Another OIL Question for 3lt Patrol

Submitted: Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 09:45
ThreadID: 11566 Views:3730 Replies:7 FollowUps:13
This Thread has been Archived
THis has been posted as a follow-up to an earlier question but I am very confused and want someone to explain it all in simple terms please. So Martyn ...or someone ..please explain...in simple terms..
I have been using in my 2001 3LT Turbo GU Patrol
Valvoline Super Diesel Oil.
SAE 15W-40,
API CH - 4/SJ , ACEA E3 , E5 , A3 , B3.
does this meet the Nissan standards..they say for the 3LT in Australia
API CD , CE , CF , CF-4,
and to never use API CG-4..
To me this seems like they are saying to use a lower grade oil..
All this is very confusing to just a simple man like myself....
So please someone explain..
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Russell from Synforce Lubricants - Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 11:28

Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 11:28
g'day from synforce.
stick to the CH4 or CF4, 15w/40, do not use any of the CD, Ce, CF as they are a tad behind the times.
Valvoline super diesel is fine in your case, even though we say ours is better.
it is my firm opinion that the oil that you are using meets the nissan requirements and i would be very surprised to hear nissan offer a different opinion.
for more info on oil specs etc, go to our web site.
regards russell
AnswerID: 52038

Reply By: Member - Captain (WA) - Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 11:39

Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 11:39
Hi Rlnomad,

Diesel oil grades are, in order of introduction:
... CF, CG, CH.

Now CF have been around for a while and are relatively high detergent oils. Also, they do not have any limitation on the sulphur content in fuel.

When CG was introduced, while it had better lubrication properties, it has a lower detergent content but more importantly it had an upper limit of 500ppm sulphur content in fuel. Australia had ~1300ppm sulphur in diesel fuel at that time and I believe the high sulphur combined with the lower detergent content is why Nissan so do NOT use CG grade oil.

CH is the latest diesel oil grade and it has a higher detergent content than CG (probably equivalent to CF). It also has even better lubrication properties, but still has a 500ppm sulphur limit on diesel fuel.

But the good news is that we now have a maximum of 500ppm in our diesel thanks to new laws. And in Perth, Brisbane and Sydney any BP diesel users get only 50ppm diesel (would recommend using BP in these places in newer diesels- a whole heap of benefits - but be aware of Buna-N rubber seals in older rotatry fuel pumps!!!).

So, I to have a GU 3.0TD and use CH oil. I cannot/will not say that it is fine, you need to make your own decision.

There is a lot more in the fine detail than I have written above, but I hope that it contains enough info as a summary for you. Just ask if you want more detail (a bit of a chemistry lesson in places though).

Cheers

Mark
(Chemical Engineer)
Its not what you drive, but how you drive it!
LC 200 + AOR Quantum

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 52040

Follow Up By: chrisfrd - Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 14:56

Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 14:56
Totally agree with you there Captain-my-Captain.

England is going the way of 30ppm counts as average!

This is due partly to the different taxes that they pay for diesel engined vehicles and their fuel over there.

The part/full synthetic oils are the best for this, as they are much more accepting of wide sulphur counts.

I'm looking at getting some independent tests done on fuels here (I work for a University as a researcher/engineer) to test the qualities of fuels that are available in areas around the country.

Chris.
0
FollowupID: 313862

Reply By: Russell from Synforce Lubricants - Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 12:14

Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 12:14
hello mark, hello rlnomad,
ditto mark, but i will add some summary
CF4 in the main had 1.3 ash, CG4 1.0 ash and the newer Ch4's are being produced in at least wto different ash levels by most companies.
japanese engine manufacturers when calling for CF4 are in part focusing on medium ash levels that are also experienced in some CG4 oils.
based on the above, one would assume that a CH4 with ash at about 1.3 is the way to go as the CH4 does offer better aspects in wear protection etc.
do not use CD, CE or CF ( no 4 after them) as these are a tad out of date in spec for these type of engines and are usually now found following a petrol spec for eg api SJ/CF.
as diesel oils are built somewhat differently than petrol oils look for the "4" following the rating, ie Cf4 not CF alone.
be carefull of the now introduced CI4 (just to confuse you even further) as some brands have experienced problems here.
there is not an engine, to my knowledge, in australia at present, that requires or is recommended to have CI4.
CI4 came about mainly because of american regulations for EGR (exhaust gas recirculating) in diesel engines and the resultant need for an oil to handle such a scenario.
as with the "questionable" introduction in australia of petrol SL rating, CI4 is not needed in this country as yet. I am not aware of any manufacturer requiring SL or CI4 for engines in australia, and to give further comment, you should find over the near future, more specs such as GF-2 and up to 4, (petrol) energy conserving ratings, and other euro type ratings being of focus more than the traditional
API.
i hope this clears up some things, regards russell
AnswerID: 52042

Follow Up By: Member - Captain (WA) - Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 14:46

Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 14:46
Hi Russell,

Interesting to hear about the CI-4 oil grade. The Nissan 3.0TD has had a few issues with EGR valves failing!!! There was a major upgrade of the 3.0TD motor from the series II to III, but that was mainly related to oil cooling issues (oil sprays on cranks/pistons etc...) I believe.

What is the difference in the oil required for the EGR valve? Is the recirculation of the exhaust gas resulting in high NOX emmissions, or is it related to lubrication of the EGR valve?

Perhaps there is a niche market for "Patrol Oil" for EGR valves on "high tech" diesels. Seriously though, there would be more than just a few of us interested in an oil that could potentially benefit the EGR valve issue, thats if the CI-4 addresses the lubrication side of the EGR valve.

All the latest high tech diesels are using EGR valves and this is sure to become a bigger issue in the future, particularly if the yanks are already seeing problems.

Thanks for the info

Mark
Its not what you drive, but how you drive it!
LC 200 + AOR Quantum

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 313861

Follow Up By: Member - Andrew (Bris) - Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 18:46

Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 18:46
Just for the record, I'm one of those who has suffered from a dodgy EGR valve. Not nice being broken down in the middle of peak hour traffic. I bought a new vehicle to avoid the possibility of breakdowns. Technology is great, just another thing to go bingo.
0
FollowupID: 313938

Reply By: Member -Bob & Lex (Sydney) - Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 16:56

Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 16:56
Thats the oil I use & no probs
AnswerID: 52078

Reply By: DiesAl - Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 19:27

Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 19:27
Gday Russell,

I read with interest your comments on CI4 oils, I have a 2000 Hilux Dual Cab 3L Diesel 5LE Motor. I haven’t had it long and have only done 1 oil change on it using Casrol RX Super CI4….Now I’m slightly worried….What were the problems that some brands have had with the CI4 oil? Thought I was making the right choice using the latest rating……..perhaps not.
AnswerID: 52107

Follow Up By: Russell from Synforce Lubricants - Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 21:34

Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 21:34
hello diesAl, i should further explain the CI4 and that is that another factor that brought pressure on the intro of CI4 was the newest american emmision controls, so it was not just for egr engines.
some lubricant manufacturers did have problems with their intro of CI4 into the aust market, but most were ralated to increase in oil consumption, not mechanical, so there is not much to worry about.
i will admit that prior to my involvment with synforce and for many years. i was an RX super fan, and having had many high hp diesel engines over the years, could not fault it.
it still is a very good product in my opinion and would certainly be my second choice. no prize for guessing my first choice though.
you have made a good choice.
regards russell
0
FollowupID: 313961

Follow Up By: DiesAl - Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 21:50

Friday, Mar 26, 2004 at 21:50
Thanks mate, I keep a good eye on oil levels so if that was the only problem should pick up on it pretty soon.

Al
0
FollowupID: 313963

Reply By: Member - AndrewPatrol - Saturday, Mar 27, 2004 at 17:57

Saturday, Mar 27, 2004 at 17:57
To add to this discussion and to get an opinion on the oil that I use. Mobil Super XHP, among other things it states the rating as CF. Now it states in my owners manual that this the grade required and now I'm confused by the addition of the comment above about CF-4. Mobil states that this oil is suitable for gas, petrol and diesel motors. Is this oil so out of date that that I should consider another type/brand? Does the CI-4 have a rating to comply with Nissan and the sulphur content of our fuels, also is it expensive ( yeh, I know the argument about "how much is my motor worth") or can i safely use CF-4? F#^% this gets as messy as doing your own oil changes!!!!!!!
AnswerID: 52205

Follow Up By: Member - AndrewPatrol - Saturday, Mar 27, 2004 at 18:17

Saturday, Mar 27, 2004 at 18:17
Russell, just looked at your site. If your "cruiser oil" meets or exceeds all those ratings then how does it suit the Patrol when they say not to use CG-4. But it meets CFand CF-4. This is the most bizarre and confusing bunch of )(*&^&^%^%$ I've ever seen.
0
FollowupID: 314020

Follow Up By: Russell from Synforce Lubricants - Saturday, Mar 27, 2004 at 19:51

Saturday, Mar 27, 2004 at 19:51
hi andrew, CF4 is ok in your patrol.
Cruiser oil is CH4 but to better explain the specs on the web site ...
"cruiser oil meets or exceeds cf, cf4, cg4, and ch4."
what this is saying is that it either meets or exceeds all of these ratings, the highest being CH4, so that is why it is reffered to as a CH4.
in other words it meets CH4 and exceeds CF, CF4, CG4.
does this help, regards russell
0
FollowupID: 314022

Follow Up By: Russell from Synforce Lubricants - Saturday, Mar 27, 2004 at 19:56

Saturday, Mar 27, 2004 at 19:56
andrew, i take it that the patrol is diesel, in which case your manual from memory will say CF4 in a multigrade. i do not have mobil specs handy (at home) so am not sure of mobil superXHP specs.
regards russell
0
FollowupID: 314024

Follow Up By: Member - AndrewPatrol - Sunday, Mar 28, 2004 at 20:19

Sunday, Mar 28, 2004 at 20:19
Thanks Russell,
Yes 3.0 lt diesel
Sorry to drag this out but how does an oil qualify for CF status then also CG-4 which has a lower capacity to suspend sulphur within. I'm not sure that I'm explaining myself very well but I have difficulty with the different multiple ratings these oils qualify for (CF, CF-4, CG, CG-4, CH) but then Nissan says DO NOT use an oil that rates CG-4, so by my reading that means any oil that states that rating(CG-4), even if the other correct type is listed.Is that clear, I hope so.
0
FollowupID: 314114

Follow Up By: Russell from Synforce Lubricants - Sunday, Mar 28, 2004 at 22:15

Sunday, Mar 28, 2004 at 22:15
g'gay andrew,
CF4 had about 1.3 ash indicating a medium detergency level.
Most brands of CG4 had arround 1.0 ash indicating a lower detergency level than that of CF4, and some other differences in chemical make up.
my belief is that the CG4 did come about, amongst other things, because of different sulphur levels overseas, as most of the additive packages available were designed arround the US and Euro markets.
apart from this i have no explanation, but i will research into it further.
It did not take long, however, for the CH4 packages to follow, both in low ash (1 to 1.2) and medium ash (1.2 to 1.5), giving a wider choice in diesel oils.
generally the higher the rating the more protection etc.
If you are going to a CH4 in a jap engine, then go for the medium ash.
From your earlier comment about using a CF (i take it you did not mean CF4) and if you were referring to a multigrade (for eg 15w/40) then i have a nigling thought that you may be using an oil designed in the main for petrol engines with a "light" diesel rating.
the best way here is to know that an oil with a rating of SJ/CF, sj being quoted first, was designed firstly for a petrol engine but has the light load diesel rating of CF (not CF4, heavier load)
should an oil be quoted as CF4/SJ, the diesel spec first and including a "4", then the petrol spec, then the oil was designed firstly with diesels in mind but then also has a SJ petrol engine.
the correct oil choice from what is available today for your vehicle is either a 15w/40 CF4/SJ or a 15w/40 CH4/SJ, ranging in 1.2 ash to 1.4 ash.
does any of this help, chers, russell.
0
FollowupID: 314126

Reply By: sean - Sunday, Mar 28, 2004 at 22:02

Sunday, Mar 28, 2004 at 22:02
They also say you can use JASO DH-1.

Teh wrong oil can lead to engine failure in modern diesels.

Latest spec does not mean better. It depends on the motor, the oil temp, the emission controls, the design of the piston, the fuel sulphur and so on.

CF4 oil is a safe bet. CG4 oils have lower zinc and it is claimed this can lead to valvetrain wear.

Later spec oils in modern diesels can (has) be the cause of engine failure. Such can be in the form of under piston deposits leading to piston failure (sound familiar??)

Valvolene super diesel does not meet the nissan specs.

Try Delvac HP, Valvoline JTech, shell rimula X as I think all these meet the Nissan Spec.

I had a 3 litre and ran Delvac HP. I now have a 4.2 patrol with EGR and am switching to Delvac 1 for its JASO Dh-1 rating.

Sean

http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=22;t=000174
AnswerID: 52336

Follow Up By: Russell from Synforce Lubricants - Sunday, Mar 28, 2004 at 22:31

Sunday, Mar 28, 2004 at 22:31
hello sean,
from memory, DH-1 was the forerunner (tests spec) for DHD1, which some CH4's now pass.
zinc is an antiwear additive and there was some changes in the percentage from CF4 to CG4, and again to CH4.
CF4 adpack was a different type CG4. most CG4, CH4, are of similiar ad pack type but CH4 use's a different percentage of additive and "spikes" to obtain different results. CI4 can contain the same adpack with different spikes again to build TBN and raise ash.
Ch4 does offer better piston cleanliness and less deposits than CF4 and CG4.
regards russell
0
FollowupID: 314129

Follow Up By: sean - Monday, Mar 29, 2004 at 12:12

Monday, Mar 29, 2004 at 12:12
Russell

DH-1 is JASO and DHD1 is Global. The nissan specs say for both the 3 litre and 4.2 with EGR that JASO DH-1 complies.

Phosphorous also protects the engine and this has been reduced in later spec engines to meet emission controls.

Their is no point talking CG4, CH4 or CI4 with Nissans latest offerings becuase these are not the specified oil grades regardless. Their is no point saying that CH4 is better than CG4 if it is not the specified oil.

Shell Rimula X and Delvac HP are CF4 oils and nissan diesel engines using these oils have done 600,000ks without rebuilds. These oils have been used sucessfully worldwide.

It is now a question of what oil is needed to provide for the extra soot loadings and oil temps in latest spec engines. And from what I can gather, it depends on engine design with no universall answer - unless you use Delvac 1 and a handful of others of course.

I think it important for people to realise that emmision equipped diesels are a different kettle of fish to the earlier offerings and that premature engine failure has occured due to deposits with the wrong oils being used.

It is also interestinig to note that there are people who have had their 3 litre engine failure and they dont know what oil went into it. So how can people preclude the oil as a significant factor. Can oil grade and adequate oil levels be ruled out. I dont think so.

Go to the Shell and Mobil sites and note they are carefully sticking to the Nissan recommendations so it 'appears' they are being careful to keep away from failures.

I would be very careful if I was a 3 litre owner (which I once was) as to what oil I used and to carefully check the level.

I think this whole oil thread is excellent becuase too many people I think take it as gospel that latest oil spec is best and this just aint true.

Sean
0
FollowupID: 314168

Follow Up By: Russell from Synforce Lubricants - Monday, Mar 29, 2004 at 16:40

Monday, Mar 29, 2004 at 16:40
it seems we have a few differences here in oz as to US products.
Shell rimula x here in aus is a ch4, yes dh1 also, but a high 1.6 ash.
Nissan whilst quoting dh1 probalbly realise that FEW oils here in aus actually meet dh1 and are suggesting CF4.
valvoline super diesel and castrol rx super both do not meet dh1 but are widely used in nissans even by dealers.
most cf4's here only meet acea b2 and e2 with some experst saying that for these type of engines b3 should be the minimum.
i guesss what they are saying is that in the absence of dh1 at least look for b3, and this seems to be what the tech boys at the various coy's are suggesting.
personally, i would not like to put a CH4 1.6 ash into a nissan engine that had been on CF4 for a few hundred thousand k's
most CF4's here have the SJ petrol rating as well but most CG4's when first introduced had only SH, indicating less efficient on valve train wear.
most CG4's now have gone to SJ (better valve train wear).
whilst most of the early cg4's had only sh they also had b3, confusing the situation even more so.
I am not aware of any CF spec oil here in aus that meets DH1 or even b3, so i would have concerns there.
It would be interesting to get hold of Nissan's own Nissan's oil spec sheet to see how that reads.
as CH4 offers better nearly everything over CF4, choosing CH4 with a 1.2 to 1.5 ash having b3 would surely have to be our best bet in oz for the Nissan.
remember rimula x here is a ch4 passing dh1 and b3, but 1.6 ash, bit of a worry is it not.
russell
0
FollowupID: 314210

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)