Diesel Place banner

1 - 20 of 440 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
841 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Nick has asked that I bring the discussion to a new thread. This way the original thread and report can be permanantly archived in the Sticky's. So, carry on! Same discussion under a new title! SPICER
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
841 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
To anyone who would like to forward this data to other sites, etc. Please send the above PDF version, not the one in the original post by me. This one has all of the recent updates and changes. Thank You! Arlen Spicer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Olemax

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,558 Posts
well as the first response to this thread, one like everyone else good job Arlen(btw i need those 2 trees down if you have some time send me a $$).

Also, I'm really bummed out, if not PO'd that my FPPF 'Lubricity plus Fuel Power' fared so poorly. I bought 5 gallons of this stuff on sale and it's worse that using no addivtive at all.

I'd like to convince myself that your sample was a bad batch
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
I understood it was OK to ad 2-cycle oil at the rate of 32 oz. per 26 gal. tank. The test showed it was added at 16 oz. My question is: Does this double the lubricity performance? If so, the 2-cycle lubricity numbers would be much higher in the ranking. I have been using at this ratio for several months and had no problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Hi Spicer, great work on the study. New member here and I think this is going to really open up the debate on lubricity, etc.

I read the entire lubricity posts (kinda seeing double right now:) but I'm not sure I saw the answer to this and if you can ask the lab guys I'd appreciate it.

1. How do the additives already put in the ULSD react with the aftermarket or homebrew additives in your study? Are there any thoughts about this from the petrochemical specialists on this board? Would we see the same reduction in wear from bio diesel or the opti lube product if the ULSD had not been virgin? In other words, would the bio knock down the scar reading the same huge amount or would the existing additve package allow the bio diesel to lubricate even at a lower wear scar reading?

2. Can the additives that are suppose to be added to the ULSD make a over the counter or homebrew additive work better than what we saw with the virgin ULSD?

3. On the opposite end, can the ULSD additives react adversly with the over the counter or homebrew additives we ad in?

Hope this all makes sense.

Again, thanks for the effort in this study...it really was eye opening.

Cheers,
5150 H1
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Been using Primrose 405 for over 120,000 miles over two different vehicles, both Bosch HPCR.

NO FUEL SYSTEM ISSUES

I love the stuff.

George of http://www.avlube.com/addiga.html is very very knowledgeable and was one of the first to step up and teach everyone about diesel fuel and how to keep it 100%
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
841 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
QLCsteve;1975577; said:
I understood it was OK to ad 2-cycle oil at the rate of 32 oz. per 26 gal. tank. The test showed it was added at 16 oz. My question is: Does this double the lubricity performance? If so, the 2-cycle lubricity numbers would be much higher in the ranking. I have been using at this ratio for several months and had no problems.
The way I understand it, it is impossible to know. Sometimes a double dose shows a slight improvement over a single dose, sometimes a big improvement. It all depends on the so called lubricty saturation point of the particular additive in a particular fuel. And without lab work, it is a guess. SPICER
 
  • Like
Reactions: jrsavoie

·
Registered
Joined
·
841 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
5150 H1;1975734; said:
Hi Spicer, great work on the study. New member here and I think this is going to really open up the debate on lubricity, etc.

I read the entire lubricity posts (kinda seeing double right now:) but I'm not sure I saw the answer to this and if you can ask the lab guys I'd appreciate it.

1. How do the additives already put in the ULSD react with the aftermarket or homebrew additives in your study? Are there any thoughts about this from the petrochemical specialists on this board? Would we see the same reduction in wear from bio diesel or the opti lube product if the ULSD had not been virgin? In other words, would the bio knock down the scar reading the same huge amount or would the existing additve package allow the bio diesel to lubricate even at a lower wear scar reading?

2. Can the additives that are suppose to be added to the ULSD make a over the counter or homebrew additive work better than what we saw with the virgin ULSD?

3. On the opposite end, can the ULSD additives react adversly with the over the counter or homebrew additives we ad in?

Hope this all makes sense.

Again, thanks for the effort in this study...it really was eye opening.

Cheers,
5150 H1
The way I understand it, bio prettty much always works. There are some definite instances of additives not working well together, but I have no details on this. Again, probably a hit or miss propostion. On the other hand, they can work synergistically. I would like to see more info and data on this, but it is beyond the scope of my work and over my head. SPICER
 
  • Like
Reactions: jrsavoie

·
Registered
Joined
·
259 Posts
I have used the Stanadyne Performance and Power Service Diesel Kleen for years in my 6.5 TD and now in my LBZ. I'm wondering if there products that were designed for use with "old" diesel fuel formula and not not the new Ultra Low Sulfur had different goals ? Now that most all (on road) Diesel is Ultra Low Sulfur (primary purpose of the sulfur was lubrication) we will probably see Stanadyne and the other Diesel additive company's start to change their focus. For years I was concerned with preventing algae, dissipating water, preventing gelling in winters(in VT) and hell if you can add some cetane at the same time to increase power that was all that mattered, I never thought (or worried about) about lubrication was it an issue before Ultra Low Sulfur fuel? And to date (at least till 2006) GM does not recommend any diesel additives {obviously most of us think we know better } Unfortunately I live in New England where no one carrys Bio Diesel, so it looks like I have to rethink my Diesel additive needs. As a completely neutral party to any previous gripes about testing , It would be a more "scientific" if a random sample of Opti Lube XPD that was purchased by a "John Doe" and tested again. It would be nice to be able to purchase one additive to cure all of our Diesel fuel concerns instead of mixing up our own cocktails and witches brew ;-)
And Thanks to all who took the time, effort, $ etc to make make the study happen. {anyone care to scientifically study chips and programmers for fuel economy and power ;-) next}
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,412 Posts
Hey SPICER,

I recently noticed that Stanadyne must have changed their additives to be compatible with ULSD.

When I received my recent purchase, I noticed that now they have a bright yellow notice with black letters that states
Formulated for
ULTRA LOW SULFUR​
So I was wondering if the Stanadyne bottles you received for the test were the old formula or the new formula.

You can check out their new labels HERE.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,191 Posts
The Standyne has been formulated for the ULSD. Look at the bottle, it says fromulated for low sulphur diesel. Their site claims that it does the job. I hope so as I still have a case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,412 Posts
rtquig;1977176; said:
The Standyne has been formulated for the ULSD. Look at the bottle, it says fromulated for low sulphur diesel. Their site claims that it does the job. I hope so as I still have a case.
That's what I am refering to.

The bottles I have from a previous purchase do NOT say Formulated for ULTRA LOW SULFUR on the label. The new ones DO say it.

I just wanted to verify that the additives used for the test came from bottles with that statement on the label.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
841 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
RayMich;1977188; said:
That's what I am refering to.

The bottles I have from a previous purchase do NOT say Formulated for ULTRA LOW SULFUR on the label. The new ones DO say it.

I just wanted to verify that the additives used for the test came from bottles with that statement on the label.
I will have to look at the bottles. Can't remember off the top of my head. I will get back to you on this. SPICER
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,504 Posts
I can't say for certain, but I seem to recall that the Stanadyne rebadging was to certify that it didn't add any sulfur compounds (and endanger ULSD specified emissions equipment), not really a remix to change the lubricity additives.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,412 Posts
Idle_Chatter;1977548; said:
I can't say for certain, but I seem to recall that the Stanadyne rebadging was to certify that it didn't add any sulfur compounds (and endanger ULSD specified emissions equipment), not really a remix to change the lubricity additives.
Could very well be.

Perhaps they should be contacted to find out for sure if there is any difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
841 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Idle_Chatter;1977548; said:
I can't say for certain, but I seem to recall that the Stanadyne rebadging was to certify that it didn't add any sulfur compounds (and endanger ULSD specified emissions equipment), not really a remix to change the lubricity additives.
What determines the ability to badge as "ULSD compliant" is the sulfer content in the additive. It MUST be 15ppm or less just as the fuel must be. An additive labeled "formulated for ULSD" may or may not be formulated with more lubricating compounds. It would make sense that it has more lubricating ability, but the label simply may be making reference to the sulfer content. SPICER
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,412 Posts
SPICER;1977640; said:
What determines the ability to badge as "ULSD compliant" is the sulfer content in the additive. It MUST be 15ppm or less just as the fuel must be. An additive labeled "formulated for ULSD" may or may not be formulated with more lubricating compounds. It would make sense that it has more lubricating ability, but the label simply may be making reference to the sulfer content. SPICER
This is true, but do we know for sure if they actually changed their formula? If the Stanadyne additives that were used for the test did not say so on the label, how do we know if the formula used is what's available for sale now?

If the labels DID say that they were formulated for ULSD, then we would know for sure that the latest formula was used and my question would be answered.

I'm not at all trying to cast doubt on the test results. I am merely asking for some clarification. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
902 Posts
When I was reasearching additives a year ago I chose Stanadyne. My first order did not have the "ULSD" label on it. It is federal law that mandates this label. I remember reading that the formula was still the same just a new label to comply with the law. Back then we did not know as much as we do now. It seemed Stanadyne took the approach that they were not changing their precious additive. Personally, I still use two of their additives. I have 26k miles on my truck and it has burned a lot of jet fuel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
Any info on temperature affects of lubricity of fuels, additives, and at what temperature is fluid during the wear scar test?

I've read a bit recently on diesel fuel temp and read specifically 135F temp should be highest sent to the IP and diese fuel looses appreciable lubricity after 150F. FWIW I read typically vegetable oil lubricity is good up til 300F IIRC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
902 Posts
how hot is our fuel on a summer day when it makes it to the engine? My Titan tank is wrapped around my fuel cooler. If the additive bonds with the fuel then are we thinking there is a temp when it becomes un-bonded?
 
1 - 20 of 440 Posts
Top