Spicer's Diesel Fuel Lubricity Additive Test

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bill Plock

Joined
Jan 11, 2003
Messages
335
Location
Owego, NY
Arlen Spicer organized a test of various Diesel Fuel Lubricity additives .. The test was performed by Southwest Research Laboratory in San Antonio ..

Results are posted Here ... Lubricity Additive Study

Very interesting results for Diesel Owners ... Hat's off to you Arlen!
cool.gif


(Arlen also organized a popular Air Filter Study several years ago)

smile.gif
 
I have been waiting with baited breath for the results, thanks for posting.

There are some surprises there, and some not so surprises.
I'll just leave it at that.
 
So, to get the 2% bio-diesel ratio, one would just purchase say, a 5 gallon container of 100% bio-diesel and just add to your tank at the proper ratio for the fill up right?

I ask this because right now, one of the Get-go's in my area that I fill up my Dodge at has just started offering B20 bio blend. I put 30 gallons in my 35 gallon tank, so I think that if my math is correct, that gives be about B15 blend.

B2 being listed as the best is an interesting concept, as I thought that full bio would be better...
 
Dad if you poke around the bio-diesel sites, there is a chart on some of them for the results of lubricity improvement for different ratios of bio-D in HFRR results. From memory the bio ratios very quickly improve the numbers and give lowest wear somewhere between 2-5%, and remain at max after that. I would have to look it up to give exact percentages. I very much like running B20. Full bio was not tested in Spicer's study as the results are already published elsewhere. I do like that B2 was tested providing a baseline check against previous results.
 
I was most surprised by the performance of the Super Tech 2-stroke oil and the fact that my old favorite, Stanadyne, didn't do better. I do think this test is a little misleading in that it used untreated (meaning none of the lubricity additives put in by the blender) ULSD. While it does show a "worst case scenario" I think people that don't read the fine print are going to be vulnerable to a sales pitch. I'd rather see a national sample of treated fuel to find out just how the average fuel we are pumping is doing.
 
Jim, there is a 400+ topic over on the forum Spicer posted this study in from the start of the proposed study. Non-additized fuel was used as 1. different suppliers use different additives in varying ratios across the country to make up the pump fuel, 2. additives are put in at the distribution station at the end of the pipeline or sometimes by the tanker driver, 3.pump diesel may or may not meet even the federal standard of lubricity at every pump in the country. If further study was to be done, I would think that now that a baseline is done then additized fuel could be used to help determine if there is a diminishing returns effect of using a product in presence of another lubricity agent.
I am not surprised by the results of the Stanadyne performance formula in this test so much. I am surprised that the Lucas UCL was basically neutral in this test.
I have heard claims that MMO and DK are poor lubricity agents, but was mildly surprised at the results of this test tend to substantiate those claims for the HFRR as much as they do.
I am very surprised at the results of the Primrose product, but Primrose has several diesel conditioner products available and think the wrong one may have been chosen for this study.
 
Quote:

I am very surprised at the results of the Primrose product, but Primrose has several diesel conditioner products available and think the wrong one may have been chosen for this study.

Click to expand...


I agree!! I use Primrose 405 (actually the 405-C concentrate), and I'm sure that is the more commonly used Primrose product.

Just a stab in the dark... Spicer lists in his tag line that he is a Primrose user, and I'm guessing he uses the Power Blend 2003. I guess when it's your study, you get to test your own favorite product
grin.gif
 
Quote:

Why would the summer blend cost more than the winter blend of optilube? Weird.

Click to expand...


I'm guessing one of the reason is because of economics. You have to sell a lot more of the summer blend to make money as the mixture ratio is 3000:1, while you would not have to sell as much winter blend to make the same money because it's ratio is 500:1. Also, the summer blend may be more concentrated as it doesn't have space taken up by cheaper anti-gel chemistry mixed in.

Hammer
 
I only wish Lube Control would have participated in this test. Esp the FP Plus. I'm wondering if i'm wasting my money.
 
I don't think your wasting your money, I'm pretty sure both FP products have very good lubricity. The only thing I would question with that is maybe you can get the same results a little cheaper, but definetly not a total waste.

Hammer, If memory serves me right it's usually the anti gelling additives that cost more than the additives that don't have them. I used to always use additves in my Cummins, and I thought that's how I remember that. Anyhow, I thought that was interesting.
 
Quote:

Very interesting. Ive been adding ATF to the tractor. I wonder how that compares to the 2 cycle oil.

Click to expand...


Adding ATF to diesel fuel is a common practice among truckers as is adding 2-cycle oil to winter blend fuel. The benefits, if any, of ATF as a fuel additive are debatable. It may not harm the older "mechanical" injection systems; however, IMHO it’s definitely not good for today’s modern common rail diesel injection systems that operate with pressures in excess of 23k psi. One issue with ATF is that it’s not designed to burn without producing ash or other deposits. I remember a post by Geroge Morrison (Avlube.com) on the TheDieselPage.com forum in which he related an experience of investigating injector failures for a customer that turned out to be caused by routine use of ATF in the fuel.

However, TC-W3 2-cycle oil is designed to burn, and based on the results of Spicer's study, it’s a good diesel fuel lubricity additive. I used it for added lubricity along with Stanayne Performance formula in my diesels for several years before switching to Stanadyne Lubricity formula.. Based on Arlen’s test results TC-W3 2 cycle oil would be a good choice. It’s fairly inexpensive and readily available. With the advent of ULSD, use of a lubricity additive for all diesel engines seems to be a necessity - especially for those who haven’t been routinely using any additive in older diesel powered equipment that only gets used occasionally.

smile.gif
 
Ah. I didnt even think of the ash. Makes sense. Ill get some TC-W3 next time Im in WalMart. The ATF did quiet down the the mech injection though.
 
Quote:

test sure did not like Lucas UCL for diesel engines. Is there a similar test for gasoline engines?

Click to expand...


I'm interested in knowing as well. Just bought a gallon for my Escape. Is it snake oil when used in a gas engine as well?
 
I was surprised at the results, in the past my thinking was something is better then nothing...that's not even close.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
Anyone try or heard of 'Fuel Doctor' from Australia?
Replies
13
Views
1K
a5m
B
Renewable Lubricants Diesel Additives
Replies
0
Views
999
Blue1920
T
  • Sticky
Trying to find "The One" 15w40 oil to use across my whole fleet (pre-emission diesel and gas engines)
2
Replies
28
Views
11K
locomaster1969
OVERKILL
HOBS base oils and implicit/inherent FM
Replies
7
Views
4K
bruce381
AEHaas
The Frequently Quoted “Taxi Study” SAE 2005-01-3818
2
Replies
22
Views
4K
JohnnyO
Back
Top