Adding ZDDP plus to CK-4 oil???

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
44
Location
South Florida
Just to be safe, would one 4 ounce bottle of ZDDP plus in 15 quarts of CK-4 oil raise the Zinc and Phosphorus levels to CJ-4 standards??? I don't know how many PPM one bottle will raise the levels.
 
I'm nowhere near the most knowledgeable party on this, but assuming that one bottle of ZDDPlus is formulated to bring zinc from about 800 PPM to somewhere just under 2,000, wouldn't it raise 15 qts. @ 800 PPM to about 1,200?
 
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Who is spreading this misinformation that CK-4 specifies less zddp?


So you are saying the CK-4 oils have higher levels of Zinc and Phosphorus than CJ-4?
 
Originally Posted By: Invasivore
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Who is spreading this misinformation that CK-4 specifies less zddp?


So you are saying the CK-4 oils have higher levels of Zinc and Phosphorus than CJ-4?


Not necessarily. The CK-4 spec does not seem to directly specify lower levels of ZDDP based on what I have seen on the information published on the web. I think a lot of the early CK-4 adopters were foolish enough to rate their oils for BOTH SN and CK-4, and the API SN spec DOES limit ZDDP.

Now.. how the oil companies interpret the spec (and if they are shifting from ZDDP to other anti-wear compounds) is another consideration. A VOA of a CK-4 oil that has less ZDDP than the CJ-4 variant does not directly mean that CK-4 caused that lowering of ZDDP.
 
I'm just saying that the specification and the implementation are 2 different things.

It is not correct to directly assume that CK-4 has inferior wear protection qualities when we haven't had enough quantity or time to judge how the producers meet the spec.
 
I did a calculation off ZDDP Plus' website. I could be wrong but I think 4 ounces will raise Zinc 600ppm and Phosphorus 480ppm at 15 quarts.
 
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
I'm just saying that the specification and the implementation are 2 different things.

It is not correct to directly assume that CK-4 has inferior wear protection qualities when we haven't had enough quantity or time to judge how the producers meet the spec.


Yes, I see what you are saying. To achieve the CK-4 spec, some blenders have chose to limit different additives to achieve the result which may or may not be ZDDP.

I think I might try Valvoline premium blue extreme CK-4 since it's on "The List." I will do a VOA, and UOA at 5k, change oil again and try it with Archoil UOA 5k. I have a 6.0 Powerstroke with 170k miles.
 
There is one thing to watch, and that's how the ZDDP species isn't necessarily the same for a PCMO as for an HDEO. So, as always, one has to watch with what one expects from a ZDDP additive. A formulator would be better able to provide us with details on that.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
There is one thing to watch, and that's how the ZDDP species isn't necessarily the same for a PCMO as for an HDEO. So, as always, one has to watch with what one expects from a ZDDP additive. A formulator would be better able to provide us with details on that.


Yes, I would like to know if adding the bottle of ZDDP will negatively affect film strength, suspension of other additives, and effectiveness of other additives.
 
If other additives have been substituted in place of ZDDP for CK-4 oils,could this mean that if you added ZDDP to the package, you may have a situation where the additives are forced to compete with each other,resulting in an unbalanced blend,and/or loss of some positive benefits?
 
Originally Posted By: Invasivore
Yes, I would like to know if adding the bottle of ZDDP will negatively affect film strength, suspension of other additives, and effectiveness of other additives.

That's a very good question. To you and to Ether, as best as I recall, ZDDP has more than one function as an additive (or more accurately, additives), including not just anti-wear but as an anti-oxidant.

Just like an HDEO isn't an automatic substitute for a race oil for a gasser, I'd suspect a ZDDP additive designed for performance gasoline engines may not turn a lower phosphorus HDEO into a CI-4+ automatically. I wouldn't go so far as to talk about additive clash, but the intended benefits may just not be there.

Heck, as I recall, at least one car journalist (can't remember if it was print or TV off hand) found out the hard way that a ZDDP additive to an ordinary motor oil can at times be a poor substitute for a dedicated break in lubricant. I don't think we'd find that by running a CK-4 lubricant with a ZDDP additive, but there really isn't any evidence that the additive is needed in the first place.

For those who are worried, I suppose Ford's list is a good place to start. Of course, we are seeing CK-4 only oils, rather than dual rated options, too. I certainly understand everyone's concern. A diesel engine going south isn't like tossing in a cam and set of lifters into a 305 for $200 and an afternoon of work. However, sooner or later, CK-4 will be the only readily available product, and that's probably the case in some places by now.
 
I'm thinking about dosing up my next fill of RT6 in the Dodge with a ZDDP additive to see if it affects the Iron wear rate. I'll have two complete OCI's of CK4 RT6 to compare it to.

Of course, I could go back to my old UOA's and compare Iron wear metals of CK4 RT6 to CJ4 RT6...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top