Synthetic Oil

[Newsa]

Ford never officially released a smoking gun as to their official reason, although judging by the extensiveness of this list, I'd say it's a fair assessment that they cried wolf. And we all know what happens when you do that too many times...one tends to lose credibility.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAAegQICRAB&usg=AOvVaw35UoJzYAKvZ6xOLfGBRet5

They say ck4 provides inadequate wear protection. That's a reason.

Ck4 is designed to improve fuel efficiency.
Does supposedly improve resistance to oxidation. Does it really improved load carrying capacity?

 

[6V92TA]

this is Ford original press release on the CK4 subject. https://www.flsheriffs.org/uploads/docs/January_2017_Updated_CK-4_Position_Statement.pdf

keep in mind that much as Cummins stresses that CES 20086 ceritification Ford has their own oil spec Ford Material Engineering Specification WSS-M2C171-F1 and apparently when that press release was published there were concerns... Or else Ford was trying to push Motocraft Oil. who really knows out here in the general public.

 

[Killer223]

Why do you people take my words and shorten them? I stated NO better in a diesel engine.
Yes synthetics have their place in the auto industry. But, in these engines, it does no good to run it Unless you live where it's bloody cold.
the towing and city driving and whatever else you do with these trucks, the dino oil will perform just fine.
if you live in the north and have regular sub 0 cold starts, then the cold flow properties of the syn oil is better suited.
Not one person can give me quantifiable hard proof that a synthetic oils performed any better than a dino in these engines driven in the same conditions.
i have 50 or 60 so used oil analysis, about 1/4 of them were when i drank the synthetic coolaid. and i know for fact nothing changed in my engines when running dino vs synthetic. so now. i run what's on sale. usually travellers from tractor supply. i get them in the 5-gal pales.
although lately i've switched to a mobil delvac MX f2. it's of the older CI standard not the CJ or CK. there is a reason they started producing it again.

 

[JR]

They say ck4 provides inadequate wear protection. That's a reason.

Ck4 is designed to improve fuel efficiency.
Does supposedly improve resistance to oxidation. Does it really improved load carrying capacity?

Did you not read the link i provided? It's a list of Ford approved WSSM2C171F1 oils that also happen to carry the CK4 spec. There are several PAGES of them.

Newsa your confusing specs. FA4 oils carry a lower HTHS than CK4. They are the lighter oils designed for improved FE.
CK4 is backward compatible with CJ4 with several new test requirements and many of the current tests, more specifically the ISB/ISM tests having more stringent requirements.

 

[JR]

this is Ford original press release on the CK4 subject. https://www.flsheriffs.org/uploads/docs/January_2017_Updated_CK-4_Position_Statement.pdf

keep in mind that much as Cummins stresses that CES 20086 ceritification Ford has their own oil spec Ford Material Engineering Specification WSS-M2C171-F1 and apparently when that press release was published there were concerns... Or else Ford was trying to push Motocraft Oil. who really knows out here in the general public.

I'm still not sure what to think about them crying wolf. The whole bit about lower phos that comes along with the SN spec is bogus, if a few hundred ppm difference is genuinely catastrophic to the valve train of your engine it's going to have problems one way or the other. Not to mention there are countless oils on their approved list with the CK4/SN spec. It was probably more of an issue of them not having as much R&D into the spec as all the other diesel OEM's at the time of release as anything.

 

[JR]

i have 50 or 60 so used oil analysis, about 1/4 of them were when i drank the synthetic coolaid. and i know for fact nothing changed in my engines when running dino vs synthetic

Agreed, current conventionals are good enough that there is no measurable difference in wear between the two when following oem recomended intervals. I've said it in other threads here before, I've seen alot of these 5.9's and 8.3's with 15-20k hours on them when they got traded off and still running strong. All on fleet spec T3 oil and 500 hour intervals.

 

[fest3er]

Agreed. It is a fact that synthetic is better than conventional oil. The only argument is whether it is worth it to you and whether you'll notice the difference without doing a side by side test. Most people won't notice a thing....but this doesn't mean it is not a better performing oil.

The molecule content of full synthetics is far more consistent than that of refined crude, thus flows better at cold temps and provides a more consistent lube.

FWIW, I filled my '98 12V 4x4 (with bypass filter) with Amsoil Diesel&Marine 15W40 at about 60k miles. And proceeded to change the full flow filter every 12k and both every 25k miles (generally; sometimes a little shorter, sometimes a few thousand longer) and added fresh oil to replace what was in the filters. I didn't drain the oil until 290k miles (I had to pert near destroy the plug to get it out it was so rusted on). Truck still runs well. And with a double-shot of cetane boost, I can get over 20MPG on the highway running 70-75 MPH.

If you change your oil every 3k miles, use almost* the cheapest correct oil you can get your hands on. If you change your oil when the mfr says you should, use a less expensive synthetic lube designed to last that long.

* I said 'almost' because the cheapest lube can boil off the more volatile (more easily evaporated) parts of the lube when the engine runs hot (as in towing heavy); this makes the lube measurably thicker. If too much boils off, the lube could become thicker than is recommended for the engine and possibly not provide a good enough load bearing film everywhere it's needed.

 

[Newsa]

The molecule content of full synthetics is far more consistent than that of refined crude, thus flows better at cold temps and provides a more consistent lube.

FWIW, I filled my '98 12V 4x4 (with bypass filter) with Amsoil Diesel&Marine 15W40 at about 60k miles. And proceeded to change the full flow filter every 12k and both every 25k miles (generally; sometimes a little shorter, sometimes a few thousand longer) and added fresh oil to replace what was in the filters. I didn't drain the oil until 290k miles (I had to pert near destroy the plug to get it out it was so rusted on). Truck still runs well. And with a double-shot of cetane boost, I can get over 20MPG on the highway running 70-75 MPH.

If you change your oil every 3k miles, use almost* the cheapest correct oil you can get your hands on. If you change your oil when the mfr says you should, use a less expensive synthetic lube designed to last that long.

* I said 'almost' because the cheapest lube can boil off the more volatile (more easily evaporated) parts of the lube when the engine runs hot (as in towing heavy); this makes the lube measurably thicker. If too much boils off, the lube could become thicker than is recommended for the engine and possibly not provide a good enough load bearing film everywhere it's needed.

Just curious what was the manufacturer recommended OCI?

(AND) Excuse me, but running an oil 220-230,000 miles????? Weren't you concerned about oxidation of engine parts due to TBN exhaustion and acids? Or is the marine oil (Semper Fi) over-loaded with additives to neutralize acids formed by combustion? Obviously, the drain plug rusted.

Did you do oil analysis?

The first time I read this, I thought you (said) you changed the full flow every 12k and both the oil and full flow (you said both) at 25. [ I thought that's what you meant by both because amsoil doesn't recommend most of their oils to go more than 25k.]. Or at least they used to. But now after re-reading, I see you changed both filters at 25k intervals, but used the oil 200+k. ???????

 

[Learjet]

I use the best of both worlds...LOL... Rotella T5 Semi-Syn 15w-40

 

[JR]

Mobil Delvac 15/40 here $11.00 per gallon @ Wall Mart and a Fleetguard Stratapore filter @ Amazon. Gets dumped every six months with around 7K miles. <$50.00 per oil change and warranty compliant.

FYI, if you buy your Mobil Delvac at participating locations you qualify for a $7 per gallon rebate for the 1300. If you are using the synth blend the rebate is more .
I typically wait until Advance Auto has their 20% off sale which they do frequently and purchase several gallons. 20% off equates to roughly $13 per gallon, minus $7 per gallon rebate nets $6 per gallon give or take a buck or two.
Here is the website, at the bottom of the page is a link to the participating locations

https://mobiloil.com/en/promotion/mobil-promotions/60-off-diesel-domain

 

[Wayne M.]

Regarding basic spark engine oils, I witnessed a real eye opener about a month ago. One of the guys in my shop (we're all decent Mechanics) was doing the top end on his old Ram 150 with a 318. He was putting in a cam kit too. We all warned him about the proper break-in, and one guy, who does race engines on the side told him to use Lucas Oil 20/50 special break in oil.
Well he didn't use special oil, and perhaps he didn't run the cam in as well as he should have, but inside of a week, he wore down 4 lobes. It was a disaster.
None of us could believe this went so bad. If anyone wants to follow me on Instagram, I have a post up.
He wound up doing it over, using that break in oil, and it's all good now.
Lesson learned. Today's basic oil is not like the old stuff.

 

[kthaxton]

My bet is improper break-in.

 

[JR]

Yeah, while it's far easier to jump on the anti EPA bandwagon (guilty myself) I'd wager improper assembly or break in. And ive built my share of small blocks and big blocks in the last 25 years. Oil manufacturers have come up with equal alternatives to zddp and phos, albeit P
perhaps at the expense of slightly added cost.

Illustration above from Chevron (Delo) website demonstrating phos content related to wear. .12%, .08% (max allowable to carry API SN) and .08% phos content combined with ashless (non phos) antiwear components.

It's called modern chemistry, not always a bad thing

 

[dougsram]

According to my Ram owners manual and extended warranty, I am supposed to dump my oil at six months whether I use conventional or synthetic oil. And the AAA study on synthetics (which I've read numerous times) states that you only achieve increased engine wear protection by following your vehicles drain interval. So if you are extending your drain interval to compensate for your $60-$100 plus special synthetic oil and an additional $30 plus for the analysis that says you can keep circulating it, you probably aren't increasing the longevity of your engine or saving money over conventional. I know what my TBN (9.8), viscosity (14.1), and additive (calc, mag, phosph, zinc) levels are every six months when I install my new LF16035 and $4 a gallon Mobil Delvac. Finally, how does a Cummins owner equate test performance of syns to engine life and total miles? 450K instead of 500K? I'll need to live another 35 years at my annual usage to see the lower figure.

 

[JR]

Yeah, while it's far easier to jump on the anti EPA bandwagon (guilty myself) I'd wager improper assembly or break in. And ive built my share of small blocks and big blocks in the last 25 years. Oil manufacturers have come up with equal alternatives to zddp and phos, albeit P
perhaps at the expense of slightly added cost.

View attachment 107281

Illustration above from Chevron (Delo) website demonstrating phos content related to wear. .12%, .08% (max allowable to carry API SN) and .08% phos content combined with ashless (non phos) antiwear components.

It's called modern chemistry, not always a bad thing

I should have better clarified this chart.
Phos is the main element limited by API in zddp. It has long been proven that above 1500 ppm (.015%) zddp becomes corrosive in the long term so 1200 ppm give or take has generally been the cutoff for oil manufacturers (excluding break in oils). This goes all the way back to API SH early 1990's. As Chevron has proved with their testing engineers have been able to produce better AW additives that offer better protection than the .12% limit that has been in oil formulas for the last 25+ years.

 

[gsbrockman]

According to my Ram owners manual and extended warranty, I am supposed to dump my oil at six months whether I use conventional or synthetic oil. And the AAA study on synthetics (which I've read numerous times) states that you only achieve increased engine wear protection by following your vehicles drain interval. So if you are extending your drain interval to compensate for your $60-$100 plus special synthetic oil and an additional $30 plus for the analysis that says you can keep circulating it, you probably aren't increasing the longevity of your engine or saving money over conventional. I know what my TBN (9.8), viscosity (14.1), and additive (calc, mag, phosph, zinc) levels are every six months when I install my new LF16035 and $4 a gallon Mobil Delvac. Finally, how does a Cummins owner equate test performance of syns to engine life and total miles? 450K instead of 500K? I'll need to live another 35 years at my annual usage to see the lower figure.

Guess what????? Some of us are putting on 15k miles in 5 or 6 weeks.

Just because it isn’t a fit for you.....doesn’t mean it isn’t a fit for some.

 

[Newsa]

Why do you people take my words and shorten them? I stated NO better in a diesel engine.
Yes synthetics have their place in the auto industry. But, in these engines, it does no good to run it Unless you live where it's bloody cold.
the towing and city driving and whatever else you do with these trucks, the dino oil will perform just fine.
if you live in the north and have regular sub 0 cold starts, then the cold flow properties of the syn oil is better suited.
Not one person can give me quantifiable hard proof that a synthetic oils performed any better than a dino in these engines driven in the same conditions.
i have 50 or 60 so used oil analysis, about 1/4 of them were when i drank the synthetic coolaid. and i know for fact nothing changed in my engines when running dino vs synthetic. so now. i run what's on sale. usually travellers from tractor supply. i get them in the 5-gal pales.
although lately i've switched to a mobil delvac MX f2. it's of the older CI standard not the CJ or CK. there is a reason they started producing it again.

Most of us can't use CI-4. Not compatible with DPF's

 

[6V92TA]

Cummins now recommends CK4 in place of CI4 for the older engines. see if you can read this.. from Quickserve Fluids for Cummins Products

 

[6V92TA]

chart for this stuff

 

[Killer223]

Thanks 6V92TA, i knew it wasn't compatible with the newer engines, but for all three of mine, it's a great option.