With all the discussion on clean fuel, where do fuel additives fit in? Looking at the total power site, ( I believe JK uses their products) they advertise that their product increases fuel lubricity and emulsifies moisture.


Questions:


1. Would the additional lubricity be beneficial to injection pumps?


2. Would emulsifying the moisture assist with corrosion problems within the OEM Racor filter?





Thanks!

I believe that the poor quality of diesel fuel around running an additive is probably beneficial.


I have heard that total power is a good product.


GMC http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cool.gif

I've used Total Power. I now use Stanadyne Performance.
Don't ask me why, I have nothing that says one is better than the other.

Total Power sends the water through the injection system supposedly in an emulsified state.

I believe Stanadyne does the opposite, allowing our filters to remove it.

The word is be sure they do not contain alchohol.

Goerge Morrison, the diesel fuel guru at AVLube.com also recommends Primrose 405 and 409 (winter). He strongly recommends emilsifiers that pick-up and carry the water out of the system and into combustion rather than de-emulisfiers that rid the diesel of water and which can cause water to drop out anywhere in the system.

I've use power service from wally world without a problem. 50k later...still running like new.

Ive been running the Standadyne...and before that I was running FPPF/Total Power. All of these products smell the same even the Amsoil Cetane Boost. I dont know if the are all composed simularly? Personally I think my trucks the smoothest with Standadyne, but no real proof to go on but opinion... I didnt buy it from some discount place but a local dealer...Think its like 7.20 for a bottle that treats 60 gallons. No proof it cleans up/ helps present injector issues as Predator doesnt really show any difference before/aft using it.


In winter, no one agrees with me on this but we have done it for years, is we just add a few gallons of kero when we fill up, We havent had a gelling problem in almost 10 years... If we do its usually the Ol' Ironsides garbage truck that has a Cat 3208NA

This is one of those things that as long as you're using a good quality name product, probably doesn't hurt, but whether or not it does any real good, hard to say.


I did remember hearing(take with a grain of salt) once that certain additivies while they add cetane can actually lower btu's of the fuel a small percentage resulting in lower fuel economy.


In my case I run the FPPF in every tank. It doesn't cost much(4oz+/-) a tankfull with my 26gal.


Whether or not it does me good, bad or no difference, well I can't see the internals so I truly can't answer. This is one of those things that we need time and lots of feedback on to get a baseline.


Although until I get some real answers one way or the other, I;m thinking it's a good thing.

I think the choice you need to make is who you beleive. People like George Morrison with years of fuel experience is my choice. He says to use an additive that locks up the water and passes it through the system. This equals the Total Power or the Primrose. I'm more comfortable knowing smalll quantites of water are held in suspension and not allowed to sit loose in my system. Of course if there is a big hit of water it will get caught in the filter, I hope!!

I use a Racor secondary fuel filter that claims to use a special filter media treatment called "aquablock". This supposedly blocks water from passing through. In my case, I'm thinking if the water is in suspension, this filter may not do it's job. I like the idea of stopping water as completely as possible before the injection system.

George's suggestion may be based on water buildup in the tank and/or no water repellent type filters.

Either way, I'm no expert on fuel additives. Edited by: hoot

Anyone familiar with Schaeffer's Neutra fuel treatment, thanks.


Ron

I understand generally that Schaeffer products have a good reputation, but I'm not familiar with their additive. I use Redline Oil's 85Plus diesel additive. It is also an emulsifier. Redline makes a winterized version, but I've only used the straight stuff, which is all the local distributor I go to carries. The truck seems to run a little smoother when it's in the tank. I've run it for almost a year now with no apparent ill effects.

TC

Roegs-


In April GM issued a bulletin modifying their position of no diesel fuel additives to one that it is ok if the owner see fit. A few guidlines were listed.


"This information pertains to 1994-2003 vehicles with 6.5L or 6.6L Diesel Engine (VINs F, P, S, Y, 1 -- RPOs L65, L49, L56, L57, LB7). (fig. 1)


IMPORTANT: Only alcohol-free water demulsifiers should be used in General Motors Diesel engines. Both Racor® and Stanadyne® diesel fuel additives are alcohol-free and utilize water demulsifiers to cope with water in the fuel. Other brands may be available in different areas. Before using them, be sure they clearly state that they are alcohol-free demulsifiers.


(We believe these sources and their products to be reliable. General Motors does not endorse, indicate any preference for or assume any responsibility for the products from this firm or for any such items, which may be available from other sources.)
Water Emulsifiers and Demulsifiers
Fuel additives must be selected carefully. There are two common methods that fuel additives use to cope with water in the fuel.

Demulsification causes water particles to combine together to form larger particles, which drop out of suspension. This allows the fuel filter/water separator to separate the water from the fuel as it is designed to.

Emulsification keeps water particles suspended in the fuel. Alcohol is frequently used as the emulsifier. Emulsification can allow water to get past the fuel filter/water separator, in most cases causing damage to the fuel system."

Sounds like GM doesn't like Total Power or the Primrose.

There are diesel fuel additives and then there are additives. Some are high quality, really useful. Primrose and FPPF are two that I have many years experience with. The advantages to a diesel fuel system with Primrose 405 are: 1. Cetane boost in the 4 to 5 range depending on base stock quality. 2. Lubricity enhancement. 3. Emulsion of free water, to tie it up, surrounding the water molecule with a lubrcating barrier so it can safely pass through our fuel system. 4. rust and corrosion prevention 5. detergency to keep the complete fuel system including injector tips clean and performing optimally. 6. Functioning as a bacteriastat in that if there is no free water in the system, there will be no water/fuel point for bacteria to propagate.
All packed into one ounce per tankful... A modest investment for a pretty effective insurance policy. Plus continued optimum performance. With so much marginal 40 to 45 cetane diesel fuel on the market, our high performance Duramax engines thrive on a 50 cetane! Yes, you can feel the difference with the Duramax.. And yes, my position is contrary to that published by GM. However, Primrose/FPPF fuel additves do not contain alcohols but do tie up free water. We have run numeous before/after fuel tests on the Duramax OEM fuel filter/water separation system which clearly indicates what goes in comes out the other side unaffected.. i.e. a 90 ppm water level in yields a 90 ppm water out of the water separator.. Moreover, if one gets a 'slug' of water in a diesel fuel load, not even the Primrose or FPPF is going to be able to emulsify that much water, nor will the water separator; your truck will announce loudly that there is a water problem!
George Morrison, STLE CLS Edited by: Georgecls

Thanks George! I figured you'd be over here on the new page. :)

Ok got to get my nose in here.What happens if we have injector,lines,pump problems and they find so called "water" damage somewhere on the wrong side of filter.Maybe the dealer says oh well, or maybe he says emulsifier no warranty you pay and if you have a problem with that we will send your fuel for a test and charge you if positive resultshttp://dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cry.gif.All that being said I use Stanadyne "GM approved" and find a big differance when I forget to add to my tank.Also the other day I was talking to our local Bosch diesel service center and his opinion was do not try to make the water go past the filter by using a emulsifier, use nothing or a demulsifier.So that is His,GM,Mine,and he says Bosch's opinion. If I am missing something just let me know.I just think using non GM approved product might cause problem's if we have fuel related trouble.Which a few seem to be having. Oh by the way great site and it's FREEhttp://dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif

It sounds to me like George is saying that the filter really does not seem to trap entrained water, so it is best to try to break it up and wrap a lubricant around it. Also, I would say what the dealer don't know won't hurt him. Don't volunteer that you are using FPPF or primrose....


I think I might just keep a bottle of stanadyne around...if I have problems where the dealer might be interested, time for a double slug in the tank. If anyone wants to sample, let 'em try to figure that one out! http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif

CS-DMAX


I agree maybe George is right but GM and Bosch say no and GM does the warranty.So my point being if you use something that they say not to and have a problem you should be prepared just in case, as you have said to cover your a$$.My opinion is after 2 years of the Duramax being on the market GM comes out and says use a demulsifier if you want to,after doing checks on their many warranty claims I'm sure .Now if they thought water was getting past the filter and causing a problem they could have just as easy have said emulsifier instead but they didn't.So after 2 years of warranty research is GM wronghttp://dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif maybe I don't know.I have lots of questions but few answers.Something to think about anyway.http://dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Ermm.gif

One of the easiest way for GM/Dealer to get around warranty claims on a diesel is 'visible corrosion due to water'. I work with construction companies that literally have hundreds of 6.5's and Duramax service verhicles. In case after case, they had been writing multi-thousand dollar checks for pump and system repairs due to disallow of warranty due to obvious water damage/corrosion. Not that the component was damaged from water; in most cases it was just a physical, unrelated failure. However, free water is the number one cause of warranty disallow. Soooo, if one wants to address the #1 cause of warranty disallow in addition to providing all the other benefits that a high quality fuel additive can bring...??? One recent trip to a local GM service center had 3 trucks sitting out back as the $3,000+ estimate for repairs for each was beyond each owner's budget; the trucks had been there for several weeks. All three trucks were under the mileage/time warranty limit but all three had fuel system corrosion..
Since the EPA pronounced that diesel fuel bottom water is hazardous, many fewer operations are drawing bottom water off diesel fuel storage tanks. Both free and entrained water is now present in much higher quantities than in years past. As we have seen in fuel test after fuel test, the Stanadyne water separator is relatively ineffective (some say totally) at removing water. Even with a de-emulsifying fuel additive, the minute the vehicle starts up and begins moving, that separated water goes right back into loose emulsion and will not be removed by the water separator. Now, when the vehicle shuts down again and the loosely emulsified water that has passed by the water separator has time to sit, yes, it will once again separate out, settle and proceed to cause corrosion, rust and on start-up potential damaging results..
George Morrison, STLE CLS

Welcome George.

How about the emulsifier types. How well do they work at keeping the water in emulsion?

Racor claims their "Aquablock" filter media repels water. It's all kind of confusing. Emulsify, block, trap, let it run through.

I figured using the aquablock and two filters with water traps, the Stanadyne formula would complement the whole system. The idea being stopping water before it gets into the high pressure pump.

Are we sure emulsifing makes a difference?

Since you stated that the Stanadyne water seperator does little to seperate water, I think I will go back to FPPF when this case runs out.Edited by: hoot

I have used Amsoil, Stanadyne and now FPPF. I got one drop of water out, one time and that was with the Stanadyne. IMO our OEM filters don't do diddly for filtering water out. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Angry.gif

Hoot: re your comments: "I figured using the aquablock and two filters with water traps, the Stanadyne formula would complement the whole
system. The idea being stopping water before it gets into the high pressure pump." This sounds wonderful in theory; unfortunately from all the real world fuel tests we have run, we have not seen these separators or water repelling filter mediums have any affect whatsoever on entrained water. Diesel fuel emulsifiers work very well locking up emulsified water with normal levels of water that exist in diesel fuel. Gravitational settling *will* occur without chemical enhancement. If one gets a significant amount of water from a bad fueling, no, the fuel emulsifier additive will not be able to emulsify an extremely high level of water content and it will then be left to the water separator to do its job. Moreover having free water anywhere in our diesel system is not good. Using a product that actually chemically promotes free water is going to create more problems than it solves, from my experience...
George Morrison

Well that definately settles that.

Thank you George.

George, check your PM


Steve

Just curious, but what would happen if one were to put both types of additives in at the same time? No plans to do so, but I wonder who would "win", or would they merely cancel each other out as far as water is concerned?


In a previous debate at the other page a while back, I remember someone running a demulsifier talking about instaling a valve at the low point of the fuel tank so they could periodically drain any water that accumulates. Anyone know if this has been tried? Do any of the larger aftermarket tanks come with such a feature?

George


I have been a lurker on TDP for a couple of years and have followed your posts since the first few.In reading your many posts and answers to questions I feel that I can call you a expert.So if I may would like to ask a question or two.After two years of the Duramax being out GM came out and said use a de-emulsifier not a emulsifier, if you want to use anything in your truck.This I would think is based on two years of warranty work done and parts checked by GM HQ.So is GM wrong and maybe causing us more damage to our fuel system and then maybe refusing to do warranty because we used Stanadyne and cause free water, which you said is causing problems in our systems?This is not what I think GM should be telling the public if you are correct.George I am not trying to argue with you just trying to get this staight in my head.Is it possible that emulsified water in diesel could separate after the filter and cause the same problem as you said de-emulsifier use can?Also I would think that if you use what GM says to use and their water separator does not do the job and causes damage to our system you would have a real good small claims court case "maybe", if they refused warranty.As I said above not trying to argue just to get expert answers and opinions

Stanadyne builds water separators. Stanadyne's water separators work better at separating "free" water from diesel fuel if a de-emulsifier is used. Not perfectly, however.. That said, in the real world of vibrating, shaking, diesel engines and trucks, getting free water into loose emulsion occurs almost instantly after engine start-up; even with a de-emulsifier added.. Therefore the possibility of free water settle anywhere in our system is greatly increased as it *will* occur with the de-emulsifier additization.. Therefore corrosion will very likely occur in the diesel fuel system.. The greatest single cause of warranty dis-allow is corrosion/rust, from my experience.. Thus, in one manner, the use of a de-emulsifying additive may in fact reduce valid warranty claims and resulting warranty payments for a manufacturer.. George

But for some reason George, I believe GM put out a statement mentioning Stanadyne and others as OK to use.

Marketing Bulletin #MB 2059, May 2003
GM Approval of Stanadyne Performance Formula®
“Information on Diesel Fuel Additives”, GM Bulletin # 03-06-04-017; March 13, 2003

Information on Diesel Fuel Additives #03-06-04-017
The use of diesel fuel additives is not required or recommended for the 6.5L diesel or the 6.6L Duramax® Diesel engine under normal conditions. The filtering system is designed to block water and contaminants without the use of additives. However, some customers may desire to use fuel additives to improve the characteristics of available diesel fuels.

Water Emulsifiers and Demulsifiers
If the customer desires to use a fuel additive, care must be taken in its selection. There are two common methods that fuel additives use to cope with water in the fuel. One method is through demulsification of water in the fuel. This method causes water particles to combine together to form larger particles, which drop out of suspension. This allows the fuel filter/water separator to separate the water from the fuel as it is designed to. The other method of coping with water in the fuel is through emulsification. This method, often using alcohol as the emulsifier, keeps water particles suspended in the fuel. Emulsification of water in the fuel can allow water to get past the fuel filter/water separator, in most cases causing damage to the fuel system.

Only alcohol free water demulsifiers should be used in General Motors diesel engines. Both *Racor® and *Stanadyne® diesel fuel additives are alcohol free and utilize water demulsifiers to cope with water in the fuel. Other brands may be available in different areas; be sure that they clearly state that they are alcohol free demulsifiers before use.

*We believe these sources and their products to be reliable. General Motors does not endorse, indicate any preference for or assume any responsibility for the products from these firms or for any such items which may be available from other sources.Edited by: hoot

Regarding your comment:"But for some reason George, I believe GM put out a statement mentioning Stanadyne and others as OK to use". Could it be the same reason they equipped our Duramax OEM with a diesel fuel filter that is 50% efficient at removing the fuel system life shortening contaminants?? Hmmmm......
George

Now the question is..... who has the most experience with diesel fuel and filtering....

History has shown it ain't GM.

Hoot, regarding "Now the question is..... who has the most experience with diesel fuel and filtering". That is an excellent question, very pertinent, and frankly is *the* problem. We have gone from 3,000 psi diesel fuel systems that would process visible dirt to 25,000 to 35,000 psi systems that require 'jet fuel' level cleanliness and dryness. And as a result, no one really does have a long history of dealing with state of the art diesel fuel requirements.. CAT was one of the first to realize they had fuel system problems trying to work with 20 year old diesel fuel specifications and has been working arduously toward very high filtration standards. Even to the point of building a completely automated filter factory to enable zero tolerance levels. We are in the 'right now' with respect to dealing with these issues.
George

I'm on the Primorose 405, emulsifier with a CAT 2 mic filter.


What does CAT recommend: Emulsify, or, demulisfy?

Regarding CAT's position: to Emulsify or demulsify... From the Caterillar "Operation and Maintenance Manual, Fluids Recommendations": "In cold conditions, treatment for entrained water may also be necessary"...
Now, that clearly answers that question! :-)
George Morrison

Thanks George. I'll stick to the Primrose 405 and go to the 409 if I'm going into snow/cold up the mountains.

I've been using Power Service since the vehicle was new - it's easy to find at any Wally World. It says it does everything we want it to do - including lubricate the injectors.... I've got a 2001 model so I'm expecting the injectors to start to go south at any time.... I'll let you know in another 75,000 miles.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gif Currently have 27,798 trouble-free miles http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gif

I think fuel additives are a big waste of money. I read and hear that people buy fuel additives to help fuel mileage. They forget to add the $5 per tank of fuel they spend on additives, yet they bitch about the cost of fuel. Makes no sense to me. Save your money for better things. Then again, it's your money, spend it where you like.Edited by: hdmax

I don't buy my fuel additive to increase my fuel mileage.

My injectors can use all the help they can get. Especially when they get over 100,000 miles...

Mike, regarding your comment "They forget to add the $5 per tank of fuel they spend on additives" Primrose 405, for example requires one OUNCE per tankful which works out to about 50 cents per tank. For the 50 cents one gets 1) 5+ cetane boost, 2) lubricity enhancer for the injectors, pump 3) corrosion protection 4) elimination/minimization of free water and its associated potential damage 5) with the elimination of the free water, elimination of bacteria spawning grown; i.e. bacteriastat 6)detergency to keep the system and injector tips clean. All for 50 cents a tank... Other fuel conditioners offer the same types of benficiation also. Have you read any of the fuel analysis results that have been posted on various sites? Some diesel cetane just barely meets minimum; some does not.. Pretty inexpensive insurance policy in my opinion.
George Morrison

Mike


If you were talking about gas additives I would agree.Diesel now that's a different story I still have a open mind mainly due to being able to here the change in sound of the motor for one and additives for two save the injectors "maybe" for three.The problem I have is GM says one thing, Kennedy and George say another and Mike says something else.It would seem the more you know the better the chance of making a infomed wrong choice.Not really but sure seems so some times.I think we need a poll of the board emulsifier,demulsifier,save your money and buy beer.What do yah think

You can always count on Hoot to ask the questions that put someone to their proof. And I don't mean this sarcastically. He steadfastly resists the temptation to take things at face value or simply to take someone's word for it. That kind of probing goes a long way toward separating the facts from the fiction.

I don't know the answer to who has the most experience. Nor do I know whether either side of the emulsify/de-emulsify debate is acting in a manner consistent with that experience or whether their recommendations, GM's for example, might stem less from engineering and more from liability avoidance.

But, in this one, and for myself alone, I decided to go with George's recommendation, clasping my hands and hoping he has the experience and expertise he says he does and that his informed judgement correctly reflects what appears to be the more progresive views of fuel system water management. I will say, though, that after nearly a year of using an emusifying additive and 20,000 miles, my truck purrs. George's advice, my choice. So far, so good.

TC

Low sulphur/low lubricity is also hard on the injector pump so I figure it will also benefit from some additive. On the other hand Brokers claimed 2 of his trucks have gone 400,000+ w/o additives, only secondary fuel filtration and only one bad injector between them.


I have the 45 gal transfer flow replacement tank. So, 2.5 oz of Primorose 405 per tankful seems too miniscule to be of any benefit but George says it's some really concentrated stuff.

And I must say that I understand GM's position very well. There are many diesel fuel additives that are of minimal value; there are some diesel fuel additives on the market that can do physical harm to our state of the art diesel injection systems. I agree that we cannot just use any diesel fuel additive. Nor can GM require the use of a certain diesel fuel additive. And with their long standing relationship with Stanadyne, pretty difficult to suggest an additive from one of the many companies who they do not have a relationship with.
Moreover please keep in mind that the aspects of fuel we are discussing on this site are light years ahead of the knowledge base of most multi-hundred truck fleet operators who buy millions of dollars of diesel fuel a month! The variety of views expressed and discussed here is fantastic! At a recent fleet industry meeting I attended there were NO views expressed as there was absolutely no knowledge of anything with respect to diesel fuel *except* the common, serious problem of skyrocketing costs for fuel system maintenance.
George MorrisonEdited by: Georgecls