Following this with interest.

 

David, I am as well. Although, I have done quite a bit more reading today about oil, viscosity, blends, formulas, additives and snake oil than I care to divulge. What I have come up with as a decision for my own personal situation and future is to purchase just enough Rotella T6 for my next oil change and see how this goes into the new year.

I honestly feel that there are three ways this can go.

1. Ford will sanction the use of CK-4 and all will be fine.

2. Ford will not sanction the use of CK-4 and we will be forced to either use the Ford/WSS-M2C171-F1 blend at a premium cost.

3. Ford will not sanction the use of CK-4 and we will have to purchase additives for the CK-4 blend such as ZDDP Maxx, Archoil, Lucas, etc...

Anyway you look at it, there are options available to us and I think that running to the store to buy milk and bread before everyone else does is not the proper course of action. The sun will still rise in the east and set in the west after the oil companies switch to CK-4.

Disclaimer: This is all based on my own opinion and thoughts, I don't have any authority in anyway shape or form to make decisions for others.

 

Subscribing: I already have enough oil for the next three years.





But I want to have options.

 

Ford is not making any decisions based on trying to sell "their" oil because Ford does not blend, manufacture, or otherwise distribute oil. They purchase a CJ-4 oil which meets their specifications from a lubricant manufacturer and simply have it labelled with the Motorcraft label.

The only dog they have in the hunt is their own engines and their customers who have them, and their primary objection is going to be based upon how the new oil specification redirects their current engine design specifications... re-engineering an oil to new specifications is just about as time-consuming and costly for lubricant manufacturers as it is for engine builders.

 

When reading that first part of my previous post, it seems to imply that Ford made the decision to reject the oil only to sell their own. That was not my intent. I just see it as a possibility for Ford to push the oil that they find that meets their spec if they cannot reach common ground on CK-4.

I agree that Ford made the decision to reject the rating as it does not meet the needs of their engines. It is my belief that Ford has rejected the oil as it doesn't meet the needs of the 6.7s and only the 6.7s. After all, the 6.7 is the only in-house diesel Ford uses, effectively making it the only diesel engine that is truly theirs. I have been wrong before, but I highly doubt that they check to make sure the current oil meets the specs of an engine they stopped using 13 years ago made by another company.

Navistar built these engines that we all know and love, meaning they know best when it comes to them. I plan to reach out to Navistar and other manufacturers tomorrow while at work to not only learn more about the feasibility of CK-4 in our trucks, but to better understand the differences the new spec entails and be able to better explain them to our customers.

Unless something catastrophic happens and reveals something detrimental to our engines specifically, I plan to use the oil so long as it meets the CH-4 specs that were in place when our engines were originally produced.

 

Sous, a public apology is in order for my reaction. I must have "post-election/protesters/haters" fatigue But seriously, I grossly misunderstood where you were coming from. This post is spot on....not that you need my input. Anyways, that's all.

 

No problem at all.

Stay tuned for developing information from expert sources and engine manufacturers.

 

I think that all diesel engines benefit from bypass/secondary oil filtration. All large diesel engines have bypass filtration to remove carbon, etc. Even with molecular shearing, the injectors, bearings etc. live a much happier life when the oil is clean.

The only reason our vehicles do not have bypass is because of marketing/price conscious consumers who would rebel at the cost to service filters. Auto manufacturers try to minimize maintenance expenses (remove grease zerks, etc.) to sell more vehicles.

Reduced maintenance costs do not equate to longevity, especially since HEUI systems have so much retained oil that does not get changed out. And the reality is manufacturers have a history of not caring if vehicles have a long, repair free life.

 

Considering the topic of this thread, this should be timely for all of us who want to stock up or try a different brand. NAPA has Valvoline 5w-40 Premium Blue Extreme on sale for $18.99 per gal. Many of us consider it to be one of the better oils on the market for HEUI injector engines due to superior shear protection.

It is also less than Rotella T6 at this price point.

15-40 is also on sale.

 

Charlie, please share your findings. Thanks.

 

I got in touch with a tech today and got some explanations on what all is occurring with the rejection. I managed to leave my notes at work and will be going off my memory. I will pick them up tomorrow so I can elaborate on anything I may have forgotten.

The main reason that CK-4 was concocted was to extend service intervals, increase soot tolerance and resistance to oxidation. The FA-4 designation is geared toward and ONLY meant for the to-be-released engines (think next year or so), not the older/current designs that are on the road today. Both oil designations will not start trickling down to us consumers until the December/January timeframe, allotting time for all labels/stocks to fully switch over.

The reason that the API spec was rejected by Ford is that they were having sleeve wear issues due to an inadequate amount of phosphorous in the oil. The tech that I spoke with stated that many companies reduced the phosphorous level in their oil, while they kept theirs at the same level and haven't experienced the issue. If this reigns true, their oil will be on the approved brand list that Ford will most likely push out in the coming months.

The tech said he believes that Ford will work with Rotella to get the oil to meet their spec, be it increasing the amount of phosphorous in the oil or what have you. He seemed to agree with my logic that if it is backwards compatible, it shouldn't pose many issues (if any) to our older trucks, especially when using an oil with a larger amount of phosphorous in it. The tech also went into some deeper details about both categories, but they escape my mind at the moment.

I believe we will be fine when it comes down to it. Worst case we may have a bit of a delay before we can use Rotella in our trucks again. The tech that I talked to is with one of the more expensive brands that we offer at work, so absolute worst case I can switch to them.

I didn't get a chance to talk with an engineer at Navistar or somebody at Shell today. Turns out the engineers at Navistar have the week off, and I just simply ran out of time to talk with Shell.

I will be sure to come back and update you all once I have some more information.

 

Charlie, would it be too much to ask which company the tech you spoke to is with? Basically, what oil brand should we keep an eye out for when it comes time to change oil in the trucks before Rotella gets their formula straight?

We are looking forward to what you can gather from both Shell and Navistar. Thank you for doing all of the hard work for us.

 

I was told that the reason for the change was because of higher engine oil temps. The engine are running higher temps and the current oil can't withstand the temps causing excessive wear. I'm not one bit worried about this new oil working in our engines. If
Anything it will be better.

 

Sous, I replied to your PM.

Cjfarm, that is what partially what the increase in oxidation resistance is for. While the engines are -somewhat- running hotter, for the most part the temperatures are remaining the same. Oil should never get over 250°F, or else it will begin to boil, so that ceiling is still in effect. Coolant, on a 15PSI cap, can max out at 257°F before boiling. I have seen anything from 189-212°F thermostats in trucks, so you can figure the oil is only running a little bit higher than that.

 

The Fleetguard LF 9027 has a built in bypass filter. It is pricey but I consider it worthwhile and have always used it.