Engine/Transmission (1998.5 - 2002) CI-4 Diesel Engine Oil Availability

[OldRetiredAFGuy]

Just read the TDR #84 article on pages 40-43, and would to take exception to Mr. Martins statement: "Since you can no longer obtain CI-4 diesel oils." in the next to last paragraph of the article.

I purchase Lucas 15-40 Magnum High TBN CI-4 oil at my local chain auto parts. The part number for this oil in quarts is 10075. Part number for gallons is 10076. For my 2006 JD farm tractor, I purchase either ConocoPhillips Super HD II CI-4 Plus, or Country Tuff 15-40 CI-4 Premium Diesel Engine Oil, at my local farm supply store.

Also, Delo 400 15-40 CI-4 Plus is still available from your local Chevron supplier, or farm supply store, in 5 Gallon pails and in 55 Gallon drums. I've been stockpiling this for years as a last resort backup in case Lucas is no longer available.

I can't afford to cut my change interval in half for CJ-4! :-laf

 

[JR]

You don't have to cut your intervals in half to run CJ4 oil. There are literally hundreds of millions of miles put on CJ4 oils every year on pre emission engines at the same or longer intervals that your putting on your CI4 oil.

 

[JMcCoy]

I too use the Lucas 15w-40 CI-4. CI-4 has more zinc for better valve train wear and ability to withstand pressure. I purchase it at Napa for $6 and change. Good to know others still sell it, especially in bulk. Thanks for the information.

 

[JR]

http://www.nonlintec.com/sprite/oil_myths.pdf

If you can't open the link directly in pdf. try opening it in your browser

 

[OldRetiredAFGuy]

You don't have to cut your intervals in half to run CJ4 oil. There are literally hundreds of millions of miles put on CJ4 oils every year on pre emission engines at the same or longer intervals that your putting on your CI4 oil.

From TDR # 71 article Lube Oils: "I know that the major oil marketers are telling their customers that CJ-4 oils are backward compatible (you can use them in pre-2007 engines), and that is somewhat true. But if you use less detergent in an oil, your oil change interval should be shortened accordingly."

From TDR # 57 article Analysis of Lube Oil-Part 2: "None of the CJ-4 oils look like much of a deal to me either. You should only utilize these oils if you have particulate traps on your vehicle.

 

[Regcabguy]

My Blackstone readings are nearly identical on the present CJ as they were on the prior CI products. Same mileage interval,programmer,load etc.

 

[JR]

A quote from the GM engineer in the link I posted above:

The Starburst Oil Myth

The latest myth promoted by the antique and collector car press says that new Starburst/API SM engine oils (called Starburst for the shape of the symbol on the container) are bad for older engines because the amount of anti-wear additive in them has been reduced. The anti-wear additive being discussed is zinc dithiophosphate (ZDP).
Before debunking this myth, we need to look at the history of ZDP usage. For over 60 years, ZDP has been used as an additive in engine oils to provide wear protection and oxidation stability. ZDP was first added to engine oil to control copper/lead bearing corrosion. Oils with a phosphorus level in the 0.03% range passed a corrosion test introduced in 1942. In the mid-1950s, when the use of high-lift camshafts increased the potential for scuffing and wear, the phosphorus level contributed by ZDP was increased to the 0.08% range. In addition, the industry developed a battery of oil tests (called sequences), two of which were valve-train scuffing and wear tests. A higher level of ZDP was good for flat-tappet valve-train scuffing and wear, but it turned out that more was not better. Although break-in scuffing was reduced by using more phosphorus, longer-term wear increased when phosphorus rose above 0.14%. And, at about 0.20% phosphorus, the ZDP started attacking the grain boundaries in the iron, resulting in camshaft spalling. By the 1970s, increased antioxidancy was needed to protect the oil in high-load engines, which otherwise could thicken to a point where the engine could no longer pump it. Because ZDP was an inexpensive and effective antioxidant, it was used to place the phosphorus level in the 0.10% range. However, phosphorus is a poison for exhaust catalysts. So, ZDP levels have been reduced over the last 10-15 years. It's now down to a maximum of 0.08% for Starburst oils. This was supported by the introduction of modern ashless antioxidants that contain no phosphorus. Enough history. Let's get back to the myth that Starburst oils are no good for older engines. The argument put forth is that while these oils work perfectly well in modern, gasoline engines equipped with roller camshafts, they will cause catastrophic wear in older engines equipped with flat-tappet camshafts. The facts say otherwise. Backward compatability was of great importance when the Starburst oil standards were developed by a group of experts from the OEMs, oil companies, and oil additive companies. In addition, multiple oil and additive companies ran no-harm tests on older engines with the new oils; and no problems were uncovered. The new Starburst specification contains two valve-train wear tests. All Starburst oil formulations must pass these two tests. 1Sequence IVA tests for camshaft scuffing and wear using a single overhead camshaft engine with slider finger (not roller) followers. 2Sequence IIIG evaluates cam and lifter wear using a V6 engine with a flat-tappet system, similar to those used in the 1980s. Those who hold onto the myth are ignoring the fact that the new Starburst oils contain about the same percentage of ZDP as the oils that solved the camshaft scuffing and wear issues back in the 1950s. (True, they do contain less ZDP than the oils that solved the oil thickening issues in the 1960s, but that's because they now contain high levels of ashless antioxidants not commercially available in the 1960s.) Despite the pains taken in developing special flat-tappet camshaft wear tests that these new oils must pass and the fact that the ZDP level of these new oils is comparable to the level foundnecessary to protect flat-tappet camshafts in the past, there will still be those who want to believe the myth that new oils will wear out older engines. Like other myths before it, history teaches us that it will probably take 60 or 70 years for this one to die also.


While this does not pertain specifically to diesel engine oils it is relevant to flat tappet engines. As far as the TBN the sulfur content has drastically been reduced since the CI4 days. I have several UOA reports past 10k miles still showing strong TBN numbers. While I am no engineer I would have to say there is a lot of evidence to back this up, just look at the vast majority of the nation who has been running CJ4 specd oil for going on 8 years now with billions of miles accumulated. If there was a problem with this oil in pre emission trucks I would certainly think there would be countless horror stories of premature engine failures.

 

[JMcCoy]

That is all good information. I am also no engineer. My issue is that the new CJ-4 oil was developed to address issues with the newer engines and newer emmissions standards. I would rather run oil that was developed for my engine's issues and emissions standards at the time it was built. There may not be countless horror stories, but you may (or may not) get only 800,000 miles out of my engine instead of 1,000,000 miles. Why bother when there is perfectly good CI-4 out there for purchase. Just my opinion.

 

[JR]

What a lot of people don't realize is when CJ4 oils were introduced they were "qualified" using more severe tests than the CI4 oils were tested at. When tested against CI4 oils (according to the API website) CJ oils had better wear protection, soot and deposit control, higher shear viscosities, lower cold temperature pumpability, and the big one that people hang on to CI4 oils in the first place for, better protection from oxidative breakdown. The higher TBN content was to counter the acidic conditions due to the higher content of sulfur in the fuel, with ULSD it is not needed in such high amounts.

In order for API to certify an oil, it has to meet or exceed every criteria the previous certification had. We all use the latest spec gear oils, transmission fluids, antifreezes, and even light duty engine oils for gasoline engines with no reservations as they have all been greatly improved over the years, I can't find any solid evidence to support why the same can't be said for diesel engine oil....

 

[JMcCoy]

Valid arguement. Just so you know, I still own an oil can funnel. LOL

 

[gtwitch]

This from my observations over the past 25 or so years. With the Reduction of ZDP in the newer oils as a result of EPA requirements, I have seen continuing cam/lifter failures in flat tappet engines in either newer or classic restored cars and tractors which I attribute to the reduction of ZDP in the newer oils. About 20 years ago in the aircraft industry, there was a sudden rash of cam/lifter failures (our club 172 Cessna lost a Cam anc Lifters at less than 300 hrs), Lycoming came out with a TSB requiring the use of an additive which contained ZDP and that seemed to solve the cam/lifter failures. In my Cummins and my gas burners of late and also in the classics that I have helped to build, I have used either an additive containing ZDP or an appropriate oil and have not seen any cam/lifter problems.

Just some ramblings from my observations.

gtwitch in wyoming

 

[JR]

20 years ago was before the CI4 days and I'm sure had even higher ZDP content then the CI4. So do you run an additive with your CI4 as well? You would have to to achieve the same levels as what you were using in your Cessna. Using a ZDP additive for break in on flat tappet engines have been a requirement for many many years, even if you choose to run an older specd oil.

 

[OldRetiredAFGuy]

Another interesting thought: What would be the effect of using CI-4 or CI-4+ oil in a later engine, say the new 6.7? Harmful, destructive, cleaner engine, Catalytic Converter or DPF failure or what?

 

[JR]

The zdp has been reduced due to the plugging of the dpf in diesels and convertors in gassers. As far as cleaner engines, they would actually be dirtier with a CI4 because the CJ oils have been formulated for superior soot retention to counter the egr in newer engines

 

[Tuesdak]

I have not seen UOA that "fleet" customers were getting that the TDR article referenced when the CJ oils came out. I think this would be very interesting info as to what was causing reduced miles out of the oil. What I do know from our own experience is there IS a reason they reformulated the oils after they came out.

When oil fails it fails quickly and damage is also quick, expensive to repair, and may not get you home. Having scuffed a piston, seen "Low Oil Pressure stop engine" alarms on a extreme hot day towing, viscosity jump to nearly a 60 weight, extreme soot... I get phone calls from the oil lab.

Those with a daily driver that don't tow, ever, can just skip the rest of my rant. :-laf

Towing a 24-28' cargo trailer around the 121 degree summers in Arizona stuffed full of auto parts and tires. Add to this mountain grades that go on for miles. Mountain Grades starting at 7% up to 18%. Literally uphill both ways on a delivery route we had.

I should run a synthetic oil. But changing it every week would be expensive... In one case it could have saved me from scuffing a piston when the cooling system wasn't doing so good. The engine nearly locked up on one grade running hot and then continued running. 7000 miles after cooling system repairs with UOA having lots of things in red the engine finished burning through a cracked piston in a scuffed cylinder and blew oil everywhere from the crankcase pressure. Oil changes were every 3000 miles, once a week, and the UOA was miserable, cooling issue engine aside, even though the three 6.5's I ran vaporized a quart every 500 miles. So I really changed the oil 2x over a week by adding a quart every day. Yes, older 6.5TD working hard on modern emissions oil. Yes, the oil spec for the 6.2 engine was originally straight 30 weight oil.

Prior to this we used a 2008 Duramax that the auto liked to lug 6th gear (double overdrive) and heat things up. Ever boil a battery dry from underhood temps? Even with a 2 quart aftermarket oil cooler: after kicking off the trailer at the end of the day on a hot afternoon with the engine idling then a shift to drive would trigger the low oil pressure alarm for a moment. Oil pressure below 9 PSI. GM has likely "buffered" this low oil pressure spike since. Tends to happen in extreme hot weather near the end of the oil's 9k mile life. The alarm, of course, means the oil is done. Extending the oil drain intervals to me that I read about others doing would be a bad joke for these conditions.

My 2nd 6.5TD I hot rodded a lot and with the BD spool valve noticed it kept more heat in the engine from the exhaust. Not being afraid of 1550 EGT on that engine it held together just fine while we perfected the tune to run a little cooler. Later during the hot summer with 1400 or less EGT and 210 or less ECT I got a UOA back saying I more or less ruined the oil via overheating it (and some soot) as it was nearly a 60 wt. Was a 15w-40... I switched to synthetic on that engine. So much for the extra soot holding limits of the oil.

In conclusion you can reach the limits of conventional and synthetic engine oil. The EPA mandated changes to oil make that limit easier to reach. Just a slightly higher setting on the programmer maybe gets you there.

IMO if you want to really see the changes you have to "test until failure" rather than using just UOA. UOA just tells you you didn't reach or are near the limits. Scuffing from oil failure, heat failure, soot loading viscosity changes, soot build up, overloading via lugging and resulting metal to metal contact, and fuel dilution limits can show you the real changes to what you once thought was a good oil. Sure the new "neutered" oil will work in a modern engine. The older engines are out of warranty so it must be miles and age killing the camshafts rather than oil that is no longer designed for the "old" engine. The EPA is quite happy when the old engine fails and has to be replaced with a new low emission engine. Yeah, we have seen changes "harm" old engines in the past and the emissions Diesel oil has affected oil drain intervals for the worse on older engines.

I am curious if the reformulations have corrected oil drain intervals for fleet operators lately.