Low sulfur fuel and additives

[Mike Hohnstein]

Believe what you want folks, I'm a cynic and choose to stay with product my
simple mind can accept. On the other hand I do have a couple of spare engines
on the pallet racking in the shop so I might be a little more cavalier than
most. Then there is the issue of accepting some companies claims about a cheap
readily available solution at the expense of their fancy proprietary snake oil.
Not a surprise they would discredit the notion. We should remember that
diesels were invented and developed with vegetable oil in mind as a fuel and
they are a true multi fuel engine. There are those that actually try things and
those that talk about things, I take the former path.
One other thing, most of the forum have 3208s or 2 stroke Detroits, good old
engines that run on good old fuels. I like that black smoke. If I were using
a state of the art 07emmission bad to the bone catalytic equipped new fangled
power plant, I might be a little more concerned about fuel additives.
MH
----- Original Message -----
From: Tom Warner
To: WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: [WanderlodgeForum] Re: Low sulfur fuel and additives


Mike you are right this discussion has been around for a long time
but appears to not be based on fact. Why would anyone want to add
automatic transmission fluid to their expensive diesel engine without
testing to prove that it will not harm the engine in any way? Forum
members may want to read these and then decide.
http://www.diamonddiesel.com/fueladditives/ffaq-2.html

Can automatic transmission fluid (ATF be added to the diesel fuel to
increase lubricity and to help clean engine deposits?

It is not a good practice and likely will cause far more problems
than it could solve. Using ATF in this way is something of an "old
truckers tale" and has been used on everything from Volkswagens to
Class 8 trucks. Another erroneous strategy is to add old or new
engine oil for lubricity. The problem with these "additives" is they
are specifically designed to resist high temperatures and burning. As
a result, if they are added to diesel fuel they leave behind ash,
heavy metals, and other deposits that can easily cause costly damage
to fuel injectors and other sensitive engine components. The best
practice is to use quality diesel fuel additives like Stanadyne's
Performance Formula. They are designed to clean and lubricate engine
components without leaving behind residues that can be hazardous to
your engine's health. The bottom line is, don't add anything that is
not specifically designed to be combusted in the engine.

http://dieselfuelsystems.com/faq.asp
Can I use ATF (automatic transmission fluid) as a lubricant in my fuel?
Since October 1993, some diesel end-users have tried adding automatic
transmission fluid (ATF) to diesel fuel to improve the fuel's
lubricity. According to the U.S. Army's quarterly fuel and lubricant
bulletin (March 1994), laboratory testing using the Ball-on-cylinder
lubricity evaluation (BOCLE) had shown that the addition of ATF to a
low sulfur fuel does not improve the fuel's lubricity rating.
Moreover, the presence of ATF in fuel can adversely affect other
performance properties of diesel fuel.

Tom Warner
vernon center,ny
1985 PT 40

At 07:06 PM 12/5/2006, you wrote:
>Lee,
>
>This has been discussed on many forums recently. Basically as I
>understand it, it summarizes as this: the new ULSD fuel has less
>lubricity, less aromatics and less fuel efficiency.
>
>Less lubricity for the older engines (defined in this case as
>pre-2007) means you *will* need to find a good additive package. One
>inexpensive way to add lubricity is to add plain old ATF (automatic
>transmission fluid) at each fill up. I have seen many different
>estimates of how much, everywhere from 1qt to 1gal per 100 gallons of
>fuel. Mike H., one of the forum's resident diesel gurus, even
>mentioned up to 5% ATF, which seems pretty high to me. Check with
>truck stops to see if any commercial additive packages for the ULSD
>have hit their shelves yet. While there are claims that fuel
>manufacturers have added additional lubricity additive packages to the
>ULSD, one of our Lone Star Birds members who owns a heavy diesel
>repair shop has said fuel pump manufacturers were recommending adding
>lubricity additives even with the previous LSD fuel or they would not
>warrant the pumps. In any event, it seems clear that you will need a
>lubricity agent to be safe.
>
>Less aromatics means less seal swelling which may translate into fuel
>leaks on some engines. A high pressure fuel leak on a hot engine is
>something I plan to keep a good eye out for when I have to start
>buying the ULSD (still have LSD available around here so far in spite
>of deadlines). I have heard rumors that some Mercedes and Cummins
>forums have already reported fuel leaks as a problem, but that could
>be more good old internet urban legends than fact. Find a discussion
>group specific to your engine, but watch your individual engine to be
>sure.
>
>Less fuel efficiency in the neighborhood of 1.2% has been reported
>(see

>http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collec...n2006\
22.pdf)
> At my fuel inefficiency of about 5-5.5mpg, a 1.2% decrease appears to
>be rounding error from my standpoint and something I can't much fret
>over. Points one and two are much more significant to me in terms of
>potentially disasterous results and long term engine wear.
>
>Something that has not been reported or discussed on the forums is how
>the new EPA laws have also affected lubricating oils. The new
>"CJ"-rated diesel engine oil spec was specifically designed for the
>2007 ULSD engines. It also has reduced sulfur as well as phosphorous
>and sulfated ash which helps stabilize the oil's TBN (total base
>number), acts as a lubricity agent and provides alkalinity to
>counteract acid formation during combustion. My understanding is that
>oil manufacturers can not maintain the TBN with current additive
>packages. All of this taken together may result in reduced ability to
>neutralize blow-by which creates more sulpheric acid which in turn
>creates corrosion, more deposits which could clog piston rings and
>cause cylinder wall scuffing, less total wear protection for the
>engine, etc, etc...... While oil ratings are generally rated as
>backwards compatible (CI vs. CD, etc.), I noted some engine oil
>manufacturers recommending to use the CJ oils only in the new (2007+)
>heavy duty engines and stick with the older rated oils for older heavy
>duty diesel engines. In my opinion, you really need to be sure you
>are sticking with a CI rated oil for older (pre-2007) engines. As
>time goes on, and the over the road fleets mature into a predominance
>of 2007+ engines, the older oil formulations will probably be harder
>to come by.
>
>Just my understanding. Not a fuel or oil manufacturer, but grew up in
>the fuel distribution business and have maintained an interest in what
>is really going in my engines.
>
>FWIW, etc, etc....
>
>Mike Bulriss
>1991 WB40 "Texas Minivan"
>San Antonio, TX
>
>--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "Lee Davis" wrote:
> >
> > I have a 95 BMC with the 300 Cummins diesel engine. I am full time now
> > on the West Coast and of course all you can get now is the new fuel.
> > Should I be adding something when I fill up or is it OK for the older
> > engines? If I should be using an additive, what is recommended and
> > where do you get it?
> >
> > Lee Davis
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]