Dodge Cummins Diesel Forum banner

101 - 120 of 239 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,224 Posts
It isn't the money, it is thinking that an additive adds "a layer of protection" that is dumb. There is absolutely no evidence it is true. How you spend your money makes no difference to me. Spreading false information is what bothers me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grogg

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
It isn't the money, it is thinking that an additive adds "a layer of protection" that is dumb. There is absolutely no evidence it is true. How you spend your money makes no difference to me. Spreading false information is what bothers me.
There has been extensive Independent testing done showing exactly how much lubricity each name brand adds. I think it was done by a member if this group. Maybe another. Aside from pure skepticism, do you have any basis to back your assumption that the additives don’t add lubricity?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,153 Posts
There has been extensive Independent testing done showing exactly how much lubricity each name brand adds. I think it was done by a member if this group. Maybe another. Aside from pure skepticism, do you have any basis to back your assumption that the additives don’t add lubricity?
Here it is............https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GCEU_enUS846US846&sxsrf=ACYBGNSelfdHdaeOeu2Pkw0c8ZJ50t-3sQ:1573092150460&q=plecebo&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjZ88n2gNflAhXFmeAKHfI1Aq8QtpMCegQIARAF&biw=1366&bih=635
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
The thing that's dumb is trying to prove a negative. I am not claiming anything as factual information. I am saying that based on some basic research, it seems likely that slippery stuff helps lubricate. But I am acknowledge that I could be wrong. I'm simply saying that since it might be true, I am willing to gamble a few cents a gallon. On the contrary, to say that it is definitely false implies that you know, for a fact, that it doesn't work. I don't care what you do with your money just like you don't care what I do with mine. BUt I do think it's important to be able back up information that you present as factual. There are very few absolute certainties in the world. And neither your in depth knowledge of diesel additives, nor mine are one of those certainties. If you do have any lab reports or case studies that back up your good ole' skepticism, I would welcome that. Data helps me form opinions. And common sense tells my my opinions could be wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy N.

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,830 Posts
I cant say whether or not adding a fuel lubricity product helps on my pre-2007 ULSD truck.....but I can say that there is enough data out there proving that ULSD does not have the same level of lubricity as LSD. Therefore I cant imagine why it wouldn't help pre-ULSD fuel components. Speculation?...sure, but there are plenty of other things people do to their vehicles which have zero data to support what helps them sleep at night. :thumbup:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy N.

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
Here's one for you, take it for what it's worth.

For the past 7 or 8 years I have been using a centrifuge to clean WMO and burn it in my pickups as well as older mechanical tractors. The centrifuge has easily paid for itself time and time again in fuel savings and I have never seen my filter life shortened. In fact, I still have the same filters coming out of my clean storage tank as when I built the setup.

Anyways, I have never been brave enough to run it in anything newer or more expensive (I.E. common rail or HEUI).

For the past 3 or 4 years, our Deere swather with a 6.8 common rail engine has developed a rough idle when cold and intermittent miss and black smoke when warm. We have put over $5K into it trying to fix the problem with new injectors and a myriad of new sensors. Had a Deere tech come out and try more new injectors and even a new ECM to no avail. Talked to a few other owners of the same model swather and have found a couple that have the same problems.

Thinking it must be a lubricity issue, we tried every additive under the sun. Our Co-op sell fuel with a built in additive that we have always run for the past 10 years. We added Howes, and then added some more, and even a little more. Dumped a full gallon of Lucas into 100 gallons of diesel to no avail. Tried a similar concentration of 2 stroke oil with no change. Local Schaffer salesman donated some of his fancy treat to the cause to no avail at 3 or 4 times the recommended rate.

Since I had it left over, I dumped the rest of the 2 1/2 gallon jug of Schaffer's into about 75 gallons of diesel since I didn't have anything else to do with it. Much to our surprise, the rough idle completely disappeared.

Ran another tank of diesel through it and the symptoms came right back. By this point, my brother (who has never touched used oil in any of his personal engines) decides that there is merit to used engine oil and dumped 10 gallons of WMO in the 120 gallon tank and discovers that the rough idle and miss again disappear.

Just to make sure, we run another tank of diesel through it and the symptoms come back. It now gets a steady diet of nice black diesel/oil blend.

Long story short, we have been skeptical of additives (and still are) but know that ULSD needs added lubricity and are now 100% on board with running a little WMO in all our diesel engines (except for the semi's, still gun shy about the DOT and passing a fuel dip).

Additives are a nice idea, but with the trace amounts most people run, they are too diluted to make a noticeable difference, in my opinion.

Oh, and my 6.0 powerjoke now starts noticeably better with a blend of WMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,224 Posts
Aside from pure skepticism, do you have any basis to back your assumption that the additives don’t add lubricity?
I did not state additives don't add lubricity, I stated "it is thinking that an additive adds "a layer of protection" that is dumb". Does adding a qt of oil to the crankcase add a layer of protection? No, the oil in there is slippery already. Contrary to internet myth there is not one piece of evidence that ULSD has less lubricity that the LSD it replaced. There is also no evidence that any additive will extend the service life of any injection system component.

Here is the most comprehensive compilation of data that I've found to explain the lubricity of many different additives. It's independently done and easy to read.

Lubricity Additive Study Results - Diesel Place : Chevrolet and GMC Diesel Truck Forums

Any actual data or information that supports or contradicts this is very welcome.
Not a compilation, not a scientific study and the link has been addressed at least two times previously in this thread. It is an advertisement for Optilube with a amateur attempt to look like scientific research. Anyone who took a basic science class in high school (and passed) knows what a real scientific research paper entails.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,224 Posts
Here's one for you, take it for what it's worth.

For the past 7 or 8 years I have been using a centrifuge to clean WMO and burn it in my pickups as well as older mechanical tractors. The centrifuge has easily paid for itself time and time again in fuel savings and I have never seen my filter life shortened. In fact, I still have the same filters coming out of my clean storage tank as when I built the setup.

Anyways, I have never been brave enough to run it in anything newer or more expensive (I.E. common rail or HEUI).

For the past 3 or 4 years, our Deere swather with a 6.8 common rail engine has developed a rough idle when cold and intermittent miss and black smoke when warm. We have put over $5K into it trying to fix the problem with new injectors and a myriad of new sensors. Had a Deere tech come out and try more new injectors and even a new ECM to no avail. Talked to a few other owners of the same model swather and have found a couple that have the same problems.

Thinking it must be a lubricity issue, we tried every additive under the sun. Our Co-op sell fuel with a built in additive that we have always run for the past 10 years. We added Howes, and then added some more, and even a little more. Dumped a full gallon of Lucas into 100 gallons of diesel to no avail. Tried a similar concentration of 2 stroke oil with no change. Local Schaffer salesman donated some of his fancy treat to the cause to no avail at 3 or 4 times the recommended rate.

Since I had it left over, I dumped the rest of the 2 1/2 gallon jug of Schaffer's into about 75 gallons of diesel since I didn't have anything else to do with it. Much to our surprise, the rough idle completely disappeared.

Ran another tank of diesel through it and the symptoms came right back. By this point, my brother (who has never touched used oil in any of his personal engines) decides that there is merit to used engine oil and dumped 10 gallons of WMO in the 120 gallon tank and discovers that the rough idle and miss again disappear.

Just to make sure, we run another tank of diesel through it and the symptoms come back. It now gets a steady diet of nice black diesel/oil blend.

Long story short, we have been skeptical of additives (and still are) but know that ULSD needs added lubricity and are now 100% on board with running a little WMO in all our diesel engines (except for the semi's, still gun shy about the DOT and passing a fuel dip).

Additives are a nice idea, but with the trace amounts most people run, they are too diluted to make a noticeable difference, in my opinion.

Oh, and my 6.0 powerjoke now starts noticeably better with a blend of WMO.
Nice story, but one thing confuses me. If you can clean used motor oil enough to get all the contaminates out, why don't you put it back into crankcases? Diesel costs around $3, less in some parts of the country. Crankcase oil costs $10 and more. So why would you pour good oil into the fuel tank? Another question. Have you ever sent any of the centrifuge oil to an oil sample lab to see exactly how much of the wear metals and silicon (dirt) has been removed? For that matter, have you ever sent any of the drained oil to a lab to see what the condition of the engines, and the oil, is?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,769 Posts
...and are now 100% on board with running a little WMO in all our diesel engines (except for the semi's, still gun shy about the DOT and passing a fuel dip).
It's perfectly legal to run in your tractors, too. If the oil is from that vehicle.
But I have never figured out how they'd be able to tell which diesel engine the oil came out of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
Nice story, but one thing confuses me. If you can clean used motor oil enough to get all the contaminates out, why don't you put it back into crankcases? Diesel costs around $3, less in some parts of the country. Crankcase oil costs $10 and more. So why would you pour good oil into the fuel tank? Another question. Have you ever sent any of the centrifuge oil to an oil sample lab to see exactly how much of the wear metals and silicon (dirt) has been removed? For that matter, have you ever sent any of the drained oil to a lab to see what the condition of the engines, and the oil, is?
Yes, we do sample the oil in all of our farm trucks and tractors. Only time we have ever had a problem was the 3406 Cat in our Steiger kept coming back high in copper even after we rolled a set of bearings in it. Changed the oil cooler and all was well. That alone made me a believer in sampling (I hate trying to clean oil out of the cooling system).

I have not sent samples in on my "cleaned" oil. I know it contains tiny particles of who knows what that aren't good for the injection system. I know it can cause extra carbon build up in the engine. Hence the reason I was only running it in my old beater rigs and old tractors with forgiving fuel systems and add on fuel filters of a smaller micron rating.

Truth be told, I am still uneasy about running it in our swather. But what else can I do? I know something is wrong for it to smoke and miss. I presume it is "sticky" injectors. If a big dose of WMO keeps them from sticking, aren't I better off?

What are my other options?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
It's perfectly legal to run in your tractors, too. If the oil is from that vehicle.
But I have never figured out how they'd be able to tell which diesel engine the oil came out of.
Yeah, not going to go there. Farm trucks are already watched like a hawk for died diesel, I don't need anything else questionable when being hassled by the DOT. If they can shine a light in the tank and see a greenish tinge, all is well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,224 Posts
Yes, we do sample the oil in all of our farm trucks and tractors. Only time we have ever had a problem was the 3406 Cat in our Steiger kept coming back high in copper even after we rolled a set of bearings in it. Changed the oil cooler and all was well. That alone made me a believer in sampling (I hate trying to clean oil out of the cooling system).

I have not sent samples in on my "cleaned" oil. I know it contains tiny particles of who knows what that aren't good for the injection system. I know it can cause extra carbon build up in the engine. Hence the reason I was only running it in my old beater rigs and old tractors with forgiving fuel systems and add on fuel filters of a smaller micron rating.

Truth be told, I am still uneasy about running it in our swather. But what else can I do? I know something is wrong for it to smoke and miss. I presume it is "sticky" injectors. If a big dose of WMO keeps them from sticking, aren't I better off?

What are my other options?
I just replaced the oil cooler in my Cummins due to high copper. With no tin in the sample it was the thing to do.

If WMO keeps your swather running who am I to say otherwise? That still doesn't explain using it as fuel in the other vehicles. Since oil doesn't wear out and can go hundreds of thousands of miles with a bypass filter system my opinion is you are using thousands of dollars worth of oil to save hundreds of dollars on fuel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
I did not state additives don't add lubricity, I stated "it is thinking that an additive adds "a layer of protection" that is dumb". Does adding a qt of oil to the crankcase add a layer of protection? No, the oil in there is slippery already. Contrary to internet myth there is not one piece of evidence that ULSD has less lubricity that the LSD it replaced. There is also no evidence that any additive will extend the service life of any injection system component.



Not a compilation, not a scientific study and the link has been addressed at least two times previously in this thread. It is an advertisement for Optilube with a amateur attempt to look like scientific research. Anyone who took a basic science class in high school (and passed) knows what a real scientific research paper entails.
That’s my point. I am SUGGESTING the possibility that lubrication additives COULD protecting fuel systems from ULSD (which is notorious for its lack of lubricity). I’m not stating anything as fact. I can’t prove it. You are “STATING” the opposite. You also cant seem to prove it. The difference is that I’m acknowledging the reality that either could be true. We were born with 2 ears and 1 mouth. If we use them in that proportion, we are well served.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy N.

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,224 Posts
That’s my point. I am SUGGESTING the possibility that lubrication additives COULD protecting fuel systems from ULSD (which is notorious for its lack of lubricity). I’m not stating anything as fact. I can’t prove it. You are “STATING” the opposite. You also cant seem to prove it. The difference is that I’m acknowledging the reality that either could be true. We were born with 2 ears and 1 mouth. If we use them in that proportion, we are well served.
Only the myth is notorious, there is nothing to indicate that it is true. The evidence is all around you. Only a tiny percentage of diesel owners use additives yet the highways are not lined with broken down vehicles. OTR truck owners that use more diesel in a week than you use in a year do not worry about lubricity in ULSD. I've heard it all, dozens of times and investigated every piece of "evidence". Without fail the "evidence" is promotional material for one product or another. The ULSD mandate occurred a decade ago, so if there was any truth to the myth it would have been documented and corrected by now. No one has ever produced that document. Here is a fact that you probably are not aware of. California and Canada did not do the phase in change to ULSD, they did it without notice or fanfare. It is while the 49 states slowly depleted the LSD supply the myth was started. No one in California or Canada knew the difference. The mandate of 3% biofuel in all Oregon diesel was/is much the same. Because the pumps are not marked very few diesel owners know about it, yet the mandate has been in place for years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,592 Posts
There you go, ruining a good argument, by introducing fact and logic :grin2: Its simple... the process or removing the sulfur (hydrodesulfurization) also removed some of the components (nitrogen and oxygen) that gave the fuel its lubricity. This is a scientific fact, and was proved yet again in the linked article.

If you dont feel hydrodesulfurization lowered the lubricity enough to warrant replacing it with an additive, then dont use one. If you do feel hydrodesulfurization lowered the lubricity enough to warrant replacing it manually, then run an additive to help lubricate the moving parts. Neither view changes the fact that ULSD has less lubricity than the previous versions of diesel. What you choose to do, is up to you :wink2:

Here’s a study that dies not promote any additive vs and us not done by an additive company:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610215013879

Does anybody else think that ULSD has the same lubricity as LSD?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy N.

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,769 Posts
Does anybody else think that ULSD has the same lubricity as LSD?
I do, I do!
Not only has the government assured us that ULSD is perfectly fine, but I've also read on the internet that no additional lubricity is needed.
Between those two, I feel beyond confident that everything is as good as it can possibly get.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,224 Posts
Here’s a study that dies not promote any additive vs and us not done by an additive company:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610215013879

Does anybody else think that ULSD has the same lubricity as LSD?
All I can see is a promotion for bio diesel. No argument from me that removing sulfur strips some of the lubricity from diesel, it is well known, established, and documented. Promotional material just as this routinely fail to add that there is a standard of lubricity that must be met prior to retail sale. My stance is that pump fuel has sufficient lubricity, either by it being added after refinement or just as often remaining after refinement. I am still waiting on a document that shows the fuel you pump into your tank does not meet the specs required for the fuel components on your vehicle. The myth that no one can document is that ULSD needs any additive beyond what it already has when you purchase it. I will acquiesce that you can improve on that standard, but once again, have never seen any documentation that it will increase the service life of a component.
 
101 - 120 of 239 Posts
Top