Packard enthus.

May I tease you a bit about your above "post"..? I think you ARE being unreasonable to expect young people of today to understand the concept of "rules" and "precision of speech". You sound like someone who has a few years on him - meaning, you, like me, may be a product of the educational system of an earlier America. To get out of high school, you may have had a year of both CHEMISTRY and PHYSICS, and were taught the importance of using the English language correctly. The reason that was the case, was because in prior eras, the United States was a technological leader, manufacturing precision products to be sold all over the planet. Quality was important to maintaining the American economy of that era, and was essential to getting a job in the jobs in America in that era. You could leave your high school, and, as I did, get a well-paying job in an industry making widgets, or, perhaps fixing them. All you need to do, to understand where today's young people are coming from, is walk into a shopping mall or major department store, and LOOK around and LISTEN to them. All the familiar names are still there ( Westinghouse, General Electric, Sunbeam, etc). But they are not American. They are IMPORTED. From countries where "precision of speech" is important. The young American person of today has no need of "precision of speech". What he or she needs to know these days is " DO YOU WANT FRIES WITH THAT"...? His or her job is to "be in touch with their inner self", to be the "me me" generation and have nice emotions, just like in any other third world country that isnt going anywhere except downhill. So he or she has no embarrsement, when he gets that job he is qualified for, calling himself a "professional sanitation engineer"...! The high quality cars and technical products now come from overseas. Look in Consumer Reports, to find American cars consistantly finish LAST in quality reviews. RCA used to make the WHIRLPOOL clothes washers and dryers. Look NOW on the back of the label and see where they are made....! So - let's show some understanding - a young person of today, who fnds they are stuck with some elder's old Chevrolet or DeSoto or whatever, knows what they want...TO GET RID OF IT! They have NO idea what the difference is...say...between a 1940 Chevrolet, and a REAL classic car such as a 1940 Cadillac V-16 Imperial limosine or perhaps a 1940 Packard "180", NOR IS THERE ANY REASON FOR THEM TO ! Bottom line = I expect to see more and more of the younger generation talk about, write about, and try to sell just about ANYTHING where-ever they think they can find a buyer. They mean no harm. They are just "passing thru". GO to a car show where there are also REAL classic cars, and WATCH what the average young person does. I have, and have the video to prove it. THEY WALK RIGHT BY TO THE CUSTOM/HOT ROD displays, oh..a few will look, for a moment, at stock cars from the 50's and 60's.. "LIKE GRANDMA HAD...!". My suggestion - forget about trying to force out-dated thinking on a changed America. Oh, there will always be a few odd-balls of EVERY generation who will see the value in, and want to understand more about the "engineering marvels, magnificently overdone" that we old-timers call "CLASSICS". They DO exist, and they DO find us, and when they turn up, let's try and woo them. But as for the rest... I say..."live and let live"...!

oh oh....when people start agreeing with me...i start worrying about their mental health....! Seriously, folks, yes, it is kind of funny to watch people screeching the word "classic" at whatever they are trying to sell - my favorite example - not that long ago I pulled off the highway into a little shopping mall..parked next to a Caprice Classic, went in and had some "Classic Chicken" - washed down with "Clasic Coke". In the shopping center were two unrelated businesses - Classic Plumbing...and Classic Upholstery. I dont think many of you young people can imagine the mixed emotions some of us "traditionalists" in the CCCA have, when we see the word "classic" in common useage, used to sell all manner of stuff. here's why - the whole concept of "nolstalgia" towards old cars, especially the big old super powerful super luxury cars of the late 1920's thru 1942, was simply unknown until, oh..I'd say the late 1950's. Old cars in general were made fun of, and really big elegant luxury cars from the above era, were HATED for what they represented. The idea of saving the biggest, most elegant, and most powerful cars of that era was considered nuts by the general public. In those days, car dealers would have "smash in's". They would go find some really elegant car like, well..in one case...a beautiful early 1930's Cadillac V-16, park it on their lot, and let people whack at it with a sledge hammer in an effort to draw floor traffic into the dealership. How many of you have seen old re-runs of I LOVE LUCY, where, in several of the 30 min. shows, "LUCY" shows how silly and stupid she is by getting involved in some way with a big luxury car of the 1930's. At some point in time, a small group of nut-cases like me, were successful in convincing the public that maybe there was something worth while in the 'best of the best' of the cars of that era, and thus we became socially acceptable. I recall the shock and puzzlement, when I took a girl on a date in my '38 Packard V-12 Formal Sedan (because I was desparate to "date" that girl that night...and a deal I had to borrow an acceptable car - later model Chevrolet, fell thru). Pulled into the side entrance of the restaurant parking lot so the girl wouldnt be embarssed to be seen getting out of such an out-dated monstrosity - to my surprise (this was about 1958, when the idea of saving big luxury cars was starting to catch on.....) the restaurant manager invited me to park out FRONT where people could SEE my car....! So - those few of us "traditionalists" actually do get a kick out of seeing how the word "classic" has gone from something rarely seen or thought of, actually even despised, to something commendable...within our life-times. Do we have mixed emotions about it ? Sure ! Did the fellow who wants to get rid of his old used Chevrolet mean any harm by advertising it in a site CLEARLY labled for "classics only"...? OF COURSE NOT ! Should we all have a bit more of a sense of humor about being teased about our respective choices and opinions..? I WISH!

relax...we are all just having fun !

I want to apologize to Bill P and the fellow with the old used Chevrolet for sale - and to prove my sincerity I have followed West's "lead" and deleted my own smart-alec "post". Bill is absolutely right - there is NO excuse these days for questioning the posting for sale of used cars in here. Gariepy should "go with the flow" these days...should not be posting these silly rules about restricting what can be advertised in AACA forums, making such hurtful comments as "CCCA ELIGIBILTY RULES APPLY" . After all - the whole objective of screeching the word "classic" at things one is trying to sell, HAS taken over, so who cares about silly rules, or the silly opening "caption" of this forum "PLEASE LIMIT POSTS IN THIS FORUM TO DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CCCA AND CARS RECOGNIZED BY THE CLUB AS A CCCA CLASSIC... After all, even the CCCA itself is changing with the times - it has encouraged all kinds of people to join, so that the two thousand or so traditionalist's views have long since been buried by a bold new membership (we jumped to close to six thousand this year) that LOVES all old used cars, (especially those they are trying to sell)...and cant wait to bring more of them into our Club. Page 9 of the Club's Rule Book (HANDBOOK AND DIRECTORY) makes it clear how correct Bill P's point is - there, under the banner "SIGNIFICANT CLUB POLICY STATEMENTS 1956-2003" is "over-printed" MAY CONFLICT WITH CURRENT POLICIES West, myself, and others have come to our senses - we will no longer make smart alec "posts" about people who ignore those silly old rules. Just think, next year my used 1980's Toyota will be an "antique" and who is to say when I want to sell my Case farm tractor, I shouldn't advertise it in here...? I mean..it IS a "classic"..isn't it...?

the answer to your question is...it is a free country..and you are free to call what you want..what you need to, to sell it...! If you dont believe me..go to your nearest magazine store's automotive section, and see what they are calling "classic" these days...!

hey...watch that...! I was BORN in a 1936 Packard "120" sedan. Damn good car ! The recognition by the auto buying public that the "120" series Packards were a TREMENDOUS value in their price class, is why there was a Packard Motor Car Company for years afterwards ! Those photos are marvelous ! I wouldnt spend too much time worried about people who make a big fuss over personality issues. We arent going to be on this planet long enough to have all the fun that can be had. I say..let's have our fun NOW, and worry about the personality issues when we are drooling all over ourselves in some rest home...!

"NEW" OILS...? NONSENCE - we are just going back to the "old" oils ! The problem of random cam failures is not a new one. Down thru automotive internal combustion engine history, random failures have occured. Random failures continued to occur AFTER the introduction of the so called "anti-friction additives" introducted (in aviation motor oils ONLY a dozen or so years ago). If we accept the fact that there have ALWAYS been random failures of cam-shafts, even brand new ones, down thru the history of the internal combustion engine, the next question is "what can we do about it". A review of automotive technical literature, beginning during World War One, provides the answer. For example, using improperly heat-treated cam followers, or used / re-surfaced "re-ground" cams and/or cam folowers, and/or mixing cam followers that have been in service, on top of a "new" cam-shaft, WILL provide a higher incidence of random cam failure. Again, this is REGARDLESS of the time period, meaning, before, during, and after the introduction of so called "anti-friction additives". There is one sure-fire way to eliminate cam shaft failure. You can find it in quality motors going back, again, to the First World War. We call that "roller cams". When we say "roller cams" we are referring to the practice of having a roller or needle bearing cam follower that does not "slide" or create excessively high sliding friction on the steel surface of the cam. When we are talking about consumer grade "throw-a-way" cars for the lower and middle classes, where the car is presumed to be traded in for a new one every three to five years, going to the expense of providing roller cams made no economic sense. The typical warranty on a new car of that nature until relatively recently was "90 days or 4,000 miles, whichever occured first". In recent years, consumers of ordinary cars have demanded more long term reliability from their engines (typical of what has ALWAYS been demanded by the rich, and ALWAYS provided in the highest quality cars and most inssutrial grade motors). As such, manufacturer warranties have now been extended, some going as far as 10 years and 100,000 miles (essentially duplicating what better grade motors for industrial purpose and/or the "super luxury" cars of the "super rich" have had since the 1920's). I am not clear where any of you got the idea that an automotive maker of consumer grade automobiles ever had a duty to provide roller cams, or the degree of long term durability they provided. Where did ANY of you get the idea that a manufacture of auto engines has ANY responsiblity for durability to used car owner-operators ? I recall seeing an advertisement from the Packard Motor Car Company, which, if memory serves, was from the early 1920's. The ad. said something about the Packard of that era was a "10 year car" that could go fast. Of course, and at the risk of repeating myself, just about every maker of the highest quality industrial and auto engines from that era foward, provided their customers with roller cams. I do not recall that Fords, Chevrolets, or, for that matter, any other "consumer grade" (translation "use it for three to five years and throw it away") ever had roller cams, until recently. The bottom line is that a honest and sincere review of automotive technical history, tells us "you get what you pay for"! In conclusion, I am not convinced that the use of anti-friction additives, that are now being withdrawn from service, were anything more than they claimed to be, i.e. trying to get a little better gas mileage. As we know, these additives were screwing up the smog equipment; THAT is why their use has been terminated. And, again, since even the manufacturers of cheap cars are now accepting the idea that these cars should last longer, are including roller cams in their products. I repeat my question - anyone know of a new automobile engine that does NOT come factory equipped with a roller cam ? If there is, I am not aware of it. So there you are...you get what you pay for. Want to be free of the risk of cam failure ? GET A MOTOR EQUIPPED WITH ROLLER CAM !

what magnificent photos ! I have no idea how many of that splendid body design wound up on Super Eight chassis, and how many on Twelves. I note that the photos of the cars when they were new, make it appear that the Deluxe Eights ( again...the Super Eights ) had PLATED radiator shells and PAINTED shutters - sort of a "snob" thing by Packard so that the Twelve owners could show they had the bigger, much faster and more powerful engine). Obviously, restorers today have to do what the original buyers wanted the factory and dealer to do...MAKE IT THE WAY THE CUSTOMER WANTS ! Thus I am not surprised to see many restorers taking advantage of what I NEVER saw on the street, but AM aware was in the "options" sheets - PAINTED radiator shell like on the Twelves and PLATED shutters. But I am still not clear about the splendid car the first "poster" showed us. Is that magnificent car one of the FIRST, based on a '31 car ? Cant be CERTAIN from the photograph if I am looking at a mid-production '31 Deluxe Eight radiator shell..or a '32. ? ? ? ?

What great photography - what a magnificent car ! We need to get the REAL "experts" in here to tell us more about the story behind this car. Actually, this could be a real historical "find", as I see the makings of several interesting history stories. First of all, it is obviously a Super Eight, but what year ? Look at the radiator shell. Painted to LOOK like a "Twin Six" / V-12, but, is it a '32 radiator shell, or is it the "exchange" one to make '30 Packards look like mid-year proiduction 1931's...? Racking my brain to remember when the 8 cylinder Packards went do DOWNdraft carbueration...anyone remember ? Am NOT surprised by the "big" bumpers. A number of "Deluxe Eights" (translation - the 384 cu in Super Eight) came out of East Grand Blvd. with those monster "vibration damper" bumpers that later were exclusively for the Twelves unless "special ordered". A photo of the dash might tell our "experts" a bit more. I am NOT an expert, but my HUNCH is this car may well be a real historical "find"...meaning, one of the first, if not the first pre-production Dietreichs made for an auto show. (either that, or some restorer had a hell of a time pulling a fast one on all of us...!)

re: picture of the butchered '38 Packard V-12 two door sedan the way I found it, was to search for Lone Star Packard ( I was looking for info. about the upcoming meet in Texas at the end of March )

I just by accident spotted an article "GOODGUYS LONESTART NATIONALS" which includes a 3/4 view of a 1938 Packard V-12 two-door sedan. It appears to have been both "chopped" and "channeled" and, according to the text "is now motivated by an Allison five speed behind a '02 GM "big block" with Boyd Coddington wheels..."

My service letters do not have anything about installing '34 fenders on a '33 Packard. Again, I rather doubt this was done at the factory. I would not be surprised if dealers would be able to order exchange fenders, since they are identical except for the additional covering of the foward front tire well - everything else regarding the fender mounting is virtually the same - this would not be rocket science - just a few bolts and off comes the fender. But it would still be pretty obvious from outside the car - as the different front door window and vent treatment between '33 and '34 is pretty blatant. And of course once you were inside the car, the dash would be obvious too. Hmm...let me see...if I recall correctly, bumpers on the both the Eights and Super Eights were a bit different too, between '33 and '34. Yeah..the "small print" on the above Buick add shows us how right the first poster in this thread is. But again, let's be fair - very few people left in the old car hobby who know or remember that. And again, more and more people who CLAIM to be old car buffs just want to shove their old car off a trailer and get crowd attention at a car show. It would be dishonest of a car restorer to waste the customer's money making the typical "car show queen" mechanically solid, since actually driving and enjoying the old car for what it is, is not why these people have the old car in the first place. And to DELIBERATELY make the car less attractive by having black-walls....c'mon...be serious. Yeah..I know SOME of you CLAIM that some cars look better with just plain black-wall tires, and of course we know that the overwhelming majority of the pre World War Two cars, when they were first delivered as new cars, had black-walls. But why waste your energy - this planet is going to continue to rotate, and new people with different needs, tastes, and ideas ARE coming into our hobby. I just cant get worked up about any particular car club's rules evolving to reflect the changing times. I used to. But that was then. Time to have fun and enjoy life.

I personally am not aware of nor seen any literature confirming the Packard factory tried to "unload" 1933 models as 1934's. I have seen, over the years, (beginning in the late 1940's when I first became interested in old Packards...several Packards that had '34 fenders, but were obviously 1933 production. How they got those fenders, I have no clue. Of course there are two obvious "give-a-ways" - on all series (320 cu. in Standard Eight, 384 cu. in Super Eight, and 440 cu in V-12, there was a change in front doors (different vent & window mechanisms that will NOT interchange between '33 and '34. Also, the dash in 1933 production did NOT have a provision for the control head - in that year, the so called "factory" radio control head was on the steering column). I do NOT recall any difference in the V-12 engine itself between '33 and '34 production - it still had the "old style" front end engine support and timing case cover. My recollection is that '34 was the first year of the "new" type engine mount, in which the front of the engine is "hung" on a rubber support which attaches to the center of the timing case, but only on the Eight and Super Eight. My RECOLLECTION (which may be incorrect) is the '34 Super Eights were the first ones with the finned con rod caps, and a revised oil filter and oil cooler. Bottom line - the original "post" was correct - people monkey around with their cars, then and now, to make them look more attractive. We KNOW the first year or so of post war production came out of the factory without white-walls, because NO white-walls were manufactured until somewhere around early 1947. Anyone who has access to photos from the pre-war era knows that while SOME dealers dressed up SOME of their displays with white walls...what actually went out the door to new car buyers was what the new car buyers wanted. And, as was discussed before, that was a VERY conservative era. I would like very much to see a REAL photo of a production big luxury car from that era that we now call a "CLASSIC" (with the exception of a few custom bodied cars for VERY "showy" people and / or car shows) that came like those beautiful FORTUNE MAGAZINE advertisements....!

I flew over Black Canyon just a few days ago. Looked from the air like the place is still active..but, obviously, from altitude could not tell you how old the cars are, or what parts they have in inventory, that would be of interest to old car buffs.

Hi Bill: C'mon..man..I didnt come in here to see no photo of some damned fool overgrown yellow "Chevie" with the "lock-washer" option-let's see that '34 Packard, too ! Seriously, Bill....great shot of that LaSalle ! Of course SOME people DID order white walls, and of course your particular car REALLY "comes into its own" with them ! P F H ( NOW LET'S SEE THAT '34 PACKARD ! )

yes - that would be very interesting ! But even if so, it would not change the answer I gave to the fellow that started this particular "thread" with his question. The indisputable fact is, and at the risk of repeating myself, long before the end of the 1930's, there were LOTS of cars being driven LOTS of miles with ordinary "flat" tappets (meaning non-roller cam followers) that gave good service for far more miles than most of us car buffs would use our collector cars for today.

what next..."lowering" kit...glass packs...beaver tail for the antenna..? chop and channel...? Get rid of that silly old Laidlaw broadcloth upholstery for some nice "tuck and roll" leatherette..? SAVE THE DUCK...MAKE WEST PUT THAT DUCK BACK ON... (for those of you who dont understand our clowning around...one of the most-well known hood ornaments of Packard from the early 1930's clear down to the end of "real" Packard production, was a bird. Few things drive us Packard owners crazier than a well-meaning but innocent person referring to it as a DUCK...! What it SHOULD be called is a subject of considerable debate...best conducted after consuming appropriate amounts of...well.."adult" beverages. I have seen literature identifying it as a swan..a comorant...and a pelican. BUT NEVER EVER CALL OUR 'BIRDS'...A DUCK !

In anwer to your question, let me first assure you I personally am not competent in oil technology and certainly no expert on chemistry! Best I can do for your question, is give you the following "layman" comment - you have given us the chemical abbreviation for the "family" of zinc-based anti-friction additives used in consumer-grade MOTOR oils in recent years. Motor oils containing these additives bear the API designation "energy conserving" ( I only see this now on 5W-20 oils specified for the latest cars-cant seem to find it in the 20W-50 oil I like to use when I plan to REALLY "tear" up the desert during summer heat extremes). If engine oil from before the war had zinc-based anti-friction additives of this nature, again, I am not aware of it, and I find no mention of it either in the literature I have access to, or recall seeing it advertised or on oil containers of before, oh..say...hmmmm 1985 ? Similar anti-friction additives have been required in recent years of motor oils for piston AIRCRAFT in order to meet "Lycoming Service Bulletin 446C. If you know something I dont, by all means share it with us.

you...you...duck killer...!

regarding your question about oil additive technology in the 1930's To my knowledge, what we now know as "anti friction" additives in motor oils did not exist until the "ecology/mileage" issue hit about 15-20 years ago. Let me qualify that below: This is admittedly an over-simplification; let me repeat as briefly as I can what has been well-discussed over and over again elsewhere in these forums. Hopefully this info. will be useful to our fellow car-buffs. There were three major improvements in consumer-grade motor oils following World War II, meaning "detergent" , multi grade" and "anti friction" oils. So called "multi-grade" and "detergent" oils came in around the same time, in the early 1950's. Both terms are just plain advertising nonsence. Here's why. SINGLE grade oils are actually "multi-grade", since they only have to pass a flow test at a "standard" temp - believe it is 210 0r 212 degrees F. At any OTHER temp, they need not meet any standard, because there isnt any. When cold, single grade oils get so thick, they cant get thru all the places they are supposed to go, which explains why cold dry starts cause so much wear. Multi grade oils are in fact a SINGLE GRADE, meaning they flow well when it is very cold, but retain their "film" strength when hot. The term "detergent" is also nonsence. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS 'DETERGENT' MOTOR OIL. Again, an advertising term to show the motor stays clean. Simply means the molocules cant "link up" to form sludge. "Detergent" oils CAN NOT DISSOLVE SLUDGE ! I got into a big argument about this around 1957, when I pulled my Packard Twelve apart for an overhaul. I cleaned out all the sludge, except for some "test sections" in the crank-case. One "test section" I left on the inside wall of the crankcase is where oil thrown off from the crankshaft hits it directly - the other is behind the webbing of the main bearing supports. I "pull" my oil pan down every few years as a good maintainence proceedure just to check things out; THOSE SLUDGE SPOTS ARE STILL THERE, DESPITE USING 10w30 EVER SINCE 1957 ! Well over 100,000 miles since then, under all kinds of driving conditions, including MANY years of Los Angeles traffic (yes...I am crazy enough to STILL be driving the same Packard Twelve.) Again, "detergent" oil simply means that the engine wont make MORE sludge. Will not effect EXSISTING sludge. CANT ! Chemically wont happen! No solvents in "detergent" oils ! Oils for use in gears, such as the hypoid axle gears, DID have anti-friction additives as early as the late 1920's. Again, if any of these sulpher-based anti friction formulas were used in MOTOR oils, I am not aware of it.

West - tell me it isnt true...did you REALLY take the duck off the radiator ?

please dont blame me personally for all these nonsensical stories about many many people driving cars around for many many miles prior to the Second World War, on oil that HAD NO ANTI FRICTION ADDITIVES. I was just a child, too young to drive, too young to be an accurate observor. Of course these new oils will immediately cause your cam-shaft to uncam, your drive-shaft to un-drive, unless you RIGHT NOW run out and buy these expensive additives. Seriously, guys, I just spent a fortune going thru the engine in my aircraft - an ordinary garden-variety Lycoming "360" series (translation - ordinary over-head valve cam-shaft with "flat" tappets). The cam and lifters ground themselves to "nubs" !. (and the thing still ran fairly well..!) As many of you know - we have no choice; we MUST use "legal" aircraft engine oil THAT MUST CERTIFY IT HAS THE ANTI FRICTION ADDITIVES ! So, clearly - the anti-friction additives that aircraft oils still have, did not prevent cam "spalling". My best guess on my own cam failure is the typical failure caused by "grinding" the camshaft and "surface grinding" the lifters during a previous overhaul. Again, there is overwhelming evidence the vast majority of the cam and lifter failures on "flat tappet" engines is caused by bad shop practice during overhaul, i.e. "re-surfacing" that removes the "hardness layer" on the cam and tappet bodies. Add to that engines that may sit idle long enough for microscopic "pockets" of corrosion on surfaces subject to extremes of pressure, and you get cam/lifter failure. So - again, the 'anti-friction" additives of course MAY help the cam-shaft issue, but not much. And again, the anti-friction additives were not put in for guys with older design "flat-tappet" engines - they were there to increase mileage. Now - I admit I am a snob - I like, for my collector car, the biggest, most expensive, most powerful cars. Someone refresh my memory - was there ANY really expensive, really powerful luxury car made after the early 1920's that did NOT have roller tappets..? Now, on this oil-additive issue - if you like "conspiracy" theories, it is a free country and that is your "right". Personally, my favorite "conspiracy theory" is the one where President Roosevelt is accused of hiring the Japanese to bomb Pearl Harbor. See...he wasnt really a wheel-chair bound paraplegic...he snuck out of the White House one night..broke into a Radio Shack, where he bought a radio he used to call up the Japanese Navy...and..and..

thanks for the info about stuff on the Internet. Now we know that all those people who CLAIM to have driven all those cars all those years prior to the 2nd World War are wrong, and we have to go run out and buy all these additives....

thanks for posting the photos - great ! But...be suspicious. LOOK CLOSELY at that '34 Packard V-12. It has 1933 front door WINDOW VENTILATORS. That's a clue we are looking at "pre production car - a "factory promo" photo - not a car that was actually ordered and delivered ! Of COURSE the factory photos often show white-walls. They wanted the cars to look glamorous. But again, MOST cars were delivered in those MUCH MORE CONSERVATIVE TIMES with black walls and dark somber paint jobs.

RE : the question was - will the "new" oils cause harm to "slider" (meaning non roller equippeed) tappet/camshaft systems. C'mon..guys..you are missing the point. The anti friction additives that are no longer being put into consumer-grade motor oils, WERE NOT PUT IN THERE BECAUSE OF CAMSHAFT ISSUES ! The petrol industry and the auto industry dreamed them up to hopefully get a bit more mileage out of cars. We had a long history of non-additive oils. Cars ran fine with them and gave good service life (remember, good service life in the old days was about 30,000 miles between valve jobs...MAYBE 60,000 miles between overhauls). But that was in large measure because most cars did NOT have air or oil filters. The insistance on the addition of anti friction additives to oils, by the makers of small piston-powered aircraft motors, has NOT stopped the epidemic of cam and lifter failure ! The failures are most likely due to 1) corrosion pits from long period of dis-use and 2) bad shop overhaul techniques. Let me explain. "Grinding" cams and surface grinding lifters is BAD PRACTICE. You generally damage or lose completley the thin "hardness" layer. You are lucky to get a couple of hundred hours of operation out of an engine that has re ground cams and lifters no matter WHAT additives you put in your oil. Of course there are exceptions. But again, the answer to the original question is - GO DRIVE THE THING ! FREQUENTLY ! Change the oil at regular intervals ! There were an awful lot of cars that did not have roller lifters, prior to the 2nd World War. And they racked up a lot of miles on engine oil that was far INFERIOR to ANY "legit" multi-grade oil you can buy today.