New T6 bottles missing API SM?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Messages
72
Location
Virginia
I haven't seen this discussed on the board (How could this be, I had to have missed it) but I noticed the new bottle shape T6 has CK-4 but not SM anymore. What happened here?
 
They used to get a variance, which allowed them to be over certain additive levels on certain things. Those days are coming to pass. That's how I understand it.

Dual rated is becoming much harder to do, with the latest specs and govt regulations.

That being said, I would run the snot of some CK4 oils in certain gas applications.
 
Is SM still registered or is it like when an oil is claimed to be SL-rated, even though that's not a real thing anymore?
 
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
Is SM still registered or is it like when an oil is claimed to be SL-rated, even though that's not a real thing anymore?

They're both still "real," but most new HDEOs that are dual rated use SN. Even Delvac 1 LE 5w-30 is CJ-4/SN, rather than SM, since it came out after the original CJ-4 rollout.

joeparker54: It's out there. You may have to contact a distributor, though, since 5w-30 E6 lubricants are still a bit of a niche in North America.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
Is SM still registered or is it like when an oil is claimed to be SL-rated, even though that's not a real thing anymore?

They're both still "real," but most new HDEOs that are dual rated use SN. Even Delvac 1 LE 5w-30 is CJ-4/SN, rather than SM, since it came out after the original CJ-4 rollout.

joeparker54: It's out there. You may have to contact a distributor, though, since 5w-30 E6 lubricants are still a bit of a niche in North America.


I can't recall where I read it, but I remember reading something about older specs, such as SL (and earlier) and Dexron (specifically III) being on labels, but that they weren't checked or certified. My question should have been: are out-dated, superseded specs still certified - does the oil have to pay to have it certified at an older spec? I imagine some of the gas station oils are certified in someone's basement as being "kind of slippery, for enhanced protection", and are called out by PQIA as not meeting the labeled standard.
 
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
I can't recall where I read it, but I remember reading something about older specs, such as SL (and earlier) and Dexron (specifically III) being on labels, but that they weren't checked or certified. My question should have been: are out-dated, superseded specs still certified - does the oil have to pay to have it certified at an older spec? I imagine some of the gas station oils are certified in someone's basement as being "kind of slippery, for enhanced protection", and are called out by PQIA as not meeting the labeled standard.

As far as the API goes, they list what is a current category (and what is not) on their website here:

http://www.api.org/products-and-services/engine-oil/eolcs-categories-and-documents/oil-categories
 
I can't speak for Dexron, although I think you're right about the older ones being deprecated by GM. SL is still a current specification under the API. GF-3, however, is not. So, if an oil shows SL and the API Donut, it's legitimate. If an oil shows SL and the Starburst, it's either baloney or very old stock. I'm sure I could find some old stock here if I looked hard enough.

You'll see SL legitimately used on European A3/B4 30 grades, such as GC 0w-30 and Castrol Edge 5w-30 A3/B4. The A3/B4 40 grades get to use SM or SN, as the case may be. They couldn't sneak in under the old CJ-4/SM or CJ-4/SN rules for phosphorus, since A3/B4 would have a difficult time qualifying for CJ-4 or CK-4 due to excessive SA. So, we see an SL for 30s and SN for 40s.

Of course, there are oils out there that do just claim SL or newer, and do so honestly, without an attempt to misinform. Euro oils have claimed to meet the wear protection requirements of SN (obviously they do and exceed that) but not the phosphorus levels. Some very niche HDEOs from Imperial Oil (i.e. Mobil) and Petro-Canada claim suitability for certain API specifications, diesel and gas, without actually being formally certified, either due to it not being worth certifying or the certification being obsolete. Petro-Canada data sheets are very clear as what HDEO is actually certified for what specification and what it's actually just suitable for use.

That's most commonly seen with an oil where you see CF on it and can trust it to really be suitable (i.e. M1 0w-40, RP 10w-40). Those oils would be very legitimate (if costly) choices for a fair number of diesel engines still on the road, such as old Cummins, Powerstroke 7.3, GM 6.2 and 6.5 examples, and various older agricultural engines. In fact, they'd be much more suitable than various oils of the day that tacked on a CF. You'll also see reference to an obsolete certification when you're looking at the dedicated two stroke diesel engine oils.

As an aside, back when CF was current, my dad decidedly did not use a PCMO with CF tacked on in his diesel engines, even though that was technically legitimate. 10w-30 was a suitable winter weight for most of them, but he didn't grab QS 10w-30 that happened to have a CF on it. He bought Esso XD-3 in the appropriate variety and ran it. This was a weakness of the API specification at the time, and those who didn't see it could face issues. Doug Hillary has also told us some very interesting historical details of how that transpired.
 
Its been covered many times, when CK-4 oil came out, SN was then limited to 800ppm phosphrous. But current diesels are still looking for 1100ppm. They thought it was a loophole that was being exploited to put "catalyst" damage additives into cars they felt didn't need it.

If you see a diesel oil that is now CK-4/SN dual rated that means it has low additive, 800ppm zinc/phos. Bad.

Its a giant load of bullhockey. Put the diesel oil in, nothing has changed.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: joeparker54
Originally Posted By: bigj_16
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
I thought Shell decided to no longer dual-rate any of their Rotella oils?

The Multi-Vehicle T6 is dual rated
http://rotella.shell.com/products/shell-...heavy-duty.html


Has anyone seen the multi-vehicle out in the wild yet? I can't seem to find much info online aside from Shell's site.
I haven't seen it yet either. It isn't in Walmart or on Amazon. Walmart does have the new dual-rated
Delo 400 XLE SAE 10W-30.
 
Originally Posted By: Fraser434
Its been covered many times, when CK-4 oil came out, SN was then limited to 800ppm phosphrous.

That only applies to what are known as ILSAC grades, such as 0w-30, 5w-30, and 10w-30 HDEOs. That requirement does not exist for the 40 grade HDEOs, or even a hypothetical SAE 30 HDEO. It's also important to look at the ACEA specifications. There is a Castrol 5w-30 HDEO out there that is E6 and CJ-4, not even listing a gasoline rating whatsoever, but is low phosphorus by virtue of that ACEA specification. Of course, it has builder approvals out the wazoo.
 
Originally Posted By: Fraser434
Its been covered many times, when CK-4 oil came out, SN was then limited to 800ppm phosphrous. But current diesels are still looking for 1100ppm. They thought it was a loophole that was being exploited to put "catalyst" damage additives into cars they felt didn't need it.

If you see a diesel oil that is now CK-4/SN dual rated that means it has low additive, 800ppm zinc/phos. Bad.

Its a giant load of bullhockey. Put the diesel oil in, nothing has changed.


No, not true as long as Valvoline's site is correct OR they are just using a claim that it meets without API certification.

Click here

Click here for a CK4 UOA showing higher limit

Also I THINK PQIA did a VOA but cant seem to find it and rushing out to work right now.
 
Here you go then, if you won't take my word for it....

“In order for a diesel engine oil to claim an ‘S’ category, it must now meet all of the gasoline category’s criteria, including the limit on phosphorous levels,” Negri continues. “Phosphorous has long demonstrated proven protective qualities versus ashless chemistries in diesel engines, but has also been known to shorten the life of automotive catalyst systems in gasoline engines. This means that diesel engine oil must be below 0.08% phosphorous to claim an ‘S’ category approval [the CJ-4 specification allows up to 0.12% phosphorous].”

The loophole that allows higher phosphorous levels from diesel engine oils when used in gasoline engines will be effectively closed. In practical terms, this will create a clear line in the sand between diesel-only formulations (“high phosphorous”) and universal oils (“low phosphorous”).

http://www.fleetequipmentmag.com/demistifying-new-engine-oil-categories-compatibility-ck4-fa4/
 
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
I can't recall where I read it, but I remember reading something about older specs, such as SL (and earlier) and Dexron (specifically III) being on labels, but that they weren't checked or certified. My question should have been: are out-dated, superseded specs still certified - does the oil have to pay to have it certified at an older spec? I imagine some of the gas station oils are certified in someone's basement as being "kind of slippery, for enhanced protection", and are called out by PQIA as not meeting the labeled standard.

As far as the API goes, they list what is a current category (and what is not) on their website here:

http://www.api.org/products-and-services/engine-oil/eolcs-categories-and-documents/oil-categories


Great, thank you for the site. I didn't have that one saved!
 
Shell rep chimed in on this issue a month or two back. Basically they met CK-4 without having to change the formula but dropped SM just because. It's still SM

Probably a marketing thing, they want people to buy the dual rated t5 or t6 or a pCMO instead of nice cheap t4
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top