Will PC-12 oils be a good thing?

[johnmyster]

I know it will be met with skepticism by folks who will have their ZDDP pried from their cold dead hands, but can it actually be a good thing? Maybe the blends/additives cost more, but is there any real reason to suspect CL-4 wear protection will be a downgrade from CK-4, CI-4, etc? If so, are we all hoarding our favorite CK-4 in the basement?

Delo ADF 600 is getting good reports from those that are running it. I have yet to see anyone online criticize it, UOA or otherwise, aside from price. Is the future now? It's now regularly stocked at WM for $27 a gallon with two Delo rebate cycles this year making it $17 a gallon, which is not irregular for HDEO.

Will/how will Amsoil and the other universally better boutiques follow suit with low ash formulations, "meets or exceeds CL-4," if those standards have ash limits?

 

[Foxtrot08]

It has performed exceptionally well in my real world testing. We have about a dozen brand new Paccar engines on it.

 

[fantastic]

Great question! It sounds like we'll be calling it CL-4 & FB-4

We need to distinguish, somewhat, between PC-12A & PC12B. Although I think you're mainly speaking about PC-12A. PC-12A will be back licensable for some previous like CK-4, CJ-4 etc. While PC12B may not be backwards compatible depending on the grade. Phosphorus is going down across the board to 800 along with Ash down to 0.9% from 1% previously. FB-4 that will replace FA-4 is going to bring in lower viscosities like 20 grade into HDEO oils.

https://www.infineuminsight.com/en-gb/resources/pc-12-categories/

There seems to be some hesitation from the off-road equipment users since there will be a reduction in zddp but they're not bound to get MPG or emissions like on-road equipment. So, for now they seem happy to continue CK-4 for as long as they can. With these new updates to HDEO's here is where it's a good idea to follow what the OEM states if their is a specification to be followed. They are a part of the process so what they say is important.

Biggest issues are the "Fleet" or "Universal" oils. Trying to do both to sell more oil is a bit tricky. I'd imagine they are going to try to do it again with the 2027 change. Although, there aren't a lot of 10w-30 grades that are dual rated but with the P requirement coming down perhaps we'll see it on that grade coming with this next evolution.

Base oil quality has gone up over these changes to help compensate so that's some piece of mind. With the back spec to those older API along with higher quality base oils & add packs I'll assume they should be just fine. We won't have much choice after all the CK-4 is sold off the shelves starting in 2027.

 

[johnmyster]

PC-12A will be back licensable for some previous like CK-4, CJ-4 etc. While PC12B may not be backwards compatible depending on the grade. Phosphorus is going down across the board to 800 along with Ash down to 0.9% from 1% previously. FB-4 that will replace FA-4 is going to bring in lower viscosities like 20 grade into HDEO oils.

Okay, that's really surprising to me. I expected (based on Delo ADF 600) for the PC-12 chemical limits to be more radical. Apparently Delo ADF is an odd duck and will continue to be so in 2027+.

If that's the case, some present CK-4 oils, including all that $9 a gallon AAP clearance Delo XSP 400 5w-40 from last winter would feasibly meet the PC-12 chemistry requirements.

Based on your comments on base oil, it appears the biggest changes will be for cheap oils while the flagship models may already be close. CL-4 may be a nothing burger.

 

[fantastic]

Okay, that's really surprising to me. I expected (based on Delo ADF 600) for the PC-12 chemical limits to be more radical. Apparently Delo ADF is an odd duck and will continue to be so in 2027+.

If that's the case, some present CK-4 oils, including all that $9 a gallon AAP clearance Delo XSP 400 5w-40 from last winter would feasibly meet the PC-12 chemistry requirements.

Based on your comments on base oil, it appears the biggest changes will be for cheap oils while the flagship models may already be close. CL-4 may be a nothing burger.

There is no minimum for P but there is a maximum of 1200 for CK-4. The idea being that it's better for emissions systems & if the oil makers can develop oils that will work with the lower amounts there would be no hurdles. The ADF Delo 600 may be one of the "odd" ones & I would think that product is really positioned for the latest emissions equipment. Certainly not necessary for older stuff as you well know.

If that's the case, some present CK-4 oils, including all that $9 a gallon AAP clearance Delo XSP 400 5w-40 from last winter would feasibly meet the PC-12 chemistry requirements.

You may be onto something since the biggest changes to PC-12 are reducing chemical limits to help prolong emissions systems. Now that I think about it the ADF 600 may not be an odd duck in the long haul since emission warranties are going from 400,000 miles to 800,000 miles, yes double, for the newest trucks. I think the biggest question you're asking is how this new API rating will work in older equipment & again, good question, CK-4 went through some evolutions too so it'll be interesting to see what changes will be made but sticking to OEM spec is the best chance of making sure the stuff is protected.

I could be called a "thickie" & these changes seem to help make sticking to or going with the thickest oil when these limits get reduced very easily for my old iron. But there's more to the story as I mentioned about base oils improving along with additive chemistry changes to help compensate for the loss elsewhere. It's why some forum board members scoff at oils like Pennzoil Ultra Platinum with lower additives but on paper UOA it does really well. I do understand the hesitation but follow the OEM spec & it'll be fine. Don't go grabbing a PC-12B 5w-20 for your 6.7L Cummins as an obvious choice...Ha!

The DD13 scuffing test was added due to concerns around the lower viscosity's so they are testing this stuff to make darn sure it's adequate.
https://www.infineuminsight.com/en-gb/articles/update-on-pc-12/
Soot, Viscosity, & Oxidation improvements are being tested.
https://www.infineuminsight.com/en-gb/articles/new-test-for-pc-12/

Based on your comments on base oil, it appears the biggest changes will be for cheap oils while the flagship models may already be close. CL-4 may be a nothing burger.

I'll be just watching for my Ford F1 Spec & if it has it on the bottle it's sufficient for me. If I'm running further out closer to 10,000 miles I'll probably go for the Full Synthetic products. That being said Ford may update their specification or in your equipment example Cummins. If we only knew exactly what the mixers were up to & how much base oil ratio they were using we'd have little to no more questions. LOL

 

[johnmyster]

You may be onto something since the biggest changes to PC-12 are reducing chemical limits to help prolong emissions systems. Now that I think about it the ADF 600 may not be an odd duck in the long haul since emission warranties are going from 400,000 miles to 800,000 miles, yes double, for the newest trucks. I think the biggest question you're asking is how this new API rating will work in older equipment & again, good question, CK-4 went through some evolutions too so it'll be interesting to see what changes will be made but sticking to OEM spec is the best chance of making sure the stuff is protected.

My question is more of, is there any reason to believe CL-4 will be a downgrade/compromise in terms of wear protection? If there is no compromise on wear and deposit formation, then there is no backward compatibility concern (aside from high sulfur fuel which no longer exists.) One might see addition of the DD13 test and say the standard just got higher. Others might see it as a limit on regression.

It just seems silly for Chevron to introduce Delo 600 in 2021 if the 2027 goal was 10% lower SA content...unless they were trying to eventually monoplize the market by influencing the PC-12 standards so far that only they had a solution (since they have additive chemistry in-house.)

I would think anyone with a DPF that is concerned about longevity (like myself) would consider ADF600, especially at $17 per gallon after rebate (aside from missing that pesky F1 spec). Likewise, if CL-4 is not a compromise on wear, everyone should welcome it. Personally, I'm contemplating a switch (now) to ADF600, assuming that Chevron is already testing against any new requirements like DD13.

Not to harp on ADF600, but some have scoffed at the inferior "semi synthetic" composition. You allude to advancements in base oil being necessary to support overall reductions in additives. Apparently there are base oil advancements in the industry that are not well captured by simple GrpII / GrpIII categorization.

Cummins vs Ford:
I can't see how the Ford F1 requirement and PC-12 will co-exist. Present F1 oils (to my knowledge) only barely meet the phos requirement because of the tight min/max overlap between CK-4 and F1. F1 will need to be revised if so, either by reducing the phos requirement or substituting that requirement with a performance criteria. In my case, ADF 600 meets present CES specs (and VDS-4.5, etc) so I assume those approvals do not dictate chemistry minimums like F1 does. The whole topic makes F1 seem silly. Why dictate additive chemistry if physical tests of the whole/blended package are what really matters?

 

[Foxtrot08]

There is no minimum for P but there is a maximum of 1200 for CK-4. The idea being that it's better for emissions systems & if the oil makers can develop oils that will work with the lower amounts there would be no hurdles. The ADF Delo 600 may be one of the "odd" ones & I would think that product is really positioned for the latest emissions equipment. Certainly not necessary for older stuff as you well know.

You may be onto something since the biggest changes to PC-12 are reducing chemical limits to help prolong emissions systems. Now that I think about it the ADF 600 may not be an odd duck in the long haul since emission warranties are going from 400,000 miles to 800,000 miles, yes double, for the newest trucks. I think the biggest question you're asking is how this new API rating will work in older equipment & again, good question, CK-4 went through some evolutions too so it'll be interesting to see what changes will be made but sticking to OEM spec is the best chance of making sure the stuff is protected.

I could be called a "thickie" & these changes seem to help make sticking to or going with the thickest oil when these limits get reduced very easily for my old iron. But there's more to the story as I mentioned about base oils improving along with additive chemistry changes to help compensate for the loss elsewhere. It's why some forum board members scoff at oils like Pennzoil Ultra Platinum with lower additives but on paper UOA it does really well. I do understand the hesitation but follow the OEM spec & it'll be fine. Don't go grabbing a PC-12B 5w-20 for your 6.7L Cummins as an obvious choice...Ha!

The DD13 scuffing test was added due to concerns around the lower viscosity's so they are testing this stuff to make darn sure it's adequate.
https://www.infineuminsight.com/en-gb/articles/update-on-pc-12/
Soot, Viscosity, & Oxidation improvements are being tested.
https://www.infineuminsight.com/en-gb/articles/new-test-for-pc-12/


I'll be just watching for my Ford F1 Spec & if it has it on the bottle it's sufficient for me. If I'm running further out closer to 10,000 miles I'll probably go for the Full Synthetic products. That being said Ford may update their specification or in your equipment example Cummins. If we only knew exactly what the mixers were up to & how much base oil ratio they were using we'd have little to no more questions. LOL

Chevron is really betting on 600 ADF being the “PC12” formulation of choice. And it’s a pretty exotic formulation at that as well.

However, it has been out 6 years now. With a number of large fleets running it… and honestly the results are fairly impressive. The only “big” issue with it - it has a very high (low?) cold filter plug point. I believe in the ~-25F range vs you typically see -40f or beyond when it comes to a synthetic blend.

Otherwise, a lot of bus fleets, OTR trucking fleets, etc. are already running on it. They’ve done extensive testing with it on pre-emissions engines. Particularly in the mining and construction world.

I’m not saying it’s particularly my choice. Just Chevron thinks it’s the way of the future. And how they’re pushing it in the market place.

 

[fantastic]

Chevron is really betting on 600 ADF being the “PC12” formulation of choice. And it’s a pretty exotic formulation at that as well.

However, it has been out 6 years now. With a number of large fleets running it… and honestly the results are fairly impressive. The only “big” issue with it - it has a very high (low?) cold filter plug point. I believe in the ~-25F range vs you typically see -40f or beyond when it comes to a synthetic blend.

Otherwise, a lot of bus fleets, OTR trucking fleets, etc. are already running on it. They’ve done extensive testing with it on pre-emissions engines. Particularly in the mining and construction world.

I’m not saying it’s particularly my choice. Just Chevron thinks it’s the way of the future. And how they’re pushing it in the market place.

Right, That seems to be the trend we're heading in and they've betted on releasing this product early in the market as they saw it coming anyway. It does appear that a max of 800 PPM Phosphorus should be sufficient for extending the emissions equipment a lot longer though for newer engines. Probably why they went so low so it is more compatible with older emissions systems since it's been out for a while and well before this PC-12?

 

[johnmyster]

So I guess in addition to my initial question (will PC-12 be good/bad WRT wear) I've posed the additional question, "how does Delo ADF600 fit into PC-12." Answer being, it doesn't.

Maybe 10 or so years ago when Chevron began development they had to make a guess on where the next targets would land and overpredicted. Perhaps they chose to push SA reduction as far as possible for fleets without making any compromises on wear performance.

The way I see it, Delo will shift their other formulations a little to meet PC-12 and ADF600 will still be the overachiever oddball.

 

[fantastic]

My question is more of, is there any reason to believe CL-4 will be a downgrade/compromise in terms of wear protection? If there is no compromise on wear and deposit formation, then there is no backward compatibility concern (aside from high sulfur fuel which no longer exists.) One might see addition of the DD13 test and say the standard just got higher. Others might see it as a limit on regression.

It just seems silly for Chevron to introduce Delo 600 in 2021 if the 2027 goal was 10% lower SA content...unless they were trying to eventually monoplize the market by influencing the PC-12 standards so far that only they had a solution (since they have additive chemistry in-house.)

I would think anyone with a DPF that is concerned about longevity (like myself) would consider ADF600, especially at $17 per gallon after rebate (aside from missing that pesky F1 spec). Likewise, if CL-4 is not a compromise on wear, everyone should welcome it. Personally, I'm contemplating a switch (now) to ADF600, assuming that Chevron is already testing against any new requirements like DD13

Not to harp on ADF600, but some have scoffed at the inferior "semi synthetic" composition. You allude to advancements in base oil being necessary to support overall reductions in additives. Apparently there are base oil advancements in the industry that are not well captured by simple GrpII / GrpIII categorization.

What viscosity do they offer in that 600? Which one will you choose?

Cummins vs Ford:
I can't see how the Ford F1 requirement and PC-12 will co-exist. Present F1 oils (to my knowledge) only barely meet the phos requirement because of the tight min/max overlap between CK-4 and F1. F1 will need to be revised if so, either by reducing the phos requirement or substituting that requirement with a performance criteria. In my case, ADF 600 meets present CES specs (and VDS-4.5, etc) so I assume those approvals do not dictate chemistry minimums like F1 does. The whole topic makes F1 seem silly. Why dictate additive chemistry if physical tests of the whole/blended package are what really matters?

You have a point about Ford needing to potentially upgrade the F1 P limits. It does somewhat show the importance of P for our Power Stroke engines. There are some that say Cummins is a stronger engine that doesn't need 1000 PPM Phosphorus. I don't know outside of what they, Ford, tells me to use.

 

[fantastic]

So I guess in addition to my initial question (will PC-12 be good/bad WRT wear) I've posed the additional question, "how does Delo ADF600 fit into PC-12." Answer being, it doesn't.

Maybe 10 or so years ago when Chevron began development they had to make a guess on where the next targets would land and overpredicted. Perhaps they chose to push SA reduction as far as possible for fleets without making any compromises on wear performance.

The way I see it, Delo will shift their other formulations a little to meet PC-12 and ADF600 will still be the overachiever oddball.

Yeah, it may need some tweaks by then to pass all the tests requirements. Soot requirements on your older Cummins may not work with 600's low calcium and magnesium or does it carry the proper Cummins spec?

 

[johnmyster]

What viscosity do they offer in that 600? Which one will you choose?

You have a point about Ford needing to potentially upgrade the F1 P limits. It does somewhat show the importance of P for our Power Stroke engines. There are some that say Cummins is a stronger engine that doesn't need 1000 PPM Phosphorus. I don't know outside of what they, Ford, tells me to use.

I would be using 15w-40. The meteorological experts in the other thread told me that my winters aren't that cold, and in reality the truck doesn't see much winter use once the camper has antifreeze in the lines. 10w-30 is the other (present) choice. The XSP 400 5w-40 is 0.8 SA IIRC, so that would be your low ash 5w-40, but that very factor prevents F1.

I don't think the F1 spec is a commentary on the robustness of the PSD aside that FMC wants good oil as general best practice. HUEI injectors, HPOPs, 6.7 lifters, etc...are complicated bits. (I once worked in the Siemens/International 6.0 injector factory in Columbia SC.)

Like the PUP example you gave earlier, I'm sure the PSDs don't need 1000 ppm phos, they just need a good oil and not the diet soda that CJ-4 initially was. I'm sure the industry has the technology to build a very robust oil <<1000 ppm phos, Ford would just need a wear test to enforce it. Perhaps DD13 is that test. You could take the opposite position and say it doesn't matter how much ZDDP is in an oil, it can still be garbage. We'd rather have performance tests be our guide. The present Delo XSP 5w-40 is lite on ZDDP and has not been criticized for performance.

Yeah, it may need some tweaks by then to pass all the tests requirements. Soot requirements on your older Cummins may not work with 600's low calcium and magnesium or does it carry the proper Cummins spec?

AFAIK Cummins CES20086 and CK-4 are the relevant spec for my application and speculation on ADF 600 is that it accomplishes dispersant via means other than calcium. My truck has emissions hardware but my intended OCIs are nowhere near the 15k OE specified interval. Not even half that. A third? I don't intend to press OCIs long even at a whopping $17 a gallon for oil. My annual miles are low and it's good to get under the truck every 6-8 months. It gets long trips towing the camper across state lines but then lots of short trips putting around the campgrounds, trailheads, landings, etc.

At only 87k miles, my DPF seems to have good capacity left and it would be nice to keep it that way for as long as it's on the truck.

 

[johnmyster]

However, it has been out 6 years now. With a number of large fleets running it… and honestly the results are fairly impressive.

I’m not saying it’s particularly my choice. Just Chevron thinks it’s the way of the future. And how they’re pushing it in the market place.

How have your results been? In terms of wear, deposit protection, etc? Exceptionally well, or exceptionally well for a science experiment? Does Chevron still have homework to do? Aside from cold flow, does the industry see it as robust as XSP400 15w-40, ESP, etc?

If it's not your choice, what would be on a vehicle with a DPF that you'd rather be kind to?

Maybe in 2027 we see Chevron introduce a full syn and/or 5w-40 version.

 

[Foxtrot08]

How have your results been? In terms of wear, deposit protection, etc? Exceptionally well, or exceptionally well for a science experiment? Does Chevron still have homework to do? Aside from cold flow, does the industry see it as robust as XSP400 15w-40, ESP, etc?

If it's not your choice, what would be on a vehicle with a DPF that you'd rather be kind to?

Maybe in 2027 we see Chevron introduce a full syn and/or 5w-40 version.

Well, to be honest:

1. The trucks are just about a year old. They’re all PX9 engines, in a Pete 537 chassis with the paccar TX8 transmission. (The transmission is also a science experiment, as they gave us a discount on the order to try them out.)

2. We are only at our ~3rd oil change on them currently. Factory oil, then we did a round of Delo XLE 10w30 after a few thousand miles to drop the factory oil. (Also XLE) Then about every 15,000 miles from there. All the trucks are under 100,000 miles.


So far, the results are very good. We could certainly extend our oil drain intervals out to even further. Probably 25,000 miles. But I’m not willing to shake up our maintenance program & schedule at this point in time on them.

Previously we ran Kendall Super-D XA 10w30. Which, wasn’t super impressive in similar applications - Paccar PX9, but with manual transmissions and tandem axles. Where these are automatics with single axles. We switched to Citgo 700 10w30 which was a little bit better than the Kendall. Then we finally went to a 5w40 on all post-emissions trucks which solved our oxidation issues at our intervals.

So far, while the results aren’t in. I think Chevron has a really, really good product. But, they’re asking a very premium price for a synthetic blend product.

I would much rather a 5w40 full synthetic, with this formulation. Not really for cold flow but just to help support the price point they’re asking of. Even at my *cost* as a Chevron distributor, it’s ~$10 a gallon more than XLE. That’s kinda hard to sell when it’s very similar price to their Full synthetic 5w40 products.

As for DPF life and such. Honestly, they’re too new to have failures. In the previous trucks, we changed the DPFs out once for ash build up. Right around the 250,000 mile range. We had some issues with fuel at one division which caused initial DPF issues. But once that was worked out, it was fine. We purchased extended warranties on the trucks so all the DPF parts were covered on that.

Since we have a similar truck, engine combination - not identical, but similar. With the same routes, drivers, etc. We should have a pretty good idea by the time PC12 is live.

We should have ~200-250k miles on the units at that point in time.

 

[johnmyster]

Well, to be honest:

1. The trucks are just about a year old. They’re all PX9 engines, in a Pete 537 chassis with the paccar TX8 transmission. (The transmission is also a science experiment, as they gave us a discount on the order to try them out.)

2. We are only at our ~3rd oil change on them currently. Factory oil, then we did a round of Delo XLE 10w30 after a few thousand miles to drop the factory oil. (Also XLE) Then about every 15,000 miles from there. All the trucks are under 100,000 miles.


So far, the results are very good. We could certainly extend our oil drain intervals out to even further. Probably 25,000 miles. But I’m not willing to shake up our maintenance program & schedule at this point in time on them.

Previously we ran Kendall Super-D XA 10w30. Which, wasn’t super impressive in similar applications - Paccar PX9, but with manual transmissions and tandem axles. Where these are automatics with single axles. We switched to Citgo 700 10w30 which was a little bit better than the Kendall. Then we finally went to a 5w40 on all post-emissions trucks which solved our oxidation issues at our intervals.

So far, while the results aren’t in. I think Chevron has a really, really good product. But, they’re asking a very premium price for a synthetic blend product.

I would much rather a 5w40 full synthetic, with this formulation. Not really for cold flow but just to help support the price point they’re asking of. Even at my *cost* as a Chevron distributor, it’s ~$10 a gallon more than XLE. That’s kinda hard to sell when it’s very similar price to their Full synthetic 5w40 products.

As for DPF life and such. Honestly, they’re too new to have failures. In the previous trucks, we changed the DPFs out once for ash build up. Right around the 250,000 mile range. We had some issues with fuel at one division which caused initial DPF issues. But once that was worked out, it was fine. We purchased extended warranties on the trucks so all the DPF parts were covered on that.

Since we have a similar truck, engine combination - not identical, but similar. With the same routes, drivers, etc. We should have a pretty good idea by the time PC12 is live.

We should have ~200-250k miles on the units at that point in time.

Thanks for the perspective. On a 15k OCI, what are typical hours? 6-7 gallon oil changes?

If I'm reading the manual correctly, paccar's standard recommendation is CK-4 10w-30, SA limit of 1.85%, and nothing special beyond that unless cold operation.

So the main compromise is with oxidative performance. Is that a particular demand specific to the PX9 or across the board for post-emission diesels? EGR? Higher oil temperatures due to?

 

[Foxtrot08]

7 gallon ish oil capacity in our set ups.


We are around ~500 hours. Which is standard interval. We are lower on mileage because of city driving / local delivery and such.


We have seen oxidation issues across the board on engines. x15s, PX9s, MX13s, DD13s. (We have a few freightliners).

So it just wasn’t the PX9. And I know we are vocational / local delivery. Which is “severe duty” so should be shorter oil drain interval. But I was just disappointed a little bit in the oxidation rate of most 10w30s. Which is why we just went 5w40 and called it a day.

I know a full synthetic 5w30 would also solve the oxidation issue. And Volvo / Mack is counting on that. However, 5w30 - even my cost - are absurdly expensive. Even more than a 5w40.

So it’s like… eh, 5w40 is fine.

@johnmyster - sorry forgot to hit quote.

 

[johnmyster]

7 gallon ish oil capacity in our set ups.


We are around ~500 hours. Which is standard interval. We are lower on mileage because of city driving / local delivery and such.


We have seen oxidation issues across the board on engines. x15s, PX9s, MX13s, DD13s. (We have a few freightliners).

So it just wasn’t the PX9. And I know we are vocational / local delivery. Which is “severe duty” so should be shorter oil drain interval. But I was just disappointed a little bit in the oxidation rate of most 10w30s. Which is why we just went 5w40 and called it a day.

I know a full synthetic 5w30 would also solve the oxidation issue. And Volvo / Mack is counting on that. However, 5w30 - even my cost - are absurdly expensive. Even more than a 5w40.

So it’s like… eh, 5w40 is fine.

Thanks for the additional insight. If I can summarize, it sounds like in your legitimately severe duty applications:

1) Conventional/syn-blend 10w-30 didn't satisfy your goals with oxidation rate.
2) Switching to a full-syn was an improvement.
3) 1 vs 2 soured you on blends.
4) You got some new trucks. Had ADF 600 on your mind and decided to give it a go.
5) ADF 600 is performing well but item 3 skepticism remains (for your use case), despite the emissions equipment upside. As such, it's something you're keeping your eye on but the data isn't concerning enough to motivate a switch back to 5w-40, yet.

But if a Delo ADF 600 5w-40 appeared on the market...you'd order up a barrel.

I don't recall you mentioning, are you using the 15w-40 or 10w-30?

 

[Foxtrot08]

Thanks for the additional insight. If I can summarize, it sounds like in your legitimately severe duty applications:

1) Conventional/syn-blend 10w-30 didn't satisfy your goals with oxidation rate.
2) Switching to a full-syn was an improvement.
3) 1 vs 2 soured you on blends.
4) You got some new trucks. Had ADF 600 on your mind and decided to give it a go.
5) ADF 600 is performing well but item 3 skepticism remains (for your use case), despite the emissions equipment upside. As such, it's something you're keeping your eye on but the data isn't concerning enough to motivate a switch back to 5w-40, yet.

But if a Delo ADF 600 5w-40 appeared on the market...you'd order up a barrel.

I don't recall you mentioning, are you using the 15w-40 or 10w-30?

1. Yes, 10w30 synthetic blend didn’t really fit what we were looking for in our operation. Nothing against it, we still sell almost a million gallons a year of it. Just in our exact situation, it wasn’t the solution. Being one of the largest oil distributors in the U.S. - I know there’s other solutions out there.

3. Not really soured on blends. See above. Just there’s time and places for everything. We just pushed the limits a little hard on it.

4. Yep. Waiting to see how it does over the winter. Then I’ll know more. So far it’s performing better than a regular synthetic blend 10w30. And it is also a synthetic blend 10w30.


As for a full synthetic 600 ADF… we will see. I’m not sure yet in general if there is a market yet for it. And the price point.



We still use Kendall Super D-XA 15w40 and/or Citgo C700 15w40 for the pre-emissions engines we have. We still rock a handful of old CAT C15s. Not a ton. But some. Anything pre-emissions is still 15w40, although I’m very aware we could use 5w40 for everything. Just politics. (My dad is still around the company.)

Being an oil distributor, and equipment installer - our bulk oil dispensing system is kinda nutty lol.

 

[johnmyster]

4. Yep. Waiting to see how it does over the winter. Then I’ll know more. So far it’s performing better than a regular synthetic blend 10w30. And it is also a synthetic blend 10w30.

BITOG will await your winter results conclusion. Or maybe just me. Meanwhile, ADF 15w-40 will likely go into my fleet of n=1.

Testing oil in trucks that deliver oil. I like it.