General Diesel Related Discussion for All General Diesel Topics , No Make or Year Specific Discussions , These Topic Should be General Diesel Related

Idiots!

  #1  
Old 08-17-2010, 07:00 PM
elshadow001's Avatar
Diesel Fan
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Grandfield Ok
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 3 Posts
Default Idiots!

I wrote a email to chevron corp.

Asked them if it was ok to add two cycle oil to my diesel fuel to lubricate my vp44.

The response was: Don't ever add two cycle oil to your fuel, use fuel injection cleaner.

What! What!

Nothing more to say or add, just sharing chevrons employees intelegence.

 
  #2  
Old 08-17-2010, 07:17 PM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 310
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by elshadow001
just sharing chevrons employees intelegence.
High intelligence it is. Two-cycle oil has no place in a diesel engine.
 
  #3  
Old 08-17-2010, 08:13 PM
24vmatt's Avatar
Diesel Wrench
iTrader: (-1)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 671
Received 44 Likes on 40 Posts
The following users liked this post:
K50 (08-20-2010)
  #4  
Old 08-17-2010, 08:40 PM
rednekroper05's Avatar
Diesel Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Big Lake/ Cameron
Posts: 488
Received 21 Likes on 18 Posts
Default

I imagine that they legally wouldnt tell because the email could be saved and if any harm came from their advice then they could be held liable.
 
  #5  
Old 08-18-2010, 08:10 AM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 310
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 24vmatt
sure it does
I see a whole lot of anecdotal discussion but no scientific research or reports from anyone in the petroleum R&D business.

Additives are completely unnecessary in the first place. Raw diesel has a minimum lubricity spec it has to meet and distribution stations add their own additives on top of it.
The entire "sulfur" scare is perpetuated by additive producers to sell more product.
 

Last edited by ForcedInduction; 08-18-2010 at 08:13 AM.
  #6  
Old 08-18-2010, 09:09 AM
24vmatt's Avatar
Diesel Wrench
iTrader: (-1)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 671
Received 44 Likes on 40 Posts
Default

Form
Mopar1973Man

Well Since DB.com has a 2 cycle oil thread I better get to work here...

Here we go... First off let me post my web site links...
http://www.frontiernet.net/~mopar197..._cycle_oil.htm

Second off here is my Dyno results running 105:1 Ratio of 2 cycle oil and Diesel fuel.

Ok Gang!

I got more to report about conserning 2 cycle oil and HP/TQ numbers... Yes I got my truck on to the rollers and got to dyno it out... You all are going to be shocked with my numbers.

First off let me lay down some baseline information. You all have seen my web page on my BOMBs and MODs I've done. Ok... We all know that the 2002 Cummins SO is rated for 235 HP 460TQ at the flywheel.


Run #1 - Stock mode with Edge Comp Turned off.
228 HP - 462 TQ

Well this proves there is very little drag between the flywheel to the rear end. Also this proves there was very little change in HP/TQ number conserning 2 cycle oil. I'm using conventional Dino lubes in everything except the transmission which requires the Castrol SynTorque. But still even this number is high for HP/TQ at the rear wheels... 2 Cycle oil maybe???


Run #2 - Edge Comp turned on 5x5
379 HP - 831 TQ

Run #3 - Edge Comp turned on 5x5
381 HP - 826 TQ


Ok we all know the Edge Comp give about 120 HP on 5x5 seting but now do the math. 381 - 228 = 153 - 120 = 33 HP difference! Where did this power come from? I got no other fueling enhancements and only a BHAF and straight piped exhaust 3"... It's got to be the 2 cycle oil helping the burn.. So never the less I'm a extremely happy camper and will continue to use 2 cycle oil. I will report my ratio of mix here soon I need to pull the information from my fueling logs. I know I'm much lower that 128:1 because I added a full quart to my last fill up.




Read more: https://www.dieselbombers.com/altern...#ixzz0wxzCHZB9


How u like them apples!
 
The following users liked this post:
ArizonaRedneck (08-18-2010)
  #7  
Old 08-18-2010, 09:49 AM
NadirPoint's Avatar
Diesel Bomber
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: CO
Posts: 2,257
Received 186 Likes on 159 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ForcedInduction
...diesel has a minimum lubricity spec it has to meet and distribution stations add their own additives on top of it.
Absolutely true. I would add that I don't normally go with "minimum" type measures when trying to meet some objective or standard with regard to the equipment I maintain and operate. I usually go for things more like "maximum" and "higher" when it comes to my engines, especially where power and reliability come into play.
Originally Posted by ForcedInduction
The entire "sulfur" scare is perpetuated by additive producers to sell more product.
Absolutely false. The entire sulphur scare comes about because of the EPA, the green lobby and their infinite wisdom about how to engineer diesel engines and their fuel systems. They also know alot about how to control air pollution with ethanol in fuel as well.
 
The following 6 users liked this post by NadirPoint:
24vmatt (08-18-2010), ArizonaRedneck (08-18-2010), big bad diesel 416 (08-19-2010), Horns (08-18-2010), K50 (08-20-2010), yeehaw (08-29-2010) and 1 others liked this post. (Show less...)
  #8  
Old 08-18-2010, 12:10 PM
24vmatt's Avatar
Diesel Wrench
iTrader: (-1)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 671
Received 44 Likes on 40 Posts
Default

 
  #9  
Old 08-18-2010, 12:18 PM
Horns's Avatar
Diesel Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Waterloo, Iowa
Posts: 161
Received 19 Likes on 15 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by NadirPoint
Absolutely true. I would add that I don't normally go with "minimum" type measures when trying to meet some objective or standard with regard to the equipment I maintain and operate. I usually go for things more like "maximum" and "higher" when it comes to my engines, especially where power and reliability come into play.

Absolutely false. The entire sulphur scare comes about because of the EPA, the green lobby and their infinite wisdom about how to engineer diesel engines and their fuel systems. They also know alot about how to control air pollution with ethanol in fuel as well.
Woohoo, someone knows whats up!
 
  #10  
Old 08-19-2010, 03:21 PM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 310
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 24vmatt
Here we go... First off let me post my web site links...
http://www.frontiernet.net/~mopar197..._cycle_oil.htm
It would help if your site actually worked...

Second off here is my Dyno results
That proves absolutely nothing. "Knowing" it provides "about 120hp" is not proof it produces 120hp. What you've posted is known as speculation, not science.
If you expect your "test" to be taken seriously by people with functioning neurons you need to actually test the fuel, not guess.

I got no other fueling enhancements and only a BHAF and straight piped exhaust 3"... It's got to be the 2 cycle oil helping the burn.
Wrong.

Absolutely false.
You sure are.
Sulfur has zero to do with lubricity. Its the process of removing sulfur that alters it. What little is lost is more than made up for artificially by the refinery.

Woohoo, someone knows whats up!
You and NadirPoint are far from it! Keep dumping money on useless crap, clearly I can't stop either of you with logic or scientific fact!
 

Last edited by ForcedInduction; 08-19-2010 at 03:26 PM.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Idiots!



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:05 PM.