PC-11 CK-4 FA-4

Status
Not open for further replies.
Could be and it may go lower as we enter Q4 2016. Nothing wrong with CJ-4 oil but I wonder how many OEMs will "back-spec" for CK-4. The two are supposed to be interchangeable, but I thought I read it was xW-30 only?
 
Well, to some degree. Virtually all the new heavy diesels are factory filled with 10w30 nowadays. CK-4 10w30 will still maintain the 3.5 HTHS requirement. FA-4 will go below 3.5 HTHS... anywhere from 2.9 to 3.2. For my Detroit engine, the lube spec manual clearly states that a 3.5 HTHS minimum is required for 10w30, which I use. Fleets are going to have to either stay on CK-4 for everything or stock different specs for newer trucks unless they want problems. CK-4 will still have both the XXw40 and XXw30 categories while FA-4 is going to be strictly XXw30. I checked with my oil supplier and even after the CK-4 and FA-4 spec oils hit in full force, they will still have CJ-4 for quite some time. But from what I have read, I probably would not scream and holler about using a CK-4. The HTHS meets the minimum for my engine. Both of the new specs, one of the main characteristics over CJ-4 is better oxidation control. A good thing.
 
Originally Posted By: dblshock
Probably the reason EOM is blowing out the Delvac 1 for $10...

Yes, there's still a while to go, and I'm not sure we'll see much in the way of blowout pricing. At least up here, that didn't happen with the CJ-4 rollout. The CJ-4 stuff came in, and they simply quit making CI-4+ stuff early. There are enough people who don't trust the new specifications who will gladly pay full price for old stock.

Imperial Oil discounted none of the CI-4+ stuff, and let it work its way out at full prices, and that didn't take long.
 
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
But from what I have read, I probably would not scream and holler about using a CK-4. The HTHS meets the minimum for my engine. Both of the new specs, one of the main characteristics over CJ-4 is better oxidation control. A good thing.
This is my thinking as well (about the same as SM v SN in PCMO).
 
I just heard recently that CK-4 will be back-speced for most engines calling for CJ-4. Odds are the majors will replace their CJ-4 inventory as fast as it will sell (my guess is that CJ-4 won't be around much more than by May 2017). That same conversation indicated that some major OEM's are going to recommend FA-4 for their on highway engines and possibly even allow their use in anything from 2008 onward. Imagine 5W30 with HTHS of 2.9 in your Detroit - lots of fuel savings and no change to wear (I assume detroit wouldn't do that if they thought that engines would wear out faster).
 
Originally Posted By: Solarent
I just heard recently that CK-4 will be back-speced for most engines calling for CJ-4. Odds are the majors will replace their CJ-4 inventory as fast as it will sell (my guess is that CJ-4 won't be around much more than by May 2017).
I would be skeptical it would happen that fast--that would only be about 6 months past the debut of CK-4 if the timing tracks true. When SN replaced SM in the PCMO world, it was about a year before a significant reduction of SM was seen.
 
The API has a one year mandatory sell through period - so your timing of a year would track with that. I think it could happen sooner because I'm sure that the oil marketers have been anxious to get these products to market - and as it's a pretty significant performance upgrade they will likely push it to capture the value from the new performance (I'm thinking more specifically FA-4 in this case).

Also the OEM's will play a big role in how quickly this turns over. If Detroit, Cummins, Volvo, Paccar etc all start pushing CK-4 or FA-4 (which is what I heard last week) then it might increase the sell through rate of the CJ-4 products. Really only time will tell but if I was running an oil company and had been investing in R&D on this category for the last several years I'd be anxious to push the sales out quickly.
 
Originally Posted By: Solarent
The API has a one year mandatory sell through period - so your timing of a year would track with that. I think it could happen sooner because I'm sure that the oil marketers have been anxious to get these products to market - and as it's a pretty significant performance upgrade they will likely push it to capture the value from the new performance (I'm thinking more specifically FA-4 in this case).

Also the OEM's will play a big role in how quickly this turns over. If Detroit, Cummins, Volvo, Paccar etc all start pushing CK-4 or FA-4 (which is what I heard last week) then it might increase the sell through rate of the CJ-4 products. Really only time will tell but if I was running an oil company and had been investing in R&D on this category for the last several years I'd be anxious to push the sales out quickly.
I would agree with all of the R&D money and time on the line, the manufacturers will want to see a return quickly, but in the case of FA-4, there is no current oil like it on the market today, so CJ-4 would not impact those sales to any degree, would they?
 
You are right. I guess the question will be which OEM's allow the use of FA-4 in older engines (it was not supposed to be backward compatible, but I've heard rumblings that MY2008 and beyond may be ok to use it with) and also how quickly consumers accept the fuel economy benefits and performance claims.
For sure there will be some early adopters, and if the adoption curve is steep, that may erode the CJ-4 market share - if that starts to happen then marketers may discount the old spec product to make room for new (think mass market retailers like Walmart). If that happens then BITOGers will hoard CJ-4 oil at rock bottom prices and then all that will be available will be the new oils.

Of course there are a lot of "what if" scenarios in that so only time will tell.
 
Originally Posted By: Solarent
You are right. I guess the question will be which OEM's allow the use of FA-4 in older engines (it was not supposed to be backward compatible, but I've heard rumblings that MY2008 and beyond may be ok to use it with) and also how quickly consumers accept the fuel economy benefits and performance claims.
For sure there will be some early adopters, and if the adoption curve is steep, that may erode the CJ-4 market share - if that starts to happen then marketers may discount the old spec product to make room for new (think mass market retailers like Walmart). If that happens then BITOGers will hoard CJ-4 oil at rock bottom prices and then all that will be available will be the new oils.

Of course there are a lot of "what if" scenarios in that so only time will tell.
hehe...you are so right. I think FA-4 will be **slowly** adopted in older engines. Look at the speed the user base has adopted 10w30 v 15w40--slowly. Even if the OEMs back specified FA-4, I am going to opine that adoption is not going to be readily accepted (except, perhaps by those who are already using 10w30).
 
this is mainly for the futur .popular and futur proofed oil like the mobil delvac le5w30 or other similar will likely be very quick to try to add this spec to their existing oil . it is very doubtfull they didnt have these futur spec in mind when they designed those oil not that long ago
 
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Well, to some degree. Virtually all the new heavy diesels are factory filled with 10w30 nowadays. CK-4 10w30 will still maintain the 3.5 HTHS requirement. FA-4 will go below 3.5 HTHS... anywhere from 2.9 to 3.2. For my Detroit engine, the lube spec manual clearly states that a 3.5 HTHS minimum is required for 10w30, which I use. Fleets are going to have to either stay on CK-4 for everything or stock different specs for newer trucks unless they want problems. CK-4 will still have both the XXw40 and XXw30 categories while FA-4 is going to be strictly XXw30. I checked with my oil supplier and even after the CK-4 and FA-4 spec oils hit in full force, they will still have CJ-4 for quite some time. But from what I have read, I probably would not scream and holler about using a CK-4. The HTHS meets the minimum for my engine. Both of the new specs, one of the main characteristics over CJ-4 is better oxidation control. A good thing.


Hi, TT!
We're both running the same motors in our Semi's, did your Oil Supplier give you any idea if the CK-4 oils will be offered in both 15W40 and 10W30?

From what I've read the HTHS numbers for the CK-4 oils are well within spec for our remanned motors, am I reading that right?
 
No, Dan hasn't said much in that regard. I will have to send him a text and find out what he knows. CK-4 allows for both XXw30 and XXw40 oils to be used, so I would expect them to offer both. FA-4 is strictly XXw30 spec.

The CK-4 spec will retain the >3.5 HTHS we currently have with CJ-4 , so it should fulfill the backward compatible goal. But I have not seen any appreciable data referencing how add pack components will differ. That will play into all of this.

The OEM's will never "slowly" approve of FA-4 oils in the older engines. From trade articles I have read on this, a engine has to have different internals that will compensate for the lower HTHS of FA-4 oils. FA-4 HTHS falls way below the minimum level of OEM recommendations for engines now. So any engine that will be "certified" for FA-4 oils will have to take care of itself more since the oil won't be doing it. Different ring and bearing metallurgy at a minimum. Pity the naive soul who puts a load of FA-4 in an older motor. You know that is going to happen sooner or later. Owners will have to stay on their toes and make sure it doesn't happen. What a fine mess our illustrious government has foisted on us.
 
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
The OEM's will never "slowly" approve of FA-4 oils in the older engines.
I meant to type CK-4 in my post above, not FA-4. I meant that CK-4 will be slowly adopted by the users of the older engines, even if it is back specified for use. Look at how SM hung on with the crowd after SN was released and the same (more or less) for CJ-4 replacing CI-4. Sorry for the confusion.
 
In that case, I don't think OEMs will have to backspec. Assuming viscosity is correct and CK-4 is certified as backwards compatible by API, that's the end of it. The vast, vast majority of manuals call for a certain API spec or newer, not one spec only, and those cases that do are dodgy at best. Further, assuming the CK-4 lubes have the builder approvals, there's not much else necessary.
 
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
No, Dan hasn't said much in that regard. I will have to send him a text and find out what he knows. CK-4 allows for both XXw30 and XXw40 oils to be used, so I would expect them to offer both. FA-4 is strictly XXw30 spec.

The CK-4 spec will retain the >3.5 HTHS we currently have with CJ-4 , so it should fulfill the backward compatible goal. But I have not seen any appreciable data referencing how add pack components will differ. That will play into all of this.

The OEM's will never "slowly" approve of FA-4 oils in the older engines. From trade articles I have read on this, a engine has to have different internals that will compensate for the lower HTHS of FA-4 oils. FA-4 HTHS falls way below the minimum level of OEM recommendations for engines now. So any engine that will be "certified" for FA-4 oils will have to take care of itself more since the oil won't be doing it. Different ring and bearing metallurgy at a minimum. Pity the naive soul who puts a load of FA-4 in an older motor. You know that is going to happen sooner or later. Owners will have to stay on their toes and make sure it doesn't happen. What a fine mess our illustrious government has foisted on us.


Thanks for the reply, TT. I hope all is going well your way.

You nailed it right on the head, my thoughts exactly!
smile.gif
I can imagine it will also be a bit of an undertaking for maintenance shops to stock separate lubes for New Generation motors, and for older motors, -which does leave margin for error. I know I'll be watching which gets put into my motor like a hawk.

I've called Mobil Delvac's Technical Support line in the past on this subject, and was told pretty much the same thing your Supplier told you in regards to the CK-4 lubes, they will be fully backwards compatible. I also asked if the FA-4 lubes would somehow tweaked in the future to be backwards combatible, but the gentleman told me the specs for the FA-4 lubes weren't set in stone at that time.
 
Depending on when you spoke with them, FA-4 is definitely set in stone now. Whether or not OEM's will allow use of it in older (probably 2008 forward) engines will be up to the individual OEM's. Like I said, I've heard rumblings that there are a couple of OEM's that are considering it.
 
Yeah, it was a while back. Like you posted, now we'll wait and see if the OEM's recommend on using the FA-4 lubes in the older motors.

I'm right there with Tired Trucker; the new generation motors have been designed for the lower HTHS numbers, the motor I run wasn't, so I'll be using the CK-4 lubes when the switch over from CJ-4 takes place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

wwillson
Pennzoil - Low-speed pre-ignition (LSPI) Q&A - Answers
Replies
6
Views
6K
garageman402
S
Volvo iShift Transmission Oil - The Saga
Replies
4
Views
5K
4wd
D
  • Locked
Ford 3.0 Diesel - to FA-4 or CK-4, that is my question.
2
Replies
29
Views
13K
DHracer297
wwillson
Dodge Durango 3.6L - HPL CK-4 5w-20 - 33,300 miles on oil - 173,000 miles total
2 3
Replies
41
Views
9K
dnewton3
L
CK-4 Diesel Oil for old 6.0l PowerStroke?
3 4 5
Replies
98
Views
27K
fantastic
Back
Top Bottom