Use the Amsoil 5w30 Series 3000 Heavy Duty Diesel synthetic (HDD)
Oil for 2008 F-250 6.4L
- Thread starter scottjima
- Start date
- Status
dnewton3
Staff member
Rabbler -
The main disagreeable effect of EGR is soot contamination being recycled into the engine; this has little effect on TBN.
TBN is most greatly effected by the fuel type used; LSD versus ULSD. If ULSD is used, then TBN will not be effected greatly, regardless of EGR configuration.
Soot/Insolubles will be effect when the EGR function is manipulated.
The main disagreeable effect of EGR is soot contamination being recycled into the engine; this has little effect on TBN.
TBN is most greatly effected by the fuel type used; LSD versus ULSD. If ULSD is used, then TBN will not be effected greatly, regardless of EGR configuration.
Soot/Insolubles will be effect when the EGR function is manipulated.
It just seems the 6.4s have been very picky with oils: Since working at a huge ford diesel dealership there have been a hand full of oils that seem to do well in the 6.4s:
Mobil 1 Turbo Diesel Truck 5w40
Amsoil 5w30 Series 3000 HDD
Amsoil 15w40 AME synthetic
Shell Rotella T 5w40
Motorcraft 5w40 diesel synthetic (same base stocks as Mobil & Amsoil)
Valvoline Premium Blue Extreme 5w40
Schaeffers 9000 5w40 (but be aware of the increased Lead issue with this oil)
If I had a 6.4 I would go with the Mobil 1 or Amsoil
Mobil 1 Turbo Diesel Truck 5w40
Amsoil 5w30 Series 3000 HDD
Amsoil 15w40 AME synthetic
Shell Rotella T 5w40
Motorcraft 5w40 diesel synthetic (same base stocks as Mobil & Amsoil)
Valvoline Premium Blue Extreme 5w40
Schaeffers 9000 5w40 (but be aware of the increased Lead issue with this oil)
If I had a 6.4 I would go with the Mobil 1 or Amsoil
Last edited:
Well, I am so far pretty happy w/ the Rotella T 5w40. I've got 5k on it now and will run to 10k then sample. The last several weeks have allot of towing w/ about 500 miles pulling the 5th wheel into 30+ headwinds! My oil temps never got over 203 degrees.
Last edited:
dnewton3
Staff member
Powerstroke, everything you listed is a "synthetic" lube.
Just what do you mean by "very picky" engines, and their preferences for synthetic lubes?
Are you suggesting that only "synthetics" work well in the 6.4L engine? I find that hard to believe, as there are some very fine conventional oils out there as well.
What are you basing this info on? These engines are far too new for any significant quantity to have been torn down due to high mileage accumulation. So, are you basing this "testimonial" on UOAs, or opinions?
Just what do you mean by "very picky" engines, and their preferences for synthetic lubes?
Are you suggesting that only "synthetics" work well in the 6.4L engine? I find that hard to believe, as there are some very fine conventional oils out there as well.
What are you basing this info on? These engines are far too new for any significant quantity to have been torn down due to high mileage accumulation. So, are you basing this "testimonial" on UOAs, or opinions?
The 6.4s do not like the CI+4 oils, whether syn or dino. There are some oils that have cause stuck pistons on the 6.4s due to improper oil! ford WILL NOT warranty 6.4s that are not using the proper specified oil, which would be CJ+4.... The oils that I have seen work very well in the 6.4s....I work at a large volume ford dealership outside of tampa and 70% of our service is powerstroke diesels: If your gonna use synthetics:
Motorcraft 5w40, 10w30 syn
Amsoil diesel 5w40 CJ+4 formula syn
Mobil 1 5w40 Turbo Diesel Truck
Shell rotella T 5w40 syn
We have had a couple of 6.4s come into the shop using oil that is not specified which gooed up and caused stuck pistons on the 6.4s and FORD refuses to cover the warranty...so a new 6.4 is hovering around $13,000...
The point is the oil you chose the 6.4 is critical to logevity, performance and smooth operation....they are awesome motors!!!!!
Motorcraft 5w40, 10w30 syn
Amsoil diesel 5w40 CJ+4 formula syn
Mobil 1 5w40 Turbo Diesel Truck
Shell rotella T 5w40 syn
We have had a couple of 6.4s come into the shop using oil that is not specified which gooed up and caused stuck pistons on the 6.4s and FORD refuses to cover the warranty...so a new 6.4 is hovering around $13,000...
The point is the oil you chose the 6.4 is critical to logevity, performance and smooth operation....they are awesome motors!!!!!
Last edited:
Powerstroke, you tell me how you can scientifically prove that a non CJ-4 spec'd oil caused a "stuck piston". I call bull [censored].
Sounds like FoMoCo is looking for a [censored] way to get out of paying a warranty. The reason that the CJ-4 spec was formulated was for the DPF, period.
No way does a CI-4+ cause a stuck piston in a new gen or 20 year old diesel (Powerstroke, Duramax, Cummins, Perkins, Caterpillar, etc.). To imply that is laughable and insults those of us who know better. I'm not coming down on you, but rather the originator of such (rap talk (whomever that may be).
Sounds like FoMoCo is looking for a [censored] way to get out of paying a warranty. The reason that the CJ-4 spec was formulated was for the DPF, period.
No way does a CI-4+ cause a stuck piston in a new gen or 20 year old diesel (Powerstroke, Duramax, Cummins, Perkins, Caterpillar, etc.). To imply that is laughable and insults those of us who know better. I'm not coming down on you, but rather the originator of such (rap talk (whomever that may be).
dnewton3
Staff member
I concur; me thinks someone is full of poo ...
A CI-4+ oil has a some different additives, and/or some in higher concentrations, than do the CJ-4 products. However, fundementally, they are very similar. The changes were made for the DPF and cats. And forget not that the fuel was altered, too. That all benefits the emmisions systems. But it has little to do with "sticking" things.
I presume by "stuck pistons" you're inferring stuck piston rings? I highly doubt that CI-4+ would "stick" anything, in this regard.
Besides, let's take away the whole CI-4+ versus CJ-4 issue. Let's presume that one only used CJ-4 in a 6.4L because that's what's required. That STILL does not answer my orignial question to you; why did you list only "synthetic" oils, and not "conventional" oils? With the exception of Amsoil and Schaeffers, there are both a dino and synthetic option for all the other brands you listed. Actually, some have semi-syns as well, but those are rare (except for the Schaeffers). So what gives? Why list only the syns? I agree with you that those products you listed would work well in a 6.4L, but that is true of any engine, because they are all great products. But you seem to be convinced of the "salvation of synthetics". I challenge you to show your proof that other products can't work well in a 6.4L. I challenge you to show proof that 6.4L's are "picky" about lubricant base stock.
I do believe that Ford, GM and Chrysler would all deny warranty if using the wrong fluid, FOR COMPONENTS THAT ARE DIRECTLY EFFECTED BY THE LUBRICANT SELECTED AND IT'S RESULTANT EFFECTS. Emissions-related stuff that failed due to the wrong fuel and/or lubricant being used would rightfully be denied under warranty. However, "stuck pistons" isn't a failure mode associated with CH-4, CI-4, CI-4+, or CJ-4 oils.
"The point is the oil you chose the 6.4 is critical to logevity, performance and smooth operation....they are awesome motors!!!!! " I think what is critical is to choose a lubricant that meets/exceeds the specs set forth by the OEM; show me where Ford spec'd only synthetic fluids!
I personally think it's a bit premature to call the 6.4L an "awesome motor". I'm not saying they suck; I'm just saying there isn't much of a track record to make any real longevity projections yet. Given the spotty record of the 6.0L engines, I'll wait a few years to make any final determination. And don't for a second think you'll suck me into the whole brand-war topic, because while I drive a Dmax, I did work at the Ford steering systems plant in Indy for 16 years. I'm not brand loyal; I'm being realistic.
You said that the 6.4L engines are picky, but to be honest, it sounds like you're the one that's picky. And if the dealership you're at is just as "picky", I'd have concern in that regard as well.
I'm being harsh; I realize that. But you've made some fairly heady claims. I'll give you the opportunity to avail youself; post of the "proof" of picky 6.4L engines. Got any significant UOA results showing where only "synthetics" saved the engine, or where "conventionals" failed? Got any teardown pictures and measurements where the "stuck pistons" would have been saved by synthetic CJ-4?
A CI-4+ oil has a some different additives, and/or some in higher concentrations, than do the CJ-4 products. However, fundementally, they are very similar. The changes were made for the DPF and cats. And forget not that the fuel was altered, too. That all benefits the emmisions systems. But it has little to do with "sticking" things.
I presume by "stuck pistons" you're inferring stuck piston rings? I highly doubt that CI-4+ would "stick" anything, in this regard.
Besides, let's take away the whole CI-4+ versus CJ-4 issue. Let's presume that one only used CJ-4 in a 6.4L because that's what's required. That STILL does not answer my orignial question to you; why did you list only "synthetic" oils, and not "conventional" oils? With the exception of Amsoil and Schaeffers, there are both a dino and synthetic option for all the other brands you listed. Actually, some have semi-syns as well, but those are rare (except for the Schaeffers). So what gives? Why list only the syns? I agree with you that those products you listed would work well in a 6.4L, but that is true of any engine, because they are all great products. But you seem to be convinced of the "salvation of synthetics". I challenge you to show your proof that other products can't work well in a 6.4L. I challenge you to show proof that 6.4L's are "picky" about lubricant base stock.
I do believe that Ford, GM and Chrysler would all deny warranty if using the wrong fluid, FOR COMPONENTS THAT ARE DIRECTLY EFFECTED BY THE LUBRICANT SELECTED AND IT'S RESULTANT EFFECTS. Emissions-related stuff that failed due to the wrong fuel and/or lubricant being used would rightfully be denied under warranty. However, "stuck pistons" isn't a failure mode associated with CH-4, CI-4, CI-4+, or CJ-4 oils.
"The point is the oil you chose the 6.4 is critical to logevity, performance and smooth operation....they are awesome motors!!!!! " I think what is critical is to choose a lubricant that meets/exceeds the specs set forth by the OEM; show me where Ford spec'd only synthetic fluids!
I personally think it's a bit premature to call the 6.4L an "awesome motor". I'm not saying they suck; I'm just saying there isn't much of a track record to make any real longevity projections yet. Given the spotty record of the 6.0L engines, I'll wait a few years to make any final determination. And don't for a second think you'll suck me into the whole brand-war topic, because while I drive a Dmax, I did work at the Ford steering systems plant in Indy for 16 years. I'm not brand loyal; I'm being realistic.
You said that the 6.4L engines are picky, but to be honest, it sounds like you're the one that's picky. And if the dealership you're at is just as "picky", I'd have concern in that regard as well.
I'm being harsh; I realize that. But you've made some fairly heady claims. I'll give you the opportunity to avail youself; post of the "proof" of picky 6.4L engines. Got any significant UOA results showing where only "synthetics" saved the engine, or where "conventionals" failed? Got any teardown pictures and measurements where the "stuck pistons" would have been saved by synthetic CJ-4?
Last edited:
I know a few Ford techs that hate the 6.4L more than the 6.0L.
It doesn't seem to be shaping up to be a great engine at all. In fact, at Butch Oustalet Ford here in MS (friends with a few techs there), they've replaced a multitude of 6.4s due to complete engine failure. Bad injectors resulting in melted pistons.
I'm glad that the new in-house diesel will be out next year, and I hope they turn out to be as good as I think they will. The diesels are the last remaining trouble spot for Ford.
It doesn't seem to be shaping up to be a great engine at all. In fact, at Butch Oustalet Ford here in MS (friends with a few techs there), they've replaced a multitude of 6.4s due to complete engine failure. Bad injectors resulting in melted pistons.
I'm glad that the new in-house diesel will be out next year, and I hope they turn out to be as good as I think they will. The diesels are the last remaining trouble spot for Ford.
dnewton3
Staff member
Off topic, a bit:
Having my family be a "Ford" family (dad worked for 35 years; I worked for 16 years), it's just upbringing I've had to like Fords. And I do like them greatly! However, I cannot and will not let my past alter the view of the present. The reason I drive a Dmax Chevy is because I got scared by the 6.0L's record; to say it's "spotty" is being polite. Let's face it; 1)iteration after interation after interation of injector programming reflashes, 2)head bolts that often fatigue even in non-tuned normal use, 3)turbos that over/under boost due to sticking unison rings, 4)early-year block issues. The list not impressive.
Flash forward to the 6.4L, and I think it's a bit early to form full statements yet. I don't blame the 6.4L for it's fuel economy issues completely; some of that is just emmisions related. The LMM and ISB6.7 are not fairing as well as their previous generations either. So some of the issues are just technology not being up to speed in the whole market yet. But if 6.4Ls are being replaced due to melted pistons, I'm a bit leary. However, I'll also say this; people often "tune" their new diesels with chips, tuners, etc. They overpower the drivetrain system (engine, tranny, diffs, etc) and then get upset when something fails. If there are 6.4Ls out there that are failing due to FACTORY fuel components or programs, that's not good. But if these 6.4Ls are getting "tuned", and thereby over-fueling the engine for more power, we cannot blame the base engine, nor Ford. And since many people want to "play" but not "pay", they will remove the tuner/chip (evidence) from the vehicle, and blame the damage on the engine, when the reality is that they modified the stock components past the design considerations of the OEM. They "play" (tune) but want Ford to "pay" (warrant). I have no respect for this! Since we rarely ever know the "truth" about such scenarios, I'm a bit hesitant to just wave a broad sword over the 6.4L and blame it without scrutiny for each situation.
BACK ON TOPIC:
Powerstroke has made some (I believe) pretty steep claims here, and I for one would like to see the real truth come out.
Having my family be a "Ford" family (dad worked for 35 years; I worked for 16 years), it's just upbringing I've had to like Fords. And I do like them greatly! However, I cannot and will not let my past alter the view of the present. The reason I drive a Dmax Chevy is because I got scared by the 6.0L's record; to say it's "spotty" is being polite. Let's face it; 1)iteration after interation after interation of injector programming reflashes, 2)head bolts that often fatigue even in non-tuned normal use, 3)turbos that over/under boost due to sticking unison rings, 4)early-year block issues. The list not impressive.
Flash forward to the 6.4L, and I think it's a bit early to form full statements yet. I don't blame the 6.4L for it's fuel economy issues completely; some of that is just emmisions related. The LMM and ISB6.7 are not fairing as well as their previous generations either. So some of the issues are just technology not being up to speed in the whole market yet. But if 6.4Ls are being replaced due to melted pistons, I'm a bit leary. However, I'll also say this; people often "tune" their new diesels with chips, tuners, etc. They overpower the drivetrain system (engine, tranny, diffs, etc) and then get upset when something fails. If there are 6.4Ls out there that are failing due to FACTORY fuel components or programs, that's not good. But if these 6.4Ls are getting "tuned", and thereby over-fueling the engine for more power, we cannot blame the base engine, nor Ford. And since many people want to "play" but not "pay", they will remove the tuner/chip (evidence) from the vehicle, and blame the damage on the engine, when the reality is that they modified the stock components past the design considerations of the OEM. They "play" (tune) but want Ford to "pay" (warrant). I have no respect for this! Since we rarely ever know the "truth" about such scenarios, I'm a bit hesitant to just wave a broad sword over the 6.4L and blame it without scrutiny for each situation.
BACK ON TOPIC:
Powerstroke has made some (I believe) pretty steep claims here, and I for one would like to see the real truth come out.
Last edited:
- Status
