6.7 PSD why is 10W30 not approved for trailer tow

[Garak]

That's where I shake my head at the confusion they sow. They approve a specific oil formally yet don't mention the grade in the manual whatsoever. The wording is so confusing as to be essentially meaningless.

So, what would they say if you used Delvac 1 LE 5w-30 CJ-4/SN with the Ford approval for severe service? It's CJ-4 and it's formally approved, so it has both those ticks, even though one is needed. Yet, it's the wrong grade. But, it can't be that "wrong" if Ford approved it.

 

[beanoil]

Really like this discussion. Valuable info, spirited, the core of what the site is about.
So I've been reading and thinking, and stumbled on a few articles about viscosity choice based on bearing clearance.
In my case, a 6.0, I've been running 10w30 for sometime now, based on others posts with success, and UOA results from the stoners.
I tow a 10k TT, 3 folks in the cab, probably a scooter, maybe a smoker to the campground. 10w30 has done well, even before having major surgery done to the engine last year. New oil and EGR coolers, studs, HG, etc. Highest oil temp I ever saw was 250, and since the work, it follows the coolant temp right along at a 9-11 degree delta.
But, if I read correctly, the bearing clearance theory put the 6.0 squarely into the 40 weight range for the "proper oil" to use. It appears that the 6.7 is right there as well, based again on main bearing clearance. My thought is that Ford wants a 5w40 because its a synthetic, and might help carry heat away more efficiently, but would also still temporarily shear without losing the protective oil film in the bearing. I think (yep could be wrong, as I'm not a scientist or engineer), that it's like was said in other threads. A 30 weight stays more stable as far as shear, and late offerings of 30 weights are just really good oils. If a 40 weight is temporarily shearing to a 30 in the bearing, and still protecting, then a 30 will protect the same. There are a whole bunch of 6.0 running around with 30 weight in the sump toward the end of an OCI that started as a 40 weight, and they haven't stopped from an oil related failure yet.
I see no reason a 30 couldn't be used, but Ford is covering their booty asking for a 40 for those that push the limits, run the oil past it's prime, and maybe provide protection under extreme (nuclear war?) circumstances.
http://www.enginebuildermag.com/2013/03/bearing-clearances/
http://www.enginebuildermag.com/2015/12/engine-bearings-under-pressure/

 

[roadrunner1]

I don't think less than 5% of diesel owners push oil past its serviceable use, from what I read here and elsewhere most change early for "piece of mind" or "cheap insurance".

With the newer trucks to say the IOLM is conservative is an understatement and with your 6.0 the owners manual stated 7,500 mi. OCI, which through my previous ownership of two 6.0's was also very conservative. My UOA data indicated that 10,000 mi. OCI were very doable.

Glad to hear the 10w-30 is working out well for you, we're part of the "thin crowd".

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: roadrunner1
I don't think less than 5% of diesel owners push oil past its serviceable use, from what I read here and elsewhere most change early for "piece of mind" or "cheap insurance".

With the newer trucks to say the IOLM is conservative is an understatement and with your 6.0 the owners manual stated 7,500 mi. OCI, which through my previous ownership of two 6.0's was also very conservative. My UOA data indicated that 10,000 mi. OCI were very doable.

Glad to hear the 10w-30 is working out well for you, we're part of the "thin crowd".



I'll go you one further, rr1. Not only do less than 5% of HDEO users push oil past to it's serviceable use, they don't even know where the end of that serviceable limit is! Just because the OEM set's an OCI at a VERY conservative limit, does not mean the oil is near it's end of useful life. I expect that, with a few rare exceptions, the typical OEM OCI is 1/2 of the oil's true limits; maybe more!

I say this because I've run gasser oils to 3x the OEM OCI, and the UOAs came back fine. I've run dino HDEOs to 2x the OEM OCI limit, and they came back fine in UOAs too.

I know that folks get very defensive when they spend $60-70k on a new truck. I get that. It's more than I paid for my first house! And we all tend to be very "into" oil (hence our reason for being here). But once in a while, I like it when some of us are willing to venture off the beaten path and actually put our thoughts into actions. RR1, TiredTrucker, myself and a few others, actually have run 10w-30 HDEO in real world normal heavy-duty use. And every time without exception the UOAs come back fine. In fact, for RR1 and I, you cannot tell our UOAs from any other in terms of wear, contrasted to those who use thicker lubes.

I am tempted to start posting my UOAs with only wear data (metals ppm). When folks cannot see the grade/base stock, it would make them focus on what really matters; wear results. In this sense, I've seen nothing to indicate that any thicker lube does any "better" than a thinner grade in real HDEO worldly use.

Why Ford (and others) seem to think a 40 grade is mandatory for towing/severe use is beyond me. I've never seen any data from any truck/tractor/generator/etc that shows a thick is necessary for safe operation.

OTOH, just to be truly fair, when I say there's no difference between a 10w-30 and 15w-40 or 5w-40 in terms of wear, then it really means one can run a 40 grade and still get good results. But that's my whole point. It just really does not matter. So why have so many grade delineations in the owner's manual? It's like they just are willing to stick their head in the sand and not delve into reality; too easy just to print a well-established and biased (and decades old) mentality of "thicker is better". In the end, it costs them absolutely nothing to do so. They don't pay for OCIs; we do. So if they stick with the status quo, it's easy to do; a no-brainer for them.


For someone who wants for follow Ford's recommendation (not requirement, but recommendation) of 5w-40 syn for severe use (which is just about anything you'd ever use a truck for ...), then go for it. Just realize that you're spending way more money than you need to, and getting the same darn results as those of us who use thinner conventional lubes.

And if you doubt me, then by all means, prove me wrong! Why not run a few "severe" OCIs with the 5w-40, and then (gulp ...) "risk" the total and complete destruction of your rig by running the CJ-4 10w-30. Until you do so, you have no ability to really know just how silly this topic is. For those of us who've done it, we realize that the whole thin/thick topic is just plain moot.

 

[DoubleWasp]

There's a lot of really good info out here about the usefulness of 10/30 oils.

I think the real issue is that nobody wants to be the one to run it and find a problem afterward.

Chrysler trashing engines with their unfortunate decision to use a 30 in their small diesel has probably just scared even more manufacturers and owners away.

 

[TiredTrucker]

But when you factor in that all the heavy commercial truck engine folks have authorized 10w30 in their lube manuals for year round use for quite some time, and they have been factory filling and recommending the same for the last few years, it clears up things a little and puts perspective in the mix. Volvo/Mack, Cummins, Detroit, Paccar, Navistar... all of them are factory filling with 10w30 and many of them have been using 10w30 for quite a while and have racked individually several hundred thousand miles with 10w30 with nary an issue.

It was long before Dnewton offered up the challenge he just did about proving him wrong, but I tried 10w30 in a my commercial diesel at the prodding of my oil supplier. Sure enough, 10w30 did as well as 15w40 or 5w40 ever had. And that was on an engine that already had 400,000+ miles on it and moving around up to 80,000 lb of truck and cargo. That same engine now has 653,000 miles on it and barely uses 2 qts of oil in 25,000 miles, and wear metals and such are as low as when it was broke in. It is presently using a new CK-4 10w30 and has about 15,000 miles on that oil. Will see what the sample looks like when I change it out. As a side note, the oil consumption has been tad lower with the CK-4. At 15,000 miles on the oil, it has barely moved off the full mark. Just a wee little bit.

And this experience is on a factory reman engine that was originally built in 2000 and now has 653,000 miles on the reman. Causes one to consider that, for this discussion, that it really isn't the 10w30 that is the problem, but the engine design and build itself for some pickup diesels?

 

[beanoil]

Another article (although one sided IMO) supporting 10w30 in commercial trucking.
http://truckingefficiency.org/sites/truc...cants_final.pdf
I'm staying with a 30 weight in my 6.0 . I've got time Friday morning, I'll be doing a change to Delo 15w30 from Valvoline 10w30 and new filters (cartridge and bypass).

 

[DoubleWasp]

Oh, I have considered the long haul experience with 10/30.

But the unanswered question is: Does the same thing apply to the pickup engines running higher specific output?

That's where I start to get a little concerned.

Readily admit I may be concerned over nothing at all, but I'd love to see some solid answers on that one.

Cummins happily recommends 10w30 for the lower output 6.7 engines, but no mention of it at all in the higher output models.