MTU Categories and FZG

[Overfill]

Chevron lists the 400 SDE and 400 XLE as both meeting "MTU category" 2.1 and 3.1, respectively.
1. Going through the Afton Handbook, does this mean that it meets MTU MTL 5044, for multigrade "1 to 3" or "3.1"?
2. If so, there is a seemingly stringent FZG test it must meet. Does anyone know how other competing HDEOs should compare in this test?
3. Is the main reason other HDEOs (Delvac 1300 or Rotella T6) don't recommend their lubes for MTU because of not meeting the mark for other criteria (eg. seal compatibility)?

 

[Overfill]

If I'm really gathering this as it seems, why does MTU require a gear wear test on a HDEO? It seems like a pretty aggressive or high-pressures test. What components do they expect would need that kind of performance?

 

[bruce381]

could be different tests applications MTU 3.1 is different than MTL 5044?
Though I think you can get a FZG pass of 11 stages with around 1% ZDDP so could be.

 

[Kamele0N]

If I'm really gathering this as it seems, why does MTU require a gear wear test on a HDEO? It seems like a pretty aggressive or high-pressures test. What components do they expect would need that kind of performance?

Because many trucks have gear driven camshafts.....plus HDEO oil goes also into retarder etc....

 

[mattd]

If I'm really gathering this as it seems, why does MTU require a gear wear test on a HDEO? It seems like a pretty aggressive or high-pressures test. What components do they expect would need that kind of performance?

For this.

 

[Overfill]

could be different tests applications MTU 3.1 is different than MTL 5044?
Though I think you can get a FZG pass of 11 stages with around 1% ZDDP so could be.

With both of these (SDE and XLE) at 760 ppm Phos, I am curious what they could leverage to bring it up there

Because many trucks have gear driven camshafts.....plus HDEO oil goes also into retarder etc....

That's pretty interesting! I never knew that some diesel engines had those. I also didn't think that gear driven camshafts would necessitate that level of performance (>stage 11). Is that pretty typical?

 

[Kamele0N]

In one of the previous jobs, I worked as a workshop assistant. Just as a help in a garage.....of transport company.
We were using Shell Rimula R6LM (ACEA E6/E9 low saps HDEO) 10w40 oil in our fleet....and it went into trucks engine and also into its retarder (those chassis which had it).....

Our fleet consisted of cca 100 MB Actros trucks.....mainly MP4 chassis....with MB OM471 engines.....(picture si random one from a web and it shows internal gearset which drives camshafts @top)

 

[Kamele0N]

And be advised.......that "our" Rimula does NOT have "JASO MA" approval.....as "yours" Rotella

 

[m37charlie]

That's pretty interesting! I never knew that some diesel engines had those. I also didn't think that gear driven camshafts would necessitate that level of performance (>stage 11). Is that pretty typical?

Yes. Do you think that an engine designed to go 30-40000 hours between overhauls would have a rubber drive belt to drive the camshaft that requires opening the engine for change every 2000 hours? Or even a chain that will stretch a lot or break over a 30k hour interval?

 

[weasley]

Chevron lists the 400 SDE and 400 XLE as both meeting "MTU category" 2.1 and 3.1, respectively.
1. Going through the Afton Handbook, does this mean that it meets MTU MTL 5044, for multigrade "1 to 3" or "3.1"?
2. If so, there is a seemingly stringent FZG test it must meet. Does anyone know how other competing HDEOs should compare in this test?
3. Is the main reason other HDEOs (Delvac 1300 or Rotella T6) don't recommend their lubes for MTU because of not meeting the mark for other criteria (eg. seal compatibility)?

This is not a straight-forward topic. To answer your questions:

1. Each oil is approved according what is stated on the PDS. One is category 2.1 and the other is 3.1. There are 3 main categories for MTU (1, 2 & 3), with two of them split into full- and low-SAPS versions (2 & 2.1, 3 & 3.1). An oil will only meet one specific category. The higher the category number (in general) the tougher the spec. The main categories are differentiated in their engine testing demands with a couple of ash, TBN and Noack differences in certain places. The Afton page is a little unclear/lazy when it says "1 to 3" - it really means "1, 2, 2.1 & 3"
2. The FZG requirement is pretty tough and is the same across all category requirements.
3. Oils not recommended for MTU will generally not have been developed for or tested according to MTU requirements. There's no way of knowing if they will or won't pass the tests or which, if any of the tests they would fail.