SM/CF and other dual ratings

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,996
Location
United States of America
We hear alot on here about the uses of HDEOs such as Rotella in gas cars, trucks and motorcycles.....but what about PCMO oils in diesel engines. I have some SM oil that has the CF rating, but the newer SN version of the same oil is not rated 'C', but instead has a ACEA rating.


So do any of you put 'gas oil in your diesel?'
 
API CF is obsolete now which is probably why it's absent from the newer oil. However CF, even when it was active, was utterly meaningless in the context of modern diesel engines and the Cat 1MPC engine test that it was based on, a ridiculous waste of space.
If you have an oil that carries an ACEA B3 or B4 rating, it's fine for your bog standard diesel passenger car.
 
Even back in the day when CF was active, the people I knew who had diesel engines would still choose HDEOs like Rotella and XD-3. Joe and others who have better memories about these products might be able to tell us if those were sold as CF first, then the gasoline rating, like HDEOs are now, or not.

There were lots of PCMOs with CF ratings then, and I don't know of anyone who gave them serious consideration for use in diesels, though.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Even back in the day when CF was active, the people I knew who had diesel engines would still choose HDEOs like Rotella and XD-3. Joe and others who have better memories about these products might be able to tell us if those were sold as CF first, then the gasoline rating, like HDEOs are now, or not.

There were lots of PCMOs with CF ratings then, and I don't know of anyone who gave them serious consideration for use in diesels, though.


You're right; no-one in the know took CF seriously. It was however one of those irritating 'luggage label' specs where the box had to be ticked. Even if your oil passed B4 and MB 228.5 you still had to get your oil through that POS Cat 1MPC and that was by no means a given!
 
We had two separate stashes of 10w-30 in those days. The taxis used 10w-30 Quaker State year round (and there was CF and the like on that stuff). We also had Esso XD-3 10w-30 for the diesels in winter. They were not considered interchangeable by my dad.
wink.gif
 
Mobil delvac1 le 5w30 , avail at TA travel center . I call it the world wide oil. Mobil went to the trouble of getting it rated, now if they could do the same for Allison automatic transmission I could put that in my manual transmission (versa)yellow metal is a drag
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
Originally Posted By: Garak
Even back in the day when CF was active, the people I knew who had diesel engines would still choose HDEOs like Rotella and XD-3. Joe and others who have better memories about these products might be able to tell us if those were sold as CF first, then the gasoline rating, like HDEOs are now, or not.

There were lots of PCMOs with CF ratings then, and I don't know of anyone who gave them serious consideration for use in diesels, though.


You're right; no-one in the know took CF seriously. It was however one of those irritating 'luggage label' specs where the box had to be ticked. Even if your oil passed B4 and MB 228.5 you still had to get your oil through that POS Cat 1MPC and that was by no means a given!


You might be able to help me nail down something that has peeved me in the ownership of my Nissan Navara (ZD30 turbodiesel).

Nissan state in the manual not to use anything "better" than CF-5, and specifically nothing CG-4 and newer...even offered to void my warranty if I played Delvac 1.

So as per the OP< I've been running petrol engine oils in my diesel (well specifically A3/B4).

Why do the Japanese manufacturers have such issues/stipulations ?
 
Mitsubishi Japan still recommend CD oils for their diesels. We don't of course, but MNZ oils are not HDEO.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
Originally Posted By: Garak
Even back in the day when CF was active, the people I knew who had diesel engines would still choose HDEOs like Rotella and XD-3. Joe and others who have better memories about these products might be able to tell us if those were sold as CF first, then the gasoline rating, like HDEOs are now, or not.

There were lots of PCMOs with CF ratings then, and I don't know of anyone who gave them serious consideration for use in diesels, though.


You're right; no-one in the know took CF seriously. It was however one of those irritating 'luggage label' specs where the box had to be ticked. Even if your oil passed B4 and MB 228.5 you still had to get your oil through that POS Cat 1MPC and that was by no means a given!


You might be able to help me nail down something that has peeved me in the ownership of my Nissan Navara (ZD30 turbodiesel).

Nissan state in the manual not to use anything "better" than CF-5, and specifically nothing CG-4 and newer...even offered to void my warranty if I played Delvac 1.

So as per the OP< I've been running petrol engine oils in my diesel (well specifically A3/B4).

Why do the Japanese manufacturers have such issues/stipulations ?



First off, is there a typo in your post? Do you mean CF-4? (CF-5 doesn't exist as far as I'm aware). In my experience, the Japanese are pretty much a law unto themselves. They usually do have a good reason for doing the things they do but they don't usually explain themselves well. For reasons I could never fathom, even the most mundane of technical facts are treated as State Secrets!

If I were to guess at what's behind the logic, Nissan might have had concerns about high dispersant treat rates (which have gone up for every new generation of HDDO's). Maybe they felt these were too aggressive to some of the seals used in the engine? Or it might have been they wanted oils based on Group I base stock (the higher iterations of HDDO progressively moved to Group II).

A3/B4 oils are mixed service PCMO's. They can be used on both gasoline and diesel engines. If anything, these days, they are more orientated towards diesel service because the tests are harder to pass and have more impact on the shape of the DI pack.

Hope that helps...
 
Joe90_guy,
yeah, CF-4 was it.

Nissan DID at one stage give me a statement that the newer oils dispersed the soot, and lead to cam wear, while the older oils tended to collect soot particles to be filtered.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Why do the Japanese manufacturers have such issues/stipulations ?

I think Doug chimed in on that one before, because I was asking much the same thing with some of their agricultural stuff. At least in some cases, they simply don't test the newer lubricants, and want to make things as basic and as simple for the "worst" market in which their product might be used, and perhaps aren't even willing to jump out on a limb, even one backed with some common sense.

I find it odd to call for an API spec, and then expressly forbid a newer API specification. To me, that seems like dirty pool. The API states that CJ-4 (and so forth) are backwards compatible to each previous specification. Most oil companies print the same verbiage on their data sheets. For example, look here, where they say meets or exceeds for all the current specs, and "recommended for" when it comes to obsolete specifications.

So, what are you supposed to do? You're supposed to hoard oil because CG-4 and older are currently obsolete, and you should have known that back then? So, they'd cover you if you bought an oil with a dodgy claim to an obsolete specification, but not cover you with a modern, licensed oil, that is required to be backwards compatible with the specification required.

You'd be doomed in Canada. Imperial Oil doesn't make anything licensed to an older specification than CJ-4. The only real attention they pay to an older specification, with products actually designed in that vein, are the monogrades for the two stroke diesel stuff.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow


You might be able to help me nail down something that has peeved me in the ownership of my Nissan Navara (ZD30 turbodiesel).

Nissan state in the manual not to use anything "better" than CF-5, and specifically nothing CG-4 and newer...even offered to void my warranty if I played Delvac 1.

So as per the OP< I've been running petrol engine oils in my diesel (well specifically A3/B4).

Why do the Japanese manufacturers have such issues/stipulations ?


I believe they do allow or recommend DH-1 for that engine now.
 
Yeah, for Japanese diesel engines like Isuzu/Hino etc , I would scout for DHD-1/DH-1 approvals , a sequence in which Japanese Engines Manufacturers play a rather big role.

I select an HDEO carrying all appropvals of CI4/DHD-1/E7 in one, to cover my fleet of off-road diesel engines like Cat, Isuzu,Hino, Scania, Vovlo etc.
 
Last edited:
A special type of oil seal that doesnt like the mobil delvac1 le5w30 ?i ll assume its possible. But i would communicate with nissan canada.or nissan america or nissan japan directly to make.sure. i never heard of a diese vehicule that doesmt accept this oil. Never.and if it is really like that?sell the thing lol. Nissan domt use gl5 in transmission because of yellow metal issue. But if you get a an allison accepted you wont get issue.its a 300 hour yellow metal test. Even the oil maker were thinking itwas impossible to make and literally told allisom. Allison told them. Thats our condition for you to be acvepted by allison. The oil industry fixed what was wrong and now the oil is the most yellow metal friendly oil that exist for transmission
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Why do the Japanese manufacturers have such issues/stipulations ?

I think Doug chimed in on that one before, because I was asking much the same thing with some of their agricultural stuff. At least in some cases, they simply don't test the newer lubricants, and want to make things as basic and as simple for the "worst" market in which their product might be used, and perhaps aren't even willing to jump out on a limb, even one backed with some common sense.

I find it odd to call for an API spec, and then expressly forbid a newer API specification. To me, that seems like dirty pool. The API states that CJ-4 (and so forth) are backwards compatible to each previous specification. Most oil companies print the same verbiage on their data sheets. For example, look here, where they say meets or exceeds for all the current specs, and "recommended for" when it comes to obsolete specifications.
...


You know, I always thought they were backward compatible too. But according to this, if it is accurate (rushing to get going to work).
I ran across this right before running across this thread. This may shed some light, if correct on Shannows post.
It states CJ4 is only backwards compatible to CI4.
Oil Service Classifications.
 
The API link they reference doesn't agree with their assessment at all. While the API link doesn't state backwards compatibility to the start of the C spec, it doesn't only go back one or two specifications, either. The API link they reference directly contradicts their own assertions. They state that CJ-4 is only back speced for CI-4 and CI-4+, whereas the API reference they linked explicitly states that CJ-4 can be used all the way back to CF-4 categories.

I pretty much guarantee that anyone still using an older 5.9 Cummins or 6.2 L GM calling for a CF lubricant is using a modern CJ-4 lubricant. I wonder how much of the concern has to do with the potential for people not using ULSD. There would also be concern with two stroke diesels and using the appropriately specified lubricant.

Doug Hillary has written before that he has has no concerns using a new HDEO in an older diesel, and I wouldn't either. As a matter of fact, it would be pointless to worry about something that you cannot really address. If I owned a 6.2 L GM, I would have very little choice except to use a CJ-4 lubricant, and I'd be satisfied doing so. The only real alternative would be an A3/B4, or some relic 5w-30 and 10w-30 PCMOs I have in the garage that mention CF, but would never see the inside of a diesel I were to own, not that I have sufficient quantities anyhow.
 
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
First off, is there a typo in your post? Do you mean CF-4? (CF-5 doesn't exist as far as I'm aware). In my experience, the Japanese are pretty much a law unto themselves. They usually do have a good reason for doing the things they do but they don't usually explain themselves well. For reasons I could never fathom, even the most mundane of technical facts are treated as State Secrets!

If I were to guess at what's behind the logic, Nissan might have had concerns about high dispersant treat rates (which have gone up for every new generation of HDDO's). Maybe they felt these were too aggressive to some of the seals used in the engine? Or it might have been they wanted oils based on Group I base stock (the higher iterations of HDDO progressively moved to Group II).

A3/B4 oils are mixed service PCMO's. They can be used on both gasoline and diesel engines. If anything, these days, they are more orientated towards diesel service because the tests are harder to pass and have more impact on the shape of the DI pack.

Hope that helps...


Found this (again) after reading your post a few times

.1,d.dGY]Old Caltex Paper

Quote:
Other design factors influence lubricant suitability for use in Japanese four-cycle diesel engines. Generally the sump capacity
of a Japanese diesel engine is smaller than in equivalent power
North American or European engines. This reduction in lubricant
capacity, and a tendency in the past for Japanese diesel engines
to have lower oil consumption than equivalent North American and
European engines, means that increased thermal stress is placed
on oils used in Japanese diesel engines. Japanese diesel engines
are designed so that piston crown temperatures are lower. This
leads to a reduction in nitrogen oxide emissions, as nitrogen oxide
emissions are a particular concern in Japan. The transfer of this
heat from the piston into the engine oil places even greater thermal
stress on the lubricant.

So an oil used in Japanese diesel engines must have substantially
greater oxidation resistance than North American or European style
oils. The level of oxidation resistance in Japanese diesel engine
manufacturer's "Genuine" diesel engine oils (3) is usually very high
to address the thermal stress placed upon the oil, and additives
used in Japanese "Genuine" oils will usually be of a specific
chemical type to enhance oxidation resistance.

Dispersants, which are used in very high levels in North American style engine oils, are not thermally stable. So the level of dispersant which can be included in a Japanese style diesel engine oil Is limited, and higher dispersancy, low-ash North American style diesel engine oils provide inferior performance in Japanese diesel engines.

Diesel engine oils suitable for use in Japanese diesel engines are formulated with a level of dispersancy carefully balanced to prevent the build up of insulating sooty deposits under the piston crown, which would reduce the transfer of heat to the piston, and at the same time not contribute to oil oxidation.
So an engine oil for use in Japanese heavy-duty four-cycle diesel engines will be highly detergent, typically have a sulfated ash level around 2.0 %, be highly oxidation resistance, and have a carefully balanced level of dispersancy.

Caltex's recommendation for Japanese four-cycle car, truck and bus diesel engines is Delo CXJ Multigrade SAE 15W-40. An appropriate monograde version of Delo CXJ may be used where the manufacturer approves monograde lubricants. Reduced oil drain intervals are recommended when diesel fuel with greater than 0.8 % sulfur content is used.


The ZD30 engine in my Navara, and particularly in the Patrols has a known history of burning down number three piston.

CXJ and it's ilk are long gone in Oz now I think.
 
Joe, Garak ... and ANYONE else who has good knowledge of this ACEA thing. If you can help that would be great. Its important to me personally to use the recommended oil type for my bike.

My bike clearly calls for CH4 or higher. In the USA its almost impossible to find except for 1 company and 2 boutique companies in a 20w50. I am currently using the 1 company, Citgo product Mystik semisyn 20/50. Has claims of up to a CJ4 oil but no API symbols etc.

This thread caught my attention with this ACEA rating thing which I know nothing about and never paid nor had a reason to pay attention to it. It almost sounds more precise and stringent rating then the API ratings.

SO QUESTION is, does anyone know for sure what ACEA rated oil would meet or beat an API rating of CH4 or better?

Is there such as thing? Is an A3/B3 the equal or superior to an (API) CH or higher?
What about an A3/B4?
or do I really need to go to an ACEA E class oil?
and what about all the ACEA oils inbetween??

Appreciate your thoughts...
Im really clueless in this area and will start researching. ... researching now, cool thread, ACEA seems like a much better rating system and stringent.


(for others reading this post I do not care to get into a motorcycle oil discussion, I just want to know if their is an equal ACEA rating for an API "C" rated oil.)
Reasear
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately, it's not that simple. ACEA E9 uses CJ-4 as a baseline, and then goes beyond that. A3/B4 type lubes may not be terribly different in HTHS, but will almost certainly have higher SA. I don't know what their friction modification will be like

Do you absolutely need a 20w-50? Do you need something with limited friction modification because of a wet clutch? If I were wanting to use an HDEO in a motorcycle, I'd be looking to Rotella 15w-40 first, and that will be CJ-4, along with E7, E9, if I remember correctly.
 
Last edited:
Yes, need a 20/50 if I was in a cooler climate I would try a 15/40, very familiar with the 15/40s.
Have used them winter time and also in some water cooled bikes.

Engine clearly calls for 20/50 and as a lessor choice 15/40. I clearly need a 20/50. My oil temps run as high as 240/250 degrees.
Our summer time high temps never run less then 95 degrees for almost 4 months straight. Typical is 95 to 102. Maybe sometimes 90 to 95.

I find this interesting, the whole subject, just ran across this, but im running out of time, (need to get ready for work)
Specialty Motor oil chart - Click

Ha, might have just answered my own question, I see in the above chart Mystik JT8 SHD Syn Blend is listed as "E". Only thing is Im using their 15/50 and its not listed.
This is why, I am looking for a more mainstream oil, tired of the guesswork. But at least I can see Citgo / Mystik product line MIGHT be legit. I would just like to buy an oil with the proper rating on the bottle. My Mystik JT8 lists CJ4 and lower but NO API donut symbol. They just claim to meet it.
Friction modifiers not a concern, this oik is just for the engine, separate sumps.
Thanks for your feedback. So might seem ACEA "E" oils shoot for the CJ4 class. But if we could buy an B3/B4 or 3/3 here in the states I would be ok, maybe
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top