Anyone Read TDR Issue 57 Oil Lube Analysis?

[DCreed]

powdered, confectionary, granulated sugars are all chemically the same but perform entirely different.

 

[BTowler]

Virgin oil analysis doesn't necessarily translate into a 100% indicator on how well those oils perform with use.



Bottom line, you could use any of the oils listed and never have an engine oil failure for many hundreds of thousands of miles.

It is a pretty good indicator though. If an oil has the correct additives/compounds it will perform the way it is intended. From what I am reading, I don't trust the new formulation in the older applications.

 

[brods]

Btt

Issue 58 sure muddies up the water. In John Martin's "Dude, Nobody Reads the Label" page 54 he says CJ-4 was not made to improve wear or deposit performance. Now flip to page 151 and look at the "spider" diagram. Is the diagram intended to convey that CJ-4 oil has about twice the valve train and bearing protection of CI-4 and CI-4 plus oils? As well as twice the piston deposit protection too? What is the real story?



A more important question, since it looks like we will have to use CJ-4 sooner or later, what will be best for our engines when running CJ-4? Shortened oil change intervals? Will there be any loss of protection running the manufacturer's recommended change intervals? If oil analysis are done, are there different indicators to watch for when using CJ-4?



In the end, does it really matter or is this typical internet hysteria?

 

[Spooled-up]

It is because of that article that I realized that spending $80 on an oil change didn't net me any significant advantage. I will not switch to Amsoil at 25K now. I am using the Valvoline Premium Blue and changing my oil every 7500 miles. I'm going to let my Amsoil dealership status lapse. Imagine if you paid full price for Amsoil every oil change and it was only just as good as the Valvoline oil at less than half the price. This is a no brainer for me.

 

[amsoilman]

Issue 58 sure muddies up the water. In John Martin's "Dude, Nobody Reads the Label" page 54 he says CJ-4 was not made to improve wear or deposit performance. Now flip to page 151 and look at the "spider" diagram. Is the diagram intended to convey that CJ-4 oil has about twice the valve train and bearing protection of CI-4 and CI-4 plus oils? As well as twice the piston deposit protection too? What is the real story?



A more important question, since it looks like we will have to use CJ-4 sooner or later, what will be best for our engines when running CJ-4? Shortened oil change intervals? Will there be any loss of protection running the manufacturer's recommended change intervals? If oil analysis are done, are there different indicators to watch for when using CJ-4?



In the end, does it really matter or is this typical internet hysteria?

If you look at issue 58 and read the "Backfire" article regarding "Evaluationg Diesel Trick Engine Oils", (PAGE 150) you will note the CJ-4 Performance upgrade over CI-4 and CI-4 Plus is quite significant, other than "Shear Stability".



This "Spider" Diagram was produced by LUBRIZOL, which is the Company that John Martin worked for.



Wayne

 

[RJOL]

I think I'll just start using Valvoline Premium Blue that Cummins NW sells. I think they should know what's best for the diesel engines they service...

 

[brods]

If you look at issue 58 and read the "Backfire" article regarding "Evaluationg Diesel Trick Engine Oils", (PAGE 150) you will note the CJ-4 Performance upgrade over CI-4 and CI-4 Plus is quite significant, other than "Shear Stability".



This "Spider" Diagram was produced by LUBRIZOL, which is the Company that John Martin worked for.



Wayne

Thanks for the reply Wayne. I read the article again and still see no answers. First we must define “significant improvement”. The chart and the text make it sound like there is a huge difference between the two oils in valve train wear, etc. Imho, since the chart used in the article is showing in the neighborhood of 100% improvement, then “significant” in this situation should be at least a 50% improvement. Please quantify what “significant improvement” means in the article.



This is the critical question: For valve train wear protection, piston deposit cleanliness and bearing protection, does the CJ-4 spec specifically call for roughly twice what the CI-4 PLUS spec is?



Are the claims of CJ-4 oil’s increased protection basically a result of the increased soot control? In other words, are the claims based on CI-4 Plus oil getting overwhelmed with soot and allowing engine wear, while the CJ-4 would still be able to control the soot and would have much less soot caused wear?



Head to head in an older engine without excessive soot, does CJ-4 still have the claimed significantly improved protection over CI-4 Plus, are they the same or is CJ-4 worse?

 

[amsoilman]

Thanks for the reply Wayne. I read the article again and still see no answers. First we must define “significant improvement”. The chart and the text make it sound like there is a huge difference between the two oils in valve train wear, etc. Imho, since the chart used in the article is showing in the neighborhood of 100% improvement, then “significant” in this situation should be at least a 50% improvement. Please quantify what “significant improvement” means in the article.



This is the critical question: For valve train wear protection, piston deposit cleanliness and bearing protection, does the CJ-4 spec specifically call for roughly twice what the CI-4 PLUS spec is?



Are the claims of CJ-4 oil’s increased protection basically a result of the increased soot control? In other words, are the claims based on CI-4 Plus oil getting overwhelmed with soot and allowing engine wear, while the CJ-4 would still be able to control the soot and would have much less soot caused wear?



Head to head in an older engine without excessive soot, does CJ-4 still have the claimed significantly improved protection over CI-4 Plus, are they the same or is CJ-4 worse?

I have read the article again and as I understand the writing, this is what is being said.

API CJ-4 oils are designed to be a significant upgrade over previous oil specifications. Since 2002, engines that have been equiped with exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) systems increase the soot loading of the oil and the oil temperature. Higher soot levels require better wear protection from the oil not incorperated into previous oils. A "substantial" improvment in capability of holding soot in suspension has been shown with CJ-4 oils using various engine tests (Mack T-11, Cummins ISM) designed specificly for gauging performance in the field. Poor soot holding capability can cause Engine deposits, sludge, impaired lubrication and oil flow. [END QUOTE]



The article also goes on to say:

Today's EGR engines are putting as much as 30% of the exhaust gas back inti the engine. Engines built between 2002 and 2007 were adding 15% or more exhaust gas into the engine. Crankcase ventilation systems have been closed, increasing the potential for trapping exhaust by-products which can and do get into the oil. One of the primary modes of valve-train wear is associated with soot particles in the engine. It is critical to have strong dispersant characteristics in the oil to keep the soot particles from agglomerating. It is essential to the health of the engine that these particles remain small and suspended in the oil. [END QUOTE]





Wayne

 

[brods]

Quoting the article does not answer any questions. It looks more and more like the claim that CJ-4 “significantly” increases valve train and bearing protection is a misleading marketing exaggeration based solely on controlling excessive soot. Is that the case or are there really special additives that protect the valve train and bearings “significantly” better than CI-4 (before the CI-4 oil becomes overloaded with soot)?

 

[LMcCary]

When it comes to oil for new engines, please look to Cummins, they have spent a lot of time and money on the research. They have found the best for the money.

 

[tgordon]

The way I read it is they have additives to prevent the soot from falling out of suspension, and hence the bearing protection etc.



My question comes as what about the pre EGR engines? If several companies are going to continue to market the old CI-4 Plus along with the CJ-4 are they simply playing into the paranoid public, or is there actually something to be said here for the older oil in the older engines without the EGR and hence the soot and combustion by-product load of the newer engines?

 

[AFoulk]

didn't that article say at the end though that the large fleets were still using the older CI-4+ instead of the CJ-4 due to what their testing has shown? That article left me kind of confused as well.

I'm beginning to think that it doesn't really matter what oil you use. We use the Castrol stuff at work in our lease trucks and customers trucks, and they always look to have good wear characteristics when we open an engine up, and no sludge build up anywhere, yet Castrol was near the bottom of the list in the past 2 TDR issues. I think we need to go by what field testing shows, and not just by what additives are in the oil.

 

[amsoilman]

didn't that article say at the end though that the large fleets were still using the older CI-4+ instead of the CJ-4 due to what their testing has shown? That article left me kind of confused as well.

I'm beginning to think that it doesn't really matter what oil you use. We use the Castrol stuff at work in our lease trucks and customers trucks, and they always look to have good wear characteristics when we open an engine up, and no sludge build up anywhere, yet Castrol was near the bottom of the list in the past 2 TDR issues. I think we need to go by what field testing shows, and not just by what additives are in the oil.

There was a rebuttel on the oil article within the TDR, that states exactly what you are saying! You simply can't tell how the oil is goping to perform by the additives or amounts of additives in the oil. The rebuttle comes from Amsoil Inc. in issue # 58.





Wayne

 

[JDecanter]

Oil Tests

I just emailed Amsoil tech this evening to inquire if they were aware of this unbiased article as well! As a user and dealer of their products, it's a little suprising to see where they placed. I did make the mistake of putting the Amsoil Premium CJ-4 in my truck last oil change, I'll have to switch it right away and go back to the 15-40, yikes!















2004. 5 600/325 48RE, 4:10 anti spin, 4X4 QC, MBRP duals, AFE 2, Edge Juice/Attitude, Rhinoed, Amsoiled

I hope you get a better response from them that I did. I asked for a breakdown of the additives to compare to the additives listed in the TDR article. They said they could not give out that information because it was propriety. Seems the lab was able to discover the propriety information very easily. I have been an Amsoil customer for 30 years, but I am very disappointed in their lack of response.

 

[amsoilman]

I hope you get a better response from them that I did. I asked for a breakdown of the additives to compare to the additives listed in the TDR article. They said they could not give out that information because it was propriety. Seems the lab was able to discover the propriety information very easily. I have been an Amsoil customer for 30 years, but I am very disappointed in their lack of response.

Well, 30 years of using Amsoil must have done you a fair job! I would suspect there are no oil Companies that will tell you exactly how much and what kinds and types of additives there are in their oils. After all, if every oil Company had the exact same kinds, types and amounts of additives, they would all be the same, and there would be no controversies about oils.



Wayne

 

[DNewell]

How about this for a solution: Run what oil you feel will work well and if you own a truck with the EGR system, why not put a filter in the EGR system?

On a friends 2002 VW Jetta TDI, he had a very interesting inline filter for his EGR system. This helped to filter out the oil in the EGR system. Not 100% sure on how it works, but it did work.

Also, running a bypass filter will help alleviate much of the concern with soot being suspended in the oil. I'm thinking that a majority of those people running heavily extended oil drain intervals will need to be concerned with the lubrication of the oil, but those who swap out at 7500 miles won't need to worry as much.

I was running the Amsoil 15w40, and I have the Bypass system. I kept it topped off, and my last change of oil had around 12k miles on it. I switched to Rotella 5x40 synth because of the price. I was paying around $85 for case of Amsoil, and that gets expensive. I spent $48 on the Rotella at Wal-Mart, and I'm going to run it for around the next year.

Either way I look at it, as long as you're not buying the absolutely crap oil and running it forever, you're going to be okay. Some will argue that this is not the case, but how many people out there have the same trucks and use generic oil and never have problems? One would think that there would be all sorts of Cummins based Dodges on the side of the road with burnt up motors because they didn't use some exotic oil. Just my . 02.