OC_Dmax pointed me to a presentation from Bosch to CARB on what is needed in U.S. fuels for lubricity standard and where the U.S. stands today in terms of fuel quality.


http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/gasoline/meeting/2003/022003bosch.pdf


Note that the fuel samples were taken in summer 2002; Doesn't winter blend have even lower lubricity?


jeffEdited by: dmax lover

This sure makes one think about premature failures and why some of these could be occuring in the high pressure systems in the Duramax and other high pressure systems.


MAYBE SOME OF THE FAILURES ARE DUE TO POOR LUBRICITY & CONTAMINATION OF TODAYS FUEL ? As you stated these are summer time fuel samples not being cut with kerosene which is providing even less lubricity.
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">


This can only re-afirm lubricity and clean ( low particle count ) fuel is a must for long life high pressure injection systems.


I also noted Page #23, 4th Bullet on Page states:All high pressure fuel lubricated injection systems are excedingly lubricity sensitive and require clean fuels ( no free water and/or contamination )</BLOCKQUOTE>





Sorry for the rant http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Angry.gif about this, but I feel fuel quality is a bigger issue than most people may believe.


Fran

Slide #8 sums it up pretty well - down near the bottom of the slide, only 80% of the fuel samples taken in the U.S. would meet european standards for lubricity.


For those of you who are from the "right coast" - CARB is "California Air Resources Board" - Kalifornia's EPA. The rest of the country usually follows along with what they do; California was the first to mandate low sulfer fuel, etc...


jeffEdited by: dmax lover

I couldn't get the link to load. But bear in mind that CARB's requirements were known to GM and Bosch when they designed, produced, and sold the systems to us. They bear a responsibility to take the real world into consideration when putting products into the stream of commerce. If knowing the playing field they failed to provide the necessary filtration or whatever to ensure that their products would work as represented we ought not to be required to make it right for them, which of course we appear to be doing. Thank God for Nick and others who've stepped up to fill the void left by GM's lack of responsibility or foresight.

TC

So who can test our fuel around here?

What is the lubricity of Primrose (1.6oz/25gal 405) additive when added to the fuel in our tanks?

Do we need to run an additive that removes water (demulsify)?

Can anyone test the fuel for lubricants?Edited by: problemchild

And yes, I agree totally that system life can be significantly extended not only by filtration but by lubricity enhancement.. There are many products on the market that fulfill that role superbly. (Primrose 405 comes to mind :-) )
However, if we have dirty fuel, lubricity to the 9s will not extend injector life one iota.. The keystone of all of this is diesel fuel cleanliness, then lubricity, from my experience.. I am afraid I could write a book studies we have done regarding lubricity vs. contamination and affects on variable piston/pump/servo valve life.
That is why I was so concerned with the Bosch studies; not one mention of cleanliness standards in any of their work and yet if one fuel was a 25/23/21 vs. another fuel that was a 17/15/13, that in itself would provide significant wear data differentiations..
For Discussion....
George Morrison

I was really tired when I made my last post...


I said...


"...only 80% of the fuel samples taken in the U.S. would meet european standards for lubricity."


When I should have said...


"...80% of the fuel samples taken in the U.S. would NOT meet european standards for lubricity".


jeff

Well that's betterhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Ermm.gif

And yes, I agree totally that system life can be significantly extended not only by filtration but by lubricity enhancement.. There are many products on the market that fulfill that role superbly. (Primrose 405 comes to mind :-) )
However, if we have dirty fuel, lubricity to the 9s will not extend injector life one iota.. The keystone of all of this is diesel fuel cleanliness, then lubricity, from my experience.. I am afraid I could write a book studies we have done regarding lubricity vs. contamination and affects on variable piston/pump/servo valve life.
That is why I was so concerned with the Bosch studies; not one mention of cleanliness standards in any of their work and yet if one fuel was a 25/23/21 vs. another fuel that was a 17/15/13, that in itself would provide significant wear data differentiations..
For Discussion....
George Morrison


The Bosch presentation puts forth a lubricity standard to CARB for adoption. It shows the current state of affairs due to the lack of standardization in this area. You can bet the wear studies were apples to apples in terms of cleanliness of fuel - they are engineers, I trust them with "the little stuff"...


As a sidenote, water in emulsion washes away that higher level of lubrication that our High pressure fuel injection requires. For Discussion...


jeff

Jeff,
Regarding your comment "As a sidenote, water in emulsion washes away that higher level of lubrication that our High pressure fuel injection requires. For Discussion..."
No, water in emulsion that is contained, chemically bonded/surrounded by a lubricating boundary layer, does not pose a wear issue for injectors. CAT has been working on a program that utilizes a very high level of water emulsion diesel fuel for emissions control. The papers and work that have been published so far indicate that pump and injector life is good however other operational problems of concentration have prevented the emulsified fuel from becoming commercial.
Varying loads pose a significant problem in the amount of water (oxygen) that can be utilized in the burn process...
Thus, as we have discussed in the past, if we use a fuel additive which really locks up/surrounds losely emulsified water, water in normal levels does not pose a problem.
George Morrison

Its too bad we cant water inject our turbos Like the Rolls Royce Merlins (P51 Mustangs) for an added 400HP.

"capable of delivering a war emergency power of 1900 hp at 20,000 feet with water/alcohol injection"

"The P-51H was an outgrowth of the experimental XP-51F and G lightweight Mustang projects of early 1944. Rather than commit the F or G versions to production, the USAAF decided instead to produce a version powered by the uprated Packard Merlin V-1659-9 engine. This engine had the Simmons automatic boost control for constant manifold pressure maintenance and was equipped with a water injection system which made it possible to overboost the engine to achieve war emergency powers in excess of 2000 hp for brief periods. North American Aviation gave the project the company designation NA 126, and it was ordered into production as the P-51H in June of 1944 even before much of the initial design work was done."

Edited by: problemchild

Jeff,
Regarding your comment "As a sidenote, water in emulsion washes away that higher level of lubrication that our High pressure fuel injection requires. For Discussion..."
No, water in emulsion that is contained, chemically bonded/surrounded by a lubricating boundary layer, does not pose a wear issue for injectors. CAT has been working on a program that utilizes a very high level of water emulsion diesel fuel for emissions control. The papers and work that have been published so far indicate that pump and injector life is good however other operational problems of concentration have prevented the emulsified fuel from becoming commercial.
Varying loads pose a significant problem in the amount of water (oxygen) that can be utilized in the burn process...
Thus, as we have discussed in the past, if we use a fuel additive which really locks up/surrounds losely emulsified water, water in normal levels does not pose a problem.
George Morrison


Let's see - reference a paper to something that has nothing to do with our trucks (running water emulsified fuel?) - I don't think so; And then follow with "the emulsifier that I am trying to sell you is okay as long as you have water in normal levels".


If I have water in normal levels - you don't need anything!!!


If I get a load of fuel with greater than normal levels of water and I run the additive that you recommend , depending on the amount of water, I will have increased wear (at 23000 psi it is abrasive) and potentially damage the fuel injectors as this water turns to steam. And it doesn't matter how many primrose pixie fairies you have surround it - it will change state - it will expand quickly, it may make the tip of your injector blow off. Period.


This is why GM highly recommends not using an emulsifier and shell doesn't use an emulsifier in Rotella DFA. I am an engineer (started out in physics) and it makes total sense to me -&gt; why don't you "get it". Are you an engineer? What degree do you have and from where?


jeff


Edited by: dmax lover

Oh Oh


I will not get involved


I will not get involved


I will not get involved


I will not get involved


I will not get involved


http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif

dmax lover - lighten up!!!!!!!! Georgecls may or may not
have a degree, but who cares!!!!! I have 3, 2 in
engineering, and frankly I appreciate Geroge's willingness
to share his opinions, research, and information. The
fact that he sells Primrose is irrelevant, and he has
simply stated that he disagrees with GM's assertion. He
isn't the only one on this page or even out there in the
big world of engineers. I suspect the money George makes
selling Primrose is insignificant, so why climb on his a@#?

Does anyone know if all diesel fuel in North America is refined to the same standards for lubrication and contaminates? Is U.S. fuel better or worse than Canadian fuel?

Jeff, apparently are new to this site.. I am not being argumentive, only presenting the fact that water that is truly 'locked up' can in fact be utilized in high performance diesel engines safely. And that water in diesel fuel does not necessarily ring death knols for injectors. So, from my view, the CAT in formation was relevant and something you may not have been familiar with..
And I disagree with your statement that normal levels of water pose no problems. Apparently you have not seen the rusted out fuel filters from 'normal' water separation that takes place anytime diesel fuel is allowed to sit for any period of time..
I am not going to publish my CV on this site and bore everyone but suffice it to say that I have more initials following my name than I care to admit but moreover I have been involved in diesel fuel research projects for a number of years, I am published and am currently one of 600 or so STLE CLS in the world.
Most of the information I am sharing is the result of having been responsible for millions of dollars of diesel fuel equipment over a 30 year period, to include today. I work with fleets that have over 500+ Duramax and 6.5TD vehicles and have much 'real world' information that we learn from.
George Morrison, STLE CLS

Jeff, apparently are new to this site.. I am not being argumentive, only presenting the fact that water that is truly 'locked up' can in fact be utilized in high performance diesel engines safely. And that water in diesel fuel does not necessarily ring death knols for injectors. So, from my view, the CAT in formation was relevant and something you may not have been familiar with..
And I disagree with your statement that normal levels of water pose no problems. Apparently you have not seen the rusted out fuel filters from 'normal' water separation that takes place anytime diesel fuel is allowed to sit for any period of time..
I am not going to publish my CV on this site and bore everyone but suffice it to say that I have more initials following my name than I care to admit but moreover I have been involved in diesel fuel research projects for a number of years, I am published and am currently one of 600 or so STLE CLS in the world.
Most of the information I am sharing is the result of having been responsible for millions of dollars of diesel fuel equipment over a 30 year period, to include today. I work with fleets that have over 500+ Duramax and 6.5TD vehicles and have much 'real world' information that we learn from.
George Morrison, STLE CLS














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

The fact that George has as much hands on experience with Diesel fuel and equipment and a 500+ DMAX lab to work with gives him the ability to have a very large base of engines to be able to see first hand and evaluate different issues with the DMAX environment. I for one really appreciate that George is willing to freely give of his knowledge on this subject. We could all be see so lucky to have a fleet, or maybe herd of DMAX's to play with. Must be like a kid in a candy store. Thanks George.


Doug

George has presented himself as an industry expert and a technical expert and alot of you follow his advice.


Unfortunately, his advice is contrary to what I have seen from GM, Bosch and Shell Oil. The damage that could result from following his recommendations is significant. Those coming on this site for the first time should know all the facts prior to making a decision.


I think it is fair to question his qualifications. Becoming an STLE CLS requires passing a 150 question essay test. Should I trust George - not knowing what his complete qualifications are? Or should I trust the chemical engineers and mechanical engineers at GM, Bosch and Shell?


jeff


Edited by: dmax lover

dmax lover - do not trust anyone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The diesel gremlins are out, and about. Please lighten up!! George, does not sell any type of filtration of his own design, whether fuel or oil. People do not get qualifications of the engineers from GM, Shell, etc. These are large for profit companies, why do you trust them. Second, who gives a @#$ what the qualifications for his initials are. The guy has been trusted by many on this forum, and you seem to be the only one on the slamming trip!!!!!!! If you don't like George's advice don't follow it, but why not get off the soap box, and George's butt. Frankly, I am pleased that someone will read all of the literature, test results, etc, and give us some heads up. Why the personal attack???? George continues to offer his opinion on technical matters not your or my qualifications. Why continue to thrash his????


Drive on George!!!!!!! I appreciate your input, and willingness to share opinionshttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gifEdited by: silatman

Uhhhh, I think if George told me my truck would run better underwater, I would have to take a stab at it. I have that much faith in him.


All the wonderful, knowledgeable folks (engineers?) at GM &amp; Bosch sorta gave us this problem in the first place didn't they? Did they know better and do it anyway because of cheaper cost or did they not know in the first place? Here in "lies" the proverbial question. Why are injectors failing and at what rate, why do the damn things cost so much and what is GM doing about it? On the LLY they made it cheaper to fix the problems and that saves labor cost, but if they would re-design or fix the injector issue in the first place, none of that would have been necessary.


Anyway, George "You Da Man" and don't sweat the newbies "Obe Wan", the force will be with them in time!


Edited by: Chevysrus

Uhhhh, I think if George told me my truck would run better underwater, I would have to take a stab at it. I have that much faith in him.


All the wonderful, knowledgeable folks (engineers?) at GM &amp; Bosch sorta gave us this problem in the first place didn't they? Did they know better and do it anyway because of cheaper cost or did they not know in the first place? Here in "lies" the proverbial question. Why are injectors failing and at what rate, why do the damn things cost so much and what is GM doing about it? On the LLY they made it cheaper to fix the problems and that saves labor cost, but if they would re-design or fix the injector issue in the first place, none of that would have been necessary.


Anyway, George "You Da Man" and don't sweat the newbies "Obe Wan", the force will be with them in time!











Isn't that the truth ....


Why the changes in injectors in the last current years ?? Where does it leave us 01 owners ?? Is GM Bosch going to help me ??


How can you deny the inadequate OEM fuel filter with the fuel cleanliness test that have been done ?? Bosch and GM let that slip right out to the unsuspecting unknowing consumer ...


Are you friends with the Feline or just starting a Mobil verses Shell war ??


What say you Jeff ??


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

Mack you are bad to the bone!! Even drawing out the Fatcat. Anyway, no mention of additional fuel filtration on your sig. What are you running on that pavement smoking, non stock, light duty dually of yours? Ooooops, off topic.

A Cat filter I PAID FOR Nicktane Bracket I PAID FOR .... That's for the lurking guests ....http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/HiHi.gif


It is setup as a "Primary" secondary filter ...


Ok it's a Nicktane but I piece meal'd it ....





Mac http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gif

I run an emulsifier, and wouldn't have it any other way...

Dmaxlover,


A degree(s) is fantastic, but really only proves the fact that someone is very good at going to school. Now combine that with real world experience and you've really got something thats priceless.


The GM/Bosch/Shell engineers are forced to tow the company line regardless of what they really feel the data is supporting. Owning up to the fact that there is a problem with injectors/fuel lubricity/fuel quality or any other problem with each companies product.... is going to land one or all of these companies a nice fat class action law suit.


George on the other hand gives us the benefit of his real world experience. Some of us place a high value on that experience. Please don't try to save us from ourselves....our politicians already have that covered. Thanks for presenting your view, some of us may not agree with it but thank you for presenting it.


I do however agree with you on one point...we all should gather the facts, question everything, and make up your own minds.

OKAY

Lets settle this once and for all.

Would everyone (who uses an emulsifier) with steam exploded injectors please respond here and now.

WHAT???

No responses???


The silence is DEAFENING!

As I had suspected, Geo isn't into tit for tat. I do recall a full listing of all the stuff following his name on his first post over on thedieselpage some yrs back. I trust him as he has proven trustworthy ~ which is the litmus test of anyone. Contrary to my handle, I too have a few degrees ~ none in engineering but feel I can afford my handle. I did have several engrs working for me for several yrs and the fact that they were engineers didn't in itself make then trustworthy/proficient and can cite more than several instances. I learned that no one possesses the sole truth but wisdom is in the counsel of several ~ which is basically the purpose of this forum ~ or at least why I'm here.Edited by: ShumDit

SHUMDIT Amen! Wish I had said that LOL ha ha ha Edited by: Chevysrus

Reguarding George______http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif----------------------------http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cool.gif Phil (Any Questions?)





edited..... to much applause made the page too wide

hootEdited by: hoot

Should I listen to GM, Bosch and......Shell ? Who gives a rats behind about Shell ? http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Wacko.gif Should I listen to George ? hmmm Lets see, good prices, good advice, Great customer service.....Now does that sound like the treatment I got the last time I went to the stealer ? NOT !


You gotta love the recent influx of the corporate propoganda. It seems we are having a bigger impact on GM and Bosch than we might have thought. I do , however think it is good to question every thing and make choices that are best for you and your truck.


My choice to follow Georges advice is based on the fact that if we follow the GM and Bosch like a flock of sheep we will be voiding our own warranties. You have to love how they want us to seperate the water, let it set in the tank, the filter etc. It will obviously rust. POOF, no more warranty. But then I suspect their was a liitle planning in that to get us to buy a new truck every 100k. The trouble with following sheep is that you have to be carefull not to step in sheep dip ! http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clown.gifEdited by: BlueMaxxxx

One of my GM technician contacts had a chance to talk to a GM field service engineer/rep or whatever the title. My contact is a Dmax owner, and is quite interested in this stuff.





Word is:


1) No official GM offereing of aux fuel filtration. Not sure about GM official endorsement of any given product.


2) He thought if anything, the filtration system on the Dmax was coming up short in the water separation department.





The only person I can speak for (integrity and knowledge wise) in this is my technician contact who is VERY sharp on this stuff...

Isn't it great to live in a free county where you can have an opinion and a choice. Thats what most of what you read on this site is, Opinions then you have to choose.. The bottom line is that YOU and ONLY YOU can decide (Choose) what is best for YOU and YOUR truck. If you are making all your truck (or anything else ) dicisions on what 1 person or 1 corperation says because you TRUST, LIKE OR just think their right, that's OK, IF you are willing to accept any and all resonsibility for YOUR discision follow them. Whose right George ? GM ? The world may never know... Pick the one you think is best for YOU and let the next guy do the same. Then the rest of us dont have to liten to the EGO crap that ruins every GOOD forum that comes to the internet. My intention is not to offend any one ony my OPINION (refer to line one).

It's funny, but I have changed my fuel filter 3 times now and not once have I seen a drop of water in it. I have never opened the drain plug in between filter changes. That should let the water accumulate in the filter, but nada, nothing. Didn't notice any rust on the first 2 looked for it on the 3rd and didn't see any. Guess I am one of the lucky ones and I don't realy run any additives regularly. I used Power Service (Wal Mart) once and FRRP a couple of bottles of the concentrate. Averages maybe every 3rd or 4th fill-up. Guess I should get up every morning and knock on wood or something. It's DIRT I am concerned about more than water so far.


My Nictane has been on for 4K, maybe I should do a fuel sample test just for the heck of it.


Gonna think about that, haven't seen anyone do one for a while now.

Uhhhh, I think if George told me my truck would run better underwater, I would have to take a stab at it. I have that much faith in him.





I second that remark!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif

Jeff,

There is nothing wrong with your questioning someone's qualifications. George has them, by the way. The way you
suggest his lack of them is a bit cranky but you're new to this site and the other one too so you are forgiven (by George!!, I bet) so motor on, do as you see fit with your truck, measure in a good dose of the interesting stuff you find here and you'll likely be better off.

Regards,
BobEdited by: Son of a gun