Dodge Cummins Diesel Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
TECH SPECIALIST
Joined
·
11,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,660 Posts
bet any money they publish the "Shore tank" numbers vs. Pump diesel haha
 

·
TECH SPECIALIST
Joined
·
11,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I wouldnt think so... I would expect they would be using the same batch of diesel for all of the testing.

If I could get my hands on one of those tools... :grin2:

I thought of trying to make a simple version of one for a personal bench test look at fuel & lubricants. :nerd:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,660 Posts
Well report #2 of theirs that you linked shows shore diesel and the improvement is like 611 to under 300... the other one shows pump diesel much lower and the % improvement is less.

they're not gonna sell more additive by showing you less of an increase in the best case scenario when they have the data on a worse case scenario to pass off - at least not if their marketing department is any good haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gr8bawana

·
TECH SPECIALIST
Joined
·
11,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Do you know the difference in the base fuels?

I crunched the numbers & one was a 35% reduction and the other was a 65% reduction in the wear scar... that's a pretty big difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,660 Posts
shore diesel is diesel stored in giant "shore" tanks. I suppose that could really be any tank not in a body of water, not just adjacent ones. in most cases its to fill up giant ships that burn bunker fuel mostly anyway, or perhaps tanks that fill locomotives or other industrial equipment that house thousands of gallons of fuel on board. big tanks for bulk receiving and dispensing of fuel.

the difference is likely in the amount of water and filtering (if any) that the fuel goes through before ending up in whatever burns it. I mean if home heating oil and the fuel for railroad locomotives is all just ULSD then that is likely the only difference, how and how much its handled before it gets to the end consumer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: steve05ram360

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
I wouldnt think so... I would expect they would be using the same batch of diesel for all of the testing.

If I could get my hands on one of those tools... :grin2:

I thought of trying to make a simple version of one for a personal bench test look at fuel & lubricants. :nerd:
Have you seen Project Farm?

https://youtu.be/T-yt5a1cWd4?t=490
 

·
TECH SPECIALIST
Joined
·
11,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #8

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,216 Posts
No chance what so ever that it is biased for advertising. :hehe::rof
 

·
TECH SPECIALIST
Joined
·
11,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
No chance what so ever that it is biased for advertising. :hehe::rof

Call them and ask... Product development requires testing, multiple iterations of a product will be formulated and tested. Test reports get generated by developers for management review, in this case internal review which ended up being presented to the client, aka HSS. Every product that gets developed by a secondary company goes thru this. This is all specified on an SOW, aka Statement of Work. If they fudge the reports, their a s s is on the line with the potential for a law suit.

If I were an engineer at HSS, I'd be proud to share the info presented.


ON another subject... back on our discussion RE: fuel lubrication and the ATF/2SO mix we use in the 3rd gen motors... I stopped using it for a bit while doing some tuning... for 8~10 tanks (guessing). Motor started rattling a tad bit and I thought it was environmental differences causing a pull in timing. After another 200 miles, I decided to throw an extra 0.25* of timing at it to quiet it down, which it did. But, a few days into that tank, rattle started to come back. Then it dawned on me that I had not used any of the mix in several tanks. Gave it an Italian tuneup as much as I could and it did improve slightly but still rattled. Tossed in the mix and 200ish miles later the rattle diminished and, to my surprise, more power started coming back.

Point is, the 3rd gen motor being daily driven under less than desirable loads needs a cleaner for the injectors. Does not need a lot, 8oz atf & 20~24 oz of the 2SO is all it took followed by 200~300 miles to restore it. Since I run mine so low on rail pressure, the issue cleared by the mix might be coming in sooner than a truck tuned with higher rail pressure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,216 Posts
Advertising takes a guy with a keyboard and instruction from his boss of what to type. They rely on those who believe the drivel to buy their product. I don't believe it for a second.

Apparently the only evidence you have of your ATF/2SO mix working is the lack of noise. Sounds like the Duramax crowd who believed their engines were superior back in the 90s because they could go through a drive through and not have to shut off the engine. I have yet to see anyone with a CR at a gas station adding anything to the fuel. Maybe your engine is special. I'm waiting for the tear down analysis when the engine goes TU. I think it is a safe bet it won't make it to 800,000 miles like mine did.
 

·
TECH SPECIALIST
Joined
·
11,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
damn right my engine is special lol... I would be extremely happy if it made it to 800k, 500k was the goal from day one.

Never thought to collect any data. Even if I did, you'd probably think I fudge it somehow lol. I did come across a sound level meter at work. Cheap one though with no data collection capabilities.
 

·
TECH SPECIALIST
Joined
·
11,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
No chance what so ever that it is biased for advertising. :hehe::rof
Digging further I found both LSI & HSS share the same address... so it seems you might be correct.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,216 Posts
Imagine that.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top