Smoke in the head lights

[avvblanc01]

Well if you would like a study on the lubricity properties of the different diesel fuel additives as compared to regular ULSD here is just that. The results are pretty surprising, as a lot of stuff just doesn't lubricate like people think it does:
http://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/a...diesel-additives-study-done-diesel-place.html

As for the paint marker and injector tolerances, I'm just taking that information directly from the technical topics article on page 44 of TDR issue 72. I linked that article above if you'd like to read it in digital form, but I would like to imagine that Joe Donnelly of the turbo diesel register wouldn't be making stuff up (at least I'd hope so haha).
The fact of the matter is that these trucks were designed to run on ULSD and that's it. There is nothing Ive ever come across from Cummins stating that additives like 2 stroke oil do anything to help the engine, otherwise they would be telling us to run them on a regular basis in the manual.

 

[cerberusiam]

Yet 2 stroke showed a definite improvement in the ISO tests, but, based on a lot of the chatter it is not recommended? Bit of contrary word smithing going on there from, as usual. The study looks to have proved what it set out to from a lubricity stand point. What it doesn't take into account is the need for those additives that provide a cleaning effect, just as important when dealing with ULSD fuels. Of course, the real existing problems are never mentioned and discussed as that would definitely call into question the efficacy of the results.

Considering ULSD was not mandated until 2007 it is hard to say they were designed for ULSD. Ran a lot of LSD thru my truck when it was the standard. It was definitely a better fuel for a lot of reasons. If you look at Cummins material you will find they recommend their own products, Power Service, frequently for needed additives. Along with a fuel quality spec the conclusion is they do in fact recommend and encourage the usage of additives when appropriate. Conversely, I have never seen stated ANYWHERE that additives are BAD for the fuel system. Just to pick one; 2 stroke oil is a proven lubricity enhancer, Cummins does not state it is bad, Bosch has never claimed it will hurt the HPCR fuel system, there is no proven documentation that it will harm the engine or fuel system On the other hand, there are many personal testimonies to its effectiveness, lack of damage, etc.

Yet, given the known body of work, it is still assumed that it has to be bad because no one has told us it is good?

 

[avvblanc01]

I wasn't saying things like injector cleaner or optilube shouldn't be run, I was referring to more viscous things like 2 stroke oil, ATF, motor oil, and whatever else people throw in their tank in the name of lubricity. Sure they show an increase in lubricity, but not as much as optilube or biodiesel do. To say that these motors weren't designed for ULSD is kind of a stretch. I may be going out on a limb here, but I'd imagine the the OEMs would be notified by the EPA that the diesel fuel standards in the united states would be changing well before they actually changed? Stuff like that doesn't happen overnight, especially since the petroleum industry would have to have time to implement changes in the production process.
If you would like, you are more than welcome to run 2 stroke as an additive. I however, don't think that it should be done since there are things that provide far better lubricity, actually provide cleaning solvents, and aren't as viscous so they atomize and flow properly in the HPCR fuel system. I am also going to side with the turbo diesel register on not adding 2stroke oil since I would like to believe that they aren't printing false information, and consult the actual manufacturers (i.e. bosch and cummins) before printing technical articles.
The HPCR fuel system isn't exactly cheap to replace, so I just don't feel like taking a risk using 2 stroke oil in it. Sure its cheaper than opti-lube, but its not a savings opportunity I think is worthwhile to take! Its totally your call to do so and I'm actually really glad you chimed in so that the OP can see a good two sided argument here and make a decision to use the fuel additives he feels are best! ...that or maybe we scared him away haha

 

[cerberusiam]

I was referring to more viscous things like 2 stroke oil, ATF, motor oil, and whatever else people throw in their tank in the name of lubricity.

That would be directly to my point, you are interpreting the article to include 2 stroke oil when if in fact did not call it out specifically. If you read down thru the QA portion of the article 2 stroke was being recommended by some people to diagnose problems because of its lubrication properties. It is fact was a tip included in the TDR.

Extending that a little bit, if it works as a diagnosing tool why would it not work on a regular basis? It is ashless, designed to burn with minimal soot, and acts as a cleaning agent. The only question that was kicked around was whether the additives in it had the potential to create deposits or acids that would be detrimental in long tem use. To my knowledge that has never been proven to be a factor.

Is it the best lube? Based on 1 test it did not score as high as others yet it did bring the fuel to a level that met north American fuel standards, but, did not score as high as others. That leaves a lot of room in the determination of suitability compared to other options, but, in no way indicates it is as unsuitable as engine oil or ATF.

Again, back to my point of interpreting these articles, lack of recommendation does not make it a bad option. That is something that is left to the reader to determine.

I am not advocating use or disuse of any of these additives, that has to be a personal decision. What I am advocating is applying a little cognitive logic to all the information to see if it passes a reality check. Sometimes, I should say frequently, you read thru these articles and they contradict themselves with some of the conclusions. Sometimes it is just a turn of the word that changes what the author really meant. It is hard enough to ferret out the real meaning without adding assumptions that turn into internet myths.