Originally Posted By: Killer223
these are more what i was reading.
http://www.turbodieselregister.com/TDR57_Oil.pdf
and TDR issue 76 but i can't find the link to it at this moment.
I could smell that coming from a mile away ... Happens about once or twice a year that someone brings up that series of "info" from TDR as if it were golden. I find it to be rubbish.
That series of "articles" was really a fear-mongering of CJ-4 established and based upon some poorly reasoned thinking. They presumed a lot based upon inputs and never paid attention to any real results. They theorized that the older lubes were better because the CJ-4 had a reduction in some additives.
However, the reality is that CJ-4 lubes, as a generalization, have shown outstanding wear and soot control over their predecessors. Because of ULSD being the exclusive fuel in the States for many years now, the entire topic of acid production and bases (TBN and TAN) has proven to be moot. The fear mongering in those articles never panned out to be true in real world conditions.
You are free to use what you want. But I'll challenge you with this ...
Pick any lube you want; use it for several 5k mile OCIs. Do some UOAs. Then do the same with some modern CJ-4 lube and test again. If your position (based upon their theory in those articles) is true, then you should be able to show a clear delineation in wear rates and acid levels between the two lube choices.
It is my assertion that you'll never be able to prove your point based upon their ill-conceived theory. And I would have a good basis to know; I do statistical process quality control and have over 10,000 UOAs in my database, and I wrote this:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/used-oil-analysis-how-to-decide-what-is-normal/
Reality trumps theory every time.
Do as you see fit.