Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 03-26-2010, 05:29 AM   #1
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,525
Lubricity Study

Found this interesting piece on a big truck board , copied and pasted.

<table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td width="7"></td> <td><pre> Flowing 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 its 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 additives
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)Howes 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." Tags: Additives, diesel, fuel, Lubricity Share Bookmark and Share
Reply to This Bold Italic Underline Strikethrough Add Hyperlink Add an Image
Upload a File Upload Files Attach File(s): * * * Replies to This Discussion jud thomas
Permalink Reply by jud thomas on August 17, 2009 at 6:11pm Delete Thanks Chuck, this is
good stuff to know. Makes that old Low Sulfer Diesel look good don't it ? Reply
to This Richard - AKA "Big Jayhawk" Permalink Reply by Richard - AKA "Big
Jayhawk" on August 18, 2009 at 8:52am Delete Once a month, I just put a gallon of
straight Vegetable Oil (Soy) in each tank, it works like a charm... Reply to This
Herb C. Hampton Permalink Reply by Herb C. Hampton on August 18, 2009 at 3:52pm Delete
Big Jayhawk, what engine do you have and how much fuel capacity? I would like to add
biodiesel but cannot find it in Oklahoma where I live. Herb C. Hampton. Richard - AKA
"Big Jayhawk" said: Once a month, I just put a gallon of straight Vegetable Oil
(Soy) in each tank, it works like a charm... Reply to This Richard - AKA
"Big Jayhawk" Permalink Reply by Richard - AKA "Big Jayhawk" on
August 18, 2009 at 4:02pm Delete I have a Detroit 60 Series in a '97 Freightliner w/ 1.5
million miles on it. I have 110 gallon tanks. I started doing it by accident. My wife
found some out of date vegetable oil in the back of the cupboard, and instead of throwing
it out, I poured it in the tanks. It smoothed out the vibration in the engine on hard
pulls, and I always get my best mpg when it's in there. I've been doing it for 3 or 4
years now, with no problems... Herb C. Hampton said: Big Jayhawk, what engine do you have
and
__________________
Advertisement

FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2010, 08:35 AM   #2
Guru
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Vessel Name: Anastasia III
Vessel Model: Krogen 42
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,716
RE: Lubricity Study

Wow. In that test, Marvel Mystery oil actually made the fuel worse!
__________________

Keith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2010, 01:57 PM   #3
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
RE: Lubricity Study

Interesting information, thanks. The lubricity additive we have used in our boat since acquiring it in 1998 is Hammond's Select3. This was on the recommendation of the diesel shop we use. It uses a mil-spec lubricity agent they developed called Lubribor. Hammonds is the same company that makes Biobor, the fuel "bug killer." We use that in our fuel, too.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2010, 05:21 AM   #4
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,525
RE: Lubricity Study

Marvel Mystery oil actually made the fuel worse!


MM as far as I can find out is #1 diesel, oil of winter green to change the smell and red die.

Why would you think it helps anything?

ATF has been used by some folks .
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2010, 09:25 AM   #5
Guru
 
Daddyo's Avatar


 
City: Cruising East Coast US
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Grace
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,441
RE: Lubricity Study

Bob Smith of Lehman fame swears by MM, that's why I use it.
Daddyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2010, 06:12 AM   #6
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,525
RE: Lubricity Study

Folks that spill salt , toss some over their shoulder , works for them.
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2010, 06:42 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 158
RE: Lubricity Study

I found this study in my Favorites based on Bio-Diesel and Lubricity.<a href="http://www.biodiesel.org/pdf_files/fuelfactsheets/Lubricity.PDF">

http://www.biodiesel.org/pdf_files/fuelfactsheets/Lubricity.PDF</a>

I know from experience that when cleaning an emergency generator fuel tank that has had Bio-Diesel, it is like pushing peanut butter. I stongly suspect the warm returned fuel being introduced back in to the tanks causes this thick glob...


El Sea/L.C.

Suckin Sludge & Havin a Gas
El Sea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2010, 06:56 AM   #8
Scraping Paint
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Vessel Model: CHB 48 Zodiac YL 4.2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,804
RE: Lubricity Study

No one seems to mention that the study is based on "on highway" or road diesel. Its viscosity is far less than that of marine diesel, and has a much lower flashpoint (illegal by marine regulatory standards). The molecular arrangements that make those differences make a big difference in the wear test results.

Do you know what's in your tank?
RickB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2010, 02:21 PM   #9
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,525
RE: Lubricity Study

"No one seems to mention that the study is based on "on highway" or road diesel. Its viscosity is far less than that of marine diesel, and has a much lower flashpoint (illegal by marine regulatory standards)."

Perhaps on ships there is some difference , but here in the USA most marinas are serviced by the same trucks delivering the same fuel they supply to gas stations.

Diesel ashore comes in #1 and #2 grades , and of coyrse is modified for winter use with additives.

Most "marine" diesel is died red to show the road tax has not ben paid , big no no for diesel car or truck users.

The "off road diesel" used to be the old style ( not super low sulfur) fuel , but now its the same (at least on farms and in the marinas in FL ) as comes out of every road truck.
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 01:12 PM   #10
Scraping Paint
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Vessel Model: CHB 48 Zodiac YL 4.2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,804
RE: Lubricity Study

Quote:
FF wrote: Perhaps on ships there is some difference , but here in the USA most marinas are serviced by the same trucks delivering the same fuel they supply to gas stations.

The "off road diesel" used to be the old style ( not super low sulfur) fuel , but now its the same (at least on farms and in the marinas in FL ) as comes out of every road truck.
First, nobody mentioned ships so I don't understand why you brought that up. If I were talking about merchant ships I would have said so.

Second, I suggest you stop by your friends at Roland Martin's, they advertise "marine diesel" - ask them what the flash point is.

Marine diesel is the term used to describe a product*which meets certain specifications. The flash point for marine diesel is minimum 60*C. The minimum flash point for automotive diesel is 38*C.

Considering the cutoff between a combustible liquid (diesel) and a flammable liquid (gasoline) is at 37.8*C, the difference between automotive and marine diesel is considerable for both regulatory as well as operational considerations.

Here in Fort Lauderdale, the diesel sold at Bahia Mar is just under 68*C, the mobile fuel barge is pumping diesel that is just under 67*C. I have not bothered to query all the marine fuel stations in town but I suspect that if they are selling marine diesel,*the specs will be*the same.

And for what it's worth, the European standard for automotive diesel is 55*C minimum flashpoint, considerably above ours and nearly as safe as marine diesel.

The link below leads to a dated but still very relevant study on this topic.

http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/...r/dfuelrpt.pdf

*
RickB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2010, 08:15 AM   #11
Guru
 
Phil Fill's Avatar
 
City: Everett Wa
Country: US
Vessel Name: Eagle
Vessel Model: Roughwater 58 pilot house
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,919
RE: Lubricity Study

I don't think it can hurt using additives.* I mean what is the down side, so maybe I waste 20 bucks?*
Phil Fill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2010, 08:30 AM   #12
Scraping Paint
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Vessel Model: CHB 48 Zodiac YL 4.2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,804
RE: Lubricity Study

Quote:
Phil Fill wrote:

*I mean what is the down side ...?*
You wreck your fuel pumps or injectors, burn up a few pistons or liners.

The question should be "what is the up side?
RickB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2010, 09:08 PM   #13
Guru
 
Phil Fill's Avatar
 
City: Everett Wa
Country: US
Vessel Name: Eagle
Vessel Model: Roughwater 58 pilot house
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,919
Lubricity Study

Ok, what is the up side?

What addtive do you suggest to increase the Lubricity for the off road low sulfer pumped at most marina pumps?* *

-- Edited by Phil Fill on Tuesday 30th of March 2010 09:14:10 PM
Phil Fill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 05:03 AM   #14
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,525
RE: Lubricity Study

Opri Lube Summer blend , at a 3000-1 mix it may help on the sliding parts and should not destroy the engine.

It costs almost as much to ship a gal as a Qt ,

a gal should handle a Millenum at 4 hours a year!
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 05:06 AM   #15
Scraping Paint
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Vessel Model: CHB 48 Zodiac YL 4.2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,804
RE: Lubricity Study

Quote:
Phil Fill wrote:

What addtive do you suggest to increase the Lubricity for the off road low sulfer pumped at most marina pumps?* *


What part of "you don't need any" is creating confusion?
RickB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 09:41 AM   #16
Guru
 
Phil Fill's Avatar
 
City: Everett Wa
Country: US
Vessel Name: Eagle
Vessel Model: Roughwater 58 pilot house
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,919
RE: Lubricity Study

Well, that is to simple?* What is the catch?*


*
I sort of believe that no additives are needed as I run 20 gallon/wee in the pick up with 275,000 miles with no problem except the fuel seal leak vs 20 gallon/year through the boat.* I still do not understand the down side of adding additives for lubrication?


*
Also, I do not understand the flash point of on road low sulfur #2 vs marine off road low sulfur #2?* I thought it was the same except had die in it.****I know #1 diesel and home heating burn cleaner than #2diesel, ignites easier and burns cleaner.* Again if*the #2*works in the pickup why not the boat?* So what is the plus/minus with having a lower flash point besides being more*eazier to ignite?
Phil Fill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 12:17 PM   #17
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
RE: Lubricity Study

The "you don't need any" reply might not be accurate for all diesels. Maybe on the newer generations of them, but the old low rpm thumpers with jerk-injection like the FL120 depend on fuel lubricity for their injection pumps and injectors to not wear out abnormally fast. All the diesel experts I've talked to on the subject, from the folks at the diesel shop we use to a friend in the marine diesel manufacturing industry, recommend a lubricity additive for our engines (FL120s). I haven't asked them about newer engines since we don't have any. So we've been using a lubricity additive that was recommended when we bought the boat and it's been twelve years now. That's not to say the engines won't explode tomorrow, but so far so good.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 12:55 PM   #18
Scraping Paint
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Vessel Model: CHB 48 Zodiac YL 4.2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,804
Lubricity Study

Quote:
Marin wrote:

The "you don't need any" reply might not be accurate for all diesels. Maybe on the newer generations of them, but the old low rpm thumpers with jerk-injection like the FL120 depend on fuel lubricity for their injection pumps and injectors to not wear out abnormally fast.
You mean the old mechanical engines with larger clearances than modern close tolerance, high speed, heavily loaded pumps and fuel injectors that make those in the Lehman look like something built in China in the 60s?

Look up ASTM D-975. If you can buy it on the street or dock, diesel fuel meets that spec right out of the refinery.* A Lehman is as industrial as your 985, you would be hard pressed to wreck the pump if you blended*black oil*in your tanks.
*
I don't buy or sell additives, and I certainly don't recommend them to anyone.*The only people I know who use them are those boaters who spend all their time talking about engines rather than using them and people who write about being truck drivers.*We go through a few million gallons of diesel every year in engines from*"thumpers"*down to little 1200 rpm*4 cylinder gensets and*lawn equipment sized*single cylinder fire pumps, all without*a drop of mouse milk added to any of them. I cannot recall a single instance of a fuel pump or injector failing due to lack of lubricity and I see the bills and talk to the repair shops.

*


-- Edited by RickB on Wednesday 31st of March 2010 12:57:19 PM
RickB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 01:56 PM   #19
TF Site Team
 
Baker's Avatar
 
City: League City, Tx
Country: Texas
Vessel Model: Carver 356
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,630
RE: Lubricity Study

I buy that Valvtec stuff. I would assume it is marine diesel but I am gonna ask next time. And I don't know if the 20 year olds at the dock would know....
Baker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 02:09 PM   #20
Curmudgeon
 
BaltimoreLurker's Avatar
 
City: Stoney Creek, MD
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Moon Dance
Vessel Model: 1974 34' Marine Trader Sedan
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,629
RE: Lubricity Study

Quote:

The "you don't need any" reply might not be accurate for all diesels. Maybe on the newer generations of them, but the old low rpm thumpers with jerk-injection like the FL120 depend on fuel lubricity for their injection pumps and injectors to not wear out abnormally fast.
FWIW - I've gotten the same instruction as Marin from everyone who has had anything to do with my FL120.*

That said, I have seen the study(ies) that say MMO reduces lubricity. And that is the only contradiction to Bob Smith direction that I've ever heard regarding our engines.

So I use this stuff http://www.fppf.com/rvbusformula.asp



*
__________________

BaltimoreLurker 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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012