CK-4 vs CJ-4

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: NattyBoh
It amazes me that boutique oil producers are still going to ck-4 ans not keeping both. I believe they will still sell the cj-4 oila

Some do some different stuff. RP seemed to hang onto CI-4 for a long time, and then came out with their dedicated HDEO line and went CJ-4 with that, first.

 

[4WD]

Killing time in WM (TPM repair) and see they have a good stock of Delo 5w40 synthetic that's still CJ ...

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: 4WD
Killing time in WM (TPM repair) and see they have a good stock of Delo 5w40 synthetic that's still CJ ...
Same in the Houston area (not sure where you are in TX). Chevron was still making CJ-4 at least until April of this year; I have a good stash of CJ-4 to wait out the Ford debacle.

 

[NattyBoh]

Yeah it's past April this year lol. So is what we are seeing, old stock that is just going to get phased out? I bought some this weekend and changed my oil out. I may get another 4 gallons to sit on

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: NattyBoh
Yeah it's past April this year lol. So is what we are seeing, old stock that is just going to get phased out?
Perhaps. I saw some on clearance in Wyoming for $36 for a 2.5 gallon jug--no room in the truck.

 

[Black6spdZ]

API says CK4 is backwards compatible and better, Ford says its not.. Of course EPA pressures for better economy but is this at the expense of longevity and our pocketbooks?! Show me side by side tests comparing CJ-4 vs CK-4, not all this press material and I'll be the judge

 

[SilverFusion2010]

Careful, they get real upset if you try to dodge the censor. It's a pain but when I feel the need I simply speak of some worthless epithet of a mechanic epithet-ed my oil change.

 

[The motor guy]

Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: 4WD
Killing time in WM (TPM repair) and see they have a good stock of Delo 5w40 synthetic that's still CJ ...
Same in the Houston area (not sure where you are in TX). Chevron was still making CJ-4 at least until April of this year; I have a good stash of CJ-4 to wait out the Ford debacle.


It's all CK-4 in my walmart. Has been since like February.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Black6spdZ
API says CK4 is backwards compatible and better, Ford says its not.. Of course EPA pressures for better economy but is this at the expense of longevity and our pocketbooks?! Show me side by side tests comparing CJ-4 vs CK-4, not all this [censored] press material and I'll be the judge

What part of CK-4 improved fuel economy?

 

[Black6spdZ]

The economy part was more generalized for most new oils and pointing towards FA-4 which came along with CK-4. I know we could beat the Z/P requirements to death in a discussion as most "modern" diesels have no flat tappets/followers anymore but does the EPA and API have the interest at heart for the best protection of all the older and out of warranty engines? Maybe a slow planned obsolescence of all the "dirty" smog producers. Cash for clunkers ring a bell?

 

[Garak]

The phosphorus limits didn't change; the SN waiver for 0w-30, 5w-30, and 10w-30 HDEOs just disappeared.

 

[ChrisGuerrero]

Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Here is what Shell and Chevron have to say:

http://rotella.shell.com/products/pc-11....mp;gclsrc=aw.ds

http://www.deloperformance.com/en-us/pc-...us-PC-11-videos


And to make things more confusing, Rotella has REMOVED the gas SN ratings from most of their bottles. As such, it appears that Rotella is still a very stout oil, while some of of the others (like Delo) now seem watered down.

I'm really likening the new Rotella. The new dual rated oils, not so much.


Hi @bubbatime, Happy to hear you're liking the latest products. We wanted to share with you some information from a recent technical bulletin highlighting the recent industry change associated with the introduction of the API CK-4/FA-4 categories. This change has taken place due to an agreement by API members and engine manufacturers to amend the API requirements for allowing diesel engine oils to historically claim gasoline category approvals.

Previously, heavy duty engine oil marketers could claim an API gasoline performance standard on their products if they met CJ-4 and the required performance tests for gasoline standards. The recommended viscosity grades for modern gasoline engines are XW-20s and XW-30s. As such, this waiver process is being phased out. Heavy duty engine oils which are XW-30s (and which claim API CK-4 approval) cannot also claim API gasoline standards, unless they meet the current phosphorous requirements/limits. With that said, The new fully synthetic Shell ROTELLA® T6 Multi-Vehicle 5W-30 is one such product that meets the performance requirements of API CK-4 as well as API SN and is formulated with 800 parts per million of phosphorous, which meets the API SN requirements.

While the industry waiver is still currently in existence for heavy duty engine oils that are XW-40’s, this remains in discussion to be addressed by the API in the near future.

However, as a leader in the transport industry, the Shell ROTELLA® brand has made the decision to remove API SN claims, regardless of viscosity, from our other products which do not meet the preferred low-phosphorous chemistry for gasoline engines. It’s also important to note that there is no change in formulation associated with this change. It simply means that Shell ROTELLA® products will no longer claim formal API SN approval for products other than our fully synthetic Shell ROTELLA® T6 Multi-Vehicle 5W-30 on labels, technical data sheets, rotella.com and marketing materials moving forward.

We hope this helps to clarify the removal of the SN ratings on the bottles.

- The Shell ROTELLA Team

 

[TiredTrucker]

Originally Posted By: userfriendly
Never seen one from 'ol Copperhead at www.silveradosierra.com either, but his truck has only 470,000 miles on it.


You don't look very hard. I have posted UOA's here in the proper section. And the factory remanned engine in my truck just turned 725,000 miles on the reman. Still only uses the same amount of oil in over 20,000 mile OCI's as it did when it only had 50,000 miles on it... about 2 qts between oil changes. UOA's have not changed at all in the 20 of them I have done on the truck, using both 10w30 and 15w40, and both in varieties of CJ-4 and CK-4. Iron still remains the same among samples. in the 20ppm range (OEM warning limit at 200 ppm). Lead stays the same in the 4-8 range (OEM warning limit at 70 ppm). Everything else 2 or less. Lots of zeros. And except for the initial oil change, all changes done at 50% beyond the OEM recommended interval.

 

[TiredTrucker]

Originally Posted By: sohccammer427
Originally Posted By: mbacfp
Is the chemistry on CK-4 oil better than CJ-4?... I


Apparently, Ford Motor Company believes it's not.

API FA-4
Due to its low viscosity FA-4 should not be used in any Ford diesel vehicles at this time.


API CK-4
Ford will not be recommending the use of CK-4 motor oils in any Ford diesel engines,
new or old. Ford testing has shown some CK-4 type formulations have shown
inadequate wear protection compared to CJ-4 formulations developed and licensed
before 2016.
Ford now recommends using oils that meet...

Complete official statement:

Ford Statement on CK-4



Well, to be fair, FA-4 and CK-4 are not the same critter by a long shot. CK-4 and CJ-4 have more similarities that differences. FA-4 is a whole new concept in HDEO. It requires totally different bearing metallurgy and other stuff. It is only recommended for engines designed specifically for it and its use is almost exclusively related to some sort of fuel economy gain, which is negligible.

Lots of CK-4 oils on the current Ford approved oil list updated as of 6/20/17, primarily in the 10w30 and 15w40 viscosities.

https://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubricants.com/main/additionalinfo/dieseloilsWSSM2C171F1.pdf

 

[zeng]

Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: userfriendly
Never seen one from 'ol Copperhead at www.silveradosierra.com either, but his truck has only 470,000 miles on it.


You don't look very hard. I have posted UOA's here in the proper section. And the factory remanned engine in my truck just turned 725,000 miles on the reman. Still only uses the same amount of oil in over 20,000 mile OCI's as it did when it only had 50,000 miles on it... about 2 qts between oil changes. UOA's have not changed at all in the 20 of them I have done on the truck, using both 10w30 and 15w40, and both in varieties of CJ-4 and CK-4. Iron still remains the same among samples. in the 20ppm range (OEM warning limit at 200 ppm). Lead stays the same in the 4-8 range (OEM warning limit at 70 ppm). Everything else 2 or less. Lots of zeros. And except for the initial oil change, all changes done at 50% beyond the OEM recommended interval.

In the cases provided, it appears a modern CK4 UOA performance equals but not noticeably better than that of a dated CJ4, presumably for similar viscosity grade in similar operating parameters, granted industry claims CK4 has some performance improvements over a CJ4.

 

[TiredTrucker]

I would generally concur, that there doesn't seem to be any appreciable gains from CK-4 over CJ-4. It would appear just a move to protect downstream emissions treatments. But at least, the "sky is falling" stuff that Ford put out is overblown. I have seen nothing to convince me that CK-4 is inferior to CJ-4 in engine protection. Just about a wash from what I can tell so far.

 

[GermanAutohaus]

Originally Posted By: ChrisGuerrero
It’s also important to note that there is no change in formulation associated with this change. It simply means that Shell ROTELLA® products will no longer claim formal API SN approval for products other than our fully synthetic Shell ROTELLA® T6 Multi-Vehicle 5W-30 on labels, technical data sheets, rotella.com and marketing materials moving forward.


So, Shells official statement is that there has been no formula change?

 

[Solarent]

The main differences between CJ-4 and CK-4 oils are as follows:

New tests for oxidation and aeration - which are more stringent than the CJ-4 tests - mostly focused on allowing OEMs to extend drain intervals
Shear stability limits are raised, providing greater protection for all engines.

API FA-4 requires passing the same tests as API CK-4 with the addition of a High Temperature High Shear (HTHS) limit for lower viscosity oils.

Universal oils – those carrying API C (Commercial Vehicles) as well as API S (Gasoline Passenger Car) are based on new formulation styles with a lower phosphorus limit, protecting emission reduction systems in passenger cars. This is amply explained from the Rotella team above.

In addition to these general requirements, the corresponding OEM credentials from DDC, Cummins and Volvo also added additional testing:

Daimler/Detroit Diesel’s specification involves a test to evaluate a lubricant’s ability to prevent heavy duty scuffing or adhesive wear, unique destructive wear patterns.
Cummins’ new specifications covering API CK-4 as well as API FA-4 oil for use in their engines.
Volvo/Mack’s new specifications include an oxidation test incorporating more stringent limits than API.

So yes, I think that CK-4 oils are much better than CJ-4 oils. For 10W30 FA-4, most DI packages I have seen use the same base as the CK-4 plus a booster of some kind or a higher treat rate to get to the FA-4 performance level (so that basically means more dispersant in the formula)

 

[Solarent]

On the blackstone report, which one is the CK-4?

 

[dustyroads]

Originally Posted By: Solarent
On the blackstone report, which one is the CK-4?


Ck-4 is on the right. Thanks for reinforcing (in my mind) the purpose of the new oils. I've mentioned much of the same, but it means nothing coming from me.

Edit- A_Harman has a VOA (of RT6 CK-4) posted in the VOA's as well as UOA of the same.