Journey with Confidence RV GPS App RV Trip Planner RV LIFE Campground Reviews RV Maintenance Take a Speed Test Free 7 Day Trial ×
 

Go Back   Keystone RV Forums > Keystone Tech Forums > Tow Vehicles
Click Here to Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-28-2017, 01:49 PM   #21
Desert185
Senior Member
 
Desert185's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Nevada
Posts: 2,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canonman View Post
Thanks Jim
For some reason I couldn't find the 2105 study. We're traveling and not using our standard browser.
Appreciate your checking on this. I was pretty sure the results were the same.
Basically just a 1/2 gallon of Biodiesel per tankful. It's good fuel so you don't have to be overly critical of the mix ratio.
For me, it would be easier to carry Diesel Kleen rather than have a 1/2 gallon of biodiesel at each fillup...which is usually a half fillup. Biodiesel is hard to find (thankfully) in my area.

Currently, I'm buying diesel for $2.29/gal, so a few ounces of additive don't really break the bank.
__________________
Desert185 🇺🇸 (Retired Chemtrail vendor)
-Ram 2500 QC, LB, 4x4, Cummins HO/exhaust brake, 6-speed stick.
-Andersen Ultimate 24K 5er Hitch.
-2014 Cougar 326SRX, Maxxis tires w/TPMS, wet bolts, two 6v batts.
-Four Wheel 8' Popup Camper.
Desert185 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2017, 10:46 PM   #22
rhagfo
Senior Member
 
rhagfo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canonman View Post
Looked into which additive would be best to replace the lubricants lost in the low sulphur fuels now required. Here is a link to a very detailed, scientific study on the different additives available. Would like to see what others think.
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/76-...y-results.html
Well I looked at that study and chose #2, Opti Lube XPD, works great and a a great product and easy to use. We just add 1/4 oz per gallon.
__________________
Russ & Paula and Belle the Beagle.
2016 Ram Laramie 3500 DRW 14,000# GVWR (New TV)
2005 Copper Canyon 293 FWSLS 32’ GVWR 12,360
Visit and enjoy Oregon State Parks
rhagfo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2017, 02:02 AM   #23
chuckster57
Site Team
 
chuckster57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Modesto
Posts: 20,234
I may have the oldest Diesel here on this site: '94 IDI with Factory Turbo. Only has 75,000 miles on it, bought in '08 with 52,000 on the clock. PS Diesel Kleen in every tank.
__________________

2012 Copper Canyon 273FWRET being towed by a 1994 Ford F350 CC,LB,Dually diesel.
Airlift 5000 bags, Prodigy brake control, 5 gauges on the pillar.Used to tow a '97 Jayco 323RKS.

Now an RVIA registered tech. Retired from Law enforcement in 2008 after 25+ yrs.
chuckster57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2017, 03:20 AM   #24
first time 5er
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: kissimmee,florida
Posts: 95
I manage a 19,000,000 fleet of heavy equipment and have extensive training in the teir 4 diesel engines. These system are very much like electronic fuel injection in the auto industry. Not much lubricity in gasoline so I don't believe lubricity is an issue in today's engines. In older mechanical pump and injector engines maybe but ultra low sulfur diesel has been around for a while. I would be more concerned with bacteria growth in biodiesel fuel. I think those of you that don't use you TV much should use additives that kill bacteria build up. Our research indicated that is the major issue. Not an problem if you drive regularly. As for additives only needed if your fuel is sitting for a month or more. our motto is " Its only as good for the first tank full" i don't use anything in my truck as we drive it regularly. Regular maintenance is best
__________________

Barb & Kev & Missie (lab mix rescue dog)
2017 F350 DRW 6.7 4X4 24K Anderson ultimate
2009 Cougar 320SRX 1995 Custom Fatboy
first time 5er is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2017, 06:35 AM   #25
Desert185
Senior Member
 
Desert185's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Nevada
Posts: 2,695
Like I mentioned in a previous posting, my injection pump was designed before ULSD, so I use an additive. If I had a new rig, I might not use an additive unless I was concerned with the cetane level during the winter months when higher cetane is important.

Do you have any experiemce with the FASS fuel filter systems on Class 8 trucks?
__________________
Desert185 🇺🇸 (Retired Chemtrail vendor)
-Ram 2500 QC, LB, 4x4, Cummins HO/exhaust brake, 6-speed stick.
-Andersen Ultimate 24K 5er Hitch.
-2014 Cougar 326SRX, Maxxis tires w/TPMS, wet bolts, two 6v batts.
-Four Wheel 8' Popup Camper.
Desert185 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2017, 03:54 PM   #26
first time 5er
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: kissimmee,florida
Posts: 95
check this link. http://berkeleybiodiesel.org/useful-...nderstand.html

a Berkely study suggest biodiesel actually adds lubricity to ULSD.
Here is a quote
The other main property of biodiesel fuel that we will discuss is its lubricating properties. It has much better lubricating and a higher cetane ratings than today's lower sulfur diesel fuels. Adding Biodiesel also helps in reducing fuel system wear. The fuel injection equipment depends on the fuel for its lubrication. The biodiesel fuel properties increase the life of the fuel injection equipment. Giving better lubricity and a more complete combustion increases the engine energy output, thus partially balancing for the higher energy density of petrodiesel. Older diesel Mercedes are well known for running on biodiesel.

As for the the fuel system you mentioned. The use of a water separator/primary and 3 micron secondary fuel filter is standard on 30,000 psi common rail systems.
Never heard of nor can i find anything on the effects of dissolved air in diesel fuel but it only make sense that the fuel would be less dense
__________________

Barb & Kev & Missie (lab mix rescue dog)
2017 F350 DRW 6.7 4X4 24K Anderson ultimate
2009 Cougar 320SRX 1995 Custom Fatboy
first time 5er is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2017, 06:18 PM   #27
Dave W
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Near Saratoga Springs,
Posts: 1,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by first time 5er View Post
check this link. http://berkeleybiodiesel.org/useful-...nderstand.html

a Berkely study suggest biodiesel actually adds lubricity to ULSD.
Here is a quote
The other main property of biodiesel fuel that we will discuss is its lubricating properties. It has much better lubricating and a higher cetane ratings than today's lower sulfur diesel fuels. Adding Biodiesel also helps in reducing fuel system wear. The fuel injection equipment depends on the fuel for its lubrication. The biodiesel fuel properties increase the life of the fuel injection equipment. Giving better lubricity and a more complete combustion increases the engine energy output, thus partially balancing for the higher energy density of petrodiesel. Older diesel Mercedes are well known for running on biodiesel.

As for the the fuel system you mentioned. The use of a water separator/primary and 3 micron secondary fuel filter is standard on 30,000 psi common rail systems.
Never heard of nor can i find anything on the effects of dissolved air in diesel fuel but it only make sense that the fuel would be less dense
Uf only that was from an impartial source instead of the cheerleader for biocrap, it would have, IMO, some more credibility. I can believe the lubrucity but have a hard time with better cetane numbers when my experience after the past two summers of significantly lower fuel mileage and perceived more throttle and the actual need for more lower gear use while traveling the Midwest and 20% biocrap. Others on Ford truck forums have noted similar results. I have also noted in states with 100% diesel, no bio, my fuel mileage went even higher then home, NY State' where they add up to 10%. This is over a period of just under 20,000 miles, about 14,000 miles towing the sig 5er so it's not a flash in the pan - seat of the pants.
Dave W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2017, 07:38 PM   #28
bsmith0404
Senior Member
 
bsmith0404's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Las Cruces
Posts: 4,665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert185 View Post
Been thinking of this for awhile. A FASS Titanium system is on the schedule for next month.
I debated for a long time about the cost vs return on investment. I read about how the high pressure injectors are designed to close on a cushion of fuel, but microscopic air bubbles can cause them to slam shut on air instead of the cushion. Over time it causes wear and eventually injector failure. I have installed two systems now, one in my truck and another in a friends. I can tell you both were noticeably quieter after installing the system. This isn't just imagined, when you first start the truck after installing the system it takes about 20 seconds for the new fuel to reach the injectors, you will no it when it gets there when the noise from the truck suddenly drops by about half and starts running smoother. The only thing I can contribute the noise reduction to is injector noise as they start closing on the cushion of fuel. With a new set of injiectors in the $3k range, the $600 spent on the FASS suddenly seemed worth every dime. I also use NAPA gold filters on the system since they are easy to get and have some of the best filter ratings of any filter on the market. I also left the OE Rocor filter in place, I have no doubt my engine is getting clean, air free fuel.
bsmith0404 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2017, 09:01 PM   #29
Ken / Claudia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Fruitland
Posts: 3,357
After reading the test I got a 8 pk on amazon of the opti lube. Not sure of cost it maybe 2 dollars more for tank fill then with kleen. I am pulling the boat all over fishing on short drives now the TT not much. likely will not get a good road test until sept. My truck sits in driveway unless pulling something.
__________________
2013 24RKSWE (27ft TT) Cougar 1/2 ton series SOLD 10-2021
2013 Ford F350 4x4 CC 6.7 engine, 8 ft bed, 3.55 rear end, lariat package
Retired from Oregon State Police in 2011 than worked another 9.5 years as a small town traffic cop:
As of 05-2020, I am all done with 39 years total police work. No more uniforms for me.
Ken / Claudia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 06:56 AM   #30
flybouy
Site Team
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Joppa, MD
Posts: 11,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by first time 5er View Post
I manage a 19,000,000 fleet of heavy equipment and have extensive training in the teir 4 diesel engines. These system are very much like electronic fuel injection in the auto industry. Not much lubricity in gasoline so I don't believe lubricity is an issue in today's engines. In older mechanical pump and injector engines maybe but ultra low sulfur diesel has been around for a while. I would be more concerned with bacteria growth in biodiesel fuel. I think those of you that don't use you TV much should use additives that kill bacteria build up. Our research indicated that is the major issue. Not an problem if you drive regularly. As for additives only needed if your fuel is sitting for a month or more. our motto is " Its only as good for the first tank full" i don't use anything in my truck as we drive it regularly. Regular maintenance is best
Wow that's a lot equipment. As for your second post with the quote about Bio I would have to ask Who paid for the study? I have yet to read a positive review on Biodiesel from any group actually using it. By the way, comparing gas vs diesel is apples vs oranges, the least of which are the fuel pressures as diesel is typically 3 - 4 times greater.
I'm not a diesel engineer or researcher so I can only relate my own real word experiences on the matter. My personal choice is Diesel Kleen®. It has raised my mpg slightly and absolutely reduced the "diesel clatter" in my truck and is available at Wal-Mart and most auto parts stores. As a disclaimer, I'm not a "additive" type guy as my 50 + years of shade tree mechanics and extensive reading habits have made me a sceptic on "snake oil treatments". With that said, when I find something that real users (not the advertisement folks but the countless numbers on the many blog sites and speaking with mechanics, truck drivers at fuel stops, etc.) report on in a positive manner than I will try it out and make my own assessment. This has resulted in my use of Diesel Kleen®. Others may have a different experience.
__________________
Marshall
2012 Laredo 303 TG
2010 F250 LT Super Cab, long bed, 4X4, 6.4 Turbo Diesel
flybouy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 07:57 AM   #31
Canonman
Senior Member
 
Canonman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: South Jordan, Utah
Posts: 2,221
With that said, when I find something that real users (not the advertisement folks but the countless numbers on the many blog sites and speaking with mechanics, truck drivers at fuel stops, etc.) report on in a positive manner than I will try it out and make my own assessment. This has resulted in my use of Diesel Kleen®. Others may have a different experience.[/QUOTE]

I agree that advertising hype is not the best way to decide on what product or process to use. Likewise anecdotal information can also be just as biased or even inaccurate. Here is the link to the blind test results performed by an independant lab posted earlier, paid for by both the product manufacturers and dieselplace.com a reputable diesel users forum. Have a look and decide for yourself.
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/76-...y-results.html
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	_MG_0696.jpg
Views:	160
Size:	196.6 KB
ID:	13485  
__________________
2017 Cougar 279RKSWE
2007.5 Dodge Ram 2500 6.7 Cummins
Retirement Training Completed
I think the little voices in my head have started a chat group.
Canonman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 07:59 AM   #32
Desert185
Senior Member
 
Desert185's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Nevada
Posts: 2,695
Link no workee for me...
__________________
Desert185 🇺🇸 (Retired Chemtrail vendor)
-Ram 2500 QC, LB, 4x4, Cummins HO/exhaust brake, 6-speed stick.
-Andersen Ultimate 24K 5er Hitch.
-2014 Cougar 326SRX, Maxxis tires w/TPMS, wet bolts, two 6v batts.
-Four Wheel 8' Popup Camper.
Desert185 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 04:10 PM   #33
first time 5er
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: kissimmee,florida
Posts: 95
My company has over $325,000,000 in Florida alone. we've done our home work. Today's diesel fuel injection is very much like its gasoline counterpart in terms of theory. electronically controlled injectors being controlled by an ECM that get its input from various sensors. I don't claim to be an expert on the efficiency of biodiesel either what I've learned is that B20 is only 2% less efficient than ULSD adds additional lubrication and less emissions. I do believe that increasing the cetane level will improve economy to a point but it will do that with ULSD also. I think people tend to form an opinion without doing the proper research and there is some much out there it is difficult to determine what is true or as you put it "who paid for the study" I agree. I tend to stay with what the manufactures suggest because "they made it" and know more than i do.
__________________

Barb & Kev & Missie (lab mix rescue dog)
2017 F350 DRW 6.7 4X4 24K Anderson ultimate
2009 Cougar 320SRX 1995 Custom Fatboy
first time 5er is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2017, 11:48 AM   #34
ADQ K9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Anchorage
Posts: 605
Being that the Ford additives are only available at the dealer I usually opt for the Power Service every 3rd or 4 th fill up I usually don't go below a half tank of fuel before fillup but I have pretty good quality fuel localy too ( no bio diesel). Planning a filter change at 15 K but I don't even have 10K in the truck I got in Feb of 16. I think a lot depends on your fuel source.
__________________
Mike
2016 Ford F350 CC 6.7 4x4 SRW (Ghost Rider)
2017 Cougar 29 RKSWE (The Tumble Weed)
Connected by a Curt 15K WDH W/Sway Control
ADQ K9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2017, 01:54 PM   #35
Canonman
Senior Member
 
Canonman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: South Jordan, Utah
Posts: 2,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert185 View Post
Link no workee for me...
Sorry, let's try this again: Copied and reprinted without permission


Lubricity Additive Study Results
The following are the preliminary results of a research study on diesel fuel Lubricity Additives. There is likely to be further commentary and explanation added at a future time.

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this research was to determine the ability of multiple diesel fuel additives to replace the vital lubricity component in ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfer Diesel) fuel.

HISTORY:

ULSD fuel is the fuel currently mandated for use in all on road diesel engines. This fuel burns cleaner and is less polluting than it’s predecessor, called Low Sulfer Diesel Fuel. Low sulfer fuel contained less than 500 ppm of sulfer. ULSD contains 15 ppm or less.
As diesel fuel is further refined to remove the polluting sulfer, it is inadvertently stripped of its lubricating properties. This vital lubrication is a necessary component of the diesel fuel as it prevents wear in the fuel delivery system. Specifically, it lubricates pumps, high pressure pumps and injectors. Traditional Low sulfer diesel fuel typically contained enough lubricating ability to suffice the needs of these vital components. ULSD fuel, on the other hand, is considered to be very “dry” and incapable of lubricating vital fuel delivery components. As a result, these components are at risk of premature and even catastrophic failure when ULSD fuel is introduced to the system. As a result, all oil companies producing ULSD fuel must replace the lost lubricity with additives. All ULSD fuel purchased at retail fuel stations SHOULD be adequately treated with additives to replace this lost lubricity. The potential result of using inadequately treated fuel, as indicated above, can be catastrophic. There have been many documented cases of randomly tested samples of diesel fuel. These tests prove that often times the fuel we purchase is not adequately treated and may therefore contribute to accelerated wear of our fuel delivery systems. For this reason it may be prudent to use an after market diesel fuel additive to ENSURE adequate lubrication of the fuel delivery system. Additionally, many additives can offer added benefits such as cetane improver, and water separators or emulsifiers.

CONTENT:

In this study we will test multiple diesel fuel additives designed to replace lost lubricity. The primary component of this study is a side-by-side laboratory analysis of each additive’s ability to replace this vital lubricity. Additionally, claims of improving cetane, water separation or emulsification, bio-diesel compatibility and alcohol content will be noted. These notes were derived from information that was readily available to consumers (via the label and internet information) and none of this information has been evaluated for validity and/or performance. Cetane information has only been noted if the word “cetane” was used in the advertising information. The words “improves power” has not been translated to mean “improves cetane” in this evaluation. Information on alcohol content is provided by indicating “contains no alcohol”. Omission of the words “contains no alcohol” does not imply that it does contain alcohol. This information was simply missing in the information available to a consumer. However, the possibility of a form of alcohol in these products is possible. Additionally, information on dosages and cost per tankful are included for comparison purposes.

How Diesel Fuel Is Evaluated For Lubricating Ability:

Diesel fuel and other fluids are tested for lubricating ability using a device called a “High Frequency Reciprocating Rig” or HFRR. The HFRR is currently the Internationally accepted, standardized method to evaluate fluids for lubricating ability. It uses a ball bearing that reciprocates or moves back and forth on a metal surface at a very high frequency for a duration of 90 minutes. The machine does this while the ball bearing and metal surface are immersed in the test fluid (in this case, treated diesel fuel). At the end of the test the ball bearing is examined under a microscope and the “wear scar” on the ball bearing is measured in microns. The larger the wear scar, the poorer the lubricating ability of the fluid. Southwest Research runs every sample twice and averages the size of the wear scar.
The U.S. standard for diesel fuel says a commercially available diesel fuel should produce a wear scar of no greater than 520 microns. The Engine Manufacturers Association had requested a standard of a wear scar no greater than 460 microns, typical of the pre-ULSD fuels. Most experts agree that a 520 micron standard is adequate, but also that the lower the wear scar the better.

METHOD:

An independent research firm in Texas was hired to do the laboratory work. The cost of the research was paid for voluntarily by the participating additive manufacturers. Declining to participate and pay for the research were the following companies: Amsoil and Power Service. Because these are popular products it was determined that they needed to be included in the study. These products were tested using funds collected by diesel enthusiasts at “dieselplace.com”. Additionally, unconventional additives such as 2-cycle oil and used motor oil were tested for their abilities to aid in diesel fuel lubricity. These were also paid for by members of “dieselplace.com”.
The study was conducted in the following manner:
-The Research firm obtained a quantity of “untreated” ULSD fuel from a supplier. This fuel was basic ULSD fuel intended for use in diesel engines. However, this sample was acquired PRIOR to any attempt to additize the fuel for the purpose of replacing lost lubricity. In other words, it was a “worst case scenario, very dry diesel fuel” that would likely cause damage to any fuel delivery system. This fuel was tested using the HFRR at the Southwest Research Laboratory. This fuel was determined to have a very high HFRR score of 636 microns, typical of an untreated ULSD fuel. It was determined that this batch of fuel would be utilized as the baseline fuel for testing all of the additives. The baseline fuel HFRR score of 636 would be used as the control sample. All additives tested would be evaluated on their ability to replace lost lubricity to the fuel by comparing their scores to the control sample. Any score under 636 shows improvement to the fuels ability to lubricate the fuel delivery system of a diesel engine.

BLIND STUDY:

In order to ensure a completely unbiased approach to the study, the following steps were taken:
Each additive tested was obtained independently via internet or over the counter purchases. The only exceptions were Opti-Lube XPD and the bio-diesel sample. The reason for this is because Opti-Lube XPD additive was considered “experimental” at the time of test enrollment and was not yet on the market. It was sent directly from Opti-Lube company. The bio-diesel sample was sponsored by Renewable Energy Group. One of their suppliers, E.H. Wolf and Sons in Slinger, Wisconsin supplied us with a sample of 100% soybean based bio-diesel. This sample was used to blend with the baseline fuel to create a 2% bio-diesel for testing.
Each additive was bottled separately in identical glass containers. The bottles were labeled only with a number. This number corresponded to the additive contained in the bottle. The order of numbering was done randomly by drawing names out of a hat. Only Spicer Research held the key to the additives in each bottle.
The additive samples were then sent in a box to An independent research firm. The only information given them was the ratio of fuel to be added to each additive sample. For example, bottle “A” needs to be mixed at a ratio of “480-1”. The ratio used for each additive was the “prescribed dosage” found on the bottle label for that product. Used motor oil and 2-cycle oil were tested at a rationally chosen ratio of 200:1.
The Research Laboratory mixed the proper ratio of each “bottled fluid” into a separate container containing the baseline fuel. The data, therefore, is meaningful because every additive is tested in the same way using the same fuel. A side-by-side comparison of the effectiveness of each additive is now obtainable.

THE RESULTS:

These results are listed in the order of performance in the HFRR test. The baseline fuel used in every test started at an HFRR score of 636. The score shown is the tested HFRR score of the baseline fuel/additive blend.
Also included is the wear scar improvement provided by the additive as well as other claimed benefits of the additive. Each additive is also categorized as a Multi-purpose additive, Multi-purpose + anti-gel, Lubricity only, non-conventional, or as an additive capable of treating both gasoline and diesel fuel.
As a convenience to the reader there is also information on price per treated tank of diesel fuel (using a 26 gallon tank), and dosage per 26 gallon tank provided as “ounces of additive per 26 gallon tank”.

In Order Of Performance:

1) 2% REG SoyPower biodiesel
HFRR 221, 415 micron improvement.
50:1 ratio of baseline fuel to 100% biodiesel
66.56 oz. of 100% biodiesel per 26 gallons of diesel fuel
Price: market value

2)Opti-Lube XPD
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, demulsifier
HFRR 317, 319 micron improvement.
256:1 ratio
13 oz/tank
$4.35/tank

3)FPPF RV, Bus, SUV Diesel/Gas fuel treatment
Gas and Diesel
cetane improver, emulsifier
HFRR 439, 197 micron improvement
640:1 ratio
5.2 oz/tank
$2.60/tank

4)Opti-Lube Summer Blend
Multi-purpose
demulsifier
HFRR 447, 189 micron improvement
3000:1 ratio
1.11 oz/tank
$0.68/tank

5)Opti-Lube Winter Blend
Muti-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver
HFRR 461, 175 micron improvement
512:1 ratio
6.5 oz/tank
$3.65/tank

6)Schaeffer Diesel Treat 2000
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, emulsifier, bio-diesel compatible
HFRR 470, 166 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.87/tank

7)Super Tech Outboard 2-cycle TC-W3 engine oil
Unconventional (Not ULSD compliant, may damage 2007 or newer systems)
HFRR 474, 162 micron improvement
200:1 ratio
16.64 oz/tank
$1.09/tank

8)Stanadyne Lubricity Formula
Lubricity Only
demulsifier, 5% bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 479, 157 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.00/tank

9)Amsoil Diesel Concentrate
Multi-purpose
demulsifier, bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 488, 148 micron improvement
640:1 ratio
5.2 oz/tank
$2.16/tank

10)Power Service Diesel Kleen + Cetane Boost
Multi-purpose
Cetane improver, bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 575, 61 micron improvement
400:1 ratio
8.32 oz/tank
$1.58/tank

11)Howe’s Meaner Power Kleaner
Multi-purpose
Alcohol free
HFRR 586, 50 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.36/tank

12)Stanadyne Performance Formula
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, demulsifier, 5% bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 603, 33 micron improvement
480:1 ratio
6.9 oz/tank
$4.35/tank

13)Used Motor Oil, Shell Rotella T 15w40, 5,000 miles used.
Unconventional (Not ULSD compliant, may damage systems)
HFRR 634, 2 micron improvement
200:1 ratio
16.64 oz/tank
price: market value

14)Lucas Upper Cylinder Lubricant
Gas or diesel
HFRR 641, 5 microns worse than baseline (statistically insignificant change)
427:1 ratio
7.8 oz/tank
$2.65/tank

15)B1000 Diesel Fuel Conditioner by Milligan Biotech
Multi-purpose, canola oil based additive
HFRR 644, 8 microns worse than baseline (statistically insignificant change)
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$2.67/tank

16)FPPF Lubricity Plus Fuel Power
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
Emulsifier, alcohol free
HFRR 675, 39 microns worse than baseline fuel
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.12/tank

17)Marvel Mystery Oil
Gas, oil and Diesel fuel additive (NOT ULSD compliant, may damage 2007 and newer systems)
HFRR 678, 42 microns worse than baseline fuel.
320:1 ratio
10.4 oz/tank
$3.22/tank

18)ValvTect Diesel Guard Heavy Duty/Marine Diesel Fuel Additive
Multi-purpose
Cetane improver, emulsifier, alcohol free
HFRR 696, 60 microns worse than baseline fuel
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$2.38/tank

19)Primrose Power Blend 2003
Multi-purpose
Cetane boost, bio-diesel compatible, emulsifier
HFRR 711, 75 microns worse than baseline
1066:1 ratio
3.12 oz/tank
$1.39/tank

CONCLUSIONS:

Products 1 through 4 were able to improve the unadditized fuel to an HFRR score of 460 or better. This meets the most strict requirements requested by the Engine Manufacturers Association.
Products 1 through 9 were able to improve the unadditized fuel to an HFRR score of 520 or better, meeting the U.S. diesel fuel requirements for maximum wear scar in a commercially available diesel fuel.
Products 16 through 19 were found to cause the fuel/additive blend to perform worse than the baseline fuel. The cause for this is speculative. This is not unprecedented in HFRR testing and can be caused by alcohol or other components in the additives. Further investigation into the possibilities behind these poor results will investigated.
Any additive testing within +/- 20 microns of the baseline fuel could be considered to have no significant change. The repeatability of this test allows for a +/- 20 micron variability to be considered insignificant.

CREDITS:

This study would not have been possible without the participation of all companies involved and dieselplace.com. A special Thank You to all of the dieselplace.com members who generously donated toward this study and waited longer than they should have for the results. You folks are the best. Arlen Spicer, organizer.
__________________
2017 Cougar 279RKSWE
2007.5 Dodge Ram 2500 6.7 Cummins
Retirement Training Completed
I think the little voices in my head have started a chat group.
Canonman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2017, 07:52 PM   #36
rickhz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Wittmann, AZ
Posts: 36
Completely anecdotal, but here it is...

My friend and I both bought our 2003 Ram/Cummins within months of each other. He put his miles on about twice as fast as I did. I found that I could closely anticipate when something would go bad on my truck, by how long it lasted for him.

Then came the fuel injector issues. Both of us had to replace our fuel injectors at the same time. He had nearly 300,000 on his, I had about 140,000 on mine.

I couldn't imagine why mine failed so quickly. What I came up with is that we both started using the mandated ULSD fuel at the same time. I've used Diesel Service regularly ever since.
rickhz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2017, 09:48 PM   #37
Desert185
Senior Member
 
Desert185's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Nevada
Posts: 2,695
Canonman:

Thanks for posting that. What is the date of the testing?
__________________
Desert185 🇺🇸 (Retired Chemtrail vendor)
-Ram 2500 QC, LB, 4x4, Cummins HO/exhaust brake, 6-speed stick.
-Andersen Ultimate 24K 5er Hitch.
-2014 Cougar 326SRX, Maxxis tires w/TPMS, wet bolts, two 6v batts.
-Four Wheel 8' Popup Camper.
Desert185 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2017, 07:53 AM   #38
Tbos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Solomons
Posts: 3,874
What happened to the summary on products 10-15?


2016 Passport GT 2810BHS, 2016 F350 CC DRW
__________________
Tom
2019 Alpine 3651RL
2016 F350 CC DRW
Tbos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2017, 10:07 AM   #39
5J's
Senior Member
 
5J's's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Schulenburg
Posts: 1,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbos View Post
What happened to the summary on products 10-15?


2016 Passport GT 2810BHS, 2016 F350 CC DRW
The last paragraph said anything with results of +/- 20 microns were considered no significant change. That is where products 10-15 fall.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
__________________
Joey

2017 Hideout 308BHDS

2006 F-350 6.0L PSD CC 4X4
5J's is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2017, 09:18 PM   #40
Desert185
Senior Member
 
Desert185's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Nevada
Posts: 2,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsmith0404 View Post
I debated for a long time about the cost vs return on investment. I read about how the high pressure injectors are designed to close on a cushion of fuel, but microscopic air bubbles can cause them to slam shut on air instead of the cushion. Over time it causes wear and eventually injector failure. I have installed two systems now, one in my truck and another in a friends. I can tell you both were noticeably quieter after installing the system. This isn't just imagined, when you first start the truck after installing the system it takes about 20 seconds for the new fuel to reach the injectors, you will no it when it gets there when the noise from the truck suddenly drops by about half and starts running smoother. The only thing I can contribute the noise reduction to is injector noise as they start closing on the cushion of fuel. With a new set of injiectors in the $3k range, the $600 spent on the FASS suddenly seemed worth every dime. I also use NAPA gold filters on the system since they are easy to get and have some of the best filter ratings of any filter on the market. I also left the OE Rocor filter in place, I have no doubt my engine is getting clean, air free fuel.
FASS Titanium just installed. The biggest difference I've noticed is how much smoother and seemingly a bit more powerful the engine runs with not much fuel in the tank. With the sloshing and resulting aeration of the fuel in the tank it affected how the engine ran. I'm impressed. Will check mileage over the next few tanks. Might even be a little quieter.
__________________
Desert185 🇺🇸 (Retired Chemtrail vendor)
-Ram 2500 QC, LB, 4x4, Cummins HO/exhaust brake, 6-speed stick.
-Andersen Ultimate 24K 5er Hitch.
-2014 Cougar 326SRX, Maxxis tires w/TPMS, wet bolts, two 6v batts.
-Four Wheel 8' Popup Camper.
Desert185 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
Disclaimer:

This website is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Keystone RV Company or any of its affiliates in any way. Keystone RV® is a registered trademark of the Keystone RV Company.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.