I bought 15 gal of B100. I put 5 in the truck w/20 gallons of diesel, the other in two jugs to take with me. Went from eastern OH to Indy to St. Louis and back. I put one of the jugs in on the next fillup along with 24 gals of diesel. So far, I can't really tell any difference in operation. The exhaust doesn't have that pungent odor it had before, but there is no smell like french fries. I suppose the cat is doing its thing. I think I will probably continue to put 5 gals in with each fillup. That will end up somewhere around 16%, because it usually takes 30 gals to fill. I put one of the jugs in the front a couple of hours before I had to fill up. I was afraid it was clouding, so I let the heater blow on it until I stopped for diesel. I put the bio in, then drove up to the pump and filled it all the way. Mileage seems identical, got 26 mpg just like before. (I have supplemental lp) So far so good.

Marcdeluca,

You will not get a FF smell with only B16---i did not get it with about B70. What you do notice is a lack of that Diesel odor. Every little bit helps...Bioblend...ULSD and CAT.

Blending in Tank can be tricky....the research I found is to put Bio in last since it is heavier?? Maybe some idling after putting it in helps recirculate and mix??

Do you have guages?? IF so did the egt's change with your bioblend and propane?

Thanks

I don't have an egt gauge. I plan to get one soon. I have been curious to know if the egts have been lower with the propane. My guess is that they are because it runs less boost w/lp. At 70 mpg, w/o lp it runs 4 lbs, w/lp it runs 2.5. I read on some lp fumigation site that lp lowers egts, but that may be at low load levels. I haven't trailered with this truck, so it doesn't ever have to work hard.

I noticed a significant difference in smell with b20, but I dont have a cat.

I ran B100 for a tank and it smelled like popcorn not french fries. I have changed my fuel filter and now will run a mix of approx B20 for a while. The only things I noticed that changed were the smell and the noise. Even though the DMAX is pretty quiet for a diesel, it wasn't as loud as fosil fuel for some reason. I am thinking the lubrication benefits are worth it I guess?

I couldn't tell any difference in the noise level, but the amount of lp I use quiets it down quite a bit already. I was talking to a bio dealer yesterday, he said that if you could buy 7500 gals, you could get it for about half of what he sells it for. Trouble is, it only keeps for 6 months, even if you did want to lay out that much money to save some.

You Know that is where a Co-op comes in a makes a bulk purchase and saves money...diesel is probably going to keep rising short term....I think I'd rather run the b100 if the prices are close say within 10 -15cents a gallon.

marcdeluca,

Sounds like you've found the right approach to "splash blending" in the fuel tank: Room temperature biodiesel blended with the petrodiesel with the truck warmed up.

At the beginning of last winter I added petrodiesel and Power Service on top of a 1/3 tank of mostly BD. The cold BD did not blend. It gelled separately and sat at the bottom of the tank; N.G. with a bottom-of-tank fuel pickup. The truck then starved for fuel as soon as temps went below 15-20 F. I ended up getting the tank drained, and an Artic Fox coolant loop heater put in the tank; http://www.arctic-fox.com/. [ Our VW has a floating pickup, so it would run OK until it hit "the lump", then die. We ran half tanks of petro all last winter. When temps finally got above around 70, the BD un-gelled. ]

This winter I've been adding warm BD to each vehicle when they're warmed up or the temp is well above freezing. Then I go out and fill the tank up the rest of the way with dino to finish the blend. Been safely running between B10 and B25 all winter, including with temps below 0 degrees F.

King Nuzz, after reading your post I'm really glad I put the jug in the front with me for a few hours. I doubt it was anywhere near room temp, but it had to have helped some. What alot of trouble you had! I'm glad winter is winding down if I am going to continue to use this stuff!

Update. I am now on my third tank of approx 20% bio. My second tank got exactly 30 mpg. (All highway, 70 mph, LP gas on full time) It does seem a bit quieter at highway speed. I bought another 10 gal today, and carry it with me for my out of state fillups. So far, running like a top.

30 mpg!?!?!?

You sure your math is correct?

He is running LP as well.

Ben

I wasnt aware that that is good for 30% increase in mileage........

I am not sure that it is! Are those people including the number of gallons of LP that they use when they calculate their "fuel mileage"?:eek:

We gotta remember that LP is "fuel" too when calculating "fuel mileage"...

753 miles/(20 gal diesel +5 gal B100) = 30.1 mpg. I would make it use more lp, but the cruise control can't hold the speed steady because it only controls the diesel fuel part. You can run up to 85% lp on a diesel. Since I still have over 1500 gal of lp that I got for $1.09, it really helps my cost/mile. I get 30 mpg on lp, so that comes to 3.6¢/mile. Running straight diesel (no bio) at $2.17/gal comes to 7.2¢/mile for a total of 10.8¢/mile. If I had no lp on, no bio, it would be $2.17/18 mpg for 12¢/mile. Running bio at 20% with $3.09/gal of B100, added to the $2.17 diesel raises the cost/gal of the blend to $2.35. So, $2.35/30 is 7.8¢ + 3.6¢ for 11.4¢/mile. So, I am still saving .5¢/mile using the lp and bio instead of straight diesel. Using 20% bio w/o lp would push me up to 13¢/mile. I realize that the lp doesn't make any large difference, but the quieter running and beautiful oil and great power are nice side benefits.

I took the Dmax from eastern OH to Des Moines and back through St. Louis. Running steady 70 mph, diesel mileage came to 31.4 mpg. (918 miles on first tank, took 5 gal B100 and 24.2 gal diesel) I installed the EGR blockoff plate a few thousand miles ago, it has helped the mileage some. I had been averaging 26 to 29 before the plate. Still running the B100 5 gal to a fillup, have consumed 25 gal so far.

Marcdeluca -


Your post contains a lot of information, but re-reading didn't help me understand what your combined (LP and diesel) fuel mileage is...? I am saying that you are simply trading one fuel for another. With the lower BTU/gallon content of LP, I am skeptical that you are actually getting better "fuel mileage".

BTW, how are you getting 30MPG anyway? Are you reading this off info (gallons used, avg. MPG, etc) off the DIC? If you were to take your trip mileage and then divide that by your diesel and LP fuel consumed (with a calculator) then I would not be so confused about your claim...

You can approximate the volume (gallons) of LP consumed by dividing the weight of LP consumed by 5 (lbs/gallon)

Please let us know your true combined fuel mileage...

Thank you,

I think Marcdeluca is using a mix of 50/50...diesel/lp.

His analysis shows that his cost is just lower than running straight diesel at 2.17/gal.

The Mpg is reported for each component...the combined would be around 15mpg...but since lp at 1.09 is soo low...you still come out ahead cost wise..plus all the other benefits mentioned.

I hope I got that right.

What RonJT said! I don't have the DIC mileage calculator, these figures are all by hand. I wish it was easier for me to quantify the lp mileage, but I don't have a meter on my tank. The way I measured the 30 mpg was I this: I weighed a 10 lb bottle empty. I filled it, and weighed it again. I got exactly 10 lbs in it. I waited until I got on the interstate, then hooked it up. I got exactly 70 miles before it ran out. LP weighs 4.25 lbs/gal, which comes to 2.3 gal. 70/2.3 = 30 mpg. That was at a steady 70 mph. The diesel/lp proportion changes depending on load. It seems that the heavier the load, the higher the lp ratio. So running steady 70, I got 31.5 mpg on diesel, but another tank that had alot of 60 mph got 29 mpg. You know the truck used more combined fuel/mile doing the higher speed, so it had to be more lp.

What RonJT said! I don't have the DIC mileage calculator, these figures are all by hand. I wish it was easier for me to quantify the lp mileage, but I don't have a meter on my tank. The way I measured the 30 mpg was I this: I weighed a 10 lb bottle empty. I filled it, and weighed it again. I got exactly 10 lbs in it. I waited until I got on the interstate, then hooked it up. I got exactly 70 miles before it ran out. LP weighs 4.25 lbs/gal, which comes to 2.3 gal. 70/2.3 = 30 mpg. That was at a steady 70 mph. The diesel/lp proportion changes depending on load. It seems that the heavier the load, the higher the lp ratio. So running steady 70, I got 31.5 mpg on diesel, but another tank that had alot of 60 mph got 29 mpg. You know the truck used more combined fuel/mile doing the higher speed, so it had to be more lp.Marcdeluca -

I understand exactly what your doing. I just think that it is intellectually dishonest to claim 30+MPG from what you are doing!

You HAVE to divide the mileage accumulated by the propane AND diesel fuel consumed to get the actual MPG's.

For example: Let's say I run my truck on horse farts, hydrazine, diesel fuel, potato mash, corn gluten, and tofu.

I drove 5000 mile and only used 2.7oz of corn gluten.
2.7oz * 40lbs/gallon= .000423 gallons of corn gluten
5000miles / .000423 gallons (corn gluten) = 11,820,000 MPG

I am not trying to rain on your parade. My point is that with the high cost of fuel these days, there are many people that are looking for the "magic MPG" bullet. I want people (including me) to understand that your claimed 30 MPG, is not TRULY 30 MPG as others calculate their (#2 only) mileage!!!!! Before others go out and buy (or build) LP injection systems, someone needs to point out that you do not get something (30MPG) for nothing.

Please tell me that I am missing something and that you are TRULY getting a "combined" 30 MPG...:help2:

Thanks

I think Marcdeluca is using a mix of 50/50...diesel/lp.

His analysis shows that his cost is just lower than running straight diesel at 2.17/gal.

The Mpg is reported for each component...the combined would be around 15mpg...but since lp at 1.09 is soo low...you still come out ahead cost wise..plus all the other benefits mentioned.

I hope I got that right.
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

If this is the right answer, I think that I won't waste my time and money on an LP system. I understand that you are "still saving .5¢/mile" but have you factored the cost of the LP system into that?

Still trying to get this straight...

Goldsburg,

I think the cost of most off the shelf LP systems are high. Total kits I priced...tank, regulator and remote fill kit are over $1000.00. But Marcdeluca has pieced one together for much lower cost.

The other issue here is driving range on diesel only. IF you are getting 30mpg vs say 19 mpg then on a 26 gallon tank it would be the same as if you had a 41 gallon tank(30/19*26gallons).

Driving range improvement is usually done by buying a bigger tanks...which are not cheap! They are about $700 to $1000 dollars. Those tanks range from 45 to 53 gallons with usable fuel around 5-7 gallons less than the full amount.

So Lp gives you the benefit of driving range, more power...as if you had a moderate program..and reduce engine wear becaue you are burning cleaner.

Strictly from a mileage improvement only...the system does not pay for itself...but when you consider the other benefits...it will depend on how you use your truck and the value you put on the benefits mentioned.

So does the "combined fuel" (#2D and LP) mileage really work out to about 15MPG? I would like for marcdeluca to answer.

That is what I am really looking for.:help2:

I see how there is supposed to be a cost benefit (of 5 cents per mile according to marcdeluca, himself) and understand the cleaner burning aspects, etc.

You can't just add the two mpgs together. It has to be determined by summing the individual cost/mile since the two fuels are so different in btus and cost. What I am doing is not a magic bullet. The way I see it, if I save anything per mile it is an improvement. Yes, I could slow down to 50 mph and save more than doing the things I'm doing, and do it on straight diesel. For me, the benefits outweigh the hassle. For most, it probably wouldn't. I have run lp for 15 years in gas motors and have grown fond of clean engines. I appreciate a dipstick that always looks like the oil was just changed. So if I can save a bit and have some more power, run quieter, etc, why not?

Uggggggggghhhhhhhh :rolleyes:

1. I am not berating you for what you are doing. If you like LP and think that it works for you, that is awesome! :boxing:

2. I understand your position on the cost factor (0.5 cents/mile savings per your earlier comment).

3. I am not adding your MPG's together.

4. MPG and cost are not related. They are totally independent variables.

5. I am only interested in your total (combined) fuel economy (no $$$$ needed here)

5. What is your Miles Per Gallon when you consider that you are consuming diesel and LP as you go down the road? I do not want to hear "

"I got exactly 70 miles before it ran out. LP weighs 4.25 lbs/gal, which comes to 2.3 gal. 70/2.3 = 30 mpg"

In this example, you are calculating your MPG with the LP only! What is it when you calculate with both the diesel and LP consumed over those 70 miles (or other distance)?

Can you not distinctly answer because you haven't documented the total gallons (weight, whatever) of LP consumed with a tank of diesel? If so, that is understandable. But it just seems like you are ducking the question...?


I appreciate your patience. I am just trying to get the answer about "combined" fuel economy to tell ME if it is worth it or not (I already know that it is worth it to you)... :duh:

Unless you can get lp cheap, it isn't worth doing from a cost per mile standpoint.