a-bear’s latest fuel test results with a CAT 1R0755 filter on his Mega filter mount have been added to the fuel test results tables.
Fuel Test Results – PDF (http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO/OC_Dmax.pdf)
Fuel Test Results – Excel (http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO/OC_Dmax.xls)
Also see ISO Contamination Code Table (http://www.edm-mechatronics.com/iso_table.htm) for an explanation of the ISO codes.
The files have also been reformatted and lines added for Water and Cetane Index. Previously posted values for water (ppm) and cetane index have been included. It may be interesting to compare these values along with additive usage at the time samples were taken. If those who have performed fuel tests can post (or email me) water, cetane index and additive used for the respective sample I’ll add this info to the data tables.
Send data to diesel1 at usadatanet dot net
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gif

Thanks for putting that together ..... Excellent info .....


I had no idea The Racor R45S was also running at such a high efficiency ..... Post or pre OEM ??





Mac http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Thumbs Up.gif

I had no idea The Racor R45S was also running at such a high efficiency ..... Post or pre OEM ??


Greg Landuyt had the Racor mount Pre-OEM on a 6.5 diesel. He took a sample from the tank and again at the input to his OEM filter.


Per Racor the "S" media is 88% efficient at 2 micron and 98% efficient at 4 micron. It appears to be approaching those values in this case.





Bill, good update on the Fuel Analysis spreadsheet.





AlanEdited by: OC_DMAX

Bill, good update on the Fuel Analysis spreadsheet...Alan
Thanks Alan!

And by the way for those who haven't seen this data before, Alan was the one who conceived the idea for creating a central location to summarize the all the various fuel filter test results and created the original spreadsheets. (I'm just the custodian).

If anyone would like to add their results including the addition the ppm water, cetane index and additive usage, please send it to diesel1 at usadatanet dot net.


http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gif

Thanks Allen An Bill


Geno

The Fuel Test Data reposts have been updated to include Geno’s latest data as well as some water and cetane index values from earlier reports that Alan had in his archives (Thanks Alan!) Everyone please check their respective data for accuracy.
Fuel Test Results - PDF (http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO/OC_Dmax.pdf)
Fuel Test Results - Excel (http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO/OC_Dmax.xls)
Also Geno, I searched for a description of your set up… did I get it right? Stanadyne FM100 Liftpump/prefilter, OEM and Post OEM Mega Filter?
If anyone else has fuel test data they would like included in the report please post or email me (see signature for address).
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif

Bill


That is the correct system I am running. thanks for all the help.


Geno

Bill


That is the correct system I am running. thanks for all the help.


Geno


Your welcome...My pleasure! http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gif http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif

Added Nick's Water and Cetane numbers...
Fuel Test Results - PDF (http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO/OC_Dmax.pdf)
Fuel Test Results - Excel (http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO/OC_Dmax.xls)
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gif

Update on Geno’s fuel test results:
I heard from Geno today and it turns out his sample was taken from the Mega Filter bleeder port. Since the mega bleeder is on the dirty side the filter, Geno’s test results are measuring the performance of his Stanadyne FM100 5 micron filter (with lift pump) and the OEM filter. His 15/14/11 ISO test results are pretty good considering they don’t include the contribution of the MegaFilter. The fuel coming OUT of his mega will surely have even lower (better) ISO results. This would also imply that an FM100 with a 2-micron element should meet the ISO targets as a PRE-OEM filter.
(The comment block in the fuel test results file has been updated to show Geno’s test conditions)
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gif

Now I know why they call this the dirty valve, Just cost me $70 I think Kennedy should help me pay for another fuel test cause he does not state this in his instructionshttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gifhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Evil Smile.gifhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cry.gif lust kiddin J/K


Dummie

Old guys http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Dead.gif

What is the deal about getting old anyway. Seems like they (we) get dummer http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Wink.gif

Geno,


Don't feel bad.. Your test still yielded some interesting and valuable data that we didn't have ... You can be sure the fuel coming out of your Mega is very clean...http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gif http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif

Bill


Thanks again---- And Hootie Poo yes im only as old as I feel but that don't keep me from getting Duuuuuuuuuh


http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif Geno

Chris's (Chuntag95) Pump and OEM fuel test results have been added to the fuel test results tables (page down).
Fuel Test Results – PDF (http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO/OC_Dmax.pdf)
Fuel Test Results – Excel (http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO/OC_Dmax.xls)
Also added are separate efficiency entries for "All Filters" and "OEM only" for those samples where pump, OEM and overall filter test data is available.
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gifEdited by: jbplock

Bill


Once again thanks





Mac http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Thumbs Up.gif

Geno, Why is your bleeder on the dirty side? (inlet side?) Later! Frank

Bill, I couldn't figure out how to give you my data on the web page.


My water = 45 PPM


Cetane = 48.50


Later! Frank (Lone Eagle)Edited by: Frank Blum

Some of the raw fuel tests are better then dual filtered by others.

It would be nice if you included what setup everyone has on the sheet along with results.

Jbplock,


I really appreciate you collecting data. It is pricelss information. When you list filter effeciancy could you also list target effeciancy? Meaning how close did we get to the ISO standards. List this for OEM as well. Really dirty pump fuel tends to make the OEM look really good and really clean pump fuel tends to make the OEM look really bad when only listing %effeciancy as compared to the pumpfuel. Just a suggestion and once again thanks for the info.

Thanks every one for the feed back. I also want to point out that Alan (OC_Dmax) was the originator of the Fuel Test files and I have just been hosting and maintaining them. Thanks Alan!

Regarding the questions …

Geno, Why is your bleeder on the dirty side? (inlet side?) Later! Frank

Frank,
Geno took his sample from the MegaFilter Bleeder port which (by design) is on the input (dirty) side of the filter. On the Mega head the bleeder is also the highest point – above the filter outlet. His data was a good measure of a 5-micron Stanadyne pre-filter (with lift pump) in front of the OEM. If Geno were to also test at the schrader valve (after the Mega) the results would be even better. And, thanks for supplying your water and cetane numbers... they are in the charts.
Some of the raw fuel tests are better then dual filtered by others. …. It would be nice if you included what setup everyone has on the sheet along with results.
PC,
I hadn’t looked that close at the pump data ISO numbers but JK and CCDS do have fairly good numbers considering they are from the pump. With the exception of Hoot’s data (who acknowledged having some sampling problems) I believe all the double (or triple) filtered fuel ISO code results were better than the best pump fuel ISO codes.
Also, the setups are briefly described at the bottom of each column (easy to miss). We tried to include filter(s) type, location (Pre/Post OEM), lift pump, etc.
... When you list filter efficiency could you also list target efficiency? Meaning how close did we get to the ISO standards. List this for OEM as well. Really dirty pump fuel tends to make the OEM look really good and really clean pump fuel tends to make the OEM look really bad when only listing %efficiency as compared to the pumpfuel...

Bronco,

Basically compare the filtered fuel to the ISO target to calculate effeciancy. You could use the highest allowed count in each target code. Then calculate a percentage. Thie will tell you a filter true effeciancy. The way it is currently being done only tells you your results compared to the unfilterd sample. if you look at Nicktanes website you will see what I mean. His little gas station on the corner has some of the dirtest fuel in the world. After you put it through the OEM it comes out fairly clean. %wise it looks real good. On the flip side if you start with really really clean fuel there is just not as much dirt for the OEM to remove in the firstplace. It makes the filter look like it didn't do much work. Because it didn't. Let me know if you are following me? You don't want me to have to break out some formulas. That could get ugly.

Bronco,
OK I get it now.. Good idea... http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gif Use the max particle counts associated with each ISO target and the measured particle counts to calculate a percentage. That would be an interesting exercise.. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gif I'll play around with the numbers later this evening and post the results. Or, if someone else would like to do it please feel free...
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gifEdited by: jbplock

OK... BUT IN PLAIN TALK, HOW GOOD IS POST CAT FILTER + OEM?


WHERE DOES IT RANK IN THE OVERALL 1-10 SCALE?