Originally Posted By: Donald
I read my owners manual for my 6.7 Powerstroke and did not see CJ4 listed as an approved oil.
So does that mean the Rotella T6 in my engine is not approved?
This whole topic just reeks of the fear-mongering from a decade ago; it's a cringe-worthy apprehension of CJ-4 version 2.0
Except that now it's an OEM doing it.
Unfortunately Ford has become just about schizophrenic in terms of making lube recommendations ...
https://jobbersworldblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/ford-motor-company-ck-4-position-statement.pdf
I find it interesting that they plainly state that some CK-4 lubes apparently have shown increased wear in their testing. Quoting them here:
Testing Ford has done on some CK-4 formulations have shown inadequate wear protection compared to CJ-4 formulations developed and licensed before 2016.
Ummmmmm ... care to elaborate? Don't drop a bombshell like that and then walk away! And I expect the maker of the lube you tested would REALLY like to see those results as well. If you're going to badmouth something, be prepared to back it up! I find it odd that Ford tested a CK-4 and found it unacceptable, but the API and many VERY CREDIBLE lube producers (Shell, Chevron, Mobil, etc) claim less wear with the CK-4 versions of their lubes. Am I supposed to believe that some fly-by-night company sneaked one past the API and ran a batch of junk lube into the Ford test mule? I am finding that hard to believe. So, man-up, Ford, and tell us the actual details of what was tested, how it was tested, and how it was "inadequate".
In this Ford released document, you'll see they find any CJ-4 API approved fluid as "acceptable" for use (sans CK-4 cert). And I quote:
"
An oil showing CJ-4 in the API donut without showing CK-4 would be acceptable for service even if not showing WSS-M2C171-F1. "
So, yes, the T-6 would qualify if it's an older version prior to CK-4 on the donut. And so will a host of others not on their WSS-M2C171-F1 list. There are plenty of good oils on their list, but there are also a lot of good oils not on that list, but are now "acceptable" for use.
"Acceptable" does not delineate between "required" and "recommended". It's just a simple-to-understand "OK to go ahead and use this" statement. "Acceptable" is their written approval of any CJ-4 licensed lube prior to CK-4.
Of course, here's Ford's approved list:
https://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubricants.com/main/additionalinfo/dieseloilsWSSM2C171F1.pdf
And yet many of those on the Ford spec list, are actually CK-4 licensed. For example the Rotella T4 10w-30, and T5 15w-40, are CK-4 approved, but also on Ford's WSS-M2C171-F1 list. As are a whole host of others.
So, if I read the entirety of Ford's mental break-down correctly, it would be interpreted thusly:
OK to use any Ford spec'd lubes, even if they are CK-4.
OK to use any CJ-4 licensed lube, as long as it's prior to CK-4.
So we just cannot use a CK-4 lube that is not on Ford's approved list.
It's a circular referenced oil-related-Hades that Ford lives in .... At this point they would have absolutely zero plausible deniability in arbitration/court because their written statements, owner's manuals, and approved lists are all cir-cum-referenced applications of contradictory advice.
Maybe if we just use a Fram Ultra, it will filter out the CK-4 stuff and leave the CJ-4 stuff in circulation ...
