Fuel Additives
#71
02-15-2010, 01:34 PM
you proved nothing the little parts you posted out of a book had nothing to do with fuel additives. Too much of any additive can be a bad thing. But as stated before Cummins allows for 5% weo to be used. I would not use weo but some do. I have run 2 stroke oil and gained a little mpg and know that it was helping the lubricity of the fuel. as stated in this test. HFRR I never said that school was bs, but some things people learn in school is not always correct. A lot of the mechanics as dealers are right out of school and only know what the book says. Just like Ford says on their 6.0 you can .002 between cylinders on a head and thats within spec. they measure only between the 2 cylinders when testing this. Not put a straight edge across the head and measure it. OEM want you to buy more vehicles so they make sure their cars and trucks will live past warranty and thats all they care about. The mighty dollar. I am not saying don't go to school, but school is not the only way to learn. Yeah you have one book that states this, but it's possible there is others that state it different. These companies that make aftermarket fuel additives spend a lot of money on testing. It's not hurting your truck to put them in your fuel unless it contains alcohol or something that breaks down the fuel.
#72
02-15-2010, 01:37 PM
ohh yeah and the background on that study.
The following are the preliminary results of a research study on diesel fuel Lubricity Additives. There is likely to be further commentary and explanation added at a future time.
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this research was to determine the ability of multiple diesel fuel additives to replace the vital lubricity component in ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfer Diesel) fuel.
HISTORY:
ULSD fuel is the fuel currently mandated for use in all on road diesel engines. This fuel burns cleaner and is less polluting than it’s predecessor, called Low Sulfer Diesel Fuel. Low sulfer fuel contained less than 500 ppm of sulfer. ULSD contains 15 ppm or less.
As diesel fuel is further refined to remove the polluting sulfer, it is inadvertently stripped of its lubricating properties. This vital lubrication is a necessary component of the diesel fuel as it prevents wear in the fuel delivery system. Specifically, it lubricates pumps, high pressure pumps and injectors. Traditional Low sulfer diesel fuel typically contained enough lubricating ability to suffice the needs of these vital components. ULSD fuel, on the other hand, is considered to be very “dry” and incapable of lubricating vital fuel delivery components. As a result, these components are at risk of premature and even catastrophic failure when ULSD fuel is introduced to the system. As a result, all oil companies producing ULSD fuel must replace the lost lubricity with additives. All ULSD fuel purchased at retail fuel stations SHOULD be adequately treated with additives to replace this lost lubricity. The potential result of using inadequately treated fuel, as indicated above, can be catastrophic. There have been many documented cases of randomly tested samples of diesel fuel. These tests prove that often times the fuel we purchase is not adequately treated and may therefore contribute to accelerated wear of our fuel delivery systems. For this reason it may be prudent to use an after market diesel fuel additive to ENSURE adequate lubrication of the fuel delivery system. Additionally, many additives can offer added benefits such as cetane improver, and water separators or emulsifiers.
CONTENT:
In this study we will test multiple diesel fuel additives designed to replace lost lubricity. The primary component of this study is a side-by-side laboratory analysis of each additive’s ability to replace this vital lubricity. Additionally, claims of improving cetane, water separation or emulsification, bio-diesel compatibility and alcohol content will be noted. These notes were derived from information that was readily available to consumers (via the label and internet information) and none of this information has been evaluated for validity and/or performance. Cetane information has only been noted if the word “cetane” was used in the advertising information. The words “improves power” has not been translated to mean “improves cetane” in this evaluation. Information on alcohol content is provided by indicating “contains no alcohol”. Omission of the words “contains no alcohol” does not imply that it does contain alcohol. This information was simply missing in the information available to a consumer. However, the possibility of a form of alcohol in these products is possible. Additionally, information on dosages and cost per tankful are included for comparison purposes.
How Diesel Fuel Is Evaluated For Lubricating Ability:
Diesel fuel and other fluids are tested for lubricating ability using a device called a “High Frequency Reciprocating Rig” or HFRR. The HFRR is currently the Internationally accepted, standardized method to evaluate fluids for lubricating ability. It uses a ball bearing that reciprocates or moves back and forth on a metal surface at a very high frequency for a duration of 90 minutes. The machine does this while the ball bearing and metal surface are immersed in the test fluid (in this case, treated diesel fuel). At the end of the test the ball bearing is examined under a microscope and the “wear scar” on the ball bearing is measured in microns. The larger the wear scar, the poorer the lubricating ability of the fluid. Southwest Research runs every sample twice and averages the size of the wear scar.
The U.S. standard for diesel fuel says a commercially available diesel fuel should produce a wear scar of no greater than 520 microns. The Engine Manufacturers Association had requested a standard of a wear scar no greater than 460 microns, typical of the pre-ULSD fuels. Most experts agree that a 520 micron standard is adequate, but also that the lower the wear scar the better.
METHOD:
An independent research firm in Texas was hired to do the laboratory work. The cost of the research was paid for voluntarily by the participating additive manufacturers. Declining to participate and pay for the research were the following companies: Amsoil and Power Service. Because these are popular products it was determined that they needed to be included in the study. These products were tested using funds collected by diesel enthusiasts at “dieselplace.com”. Additionally, unconventional additives such as 2-cycle oil and used motor oil were tested for their abilities to aid in diesel fuel lubricity. These were also paid for by members of “dieselplace.com”.
The study was conducted in the following manner:
-The Research firm obtained a quantity of “untreated” ULSD fuel from a supplier. This fuel was basic ULSD fuel intended for use in diesel engines. However, this sample was acquired PRIOR to any attempt to additize the fuel for the purpose of replacing lost lubricity. In other words, it was a “worst case scenario, very dry diesel fuel” that would likely cause damage to any fuel delivery system. This fuel was tested using the HFRR at the Southwest Research Laboratory. This fuel was determined to have a very high HFRR score of 636 microns, typical of an untreated ULSD fuel. It was determined that this batch of fuel would be utilized as the baseline fuel for testing all of the additives. The baseline fuel HFRR score of 636 would be used as the control sample. All additives tested would be evaluated on their ability to replace lost lubricity to the fuel by comparing their scores to the control sample. Any score under 636 shows improvement to the fuels ability to lubricate the fuel delivery system of a diesel engine.
BLIND STUDY:
In order to ensure a completely unbiased approach to the study, the following steps were taken:
Each additive tested was obtained independently via internet or over the counter purchases. The only exceptions were Opti-Lube XPD and the bio-diesel sample. The reason for this is because Opti-Lube XPD additive was considered “experimental” at the time of test enrollment and was not yet on the market. It was sent directly from Opti-Lube company. The bio-diesel sample was sponsored by Renewable Energy Group. One of their suppliers, E.H. Wolf and Sons in Slinger, Wisconsin supplied us with a sample of 100% soybean based bio-diesel. This sample was used to blend with the baseline fuel to create a 2% bio-diesel for testing.
Each additive was bottled separately in identical glass containers. The bottles were labeled only with a number. This number corresponded to the additive contained in the bottle. The order of numbering was done randomly by drawing names out of a hat. Only Spicer Research held the key to the additives in each bottle.
The additive samples were then sent in a box to An independent research firm. The only information given them was the ratio of fuel to be added to each additive sample. For example, bottle “A” needs to be mixed at a ratio of “480-1”. The ratio used for each additive was the “prescribed dosage” found on the bottle label for that product. Used motor oil and 2-cycle oil were tested at a rationally chosen ratio of 200:1.
The Research Laboratory mixed the proper ratio of each “bottled fluid” into a separate container containing the baseline fuel. The data, therefore, is meaningful because every additive is tested in the same way using the same fuel. A side-by-side comparison of the effectiveness of each additive is now obtainable.
THE RESULTS:
These results are listed in the order of performance in the HFRR test. The baseline fuel used in every test started at an HFRR score of 636. The score shown is the tested HFRR score of the baseline fuel/additive blend.
Also included is the wear scar improvement provided by the additive as well as other claimed benefits of the additive. Each additive is also categorized as a Multi-purpose additive, Multi-purpose + anti-gel, Lubricity only, non-conventional, or as an additive capable of treating both gasoline and diesel fuel.
As a convenience to the reader there is also information on price per treated tank of diesel fuel (using a 26 gallon tank), and dosage per 26 gallon tank provided as “ounces of additive per 26 gallon tank”.
The following are the preliminary results of a research study on diesel fuel Lubricity Additives. There is likely to be further commentary and explanation added at a future time.
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this research was to determine the ability of multiple diesel fuel additives to replace the vital lubricity component in ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfer Diesel) fuel.
HISTORY:
ULSD fuel is the fuel currently mandated for use in all on road diesel engines. This fuel burns cleaner and is less polluting than it’s predecessor, called Low Sulfer Diesel Fuel. Low sulfer fuel contained less than 500 ppm of sulfer. ULSD contains 15 ppm or less.
As diesel fuel is further refined to remove the polluting sulfer, it is inadvertently stripped of its lubricating properties. This vital lubrication is a necessary component of the diesel fuel as it prevents wear in the fuel delivery system. Specifically, it lubricates pumps, high pressure pumps and injectors. Traditional Low sulfer diesel fuel typically contained enough lubricating ability to suffice the needs of these vital components. ULSD fuel, on the other hand, is considered to be very “dry” and incapable of lubricating vital fuel delivery components. As a result, these components are at risk of premature and even catastrophic failure when ULSD fuel is introduced to the system. As a result, all oil companies producing ULSD fuel must replace the lost lubricity with additives. All ULSD fuel purchased at retail fuel stations SHOULD be adequately treated with additives to replace this lost lubricity. The potential result of using inadequately treated fuel, as indicated above, can be catastrophic. There have been many documented cases of randomly tested samples of diesel fuel. These tests prove that often times the fuel we purchase is not adequately treated and may therefore contribute to accelerated wear of our fuel delivery systems. For this reason it may be prudent to use an after market diesel fuel additive to ENSURE adequate lubrication of the fuel delivery system. Additionally, many additives can offer added benefits such as cetane improver, and water separators or emulsifiers.
CONTENT:
In this study we will test multiple diesel fuel additives designed to replace lost lubricity. The primary component of this study is a side-by-side laboratory analysis of each additive’s ability to replace this vital lubricity. Additionally, claims of improving cetane, water separation or emulsification, bio-diesel compatibility and alcohol content will be noted. These notes were derived from information that was readily available to consumers (via the label and internet information) and none of this information has been evaluated for validity and/or performance. Cetane information has only been noted if the word “cetane” was used in the advertising information. The words “improves power” has not been translated to mean “improves cetane” in this evaluation. Information on alcohol content is provided by indicating “contains no alcohol”. Omission of the words “contains no alcohol” does not imply that it does contain alcohol. This information was simply missing in the information available to a consumer. However, the possibility of a form of alcohol in these products is possible. Additionally, information on dosages and cost per tankful are included for comparison purposes.
How Diesel Fuel Is Evaluated For Lubricating Ability:
Diesel fuel and other fluids are tested for lubricating ability using a device called a “High Frequency Reciprocating Rig” or HFRR. The HFRR is currently the Internationally accepted, standardized method to evaluate fluids for lubricating ability. It uses a ball bearing that reciprocates or moves back and forth on a metal surface at a very high frequency for a duration of 90 minutes. The machine does this while the ball bearing and metal surface are immersed in the test fluid (in this case, treated diesel fuel). At the end of the test the ball bearing is examined under a microscope and the “wear scar” on the ball bearing is measured in microns. The larger the wear scar, the poorer the lubricating ability of the fluid. Southwest Research runs every sample twice and averages the size of the wear scar.
The U.S. standard for diesel fuel says a commercially available diesel fuel should produce a wear scar of no greater than 520 microns. The Engine Manufacturers Association had requested a standard of a wear scar no greater than 460 microns, typical of the pre-ULSD fuels. Most experts agree that a 520 micron standard is adequate, but also that the lower the wear scar the better.
METHOD:
An independent research firm in Texas was hired to do the laboratory work. The cost of the research was paid for voluntarily by the participating additive manufacturers. Declining to participate and pay for the research were the following companies: Amsoil and Power Service. Because these are popular products it was determined that they needed to be included in the study. These products were tested using funds collected by diesel enthusiasts at “dieselplace.com”. Additionally, unconventional additives such as 2-cycle oil and used motor oil were tested for their abilities to aid in diesel fuel lubricity. These were also paid for by members of “dieselplace.com”.
The study was conducted in the following manner:
-The Research firm obtained a quantity of “untreated” ULSD fuel from a supplier. This fuel was basic ULSD fuel intended for use in diesel engines. However, this sample was acquired PRIOR to any attempt to additize the fuel for the purpose of replacing lost lubricity. In other words, it was a “worst case scenario, very dry diesel fuel” that would likely cause damage to any fuel delivery system. This fuel was tested using the HFRR at the Southwest Research Laboratory. This fuel was determined to have a very high HFRR score of 636 microns, typical of an untreated ULSD fuel. It was determined that this batch of fuel would be utilized as the baseline fuel for testing all of the additives. The baseline fuel HFRR score of 636 would be used as the control sample. All additives tested would be evaluated on their ability to replace lost lubricity to the fuel by comparing their scores to the control sample. Any score under 636 shows improvement to the fuels ability to lubricate the fuel delivery system of a diesel engine.
BLIND STUDY:
In order to ensure a completely unbiased approach to the study, the following steps were taken:
Each additive tested was obtained independently via internet or over the counter purchases. The only exceptions were Opti-Lube XPD and the bio-diesel sample. The reason for this is because Opti-Lube XPD additive was considered “experimental” at the time of test enrollment and was not yet on the market. It was sent directly from Opti-Lube company. The bio-diesel sample was sponsored by Renewable Energy Group. One of their suppliers, E.H. Wolf and Sons in Slinger, Wisconsin supplied us with a sample of 100% soybean based bio-diesel. This sample was used to blend with the baseline fuel to create a 2% bio-diesel for testing.
Each additive was bottled separately in identical glass containers. The bottles were labeled only with a number. This number corresponded to the additive contained in the bottle. The order of numbering was done randomly by drawing names out of a hat. Only Spicer Research held the key to the additives in each bottle.
The additive samples were then sent in a box to An independent research firm. The only information given them was the ratio of fuel to be added to each additive sample. For example, bottle “A” needs to be mixed at a ratio of “480-1”. The ratio used for each additive was the “prescribed dosage” found on the bottle label for that product. Used motor oil and 2-cycle oil were tested at a rationally chosen ratio of 200:1.
The Research Laboratory mixed the proper ratio of each “bottled fluid” into a separate container containing the baseline fuel. The data, therefore, is meaningful because every additive is tested in the same way using the same fuel. A side-by-side comparison of the effectiveness of each additive is now obtainable.
THE RESULTS:
These results are listed in the order of performance in the HFRR test. The baseline fuel used in every test started at an HFRR score of 636. The score shown is the tested HFRR score of the baseline fuel/additive blend.
Also included is the wear scar improvement provided by the additive as well as other claimed benefits of the additive. Each additive is also categorized as a Multi-purpose additive, Multi-purpose + anti-gel, Lubricity only, non-conventional, or as an additive capable of treating both gasoline and diesel fuel.
As a convenience to the reader there is also information on price per treated tank of diesel fuel (using a 26 gallon tank), and dosage per 26 gallon tank provided as “ounces of additive per 26 gallon tank”.
#73
02-15-2010, 02:51 PM
Diesel Wrench
your right school is not the only way to learn,
and i think that the low sulfer diesel needs more lubrication, and i dont see why doony k doesnt think that 2 stroke oil wont mix with diesel because it mixes fine with gas,
imho, it mixes with the diesel and provieds better lubrication for the pump
and i think that the low sulfer diesel needs more lubrication, and i dont see why doony k doesnt think that 2 stroke oil wont mix with diesel because it mixes fine with gas,
imho, it mixes with the diesel and provieds better lubrication for the pump
#74
02-15-2010, 03:17 PM
ok here is a test by DieselPower mag.
Fuel Additive Test - Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel - Diesel Power Magazine
Check it out, does say 2-stroke will help lubricate and may increase mph but very little. Doesn't increase cetane or used as a cleaner. I also never said school is the only way to learn, I worked in shop for 2yrs before school and now in another one. I learn more from experienced techs that have been in business for years!! They know best!! Ok 2-stroke will help lube "SORRY I was mistaken", but doesnt do anything else and IMO which is ONLY an opinion, doesn't pay to use it!! The additives you buy and they sell does it ALL for you!! If your trying to save a couple bux then maybe it's worth it to you, but isn't getting the same qualities as a good additive. I'm no sales man either but it's your own choice.
Fuel Additive Test - Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel - Diesel Power Magazine
Check it out, does say 2-stroke will help lubricate and may increase mph but very little. Doesn't increase cetane or used as a cleaner. I also never said school is the only way to learn, I worked in shop for 2yrs before school and now in another one. I learn more from experienced techs that have been in business for years!! They know best!! Ok 2-stroke will help lube "SORRY I was mistaken", but doesnt do anything else and IMO which is ONLY an opinion, doesn't pay to use it!! The additives you buy and they sell does it ALL for you!! If your trying to save a couple bux then maybe it's worth it to you, but isn't getting the same qualities as a good additive. I'm no sales man either but it's your own choice.
#76
02-15-2010, 05:58 PM
Diesel Enthusiast
#77
02-15-2010, 06:24 PM
I'm still wondering and waiting to hear an explanation on how 2-stroke or used oil helps?? Some1 show me a site or oem book, you told me to show proof, I did, and your still running out the mouth about experience!! Like you said, I don't know you for jack, lets see proof, not you saying how well it works!!! If it's such a great idea to use it why don't they put it on the bottle, or why isn't it in your owners manual?? Sounds more like some backyard mechanic and hillbilly rumors!!!
https://quickserve.cummins.com/info/.../centinel.html
#78
02-15-2010, 06:38 PM
Diesel Wrench
cool info man, i ran used 15-40 and used tranny fluid in the old 6.2 and she loved it.
---AutoMerged DoublePost---
i think that bio diesel when refined is ok to run, we used to run it in all the trucks and somtimes in the semis, i never tried or seen any one try to run unrefined veggy oil, herd its a pain.
---AutoMerged DoublePost---
i think that bio diesel when refined is ok to run, we used to run it in all the trucks and somtimes in the semis, i never tried or seen any one try to run unrefined veggy oil, herd its a pain.
Last edited by wes-cummins; 02-15-2010 at 06:38 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
#79
02-15-2010, 06:56 PM
cool info man, i ran used 15-40 and used tranny fluid in the old 6.2 and she loved it.
---AutoMerged DoublePost---
i think that bio diesel when refined is ok to run, we used to run it in all the trucks and somtimes in the semis, i never tried or seen any one try to run unrefined veggy oil, herd its a pain.
---AutoMerged DoublePost---
i think that bio diesel when refined is ok to run, we used to run it in all the trucks and somtimes in the semis, i never tried or seen any one try to run unrefined veggy oil, herd its a pain.
#80
02-15-2010, 07:39 PM
I noticed a slight mpg increase with 2 stroke oil,I run 200:1.It also runs quieter and a tad cleaner.I like to run PS grey 200:1 with that too,which makes it run even cleaner.(not sure where the stings the eyes and nose thing,yer not supposed to sniff the jug,
.)(Couldn't hold that back sorry!)But if I can't afford both I just run 2 stroke.I agree that it does settle out of the diesel somewhat,as I can see it in the golden rod filter on my slip tank.Circulate for 10 seconds before I fill my truck and it's fine.So unless you are mixing 50:1 and don't keep more than a 1/16th of a tank of fuel in your truck,no way are you gonna suck up a slug of straight oil.There is plenty of circulation through the return line.I know this because I once rigged up a 5 litre jerry can under the hood to the suck side of the LP to eliminate an air problem I was trying to figure out,and I made it about 5 blocks and ran out of fuel.
...
.)(Couldn't hold that back sorry!)But if I can't afford both I just run 2 stroke.I agree that it does settle out of the diesel somewhat,as I can see it in the golden rod filter on my slip tank.Circulate for 10 seconds before I fill my truck and it's fine.So unless you are mixing 50:1 and don't keep more than a 1/16th of a tank of fuel in your truck,no way are you gonna suck up a slug of straight oil.There is plenty of circulation through the return line.I know this because I once rigged up a 5 litre jerry can under the hood to the suck side of the LP to eliminate an air problem I was trying to figure out,and I made it about 5 blocks and ran out of fuel....
