Oil Filter Fail

[Dan7070]

I did my first oil change on my 2020 ram eco-diesel. I immediately got random low oil pressure warnings. The filter I used was Mopar OEM 68507598AA. Based on another forum post, I took it off, threw it away, and put one on from the dealership. Now, everything is OK!

 

[turkeybird56]

I did my first oil change on my 2020 ram eco-diesel. I immediately got random low oil pressure warnings. The filter I used was Mopar OEM 68507598AA. Based on another forum post, I took it off, threw it away, and put one on from the dealership. Now, everything is OK!

Those ED's take a very specific oil with specific additives. Hope you used the right oil.

 

[Sherman Bird]

I did my first oil change on my 2020 ram eco-diesel. I immediately got random low oil pressure warnings. The filter I used was Mopar OEM 68507598AA. Based on another forum post, I took it off, threw it away, and put one on from the dealership. Now, everything is OK!

Welcome to the world of counterfeit parts!

 

[Dan7070]

 

[Scottly]

Oh mother trucker, here we go...Another oil thread.

 

[06 Dodge]

View attachment 520180

According to Motul oil web site below, that 5w40 oil only has an API rating of SN, no where did I see an API CK-4 diesel rating listed anywhere so you want to do some checking... https://www.motul.com/us/en-US/products/8100-x-cess-gen2-5w-40

 

[18CrewDually]

Let me guess, you bought the filter off of Amazon.

 

[18CrewDually]

Let me guess, you bought the filter off of Amazon.

I ask because it's going around bigtime. I posted somewhere around the forum about the rear fuel filter counterfeit and what to look for. I've also seen alot of Motorcraft parts counterfeit. some parts not so obvious but if the price is too good to be true...... well.. you know the rest.

 

[Choupique]

I wouldn't buy any parts from Amazon. There is tremendous risk of getting chineesium.

 

[Dan7070]

I got the filter from dieselfiltersonline.

 

[18CrewDually]

Have you contacted them and have they responded? I get filters from them now & then.

 

[Sherman Bird]

According to Motul oil web site below, that 5w40 oil only has an API rating of SN.

Taken out of context, so what? SP oil was/is designed to eliminate LSPI (Low Speed Pre Ignition) on gasoline ICE's (Internal Combustion Engines) which reach over 15:1 Air/ Fuel ratios.

The "sudden" reintroduction of CVT Transmissions wasn't any fluke. These transmissions played a major role of mitigating LSPI.
To clarify, the term "LSPI doesn't refer to low vehicle or even low engine speed alone. It refers to the low speed of the piston as it reaches TDC during the compression stroke. When the piston naturally slows at that point, combined with slowing of the engine RPM during upshift of a conventional automatic transmission, and the engine is under tremendous load, the weakness of the new efficiency mandates rear their ugly heads.

"SP" oils incorporate a nitrogen based anti-carbon additive which works much better than calcium based additives of yesterday.
This additive could not mitigate LSPI on it's own on ULEV vehicles which routinely see 15.3 to one Air/fuel ratios. Thus the elimination of the conventional transmissions' effect of exacerbating the slowing down of the piston as it reaches TDC.

In a nutshell, "SN" oil is still fine in MOST current cars, but why not just use "SP" oils across the board?

 

[06 Dodge]

Taken out of context, so what? SP oil was/is designed to eliminate LSPI (Low Speed Pre Ignition) on gasoline ICE's (Internal Combustion Engines) which reach over 15:1 Air/ Fuel ratios.

The "sudden" reintroduction of CVT Transmissions wasn't any fluke. These transmissions played a major role of mitigating LSPI.
To clarify, the term "LSPI doesn't refer to low vehicle or even low engine speed alone. It refers to the low speed of the piston as it reaches TDC during the compression stroke. When the piston naturally slows at that point, combined with slowing of the engine RPM during upshift of a conventional automatic transmission, and the engine is under tremendous load, the weakness of the new efficiency mandates rear their ugly heads.

"SP" oils incorporate a nitrogen based anti-carbon additive which works much better than calcium based additives of yesterday.
This additive could not mitigate LSPI on it's own on ULEV vehicles which routinely see 15.3 to one Air/fuel ratios. Thus the elimination of the conventional transmissions' effect of exacerbating the slowing down of the piston as it reaches TDC.

In a nutshell, "SN" oil is still fine in MOST current cars, but why not just use "SP" oils across the board?

I guess you missed the fact that he was putting API SN oil in an ECO Diesel engine that requires API CK-4/CJ-4 oil...

 

[HEMIMANN]

Taken out of context, so what? SP oil was/is designed to eliminate LSPI (Low Speed Pre Ignition) on gasoline ICE's (Internal Combustion Engines) which reach over 15:1 Air/ Fuel ratios.

The "sudden" reintroduction of CVT Transmissions wasn't any fluke. These transmissions played a major role of mitigating LSPI.
To clarify, the term "LSPI doesn't refer to low vehicle or even low engine speed alone. It refers to the low speed of the piston as it reaches TDC during the compression stroke. When the piston naturally slows at that point, combined with slowing of the engine RPM during upshift of a conventional automatic transmission, and the engine is under tremendous load, the weakness of the new efficiency mandates rear their ugly heads.

"SP" oils incorporate a nitrogen based anti-carbon additive which works much better than calcium based additives of yesterday.
This additive could not mitigate LSPI on it's own on ULEV vehicles which routinely see 15.3 to one Air/fuel ratios. Thus the elimination of the conventional transmissions' effect of exacerbating the slowing down of the piston as it reaches TDC.

In a nutshell, "SN" oil is still fine in MOST current cars, but why not just use "SP" oils across the board?

When API went from SN to SP, didn't it also mandate some viscosity reduction within SAE vis grade range for infinitesimal friction reduction? I recall the viscosities of the SP oils went down. Also the LSPI traded some calcium for magnesium detergent / dispersant additive - was a big writeup on this.

For towing truck engines, I'd prefer SN oils. For the little 4 cylinder turbo w*h*i*z motors with GDI, SP oil is a must. Not towing horse trailers with those.

 

[Sherman Bird]

When API went from SN to SP, didn't it also mandate some viscosity reduction within SAE vis grade range for infinitesimal friction reduction? I recall the viscosities of the SP oils went down. Also the LSPI traded some calcium for magnesium detergent / dispersant additive - was a big writeup on this.

For towing truck engines, I'd prefer SN oils. For the little 4 cylinder turbo w*h*i*z motors with GDI, SP oil is a must. Not towing horse trailers with those.

The chief among changes with SP oil was the transfer from calcium anti carbon/ sludge additive to nitrogen. The "lightweight oil" low viscosity began several iterations before SN.

One additive that, to my knowledge isn't used much anymore is graphite. Zinc was cut out, or WAY down, too because the snail darters got runny noses or such. And those tree-huggers!

 

[HEMIMANN]

The chief among changes with SP oil was the transfer from calcium anti carbon/ sludge additive to nitrogen. The "lightweight oil" low viscosity began several iterations before SN.

One additive that, to my knowledge isn't used much anymore is graphite. Zinc was cut out, or WAY down, too because the snail darters got runny noses or such. And those tree-huggers!

Read excessive zinc coats catalysts, 'poisoning' them.

 

[Sherman Bird]

Read excessive zinc coats catalysts, 'poisoning' them.

Maybe so. My own viewpoint is this: I keep and own cars that exceed 10 years and have over 200 thousand miles. I use ZDDP additive all the time; have for 40 years, and have yet to have a catalytic converter die from poisoning!

My 1990 GMC Suburban went 400,000 miles before it was shipped off the the salvage lot. It had the original catalytic converter replaced at 325,000 miles.

I do stipulate to the fact that Zinc shortens a catalyst's life, but which is most cost efficient long term? A $1000.00 catalytic converter, or a $8,000.00 engine. It's a no-brainer to me.

 

[HEMIMANN]

Maybe so. My own viewpoint is this: I keep and own cars that exceed 10 years and have over 200 thousand miles. I use ZDDP additive all the time; have for 40 years, and have yet to have a catalytic converter die from poisoning!

My 1990 GMC Suburban went 400,000 miles before it was shipped off the the salvage lot. It had the original catalytic converter replaced at 325,000 miles.

I do stipulate to the fact that Zinc shortens a catalyst's life, but which is most cost efficient long term? A $1000.00 catalytic converter, or a $8,000.00 engine. It's a no-brainer to me.

Depends if you're in a state with mandatory, annually pipe sniffing, I would assume. I have no idea how quickly zinc additive coats converter honeycomb, or how fast it degrades catalyst reaction. Just saying zinc was removed for this reason - not just conversion from flat tappets to roller tappets.

 

[Sherman Bird]

Depends if you're in a state with mandatory, annually pipe sniffing, I would assume. I have no idea how quickly zinc additive coats converter honeycomb, or how fast it degrades catalyst reaction. Just saying zinc was removed for this reason - not just conversion from flat tappets to roller tappets.

Houston, Dallas, El Paso, and now San Antonio are all emissions areas.... and the Suburban was subjected to annual dyno emissions tests.

I'm totally in agreement with you as to the why and what regarding Zinc Phosphate....I know, and have for years about it's detriment to catalyst. I still use it. The new converter is a bargain compared to a new engine. Simple economics viewpoint from me, a guy who keeps his vehicles for a VERY long time and a whole lot of miles.

 

[HEMIMANN]

Yup. Of course, this is spark ignited engine 3 way catalysts - despite the thefts these days, their prices are reasonable, the chemical reaction is passive, the physics and designs are well known and made.

It's a whole different world for a diesel. They've basically regulated that engine to death. My 6.4L Hemi runs great, with a tune boost tows medium lows almost as well as a diesel. I change the oil with Red Line at modest intervals, also baby the transmission after getting rid of the (over) heater thermostat. Most comfortable truck I've ever had, to boot.