schaeffer oil in a 6.7l

[ARichards]

so can anyone here give a definitive answer to the API "donut" question when it comes to Schaeffers? Do they actually have an API license number?

 

[2Rowdy]

That is a very good question ARichards. It seems to be the question.

 

[DPellegrin]

Buffalo- It's not my purpose to, in any way, cast dispersions on Schaeffer products or any product that does not have an API licence. I too have heard Schaeffer products are excellent. For this very reason I am puzzled that companies such as Schaeffers and Amsoil who make these "designer" lubricants choose not to get their API license. The API donut is the standard of the industry. It is recognized and referenced by all engine manufacturers for lube oil recommendations. All of the major engine manufacturers sit on the API committees (along with major oil companies) that develop the tests that ultimately become the requirements for compliance to an API classification. It would seem to me that the "designer' oil companies could score big PR by submitting their products to the tests required for the API license for a particular API service classification and then showing how much better they perform! I have heard the argument that the classification testing is costly and only the "big guys" can afford it. This is a weak argument.



Can an engine lubricating oil work just fine without the API licence? Maybe. I'm just not willing to take that risk.



Regards,

 

[Buffalo]

DPelligren,



My understanding is that the API testing is very expensive, also.



I wonder if Schaeffer's Oil Co. has, over the years, developed enough of a following that they don't feel the need to spend the extra money for the API licensing. It does seem that they have a very loyal following. Maybe they would rather pass the savings on to their customers.



Since they have been in the oil industry for so long, it is interesting that they don't seem to see the value in the API licensing.



BTW, I have 3 gals. of Schaeffer's 9000 (5X40, CI-4+) & just checked for the "donut" & it is not there. I've haven't used the Schaeffer's product, yet. But, as soon as I'm done with my 5 cases of Chevron Delo 400, 15X40, I will try the 9000.



I do understand your concern & see your point of view.



Joe F. (Buffalo)

 

[TAllen]

Anyone beside me use DA oil? I used it for years in my big truck. I just got 3 cases of gallons. I'll see what happens in my 6. 7. They also do oil analysis.



Tim

 

[Buffalo]

Well, I decided to get some information from the "horses mouth" & called Schaeffer's & spoke with "Larry" in their "Technical Dept. ".



According to "Larry" (who seemed quite knowledgable), their 7000 Series (synthetic/conventional blend) is already API Licensed. Their 9000 Series is about to be classified, in the near future. He said the additive suppliers are quite involved in the API Licensing & are going through the testing phase, as we speak. BTW, it costs about 2-1/2 million dollars to earn an API license for a given oil product.



I told "Larry" about the articles in the TDR Mag suggesting that the new CJ-4 rated oils were not as robust as the older formulation (CI-4+), especially in the older engines, using LSD & running extended oil drain intervals. I asked him if the higher sulphur LSD had a negative impact when extending the oil drain intervals.



His response was that the LSD had NO impact on extended oil drain intervals when using LSD. They had tested their oils extensively with extended ODI's & had great results with their oils. They even tested the new formulations using fuel with 4000 ppm (That's right. Four thousand ppm. ) just to see what the effect would be & the oils held up well.



He, also, said that the CJ-4 is, actually, much more robust than the older CI-4+ formulation. The base oils & the additive packages are much stronger. I asked him if he, personally, would be concerned about running extended ODI's in his engine, using LSD, & he said that he would not be concerned, at all. (He seemed quite enthusiastic about their new CJ-4 formulations. )



Larry also said that much of the LSD(500 ppm) actually has only 25 to 150 ppm sulphur content. If the fuel tests over the allowed 15 ppm(ULSD), it gets the LSD rating. So, the oils really don't have to deal with much sulphur, at all.



When we first started hearing all the negative comments about the new CJ-4 formulation, I called both Chevron & Schaeffer's & spoke with their tech. dept's. Both of the engineers told me, basically, the same story. The same story Larry told me, today. Larry was quite convincing & didn't sound like he was just trying to sell me his product. He seemed to have a lot of facts generated from extensive testing.



I sure would like to get Larry & the two other engineers into a room with the gentleman that wrote the oil articles in the TDR. That would be an interesting debate!!!



Joe F. (Buffalo)

 

[Buffalo]

TAllen,



I've never heard of "DA oil". Who makes it & what does the DA stand for?



I would imagine that if it's a CJ-4 rated oil it would be OK to use. Anything but a quality CJ-4 could clog up your DPF.



Thanks.



Joe F. (Buffalo)

 

[TAllen]

Joe F try this link

D-A Lubricant Company Home Page

 

[DPellegrin]

Buffalo- I admire your tenacity on this subject. However, $2. 5 million for an API licence is a bit of a stretch. If you comply with what is called "read across" the approximate cost is "only" $250,000. "Read across" allows the use of a additive package from say Lubziol, Ethyl, Infinium or Chevron that has been subject to all the tests of that particular classification. This is allowed to keep the costs of API classification certification down. If however, Schaeffer is subjecting their product to all the required tests for the CJ-4 classification, that is commendable and expensive!

Did Larry offer Schaeffer's API licence number and for which product it is referenced or any of the test results from the qualitication testing?



Regards,