Anyone get the letter from Ford about CK-4 oils?

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

racin4ds

Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
1,756
Location
Ocala, Florida
I'm trying to find the copy of the letter now, I seen it yesterday on a PSD forum and came straight from Ford, apparently its being sent to newer truck owners with the 6.7 PSD. It clearly states that Ford does not approve the use of the new CK-4 oils in their diesels. It says you must now use the older CJ-4 stuff of stuff that adheres to a specific Ford spec. in order to stay within warranty. The letter clearly mentions lack of anti-wear properties in these new oils. Have any of you PSD owners got this letter?

Very curious as I'm about to do a winter OCI in my 05 PSD and was going to use some of the new oils in the 10W30 variety.
 
35.gif
 
You get a letter saying "don't use CK-4 oils".

So, now you're wondering about using them? Really?

I would think the letter helps clarify your choices: don't use the CK-4 oils. Pick any CJ oil you like.

Pretty simple decision.
 
Originally Posted By: Astro14
You get a letter saying "don't use CK-4 oils".


You misunderstood. The OP says he saw it on a PSD forum.
 
That is interesting that Ford would warn not to use the new CK-4 oils. I can see them saying to use oils that meet a Ford spec, but to say the CK-4 lack the anti-wear properties of the CJ oils? Wonder what testing Ford has done with the CK-4 oils. Shell and Mobil Delvac say on the their websites that the wear protection has IMPROVED compared to their CJ-4 versions.
 
Last edited:
Ive read about a PC11A spec which is backward compatible and new FE oils that are PC11B.

From what Ive read CK-4 is backward compatible. Ive only read two articles - so read up! Plus I don't own my F350 powerstroke anymore.
 
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Ive read about a PC11A spec which is backward compatible and new FE oils that are PC11B. From what Ive read CK-4 is backward compatible. Ive only read two articles - so read up! Plus I don't own my F350 powerstroke anymore.
This is my understanding as well. I would want to read the letter because IF CK-4 is fully backwards compatible with CJ-4, I question the intent.
 
Originally Posted By: njohnson
Shell and Mobil Delvac say on the their websites that the wear protection has IMPROVED compared to their CJ-4 versions.

Well, naturally they're not going to come out and honestly say that due to forced compliance with idiotic EPA mandates the new version may be inferior to the old spec.
 
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Ive read about a PC11A spec which is backward compatible and new FE oils that are PC11B. From what Ive read CK-4 is backward compatible. Ive only read two articles - so read up! Plus I don't own my F350 powerstroke anymore.
This is my understanding as well. I would want to read the letter because IF CK-4 is fully backwards compatible with CJ-4, I question the intent.
I would personally question the INTERNET! Can't believe Shell & Mobil would release a backward compatible oil that would damage an engine, especially a CR diesel.
 
Last edited:
I have read the letter - but I can't post a copy sorry.

Ford will not be recommending the use of CK-4 motor oils in their engines.
They cite testing done on "some" formulations that have shown "inadequate" wear protection.
They want oils that meet WSS-M2C-171-F1 - I have not yet seen what this specification entails but probably a fired engine test in a Ford 6.7L Powerstroke or something similar.
They are allowing the use of CJ-4 or Motorcraft Super Duty Motor Oil only.

This is not uncommon at the time of a shift. DDC for example have a separate more stringent piston liner scuffing test in their OEM specification, VOLVO and Cummins both have their own specification with higher Mack T-13 limits than CK-4/FA-4. I guess we will have to wait and see who comes out with a product that meets the WSS-M2C-171-F1 spec.

I personally would not have any issues using a CK-4 oil in any current engine.
 
Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Ive read about a PC11A spec which is backward compatible and new FE oils that are PC11B. From what Ive read CK-4 is backward compatible. Ive only read two articles - so read up! Plus I don't own my F350 powerstroke anymore.
This is my understanding as well. I would want to read the letter because IF CK-4 is fully backwards compatible with CJ-4, I question the intent.
I would personally question the INTERNET! Can't believe Shell & Mobil would release a backward compatible oil that would damage an engine, especially a CR diesel.
Agreed. Sounds sketchy anyway. The current spec for the 2015 and 2016 MY 6.7L Powerstrokes is WSS-M2C171–E and very few CJ-4 oils meet that specification. In the mainstream oils that I have used (Rotella T6 5W-40, Kendall Super-Dxa 15W-40, Delo 400 LE 5W-40, Delo 400 XLE 10W-30, and Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5W-40) only the Rotella T6 and Kendall have the Ford specification (WSS-M2C171–E), but obviously all of them meet API CJ-4.
 
So . . ., for example is the T6 now on the shelves the old formulation, or the new formulation in old jugs?
 
I assume that various CK-4 oils will have the Motorcraft approval, so this seems to be much about nothing in the grand scheme. No one is going to keep a bunch of legacy lubes around to satisfy Ford.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
I assume that various CK-4 oils will have the Motorcraft approval, so this seems to be much about nothing in the grand scheme.
I am not so sure about that. CJ-4 has been around a long time and there are very few (as I noted above) with the current WSS-M2C171-E specification. My guess is even fewer will have WSS-M2C171-F1 as it is even newer. As you said though, much ado about nothing though because Ford will have to "cave in" at some point because CJ-4 will phase out. It seems strange (in one way) that Ford is balking since it was one of the first American OEMs to push xW-20 oils and I do not see CK-4 as anything other than the next evolution of HDEO.
 
Originally Posted By: claluja
So . . ., for example is the T6 now on the shelves the old formulation, or the new formulation in old jugs?
From what I have read it is the new formulation (CK-4) in the new jugs, but it carries the CJ-4 logo until December when CK-4 is "official", which makes this whole thing seem dodgy. I saw the new bottles of T6 in WM tonight and it still has CJ-4 on it.
 
Yes, I do realize that the MC certification isn't completely ubiquitous. So, I'm not expecting that every CK-4 lubricant on the shelf is going to wind up with the specification. However, I would think that the ones that do have it now will have it down the road after the rollout, or at least some point after the rollout.

Ford will definitely eventually have to cave, yes, since CJ-4 won't be around forever. At Imperial Oil, CI-4 did not linger whatsoever. There were no clearance sales, but CI-4 and CI-4+ disappeared very quickly.

They do seem to be talking out of both sides of their mouths. They don't want to absolutely require the builder approval and simply say CJ-4 is good enough. Well, whether they like it or not, the API rules on this are clear, and CK-4 is backwards compatible with CJ-4, and I wager certain products aren't even being reformulated much, if at all, not to mention that we will see CK-4 products in CJ-4 bottles for a time. Either CJ-4 or newer (which includes backwards compatible CK-4) is good enough, or the builder approval is required. You can't have it both ways.
 
I think I'd follow Ford on this one and not use CK-4 oils if the letter is in fact legit.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
They do seem to be talking out of both sides of their mouths. They don't want to absolutely require the builder approval and simply say CJ-4 is good enough. Well, whether they like it or not, the API rules on this are clear, and CK-4 is backwards compatible with CJ-4, and I wager certain products aren't even being reformulated much, if at all, not to mention that we will see CK-4 products in CJ-4 bottles for a time. Either CJ-4 or newer (which includes backwards compatible CK-4) is good enough, or the builder approval is required. You can't have it both ways.
I agree with you on all points. The part that really makes this "fuzzy" (at least to me) is that some of the oil manufacturers (Shell in particular) have said their new bottles (which have the CJ-4 logo on them) actually contain CK-4, but they cannot change the logo until December. Like you, I also wonder if some oils (Delvac 1 ESP comes to mind) had to change the formulation at all. I have enough CJ-4 to last well into 2017, but Ford will have to change this stance very quickly, CJ-4 will disappear in 2017 or 2018 at the latest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Redhawk454
Ford Motorcraft 10w30 diesel oil. Is it a synthetic blend?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
7K
fantastic
leoblack9
Motorcraft 10W-30 super duty diesel oil change intervals
Replies
2
Views
3K
SureshR
C
2015 Ecodiesel lasts 270k on original engine running P66 Guardol XT 5w40
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
meadows
W
Royal Oil Co??
2
Replies
20
Views
958
kschachn
Cygnus_
CK-4 vs FA-4 - Whats the difference?
Replies
5
Views
4K
Gene K
Back
Top