Cummins engine oil
- Thread starter Caiwu
- Start date
Not sure which Cummins you have or year. That would make a big difference, but my Cummins manual says to use CES 20078 or CES 20076. My Cummins is a 2006 ISX. The manual also says to refer to Cummins Engine Oil Recommendations, Bulletin 3810340.
My manual does show that a recommendation for CES 20071 or 20076 for a non-EGR engine. It also shows that a CH-4 can be used as an alternative to CES 20071. That would mean that CI-4, CI-4+, and CJ-4 would also work.
Get on Cummins site to check out the tech bulletins.
You must be referring to a newer model with an EGR and probably the common rail.
I would guess that Valvoline premium blue would suit you fine?
Regardless of what size Cummins you have, if it's an active catalyst engine it requires the low ash oil. However Cummins did come out with a TSB stating it was ok to run CI-4 but the DPF cleaning mileage was reduced. It would be helpful to know what engine you are referring to and if you post/send me the engine number I can find out if the TSB applies to your engine.
Unless the engine is burning oil CI-4 isn't going to "hurt" anything and it was NEVER in any danger of hurting the engine - only the emissions after treatments.
It does indeed mean a difference on which year and emission equipment is on the engine. Mine is EGR equipped but no DPF. As the EPA mandated more junk on these engines, the soot loading has increased and, as WreckerMan stated, the after treatment devices demand certain things from the oil as well.
Heck, if in doubt which oil to use, then call your local Cummins shop (not a vehicle dealer) and give them the engine ID number and they will give you all the information you need.
Actually that's a rather old spec you are referring too and I believe it's for a marine application. The latest sequential oil spec is 20081 I believe (referring to certain API CJ-4 emissions oils). I think that the N14's and M11's were even in the 20076 spec range. You might have an older engine that originally called for API CH or CG oils. If your lubricants of choice are backwards compatible to this early specification you are good to go otherwise you have other options. I think API CH had a TBN mandate of 11.7 if memory serves me correctly. Amsoil Heavy Duty Diesel and Marine should do you fine if you have access to that. Also a number of the oils that are sold via the John Deere world would work too. Anyone else out there know of a 12 TBN diesel oil that has a marine (anti-rust) ad-pack??
Good luck!
Originally Posted By: 1040 WreckerMan
Unless the engine is burning oil CI-4 isn't going to "hurt" anything and it was NEVER in any danger of hurting the engine - only the emissions after treatments.
I have an 09 Cummins 2500 (EGR & DPF)
I was considering Delo, Rotell (dino) and Delvac. Which way should I go?
15W40 Delo 400 LE changed at OEM recommendation would be a good oil for you. It controls wear very well and seems to be pretty tolerant of minor coolant and fuel contamination (as evidenced in our cummins ISM and ISX's).
Originally Posted By: George7941
Originally Posted By: 1040 WreckerMan
Unless the engine is burning oil CI-4 isn't going to "hurt" anything and it was NEVER in any danger of hurting the engine - only the emissions after treatments.
Not totally sure on the smaller Cummins diesels with EGR and DPF, but the ISX versions are pretty specific about using only a CJ-4 rated oil. I think is has to do a number of factors including the lower ash content requirement. Would think that this would also apply to the smaller Cummins engines with the emissions stuff.
Since the CJ-4 is backward compatible anyway, wouldn't it just be probably the best choice as well?
Cummins released a service document/communication that CI-4+ could be used by customers, but as WreckerMan stated the DPF cleaning would need to be increased in frequency. The last DPF's that I sent off for cleaning were about $275 for the service. To be honest my fleet saw a phenomena much like WreckerMan had indicated- the CJ-4 vehicles with noted consumption issues were the first to have plugged DPFs.
We started a substantial push on identifying why certain units went through oil at a higher rate under similar use conditions. Essentially what we found is that the dipsticks did not tell the tale of the true amount of oil in the sumps. The units that were using the oil were being perpetually overfilled versus their rated capacity. We ended up recalibrating the fill levels of these trucks and communicating to the maintenance techs and drivers that they were not to fill past these marks under any circumstances. We audited the oil levels of 15 trucks each day to ensure the policy stuck. We also put procedures in place that the oil would only be checked and topped off at the beginning of the day- that is after the trucks had set idle for more than 4 hours. Consumption quantity went through the floor and our UOA's started making more sense due to not having to account for TBN sweetening via make-up oil that was never documented by techs and drivers.
Back on topic now...all and all the debate on CI-4+ and CJ-4 has been looped here quite a bit. The OP stated that he had an old-school motor and the specification that he sighted was a marine oil spec. I personally wouldn't run CJ-4 oil in a marine diesel engine unless it had been dosed with rust inhibitors and specific deposit fighting additives.
Hi,
pickled - It is interesting to hear about your dipstick issue!
Many years ago when working for Daimler Benz I had similar problems with the first production run of engines sent here. The initial prototypes of this "V" engine family field tested here were good (on oil use) but the "line" engines had variable lubricant consumption issues. Variances in dipstick length proved to be one of the major contributing factors
Well in the end under production refinement we changed sump size and a few other things (21 items) "to get them to go" but that is another story!
Last edited:
Multiple components of variation can be blinding and frustrating to some people, but I sure love systematically sleuthing through these issues and working with teams to address the root cause of such problems. It sure is nice not getting bit in the hind quarters again by the same dog! Life would certainly be less interesting at times if we didn't have challenges to chase down 
Similar threads
