CK-4 problem for Duramax?

calgator73 · April 1, 2017

Ford noticed issues with Ford 6.7L due to intro of CK-4. They attribute the issues to lower lubricity caused by low phosphorus content. Has anyone heard of this impacting LMLs?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

redwngr · April 2, 2017

I think it's the CP4 you're referring to.

Yes, there are issues with them on the LML.

Widely discussed on several Dmax related forums. Most think/feel that the problem is not as common on the LML as it is on the Fords. I have no Ford info, but am passing on info from the Dmax forums I follow.

One of the forums has a poll, showing about 7% failure rate over 500+ responding. (which is probably higher than the real rate, since some only join/respond because thay have had a problem.)

calgator73 · April 2, 2017

No ....API specification CK-4. It replaced CJ-4 in December. Biggest change is a reduction in phosphorus to 800ppm.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Arth · April 2, 2017

I don't know about the LML but I wonder about the LP5.

No ....API specification CK-4. It replaced CJ-4 in December. Biggest change is a reduction in phosphorus to 800ppm.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

sdeeter19555 · April 2, 2017

I think wires are getting crossed, one is talking oil spec, the other is talking injection pump...

I would have assumed this would have been addressed by the oil manufacturer before the oil was released...is there really a TSB or something from Ford, or is this Internet lore?

Keep in mind the same thing took place with the change from CI-4+ to CJ-4, I bet there are still some Dodge guys with a 100 gallon stockpile of CI-4+ because CJ-4 was so bad...it was supposed to cause premature engine failures, issues with the oil-lubed high pressure pumps, eat seals, etc. That oil turned out to be better in the long run than CI-4+!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

HeliMark · April 2, 2017

It's real. "Inadequate wear protection" per Ford testing for all of there diesels.

https://jobbersworldblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/ford-motor-company-ck-4-position-statement.pdf

Should add, I have not seen anything from Chevy yet. But for me, I will be avoiding it.

Mark

sdeeter19555 · April 2, 2017

I'd like to see how they "tested" to show this is oil related...if it only affects one brand of truck....

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Cowpie · April 5, 2017

I ran a load of Mobil Delvac Extreme 10w30 syn blend CK-4 thru my Detroit 12.7L for 20,000 miles. The UOA on the oil was as good the previous 653,000 miles on CJ-4. Lots of paranoia over CK-4, but it has been really run thru the grinder and tested to make sure it will be a positive and exceed the previous CJ-4. I have been following the development over the last 2 years.

The key thing to look for.... some CK-4 HDEO's also have API SN gasoline ratings. Those have the significantly reduced phosphorus. The CK-4 oils that do not claim API SN tend to not cut out so much of the ZDDP. Check the back of the jug anytime you buy.

redwngr · April 10, 2017

Link to some Shell info -- http://rotella.shell.com/products/pc-11.html

Cowpie · April 11, 2017

Over at BITOG, we have seen a pattern on all of this. If the HDEO CK-4 oil also lays claim to being SN gasoline rated, it typically has the lower phosphorous. For instance, Schaeffer CK-4 oils are on the Ford approved list. Unlike Schaeffer's previous CJ-4 diesel oils, these no longer lay claim to being gasoline engine rated oils on their spec sheets. So a pattern is emerging..... if the CK-4 oil does not also claim the gasoline API SN rating, it is probably higher than 1000 ppm in phosphorous.

HDEO's have traditionally also had gasoline API ratings in the past. Now, some do and some don't, as it pertains to CK-4. Those that do not seem to be the ones to look for.

Cowpie · October 29, 2017

Well, on the 5th load of CK-4 in my factory remanned Detroit engine with 754,000 miles now on the reman, over 100,000 miles since the switch to CK-4 last winter. One is going to have a real tough time convincing me that CK-4 is not up to the task. My oil samples on CK-4 have been within a few points of any of the previous dozens of samples on CJ-4. Oil consumption the same as it has been since I dropped the motor in the truck. About 2 qts on 20-22,000 mile oil change intervals.

If the Dmax doesn't do well on CK-4, it would speak more to the poor quality of the motor than the oil.