A cetane booster can (might) increase mileage slightly. Every additive is slightly different in its composition, so any benefits to injectors will vary depending on the additive. As for "how the car runs" I cannot offer any scientific evidence (for Tin Man) but I can tell you what I (and others) have reported.Cool. Thanks, will do.
So in any event, suppose the big additives were benign to the fuel pump all together, is there a consensus on how they affect fuel economy or how the car runs? Are they beneficial the injectors, or is that the same lubricity idea as before?
See my sig for the link to "Why I recommend fuel additive"Ha ha! You won't hurt my feelings, promise!
I missed the link, and don't know why you just said that you didn't want to talk about it, but so be it.
Can I get the link on PS from you please?
...
Be nice, Frodo.
TM
I agree that lubricity isn't the silver bullet, and said so earlier in this thread. I'm pretty sure there are other factors at play in HPFP failures. I do think that the fact that Canadian fuel meeting the EMA recommended lubricity wear scar has something to do with the reduced failure rate north of the border. Please don't hang me for not having proper "data", but the Canadian market is more receptive to diesels, and it is assumed by many that they have a higher ratio of tdi in use so anecdotally it could be inferred that the higher lubricity standard does help....
I was reading the Canadian HPFP failure thread and couldn't help but notice that the poor fellow used Canadian diesel exclusively (with no aftermarket additives BTW) and that their diesel apparently complies with Bosch standards for lubricity. The talk is mostly about defective fuel pump design, not fuel per se.....
I think this is a fantastic idea, but good luck with the additive manufacturers giving out detailed info on that. They'd be concerned with someone ripping them off. The best thing I can suggest is to get a hold of Power Service and asked them if they've ever studied the interactions with various pump fuel/commercial additive packages. My thought is that the reason PS are so reluctant to make blanket claims about lubricity improvement is because fuel formulations can and do change from batch to batch. The end product at the retail pump has a changing baseline lubricity, so PS may only give 50 micron improvement on some fuels and 300 micron on others. They seem to be very conservative about this and that's one thing I really like about their approach. Their labs are well equipped, and claim to do hundreds of fuel tests a year, so I imagine they either have done or could do what you propose. The tricky part is to get them to OK sharing the results....
What would really be nice is to find a database that puts together brand of diesel and "best additive" to use for that particular type of additive package for those that wish to do so. Each additive company seems to put out a data sheet describing how theirs improves lubricity but often uses a graph without much detail or give any information for a statistician to analyze.
...
I share those concerns, but the fact is that VWoA has been very poor in communicating the scope of the issue, and what they are doing to remediate....
I am concerned about how diesel owners in the US put emphasis on needing additives, making the diesel experience that much more foreign to would be converts from the gasser side. It doesn't make much sense since there seems to be much more rationale to use them in gassers. There is so much bias against diesels in the US market that adding more angst about the quality of fuel that is potentially unnecessary is counterproductive. Perhaps just putting pressure on VW to make sure their fuel delivery systems are up to quality is a better strategy...
Totally different environment, different fuel sources, different Karma (Arlington, VA vs. Nevada...couldn't be more different...)A cetane booster can (might) increase mileage slightly. Every additive is slightly different in its composition, so any benefits to injectors will vary depending on the additive. As for "how the car runs" I cannot offer any scientific evidence (for Tin Man) but I can tell you what I (and others) have reported.
When I bought my car I also bought a case of 8oz Stanadyne Performance formula bottles. I noticed no significant difference in mileage or performance with or without it. However, when I switched from Stanadyne to Opti-Lube XPD there was a noticeable improvement in engine smoothness and in the sound (noise) it makes when running. I now use those little 8oz Stanadyne bottles to carry 6-7oz of Opti-Lube XPD in single tank doses. Several other members here have also reported that their engines run smoother and quieter when adding XPD. This is purely anecdotal evidence, but it has convinced me that this is good stuff. I will continue to add it to every tank until someone comes up with convincing evidence that it is harmful in some way (other than to my wallet).
Have Fun!
Don
Interesting. VW finds the majority of "HPFP failures" are related to misfueling, i.e. gasoline contamination.
What they are saying is that laboratory testing such as HFRR does not necessarily correlate to vehicle testing, which is expensive to do. Bench testing does not necessarily correlate with lab testing.Lubricity
ASTM D 6078 – Scuffing Load Ball-On-Cylinder Lubricity Evaluator (SLBOCLE)
ASTM D 6079 – High-Frequency Reciprocating Rig (HFRR)
There is no doubt that lubricity is an important property of diesel fuel performance.
A single tankful of fuel with extremely low lubricity can cause fuel injection system
components, such as a fuel pump, to catastrophically fail. Setting a lubricity requirement
to prevent catastrophic failure is relatively easy; setting a requirement to avoid long-term
fuel system wear is much harder.
There are three ways to evaluate the lubricity of a fuel. In order of decreasing long-term
and increasing simplicity, they are:
• Vehicle testing
• Fuel injection equipment bench tests
• Laboratory lubricity testing
Vehicle tests require a lot of fuel, time, and effort. They are usually reserved for basic
studies of fuel performance. Fuel injection equipment bench tests, such as ASTM D 6898,
require 50 to 100 gallons samples of fuel and 500 to 1,000 hours of operating time. Both
ASTM D 6078 and D 6079 are relatively quick, inexpensive, and easy to perform.
HFRR has become the dominant test method for fuels specification. In the United States,
ASTM D 975 – Standard Specification for Diesel Fuel Oils requires that all grades of fuel,
Grade 1-D and Grade 2-D, at all sulfur levels have wear scar diameters no larger than
520 microns using the HFRR at 60°C. Europe and many regions in Asia Pacific have
adopted a more stringent maximum wear scar diameter of 460 microns maximum.
A lot of work has been done in the past few years to correlate these laboratory tests with
field performance. Some SLBOCLE studies indicate that fuels with values below 2,000 gram
(g) will usually cause accelerated wear in rotary-type fuel injection pumps. Fuels with values
above 2,800 g will usually perform satisfactorily.
The HFRR and the SLBOCLE tests can indicate that fuels treated with an effective
lubricity additive have poor lubricity, while the more accurate fuel injection equipment
bench test rates them acceptable.
Even before variability [of fuel quality] there is the fact that Bosch has gone on record saying, in effect, that their HPFP's are not designed for fuel with an HFRR rating used in the US fuel specification (see http://www.globaldenso.com/en/topics/files/120730common_position_paper.pdf, page 2, paragraph "Lubricity") without adverse affects to the lifetime of some fuel injection system components.What appears to be the case is that Bosch didn't account for the variable fuel supply when they designed/marketed their pump..... a problem that may or may not be preventable with use of known aftermarket additives.
TM
So, maybe I'm trying to make a conclusion on something that is inconclusive as of yet, but the above being said, wouldn't most of you guys agree that a fuel additive to both remove water and improve lubricity in the HPFP at least benefit the situation? Additionally, look at the number of cars not using an additive that had a failure vs the ones where an additive was used. Again, Im a newb, but based on everything I have read, cant there be at least some agreement that an additive is at worst a wast of time/money and at best, a band aid to the crappy HPFP we have been equipped with?Even before variability [of fuel quality] there is the fact that Bosch has gone on record saying, in effect, that their HPFP's are not designed for fuel with an HFRR rating used in the US fuel specification (see http://www.globaldenso.com/en/topics/files/120730common_position_paper.pdf, page 2, paragraph "Lubricity") without adverse affects to the lifetime of some fuel injection system components.
Variability in the fuel supply is to be expected, but logicially the reference point the fuel injection system components are designed for enters into this; e.g. a pump designed for an HFRR rating of 520 would be expected to tolerate occasional fuel at, say, 570, better than a pump design for an HFRR rating of 460, which Bosch clearly indicates was the reference for their HPFP design. One has to wonder what considerations NHTSA is giving to this apparent discrepancy in pump design vs US diesel fuel specifications.
With Bosch having stated their pump is designed for standards better than specified for US diesel fuel, it would seem the responsibility would lie with VW having chosen to use this pump in the vehicles they sell in the US. Perhaps this enters into VW's assertion that fuel contamination is the culprit in HPFP failures.
...cant there be at least some agreement that an additive is at worst a wast of time/money and at best, a band aid to the crappy HPFP we have been equipped with?
They are liable, but do they all back up their fuel with that kind of guarantee? And by the sound of it, if you have a problem, she made it sound like it was a pretty easy proven process to get reimbursed.. She said that she had only seen one instance where there was even an investigation!Right now prove which one. That is the problem. All stations are liable if their fuel is contaminated, this isn't just BP.
That would be promising, but how many of us use opti lube religiously? My guess would be less than a quarter use anything at all and even fewer use it religiously.. What do you think?Another not so scientific anecdote.....
There have been 0 HPFP failures reported on this forum from anyone who uses Opti-Lube XPD religiously.
yes it does! I think that I am leaning towards getting some. I have been searching and no autozone or auto parts store has it so far..I think that not many use it (in relation to all the TDIs on the road), and it means absolutely nothing, but it still feels good to hear it
How it is handled and what kind of hassle it will be is any ones guess. If you can prove the fuel is contaminated any station is liable. BP may be easier to deal with in this regard though. No BP's in Texas or neighboring states though.They are liable, but do they all back up their fuel with that kind of guarantee? And by the sound of it, if you have a problem, she made it sound like it was a pretty easy proven process to get reimbursed.. She said that she had only seen one instance where there was even an investigation!
Great thanks! That may be why I cant find it.It's mail order only (for the most part).
There is a group buy here where you can get it for about as cheap as it comes...
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=366933
It's not longer free shipping, but I think they are only charging $4.75 to ship which still saves you about 10.00 over buying it elsewhere.
After that catastrophic spill, I can see why those states wouldn't want BP!How it is handled and what kind of hassle it will be is any ones guess. If you can prove the fuel is contaminated any station is liable. BP may be easier to deal with in this regard though. No BP's in Texas or neighboring states though.
I doThat would be promising, but how many of us use opti lube religiously? My guess would be less than a quarter use anything at all and even fewer use it religiously.. What do you think?
Every tank since January, 2010...including the 1/2 tank on the dealers lot.That would be promising, but how many of us use opti lube religiously? My guess would be less than a quarter use anything at all and even fewer use it religiously.. What do you think?