the truck stop where i get fuel now only carries ultra-low. what is your opinion on this as far as lubrication for the p-pump and related items. i always add power service fuel additive anyway. thanks in advance. truck is a '96 2500 4x4 auto w/342,000 miles.
If you are to believe these guys
Fuel Additive Test - Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel - Diesel Power Magazine adding stuff to the fuel is nothing short of magic. Adding 16 oz of two stroke oil to 30 gallons of pump diesel (200:1) gives a full mile per gallon increase. That means one pint of 2 stroke has the equilavent of 2 gallons of diesel BTUs. Diesel has 130,500 BTUs per gallon (1145 per ounce) so apparantly 2 stroke contains 16,313 BTUS per ounce, 14 times as much. So that leads to some questions. If you believe the myth that ULSD diesel doesn't have enough lubricity and that 2 stroke oil has the lubricity you need why not run straight 2 stroke? It costs roughly 4 times per gallon more than diesel but you get 14 times as many MPG. OK, might be too thick for the lift pump to pull fromthe tank, so why not 50:50? Also, if 2 stroke is so powerful why does my outboard mix of 50:1 (gasoline has 115,000 BTUs per gallon) give me 1 1/2 MPG at WOT and a 4 stroke engine that uses no oil in the fuel get 4 times that on an equal sized boat
The same holds true for the products that are actually marketed as diesel additives. If a few ounces per tank give such marvelous results why not double, triple, or quadruple the dose? I have no idea what they cost but why not 50:50? After all, to get those kinds of numbers they have to have BTUs just short of explosives.
Of couse there are some glaring flaws in the article. First is the Powerstroke only got 14. 6 mpg highway. My brother has a 98 6 speed 4X4 2500 Ford with a Powerstroke and his highway mileage is very close to mine (19 to 21). They also state that sulphur is a lubricant, WRONG!!! Natural lubricants are stripped during the process of removing sulphur, but sulphur is a corrosive-plain and simple. Then there is the glaring ommission of what the best highway and best city averages of untreated fuel were, or did they only run one tank of untreated while running multiple tanks of treated fuel? The biggest flaw is the lack of a control to weed out the variables, you know, average speed, traffic, idle time, wind, terrain, temp, fuel quality, etc. It is easy to get a 3 mpg decrease in mileage by only driving 75 instead of 65, or driving into a 20 mph headwind at 65 instead of having a 20mph tailwind at 65.
What I'm saying is before you buy into those anecdotal stories use some common sense. Go by a truckstop and watch the trucks at the fuel islands. How many of them are dumping additives into their tanks? If additives really give those kinds of results every owner/operator out there would be using them.