Proving that an oil meets spec

S

Shimmy1

Joined
Apr 6, 2023
Messages
9
Looking for some opinions on if it's a deal-breaker for any of you on how different manufacturers present the specs on their oil. I run a smaller fleet of construction equipment. Caterpillar tractors with a independent hydraulic system (not common with the trans), excavators, dozers, wheel loader, wet kits on trucks. I want to switch everything to one oil for ease of inventory mostly, but simplicity for workers as well. Currently the oils I have are Cat HYDO Adv 10, Case Akcela Excavator fluid, Komatsu HO 56, and Cenex Indol EH. I have attached what I can find on each, and Caterpillar is the only one that provides actual test results. I have been around and around with Cenex, their position is I just have to trust their oil has been tested and meets spec. I would prefer to use the Cenex since they are local, and it's $5 per gallon cheaper than Cat. What you see is what you get on the Cenex. Just so there is no confusion, none of the machines require a tractor fluid, these are strictly hydraulic systems. All are piston pumps except one old dozer. Thanks for any input.

https://www.transwest.mn/getmedia/7b1fd51c-da6f-45cc-a26b-efc02d0b27ed/PDS-HO56-HE-r2014-july.pdf

https://epliportal.pli-petronas.com...cumentId=7b881930-f067-42fa-e7e0-08da1647eae7

https://www.finning.com/content/dam...s/Maintenance-Products/Oils/Hydo-Advanced.pdf

https://www.cenex.com/~/media/cenex/files/lubricants/indol eh iso 46/indol eh iso 46 2 1 12.ashx
 
It doesn't appear that the requirements are too awfully stringent. You need and ISO 46 AW hydraulic fluid with some R/O (rust and oxidation) capability. The Cenex Indol EH should work well for you. It appears to be very similar to the Caterpillar product:

1680882925106.webp
 
FowVay said:
It doesn't appear that the requirements are too awfully stringent. You need and ISO 46 AW hydraulic fluid with some R/O (rust and oxidation) capability. The Cenex Indol EH should work well for you. It appears to be very similar to the Caterpillar product:
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply. Based on everything that I can find, it does appear like it should be fine.

My concern is wondering if I should be concerned that Cenex cannot provide any documentation or proof that the oil has indeed been tested to meet spec. As far as I'm able to determine, it only claims "designed to meet specs" and not "Meets specs".
 
Shimmy1 said:
Cenex cannot provide any documentation or proof that the oil has indeed been tested to meet spec.
Click to expand...

What specification are you trying to verify? Do you have a number that you can research and see what level of performance you're trying to meet? The only specification I found when reading over the links you shared was for the Komatsu KES 07.841.1 which was noted on several products. This was just a hydraulic fluid specification and didn't have any difficult parameters that make it exceptional.
 
Specs are one thing, Licenses are another.

My opinions are these:
- properly spec'd fluids are easily sourced from the aftermarket; OEM fluids are rarely a true necessity and generally a way for the OEM to make more money off the customer after the equipment sale
- long-standing companies like Cenex have a reputation to uphold and won't risk putting out inferior products; if they recommend their fluid for those applications, it would be a safe conclusion they are OK
- the similarities between those OEM lubes are close enough that the Cenex product will provide what you seek (savings, consolidation, safe service factors)
- the vis of the Cenex is a slight bit lower than the Komatsu fluid, but probably not enough to warrant fear
 
I'm not really sure exactly. Mainly just here asking opinions of you guys to see if I should be looking for more proof, like my title states.

I have a guy that I consult with on oil matters. He says anything OEM is pretty much trustworthy, but he's not willing to give Cenex his blessing without documented proof it's passed the tests. "Designed to meet" is not the same as "Meets spec XXXX" in his world.

You guys are saying to trust the published information. I'm good with that provided that's the majority opinion.
 
I would agree; the wording can matter. Or maybe it doesn't ... There are times when you're simply not going to get what you want, in terms of afirmation from a lube maker.

"Meets or exceeds" is a common phrase we hear. But this does not mean it's licensed, which is a whole different topic. Meets or exceeds simply claims that whatever the parameters are, the product will do as well or better, but it has not been verified by the OEM. "Meets or exceeds" is a statement of the aftermarket maker, whereas "licensed" (aka "approved") is a statement from the OEM.

"Desgined to meet" could mean it does meet the spec, or that is was targeted to the spec but failed (by how much, we'd never know). There may be something in the spec that is stated at some value (a %, or a temp, etc) and the aftermarket fluid won't quite get there, by a very small margin, but that small "miss" in meeting spec may have no real-world effect in terms of use. Viscosity is a great example. Some spec may state "min vis X.x at 100c", but the aftermarket product is at X.y. We'd all agree that perhaps a tenth or two of vis difference doesn't matter, especially if the aftermarket product does a good (or better) job of holding it's vis over the OEM product spec. An excellent example of this is the old Dexron IIIh and Mercon fluids; they were spec'd at 7.3 cSt. When the Dex VI and Mercon LV came out, those were set at 6.1 and 5.8 cSt. Ironically, the Dex/Merc fluids could not hold that 7.3 vic for long, and were known to plummet to the low 5.x vis after 25k miles or so. Yet the newer fluids were made of much better base stocks to meet the newer specs, and therefore held their vis much better than the older spec. So even though the "new" spec was a lower vis, it survived better in use. Valvoline Maxlife ATF is known for being a nearly-one-size-fits-all fluid for many trannies. They don't concern themselves with the vis spec; it is what it is out of the bottle. They care much more about the add-pack. Hence, the Maxlife ATF cannot "meet" some OEM specs, but Valvoline recommends the lube for many, many applications. They don't go get all those licenses because they fluid would never meet the various different nunaces of the market, but the general product itself can be used safely in a wide variety of applications.

My long winded point is that "designed to meet" does not assure you it's OK, but it should not be automatically interpreted as a failure to meet either.

My recommendation is to email Cenex and get a question/answer on record. Specifically ask them what they recommend for each application you seek to cover. If they say that the Indol EH will work, then that would be enough for me.
 
From Indol's typicaI oil properties, I think Indol is a safe substitute.

I think the EH stands for 'emulsifying hydraulic.'
 
dnewton3 said:
My recommendation is to email Cenex and get a question/answer on record. Specifically ask them what they recommend for each application you seek to cover. If they say that the Indol EH will work, then that would be enough for me.
Click to expand...
Tried that. I have been in contact with their oil headquarters in Inver Grove Heights, and what is published is as far as they will go. They claim verbally that it's as good as Cat Adv 10, and that's it.

I can buy their "warranty" for $800 per machine. At that point, I'd be just as far ahead to buy Cat oil, if I am not comfortable with it.

I haven't decided yet if I'm going to let it be a deal-breaker. That's why I'm here lol.
 
I get what you're saying, dn. The responding email stating what oils for what machines is the record you'd be looking for.
 
An Oil that has the proper ratings from one of the majors is the best bet for a properly formulated product.
 
Is any of the equipment under warranty? In my situation I have multiple farm tractors of different makes but only new Deere equipment. It was easiest to switch everything over to Hygard to keep one oil and avoid cross contamination when swapping implements. The old IH, Allis Chalmers, White, etc. don't care as much but it keeps the Deere's happy should something ever happen.

Short of that, the Cat HYDO 10 seems to be a very well regarded product and I think Cat is one of the most stringent manufacturers on lubricant and filtration specs. The extra $5 is easily lost with any kind of hydraulic failure on something of this size.
 
After checking with another distributor, I will actually save $8.50 per gallon. I had already committed to 110 gallons from my local retailer, but another from about 40 miles away offered it for $13.50 per gallon, so I told them to get me 4 more drums.

I am going to send in a couple of samples of new oil, one for the Cat, and the other for the Cenex. I will post the results when I get them. That should settle any questions on purity or cleanliness.
 
Shimmy1 said:
After checking with another distributor, I will actually save $8.50 per gallon. I had already committed to 110 gallons from my local retailer, but another from about 40 miles away offered it for $13.50 per gallon, so I told them to get me 4 more drums.

I am going to send in a couple of samples of new oil, one for the Cat, and the other for the Cenex. I will post the results when I get them. That should settle any questions on purity or cleanliness.
Click to expand...
You will also have to ask for a particle count if you are concerned about cleanliness. Most blenders do a good job with filtering.
 
Creekside said:
Is any of the equipment under warranty? In my situation I have multiple farm tractors of different makes but only new Deere equipment. It was easiest to switch everything over to Hygard to keep one oil and avoid cross contamination when swapping implements. The old IH, Allis Chalmers, White, etc. don't care as much but it keeps the Deere's happy should something ever happen.

Short of that, the Cat HYDO 10 seems to be a very well regarded product and I think Cat is one of the most stringent manufacturers on lubricant and filtration specs. The extra $5 is easily lost with any kind of hydraulic failure on something of this size.
Click to expand...
The warranty point is one of the most important questions asked. Another question is criticality of equipment, that is, what equipment is critical to the operation while the others are less critical. The oil needs to meet the requirements of the units under warranty or that are more critical to the operation. These are important considerations in lubrication management programs. You may only be able to consolidate to two oils, one EH and one Non-EH.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom