Opinions ULSD

[TX Gooseneck]

Must be that fuzzy TX math giving you trouble again. Time doesn't matter, only the amount of fuel burned.

If your time is worth anything, time matters greatly.



I guess more than anything it depends on the MPG seen at 55mph vs 70mph.



But my questions still remains, what if any pollution is saved by driving slower if the time on the road increases. I never said my math was based on anything scientific, more a question. Feel free to prove me wrong.

 

[Nate]

We have been running ULSD on our 1990 Cummins trucks for a couple months now, haven't seen any leaks so far.

I was talking to one of the Cummins guys at STAR a couple of weeks ago. He said 03 and up, no problems at all. 2002 and earlier 24v should not have any major problems (leaks). 12v 94-98 might have some leaks, and pre 94 will most likely leak. He said they are working on seal kits for the older engines. Apparently the earlier fuel system seals were made of a different material that does not stand up as well with the ULSD.

 

[WhiteSheep]

TX Gooseneck:



Burnt fuel creates the pollution. To take it to the extreme, what if you went on a trip and drove at 0 MPH? You would take an infinite amount of time to get there, yet not burn any fuel and therefore create no pollution.



No flame intended. Your reasoning is based on an incorrect assumption that the amount of pollution generated by your RAM is constant regardless of the amount of fuel burned.



On another note, it was my understanding that we would not need any additives with ULSD as they will be added by the refiner. I also understand the ULSD is working through the system right now to clean out the distribution lines, tanks, pumps, etc. This is why we should start seeing more clogged fuel filters, especially those who have switched to the 7 micron units.



Unleaded worked out great for the environment. We even have the highest HP engines EVER that now run on the stuff, contrary to the doom and gloomers of the early '70s. ULSD will work out the same way.

 

[Cattletrkr]

If your time is worth anything, time matters greatly.



I guess more than anything it depends on the MPG seen at 55mph vs 70mph.



But my questions still remains, what if any pollution is saved by driving slower if the time on the road increases. I never said my math was based on anything scientific, more a question. Feel free to prove me wrong.

When I said time doesn't matter, I thought we were talking about pollution. The time spent on the road doesn't add or subtract to the amount of pollution. The only thing that adds to it is the amount of fuel burned. If you drove a 500 round trip and burned up 50 gallons of fuel vs driving slower and only burning 45 gallons, sure it took you longer, but the amount of pollution is less.



I'm not saying we should all drive slower and get better mileage. For some of us that's not an option. I'm just saying that spending more time on the road doesn't directly contribute to pollution. Someone might say that more time on the road means more miles thus more fuel burned thus more pollution, but I'm talking about a trip with a set # of miles.

 

[RVTRKN]

Thank you for all your feedback on this subject. There are a lot of rumors going around, and this helped me and I,m sure others as well.

 

[Katmandu]

On another note, it was my understanding that we would not need any additives with ULSD as they will be added by the refiner. I also understand the ULSD is working through the system right now to clean out the distribution lines, tanks, pumps, etc.

That is true.

It takes a VERY small amount of LSD to contaminate a tank full of USLD. The distributors are most likely NOT relabeling fuel pumps to USLD until they are certain most of the LSD is "Washed Out" of the systems.

 

[Turbo Tim 1]

Seems i read a while back that the sulpher has nothing to do with lubricating ?

From what I have read, it's not the lack of sulfur but the process of removing the sulfur that reduces the lubricity of the fuel.