Whats The Best Availabe Cl-4 plus Oil?

Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
97
Location
Colorado
I have looked at a few studies that HIGHLY recommend running the older CI-4 Plus oils in an older Dodge with the Cummins. Right now I am looking at the Mystik JT-8 and the John Deere Plus 50 oils. Any thoughts on these two oils and does anybody have any other recommendations? Thanks HS
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
134
Location
Wi
 Originally Posted By: BoiseRob
Schaeffer #151 MolyBond 15w40 is CI4+...
DITTO
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
3,208
Location
Indiana
Amsoil has a few CI-4+ oils, as does Mobil if you can find old stock of Turbo Diesel Truck or Delvac.
 
Joined
Apr 8, 2009
Messages
1,332
Location
oh
i've been using deere plus 50 since it was introduced and have always had extremely good results with it, and less than $10 a gallon bulk
 

huntsonora

Thread starter
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
97
Location
Colorado
I appreciate the responses so far. Just for clarification, I am hoping to find something readily available like the 2 oils I mentioned in my original post. The previous owner called me and gave me a box of stuff he had for the truck, there are 3 fuel filters and 3 NAPA gold oil filters in it so I dont want to spend a lot on fully synthetic oil just yet when I am going to use these filters first. If I am going to drop the dime on Amsoil I will have a proper filtration setup to maximize my dollar, otherwise I cannot justify the cost. So, that being said, any ideas on CI-4+ oils that can be found in either auto stores or farm and ranch stores in most communities? Sorry I wasnt more specific and thanks again I will be using this oil in a 1994 Dodge 2500 with a 12 valve cummins in it. It has 145k on the odometer HS
 

huntsonora

Thread starter
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
97
Location
Colorado
CI-4+ outperformed every CJ-4 lube in this article. My truck is an older truck and from what I understand the newer oils were formulated to meet certain govt regulations on newer diesel trucks but that doesnt necessarily make the newer oils better. http://www.turbodieselregister.com/TDR57_Oil.pdf The problem I am having is that I cannot find the "Best" performing oils in that analysis because they have all gone to CJ-4. John Deere Plus-50 was rated as a "Good" performer and the Mystik wasnt tested but I can get those oils in the CI-4+ rating locally. CI-4 and CI-4 plus is what most farmers and ranchers run around here. Just looking to see what an "oil snob" would feel is best. I use the word "oil snob" with great admiration, I really want to try to do whats best for the truck and while I realize that everybody may have a different opinion it would be nice to hear the "whats and whys" of these arguements to be able to make a more educated decision about my choice. I really do appreciate the knowledge on this forum. If anybody can see why the above article may be flawed please let me know. Trust me, if I had the confidence I would have purchased 3 gallons of Rotella T CJ-4 yesterday at Sams Club cheap HS
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 23, 2005
Messages
1,528
Location
Bohica
A couple things to bear in mind with that article... 1. It is one man's opinion based on his interpretation of VOA's of those oils. "I can only analyze how I think each oil will perform based on its additive composition" 2. Those oils did not "outperform" any other oil in the article...it was an interpretation by that man who, as it appears, likes the composition of CI4+ oils...and who can blame him? They had lots of antiwear additives and produced excellent results. 3. There was no "real world" results in this article, just observations and opinions. The newer Cj4 oil are using different additives. Additives that we do not necessarily see in a UOA. And, as we are used to seeing high levels of ZDDP in most oils, we tend to have an overly discerning eye when CJ4 oil topics come up... If it was me, and I was able to come by the Rotella for a decent price like you did, I would have bought it. My point here is that the newer CJ4 oils are not inferior like many believe. And, if you don't believe then you always have the tool of OA to fall back on. With remarks like the above that I quoted, as well as "Let’s transition to the lube oils that I like the best." I would take that article with a few grains of salt. Just because one man thinks they are the best, doesn't always mean it is so... JMO,.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
1,460
Location
Alaska
Regarding CJ-4 vs CI-4+, all I can say is that Delvac 1 5W-40 (CI-4+) meets Mercedes' top oil spec for trucks: 228.5; Delvac 1 ESP 5W-40 (CJ-4)only meets 228.3 (the next lower spec) and 228.31 (analagous spec for low SAPS oil). ESP does not meet 228.51 (or ACEA E6), the top specs for low SAPS oil, for some reason. If it did, I would "use it with confidence". Since it does not, I am using Delvac 1 SHC 5W-40 which does meet 228.5 and amazingly I was able to find in the US (11 jugs of 5 gal). Yes, I know it is not CI-4 and my engine has EGR but Mercedes does recommend it in its' highest spec for even its' EGR engines. It surprised me that I could find a supply of SHC but not D1 which was ubiquitous up to last year. That said, I wouldn't use SHC in an American motor because it is only highly specified by Mercedes, MAN, Renault, MTU, etc. But just because an oil is CJ-4 doesn't mean it is the best in all respects. FWIW no CJ-4 oils have made Mercedes top list, either 228.5 or 228.51. Charlie Unimog U500/Unicat camper
 
Joined
Jun 3, 2002
Messages
8,229
Location
MI
D-Roc's COMMENTS ARE SO SPOT ON THAT THEY BEAR REPEATING. I work at a research institution and can tell you...NEVER take the word of one author/article, especially one based on speculation:
 Originally Posted By: D-Roc
A couple things to bear in mind with that article... 1. It is one man's opinion based on his interpretation of VOA's of those oils. "I can only analyze how I think each oil will perform based on its additive composition" 2. Those oils did not "outperform" any other oil in the article...it was an interpretation by that man who, as it appears, likes the composition of CI4+ oils...and who can blame him? They had lots of antiwear additives and produced excellent results. 3. There was no "real world" results in this article, just observations and opinions. The newer Cj4 oil are using different additives. Additives that we do not necessarily see in a UOA. And, as we are used to seeing high levels of ZDDP in most oils, we tend to have an overly discerning eye when CJ4 oil topics come up... If it was me, and I was able to come by the Rotella for a decent price like you did, I would have bought it. My point here is that the newer CJ4 oils are not inferior like many believe. And, if you don't believe then you always have the tool of OA to fall back on. With remarks like the above that I quoted, as well as "Let’s transition to the lube oils that I like the best." I would take that article with a few grains of salt. Just because one man thinks they are the best, doesn't always mean it is so... JMO,.
4 years ago I communicated with the late Mark Mathys (Stinky Peterson, RIP) to debunk an attack at BITOG saying JDPlus 50 was an inferior oil because it had the worst shear rates in a particular "independent" study using the ORBAHN test. Mark managed the Butler CAT oil analysis labs. Mark gave me permission to post these "real world" 15W40 UOA SHEAR RESULTS: BRAND #SAMPLES %LOW VISC. %HIGH VISC. (NOT MEETING SPEC) Pennzoil 355 2 0 Farmland 971 4 1 Mobil 23096 5 8 Exxon 17988 5 3 Shell 24679 5 4 Citgo 10228 6 4 Cenex 9937 6 2 Valvoline 62 8 5 Duron 774 9 2 Schaeffer 360 10 0 Deere 1870 10 1 Farmoyl 175 11 0 Amsoil 92 11 1 Texaco 6464 11 1 Conoco 13918 12 3 Chevron 31240 12 2 Cat 16240 12 6 Phillips 859 19 1 Kendall 374 26 2 In real world UOAs, the JDPlus50 performed as well as the Schaeffers (whose rep was shooting down the JD). Mark...."I did this without considering blends, only brands and viscosity. I also included a column for high viscosity since that is usually more of a concern in diesel engines than viscosity loss since it limit to OCI. Feel free to post this data. FYI - I searched for samples without fuel." After long discussions, he told me never to judge an oil's performance based on specs. alone and that after analyzing thousands of HDEO UOA's HE COULD NOT SAY WHICH, IF ANY, WAS SUPERIOR. This has always made me question "results" as posted in the article linked by the OP.
 
Last edited:

dnewton3

Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
8,681
Location
Indianapolis, IN
I completely agree with D-Roc. The "article" is simply supposition gleaned from VOAs, and not based upon UOAs. Knowing the inputs does not always assure the results. It's a good predictor, but not a guarantee. If we had no information as to outcome, then knowing the starting point would be paramount. But, the reality is that we can study the effects of CJ-4 oils, and the results are quite impressive. As an analogy, you can have the "best" ball players, and yet the underdog may win the championship occasionally. Knowing the starting roster is good; knowing the final score truly tells the story. What's very important to know is that CI-4+ is best paired with LSD fuel; the higher sulphur content in the fuel is better dealt with utilizing the higher TBN of CI-4+. Most people see the reduction of some of the additives (calcium, magnesium, etc) as a detriment. But the reality is that when CJ-4 oils are paired with ULSD fuel, those attributes are not as important as they once were. The base stocks and additive package have been tweaked in CJ-4, to best suit the ULSD fuel. And let's not forget that with the newest generation of DPF/EGR engine designs, soot control is paramount. So in some ways, CJ-4 is far superior to CI-4+, because it was designed to deal a level of contamination that its predecessor was not. There is plenty of industry evidence, and many UOAs now, to show that CJ-4 is a very viable lubricant. To answer your specific question as to which CI-4+ is "best", you'd have to define your personal criteria for important parameters, and then rank order them. Cost, availability, performance, etc all play into this decision.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
325
Location
Schafflund, Germany
 Originally Posted By: m37charlie
Regarding CJ-4 vs CI-4+, all I can say is that Delvac 1 5W-40 (CI-4+) meets Mercedes' top oil spec for trucks: 228.5; Delvac 1 ESP 5W-40 (CJ-4)only meets 228.3 (the next lower spec) and 228.31 (analagous spec for low SAPS oil). ESP does not meet 228.51 (or ACEA E6), the top specs for low SAPS oil, for some reason. If it did, I would "use it with confidence". Since it does not, I am using Delvac 1 SHC 5W-40 which does meet 228.5 and amazingly I was able to find in the US (11 jugs of 5 gal). Yes, I know it is not CI-4 and my engine has EGR but Mercedes does recommend it in its' highest spec for even its' EGR engines. It surprised me that I could find a supply of SHC but not D1 which was ubiquitous up to last year. That said, I wouldn't use SHC in an American motor because it is only highly specified by Mercedes, MAN, Renault, MTU, etc. But just because an oil is CJ-4 doesn't mean it is the best in all respects. FWIW no CJ-4 oils have made Mercedes top list, either 228.5 or 228.51. Charlie Unimog U500/Unicat camper
Oh come on Charlie, we've been talking about this before. The following has to be considered: 1. The max phosphorus content for ACEA E6 and MB 228.51 lubricants is 800 PPM. 2. The min fresh oil TBN for ACEA E4 and MB 228.5 lubricants is 12. You can see that this is mutually exclusive with the parameters of a real world CJ-4 lubricant.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
1,460
Location
Alaska
I'm sure it's legal, but one would have to order them, very expensively. Just making a point that very low SP/ash = 1.00% and mid TBN (12) aren't mutually exclusive; the tradeoff is probably at the cash register. Also not trying to start any fights; this forum is a great learning tool. Charlie
 
Top