fuel lubricity data- with and without additives.

[Tin Man]

Not my wish sir....what is STATED in the paper and in the quote.......
are you saying that the so-called additives that the fuel companies(gelling,cetane,lubricity, water dispersion) IF thy are putting them in....are so MUCH different from top aftermarket additives? their internals are completely different? their composition is totally different chemicals? Think what you may....I think differently....I believe most of these additives have similar properties and that Most fuel suppliers CANT be trusted to add them and add them in a quantity that protects my pump and that big aftermarket suppliers have been supplying the trucking industry for decades and know a BIT of something about producing an effective and competitive product to help extend the life of our fuel systems.....you say it's snake oil....I say I love snakes!!

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[tdi90hp]

hardly....we just see the additive world differently....

 

[Tin Man]

hardly....we just see the additive world differently....

On this alone I have mentioned how even the signed statements by the pump manufacturers specifically avoid any mention of aftermarket additives and only point to fuel company/supplier quality issues. Making it into some sort of personal competition/argument doesn't change this.

 

[tdi90hp]

actually by belaboring it YOU are making this a personal argument/competition....I DONT care tin man. Please let it go. I believe in them(additives) and it is clearly supported by smarter people than you and me in that article who run small companies like Bosch.....You don't believe in them. Fine. No worries. No hard feelings...maybe we can get others opinions besides yours? I continue to sue them. You disagree with premise of article. I don't. Pleas lets get others to pipe in now and leave ourselves out of it?

 

[tdiatlast]

Tin Man and tdi90hp: I'm not picking sides here, but the nicest thing you could do for the rest of us is to go back and delete the previous posts that have no value. Thanks!

 

[tdi90hp]

just a discussion...but thanks for your input. Happy New Year...More discussion to come in 14....

 

[Tin Man]

actually by belaboring it YOU are making this a personal argument/competition....I DONT care tin man. Please let it go. I believe in them(additives) and it is clearly supported by smarter people than you and me in that article who run small companies like Bosch.....You don't believe in them. Fine. No worries. No hard feelings...maybe we can get others opinions besides yours? I continue to sue them. You disagree with premise of article. I don't. Pleas lets get others to pipe in now and leave ourselves out of it?

'Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.'

 

[showdown 42]

I personally use the PS lub additive,and equate it to the Deer whistles we used to put on our front bumpers in NE to prevent deer hits. I can tell you they work because I've never hit a deer. When I do hit one I'll change my mind. Same with Lub Additives. My 2009 TDI is running fine thank you and I've not hit a deer yet.

 

[ISurvivedNMU]

Deer Whistles.... Wow. I have not seen them in a long time!

 

[torqueit]

I personally use the PS lub additive,and equate it to the Deer whistles we used to put on our front bumpers in NE to prevent deer hits. I can tell you they work because I've never hit a deer. When I do hit one I'll change my mind. Same with Lub Additives. My 2009 TDI is running fine thank you and I've not hit a deer yet.

Aww crap. Now I need a deer whistle.

Whole issue seems pretty simple to me. Assuming additives do no harm (interesting point of discussion), the cost benefit tradeoff is the cost of the additive measured against the risk of failure and whether adding the additive decreases the likelihood of failure (another main point of contention).

Since the cost of an HPFP repair is high and the cost of the additive is relatively low, even a modest reduction in likelihood of failure has some value to me.

If there was a fuel pump that you KNEW without a doubt contained diesel with an HFRR under 300, how much extra per gallon would you pay to pump that fuel as opposed to unknown fuel? My answer is about 10-15 cents.

Optilube costs 7 to 15 cents per gallon of diesel (according to their website).

Now if you buy into the idea that the additive will pay for itself in increased fuel economy (I'm not at all convinced), it really becomes a no brainer.

That logic holds pretty tight unless you think the additive might damage your vehicle (decreased DPF life?), that using an additive doesn't increase lubricity, or that increased lubricity doesn't extend the life of your HPFP and decrease it's likelihood of failure (which is pretty well proven in my opinion based on the presentations from Bosch showing the relationship between wear and HFRR).

 

[tdi90hp]

Aww crap. Now I need a deer whistle.

Whole issue seems pretty simple to me. Assuming additives do no harm (interesting point of discussion), the cost benefit tradeoff is the cost of the additive measured against the risk of failure and whether adding the additive decreases the likelihood of failure (another main point of contention).

Since the cost of an HPFP repair is high and the cost of the additive is relatively low, even a modest reduction in likelihood of failure has some value to me.

If there was a fuel pump that you KNEW without a doubt contained diesel with an HFRR under 300, how much extra per gallon would you pay to pump that fuel as opposed to unknown fuel? My answer is about 10-15 cents.

Optilube costs 7 to 15 cents per gallon of diesel (according to their website).

Now if you buy into the idea that the additive will pay for itself in increased fuel economy (I'm not at all convinced), it really becomes a no brainer.

That logic holds pretty tight unless you think the additive might damage your vehicle (decreased DPF life?), that using an additive doesn't increase lubricity, or that increased lubricity doesn't extend the life of your HPFP and decrease it's likelihood of failure (which is pretty well proven in my opinion based on the presentations from Bosch showing the relationship between wear and HFRR).

Finally....logic prevails. Yep it ain't Kansas. Good comment.

 

[mheat]

Exactly.

Didn't anybody see the Bosch graph about fuel pump life vs. lubricity? Plus the info about the borderline US ASTM fuel lubricity spec compared to Europe and Canada? And the study about the lubricity improvements with some additives? No brainer from an engineering perspective - doesn't get any more obvious.

 

[rotarykid]

Exactly.

Didn't anybody see the Bosch graph about fuel pump life vs. lubricity? Plus the info about the borderline US ASTM fuel lubricity spec compared to Europe and Canada? And the study about the lubricity improvements with some additives? No brainer from an engineering perspective - doesn't get any more obvious.

In the conversation I had with someone at VW corp. a couple of years back it was stated that there was a fear that there were additives out there that could increase wear in the HPFP. And they felt that a statement allowing additives to the general public, the overall stupid not so bright when it comes to engineering public could lead to more failures than prevented failures......

 

[ISurvivedNMU]

In the conversation I had with someone at VW corp. a couple of years back it was stated that there was a fear that there were additives out there that could increase wear in the HPFP. And they felt that a statement allowing additives to the general public, the overall stupid not so bright when it comes to engineering public could lead to more failures than prevented failures......

I think that might be geared to additives that are emulsifiers (ones that keep water suspended in diesel). Those are bad for pump and injector life. Many of them contain alcohol.

 

[robnitro]

Pull up all msds and you'll see a major trend. Only one chemical is used to bump cetane up. 1-3 different chemicals are used for lubrication improvement. Those two chemicals make up over 80% of most additives. The rest is rust inhibitors, cleansers, and water control chemicals.

I think some of these extra chemicals are just added so they can advertise an extra bullet.

Yep and by mass, 80% of most additives are filler: kerosene or napthalene.

One is super concentrated, fppf but hard to find. Primrose I believe too. Last I looked, Optilube had a lot of filler...hmm why? Marketing! Even if the bigger bottle treats same gallons of fuel, people would pay more for the bigger bottle (+shipping cost).

 

[tdiatlast]

Filler? I prefer to think that the "filler" gives the additive better dispersion, but that may just be my imagination.

 

[jrm]

+1 on Additives, Anyone get their hands wet with diesel often? The difference between winter ULSD and B5 bio summer blend is mind blowing. B5 is greasy like old school S-5000 diesel was in the early 1990's but plain old winter blend ULSD S15 is as dry as paint thinner and actually evaporated off my shop floor during a filter change on my Cummins.
When I cannot find Bio I feed my old Dodge a half quart of cheap non detergent 40w on every fill up as its about the same price as diesel is
I use power service in the Passat.

 

[ISurvivedNMU]

Yep and by mass, 80% of most additives are filler: kerosene or napthalene.

One is super concentrated, fppf but hard to find. Primrose I believe too. Last I looked, Optilube had a lot of filler...hmm why? Marketing! Even if the bigger bottle treats same gallons of fuel, people would pay more for the bigger bottle (+shipping cost).

This makes no sense because if you compare the same brand Optilube products, they have the same treatment amount and the small bottle treats much less than the larger bottles. Unless you compare Summer to XPD. Summer has a much smaller treatment ratio than XPD, but it has much less in it also.

Please explain your statement to me.

 

[Cool Breeze]

This makes no sense because if you compare the same brand Optilube products, they have the same treatment amount and the small bottle treats much less than the larger bottles. Unless you compare Summer to XPD. Summer has a much smaller treatment ratio than XPD, but it has much less in it also.

Please explain your statement to me.

Filler (aka carrier) helps with dosing IMO. Trying to dose 2 oz may be difficult since much of the product may adhere to the upper portion of the filler tube. The pump nozzle won't wash it down either.

 

[JSWTDI09]

Filler? I prefer to think that the "filler" gives the additive better dispersion, but that may just be my imagination.

I think it might be more accurate to call it a "carrier" instead of a "filler". The actual active ingredients are only a small part of most additives. The main purpose of the carrier is to make them easier to handle. Look at the new Opti-Lube Boost. It is basically a pure cetane booster and the dose rate would be about 1.4oz (or less) per tank for our little tanks. I do not know about you, but I would not like to have to carry around a syringe to dispense my additive. The carriers are there to make dosing (measuring) easier. Trying to accurately add one ounce of additive per tank would be more of a hassle. It is easier to just pour in a pre-measured small bottle full. Pure additives are fine if you are adding them to a 150 gallon tank, but they would be inconvenient to add to a 10 gallon fill-up.

Have Fun!

Don

 

[ISurvivedNMU]

Filler (aka carrier) helps with dosing IMO. Trying to dose 2 oz may be difficult since much of the product may adhere to the upper portion of the filler tube. The pump nozzle won't wash it down either.

I understand the carrier part. Just not his part about Opti-Lube selling quarts that treat the same amount of fuel as gallons of the same additive.

 

[jgeorge]

Oh boy- knew I was doing something wrong but just couldn't put my finger on it

 

[robnitro]

I understand the carrier part. Just not his part about Opti-Lube selling quarts that treat the same amount of fuel as gallons of the same additive.

I meant that you have FPPF and Primrose that use small bottles with smaller doses because they don't use much filler, while you look at powerservice/optilube/stanadyne/etc and they have more than half of their ingredients as naptha/kero.

Good point about filler being used to make easier dosing. However, I'd rather have a more concentrated additive using a bottle much like StaBil, where you can easily meter a 1-2 oz dose... Those bottles are useless with most addities because you need to fill 4+ oz for a tank!

Now, hmm why don't they use bio as the filler? That would add tons of lubricity!

Perhaps the naptha is also used as a cleaner?

 

[ISurvivedNMU]

I meant that you have FPPF and Primrose that use small bottles with smaller doses because they don't use much filler, while you look at powerservice/optilube/stanadyne/etc and they have more than half of their ingredients as naptha/kero.

Good point about filler being used to make easier dosing. However, I'd rather have a more concentrated additive using a bottle much like StaBil, where you can easily meter a 1-2 oz dose... Those bottles are useless with most addities because you need to fill 4+ oz for a tank!

Now, hmm why don't they use bio as the filler? That would add tons of lubricity!

Perhaps the naptha is also used as a cleaner?

That makes much more sense. Naptha can be a solvent, but I am unsure if it acts as on in this case.

 

[scdevon]

I

Now, hmm why don't they use bio as the filler? That would add tons of lubricity!

Isn't Power Service's "Slick Diesel" a concentrated soy-based lubricity additive?

 

[ISurvivedNMU]

Shaffers Bio-Shield is soy based......

 

[tditom]

Optilube provided HFRR data for their products here:
http://opti-lube.com/studies-msds.html

 

[Tin Man]

Optilube provided HFRR data for their products here:
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=419423

This doesn't remotely reflect the meaning of the word "data" - one sample from one station.

TM

 

[tditom]

Intertek provided the testing on the Optilube products. They're a very reputable testing organization. The Optilube rep I spoke to was concerned about the testing costs. More data points are always better, but I'm quite confident that if Intertek was involved, then the testing was done properly.

 

[Tin Man]

Intertek provided the testing on the Optilube products. They're a very reputable testing organization. The Optilube rep I spoke to was concerned about the testing costs. More data points are always better, but I'm quite confident that if Intertek was involved, then the testing was done properly.

The other problem is that retail brands are not bound by their "original" formulation (witness OTC Sudafed - its a brand, not a product). A friend of mine in the business of selling automotive products studied MSDS and other standard documents found that some products were diluted and otherwise compromised from their original makeup.

TM