Blending CF-PCMO w/ HDEO for light duty diesels

[Jim Allen]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Different engine manufacturers do stuff "differently"...


Nissan have told me that with mine, they don't want dispersants keeping the soot circulating through the valve train, and a less dispersive oil (i.e. not CG-4 and onwards) allows the soot to clump, and get caught.




That both makes sense and doesn't. If these engines use a bypass oil filtration system with relatively fine filtration, then it makes some sense. But to my mind, you really wouldn't want much agglomerization. If it did so, it wouldn't take much to get to the point where it could be larger than bearing clearances and cause serious wear. To my way of thinking, I would rather have dispersed sub-micronic particles flowing thru my system than agglomerized particles above 2um. But maybe there's more to this story that you can tell us.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
All the usual suspects are CF down here.


Up here, there aren't a lot of diesel engines with the warning not to go newer than CF, but they do exist. There are also a couple oddities on some diesel outdoor power equipment. Considering the thicker oil down there in general, it shouldn't be a problem for you guys. I imagine the bulk of the 10w-40 big names up here would actually be CF and really meet the specification, too.

 

[Shannow]

Garak,
pretty much so...but it's starting to change. I posted a while ago that Castrol dropped CF on their 0W-40 edge, then posted a brief campaign that it was no longer suitable for your Euro/[censored] diesel.

Jim,
I agree. It was pretty hard to deal with Nissan when I bought the thing. I offered to use ACEA specs in picking an oil, as per the manual for that engine in europe, and they stated categorically that the Aus specs were no better than CF-4,and that was final, citing cam and timing chain wear as the issue (They are pretty high load in these engines)...Now that Nissan have come aboard the ACEA specs, I'll have to check their position again, and maybe start running some decent HDMOs (in spite of good UOA on PCMOs)

 

[Jim Allen]

Originally Posted By: Shannow

Jim,
I agree. It was pretty hard to deal with Nissan when I bought the thing. I offered to use ACEA specs in picking an oil, as per the manual for that engine in europe, and they stated categorically that the Aus specs were no better than CF-4,and that was final, citing cam and timing chain wear as the issue (They are pretty high load in these engines)...Now that Nissan have come aboard the ACEA specs, I'll have to check their position again, and maybe start running some decent HDMOs (in spite of good UOA on PCMOs)


I often wonder about the differences in lubricant policies in large car companies with regards to different countries or regions and how they can be so different. Some of that you can figure out.. climate, emissions regs, CAFE and such. In other cases, it may be the availability, or lack thereof, of certain products so a "best of the worst" choice must be made. Other times, like this, it makes no sense. All the good stuff is available in Oz yet they won't use it. My first thought is that with companies that have a worldwide presence, I imagine you could have a situation where one of the local "fiefdoms" have a particular take on something. That "local take" may or may not be correct or in line with the head office or other "fiefdoms." If it ever comes up, all the the local fief has to do is cite "local conditions" and unless corporate engineering gets involved with a big (expensive) study, who's to prove him wrong? If the warranty situation doesn't get out of hand, it may never come up.

Shannow... in your case, does Nissan have a warranty hold on you? Or are the vehicles company owned so you are not free to deviate from Nissan recommendations? No insult intended, but you don't seem the type of guy to blindly follow a recommendation for your own vehicle that you see as incorrect or suboptimal.

 

[Shannow]

Jim,
no insult recorded here.

I was stuck with Nissan during warranty on the vehicle, which is why I did the the two UOAs for the last two OCIs, prove to Nissan that it did/n't work...and they were OK.

Changed my thinking somewhat, as all I could find that fitted my understanding of what I thought, and Nissan's requirement was Delo CXJ, which I still reckon was the wrong way.

Nissan had/has quite a few of these engines blowup majorly...I know 3 personally, anther 2 extended, and they blamed users and their oil choices.

Oil manufacturers don't help, Caltex insisted Delo 400, but would not bear any liablity.

Carried out some mods on my own that changed the intake charge mix at low loads/revs, changed the swirl pattern (if you get how the ZD30 swirls), gave a heap more bottom end drivability...and should deliver less soot...and IMO less blow-ups.

Next iteration is probably back to D-1, pending UOA of my shop brand synthetic (smells like gummi bears) 5W-30 A3/B4 C3 current fill.

 

[Silk]

One of our local couriers has retired his 4D56 powered L300 to back up duties and is using a Nissan Urvan with a ZD30. We service it every 5 weeks, and are using MSL - Mitsubishi Synthetic Lubricant. I have no idea what it is, it has no SAE, API or ACEA ratings on the container, just says hydrocracked, for use in petrol and diesel turbos and CNG and LPG. We use it in all Mitsi's under warranty, and some out of it. I serviced the Urvan a couple of weeks ago, and fitted it's first set of pads - the oil seems to come out pretty clean, although black it just wipes off your hands, no black stains left in my cracked skin.

Not a UOA, but it seems to be working....I wonder what Nissan would say about it?