the oil?

The Halfords stuff is very green and very sticky. Maybe it is Duckhams in disguise? I mean, if it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck(hams), right?

From checking the specs it doesn't look to be the same. Halfords classic (rebranded Comma classic) has a Viscosity Index of 120, while the new Duckhams has a VI of 135. Incidentally, Millers fully synthetic Classic Sport High performance has a VI of 133! According to the Duckhams site, the new oil is based on "hydrofinished mineral oil"... (Comma classic Viscosity@100C is 17.2 cSt, Millers/Duckhams both listed as 18.5 cSt)

The two important things to look for are the VI and the amount of ZDDP zinc in the oil(1000 to 1500ppm). The vendor data sheets tell the tale. All the rest in the literature and web pages is marketing fluff.

Regards,
Dan

They don't give a figure for ZDDP in the data sheet, just a statement about "optimised level":

Optimised ZDDP (?zinc?) level for engine component wear protection is a leading feature of Duckhams Classic Q20W-50

In the FAQ they say:

?Modern oils? have approximately one-third of the amount of ZDDP (zinc dialkyl dithiophosphate) required by classic engines which is why Duckhams Classic Q should be used. Studies have also shown that too much ZDDP, often touted as a marketing benefit, can cause stiction of components. Duckhams have an optimised level of ZDDP well above that found in modern engine oils whilst avoiding an unnecessarily high level that can cause component stickiness.

We could always ask the what the specific ZDDP figure is.

The brief research I did shows Kendall GT-1 with 1233 ppm and Brad Penn with 1500ppm of ZDDP.

Davidb wrote:The brief research I did shows Kendall GT-1 with 1233 ppm and Brad Penn with 1500ppm of ZDDP.

That's plenty!

The most important thing in a lubricating oil is the base stock used. Base stocks are classified as Group 1 to Group 5. Group 1 are cheapest and least effective, group 5 are most expensive and most effective. VI and ZDDP levels are misleading at best as measures of oil quality.

http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Rea ... oil-groups.

Additives are then used to improve the base oil performance for all the groups. For example the Viscosity index for group 1 to 3 base oils are often improved by adding masticated ( very finely chopped up ) polyethylene dissolved in the oil base stock. However the life of the additives and their performance over a range of temperatures and use cant fully compensate for an inferior base oil and it is normally inferior to using a better base stock and lesser additive package.

ZDDP is an additive that reduces wear in boundary lubrication situations where the zinc phosphate deposits on the metal surfaces and reduces the micro welding between the surfaces and scuffing wear that occurs with high contact pressures on cam to follower interfaces. It has become a marketing tool since its level was lowered in modern oils to protect catalysts. Modern low ZDDP oils provide plenty of protection to you average road twin cam. Maybe if your running over 200lb nose loads on a racing twin cam ( not needed really) or using both a steel cam and steel follower ( also common in racing engines) then high ZDDP helps... maybe. It also helps for the run in period for a new set of cams and followers as the risk is really only significant during the running period until the two surfaces polish to mate each other. Steel is more susceptible to scuffing wear than cast iron so if using these for followers or cams you introduce greater risk than using the orginal cast iron components. Steel on steel is also worse than steel on cast iron.

For a racing engine you need to use steel followers as they need to be thinner for clearances and lighter for the high revs. I get followers that have a Phosphate coating that aids the running in process. I use cast iron cams to avoid the steel on steel risk. A couple of time I have used cast iron cams with weld build up in my engines. In one I suffered premature wear, the second one was Ok when I had the cam also phosphated and reduced the maximum nose load a little by changing the spring pack and machining dimensions.

Lot of variables and no simple answer, just don't believe most of whats written about this on the internet as most is based on American V8s or push rod BMC engines in racing situations with heavy valve springs, unknown cam and follower materials and unknown running in procedures and much different cam versus follower designs with poorer lubrication compared to a twin cam

cheers
Rohan
PS I have written posts of this previously so consider it my annual post on oils, however I reserve the right to advocate for greasing your trunnions at all time

rgh0 wrote:Additives are then used to improve the base oil performance for all the groups. For example the Viscosity index for group 1 to 3 base oils are often improved by adding masticated ( very finely chopped up ) polyethylene dissolved in the oil base stock.

Hi Rohan,

thank you for your posts. Do you have an opinion on the "shockproof" route from Redline, esp. for a highly stressed gearbox ? I understand the small particles would wear out quite rapidly under racing condition, would that mean oil change as frequent as every couple hours ?