PC-12 2027 New Engine Oil Spec
PC-12 2027 New Engine Oil Spec
I've seen some limited old discussion on this. But none in the General Diesel Discussion section. This here applies to everyone. Supposedly it'll be just fine and fully backwards compatible...if you get the right oil.
Anyone know how long it took Ford to figure out they didn't like the CK-4 spec...? The whole reason they had to come out with DIESEL MOTOR OILS MEETING FORD WSS-M2C171-F1. Chicken little? Maybe. Trust but verify? Closer. Look at everything like they are actively trying to put the screws to you...? Bingo.
Think they'll get it right at the dealer or your preferred service station? Those of you that don't service your own rigs and just let others do it for you might want to pay extra attention here shortly. Not to doom and gloom, but I don't think it's a stretch to think that this will go wrong for people. Hopefully when the wrong spec is used it'll just clog a DPF or something somewhat inane and or cheapish. Junking engines is what my fear would be. Seems like that wouldn't be the case, but who knows.
*Lubrizol* PC-12: What You Need to Know
- “C” category backwards compatibility, for use in older model vehicles.
- “F” category with lower high-temperature, high-shear (HTHS) viscosity levels, enabling vehicles model year 2027 and newer to achieve improved fuel efficiency.
Think they'll get it right at the dealer or your preferred service station? Those of you that don't service your own rigs and just let others do it for you might want to pay extra attention here shortly. Not to doom and gloom, but I don't think it's a stretch to think that this will go wrong for people. Hopefully when the wrong spec is used it'll just clog a DPF or something somewhat inane and or cheapish. Junking engines is what my fear would be. Seems like that wouldn't be the case, but who knows.
*Lubrizol* PC-12: What You Need to Know
The development of the next heavy-duty engine oil category—currently known as Proposed Category 12, or simply PC-12—is ongoing. Lubrizol representatives have been busy working together with the industry consortium responsible for the category’s development to help ensure that PC-12 delivers real, tangible value to the heavy-duty diesel marketplace on a targeted first license date of Jan. 1, 2027.
The New Category Development Team (NCDT) is performing important work to finalize the matrix of testing new fluids must pass to meet specifications. Here’s what you need to know about the progress of the new diesel engine oil category.
And those changes will be significant. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently finalized stricter emissions requirements for heavy duty engines beginning in the model year 2027. The new limits call for a 75% reduction in nitrogen oxide (NOx) and a 50% reduction in particulate matter (PM) versus existing vehicles. The EPA is also requesting that aftertreatment systems (diesel particulate filters, or DPFs) effectively double their useful life, from 450,000 miles to 800,000.
To help engines reduce emissions accordingly and to prolong the lives of DPFs, the EMA’s needs statement requested improved lubricant performance in the areas of:
Lubrizol took a lead role in developing and identifying a suitable replacement for the Mack T-11 test, as did the Southwest Research Institute, and together brought two potential candidates to the table: the Cummins ISB engine and the Cummins ISM engine. After months of thorough testing, the Cummins ISB engine is likely to be the formal replacement for the T-11 test in evaluating soot-related viscosity increases in the next category.
Additional work to evaluate several other tests continues. NCDT is targeting early in the 4th quarter of 2023 for final determination on which tests will be included in the final category.
The current EMA chemical box proposal for PC-12 would set the following maximum limits:
Both Cummins and Detroit Diesel have proposed their own chemical box limitations within their own specifications. Cummins' proposed chemical box is consistent with the current EMA recommendation, but they may lower their sulfated ash level to 0.8%. The rationale is to further increase the life spans of diesel particulate filter systems. Meanwhile, Detroit Diesel has proposed they may consider limiting potassium and sodium content and is currently working to gain insight from the industry on reasonable limit thresholds.
OEM-specific considerations will likely need to be considered by lubricant manufacturers seeking to market products with widespread approvals.
We encourage you to get involved, too. The development of a new performance category is an industry-wide effort, and one that impacts all stakeholders. We’ll continue to keep you informed and educated on PC-12 as it grows nearer to finalization, and how you can best prepare for first license.
The New Category Development Team (NCDT) is performing important work to finalize the matrix of testing new fluids must pass to meet specifications. Here’s what you need to know about the progress of the new diesel engine oil category.
New Category Development Team (NCDT)
The NCDT is comprised of representatives from:- The American Petroleum Institute (API)
- The Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA)
- The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
- The American Chemistry Council (ACC)
Determining Performance Specificity
Part of the NCDT’s responsibility is to determine the specifics of the EMA’s needs statement. The needs statement is issued by the EMA requesting the development of the new performance category that meets the changing needs of diesel engines.And those changes will be significant. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently finalized stricter emissions requirements for heavy duty engines beginning in the model year 2027. The new limits call for a 75% reduction in nitrogen oxide (NOx) and a 50% reduction in particulate matter (PM) versus existing vehicles. The EPA is also requesting that aftertreatment systems (diesel particulate filters, or DPFs) effectively double their useful life, from 450,000 miles to 800,000.
To help engines reduce emissions accordingly and to prolong the lives of DPFs, the EMA’s needs statement requested improved lubricant performance in the areas of:
- Increased oxidative stability
- Improved wear protection
- Optimized soot dispersancy
- “C” category backwards compatibility, for use in older model vehicles.
- “F” category with lower high-temperature, high-shear (HTHS) viscosity levels, enabling vehicles model year 2027 and newer to achieve improved fuel efficiency.
New Testing Procedures
Concurrently, category developers are determining the battery of tests that will be included in PC-12. One of the most notable changes in the new category is the replacement of the Mack T-11 test, which evaluates a lubricant’s ability to withstand soot-related viscosity increases. Because new parts have become scarce for this test, a replacement is required.Lubrizol took a lead role in developing and identifying a suitable replacement for the Mack T-11 test, as did the Southwest Research Institute, and together brought two potential candidates to the table: the Cummins ISB engine and the Cummins ISM engine. After months of thorough testing, the Cummins ISB engine is likely to be the formal replacement for the T-11 test in evaluating soot-related viscosity increases in the next category.
Additional work to evaluate several other tests continues. NCDT is targeting early in the 4th quarter of 2023 for final determination on which tests will be included in the final category.
A Changing Chemical Box
Another complexity in determining the category parameters are some questions around the chemical box—the set of chemistry and additive components that can be used within a certified lubricant’s formulation. The proposed changes are intended to further help reduce emissions generation and help extend the lifetimes of DPFs, per new EPA rules.The current EMA chemical box proposal for PC-12 would set the following maximum limits:
- Sulphated ash content: 0.9%
- Phosphorus: 800 parts per million (ppm)
- Sulfur content: 0.35%
Both Cummins and Detroit Diesel have proposed their own chemical box limitations within their own specifications. Cummins' proposed chemical box is consistent with the current EMA recommendation, but they may lower their sulfated ash level to 0.8%. The rationale is to further increase the life spans of diesel particulate filter systems. Meanwhile, Detroit Diesel has proposed they may consider limiting potassium and sodium content and is currently working to gain insight from the industry on reasonable limit thresholds.
OEM-specific considerations will likely need to be considered by lubricant manufacturers seeking to market products with widespread approvals.
Our View
We believe that PC-12 must be a meaningful upgrade from CK-4/FA-4 to deliver greater performance value for the end user and to justify the investment in the development of a new category. To those ends, Lubrizol is engaged in the NCDT to ensure and advocate for the development of high-performance lubricants that will help enable new generations of heavy-duty engine hardware.We encourage you to get involved, too. The development of a new performance category is an industry-wide effort, and one that impacts all stakeholders. We’ll continue to keep you informed and educated on PC-12 as it grows nearer to finalization, and how you can best prepare for first license.
That's the big question. For me the hope would be that the
Would just be missing a certain additive, or a lesser amount that perhaps makes the version for older diesels less expensive. I.E. nothing that would or could cause damage. And if you accidentally use the newer spec it is just akin to throwing money away. Then like I said if you use the spec for the older engines in a newer engine it just plugs the DPF faster.
Nothing more than speculation/wishful thinking on my part.
ETA: The whole thing might be a giant nothing burger. Nothing bad happens. No confusion in getting the oil stocked. No supply chain issues. So yeah maybe nothing. I try to always have a few oil changes on hand myself. But, it seems like it wouldn't hurt to have a few extra gallons of your non-EPA'd shenanigan'd oil on the shelf just in case.
“C” category with backwards compatibility, for use in older model vehicles.
Nothing more than speculation/wishful thinking on my part.
ETA: The whole thing might be a giant nothing burger. Nothing bad happens. No confusion in getting the oil stocked. No supply chain issues. So yeah maybe nothing. I try to always have a few oil changes on hand myself. But, it seems like it wouldn't hurt to have a few extra gallons of your non-EPA'd shenanigan'd oil on the shelf just in case.
Last edited by Compression-Ignition; Yesterday at 12:37 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
origcharger
General Diesel Discussion
4
Jul 3, 2008 11:55 PM










