Fuel additive
#47
I think there is definitely a place for lubricity and cetane additives for today's fuel for yesterday's trucks. As mentioned before, when they took the sulfur out, they had to put some lubrication back into the fuel. There have been instances of these lubricity additives being incompatible with the fuel, creating what is called IDID's (internal diesel injector deposits). We actually created our Diesel Extreme for that specific issue. It is just a bi-annual treatment, but I tell customers that even if they don't use our EDT (everyday diesel treatment) to use some sort of lubricity additive every tank.
#48
I think there is definitely a place for lubricity and cetane additives for today's fuel for yesterday's trucks. As mentioned before, when they took the sulfur out, they had to put some lubrication back into the fuel. There have been instances of these lubricity additives being incompatible with the fuel, creating what is called IDID's (internal diesel injector deposits). We actually created our Diesel Extreme for that specific issue. It is just a bi-annual treatment, but I tell customers that even if they don't use our EDT (everyday diesel treatment) to use some sort of lubricity additive every tank.
I am guessing I will at least continue to use the white bottle PS when we move back to Texas just because the winter temps can tend to get down Jan-Feb. I have also been told that winter diesel fuel gets less mileage than summer blends. Is this true?
#50
"The deal" is that "tank" is a meaningless unit of measure. Fuel economy is defined as distance driven divided by volume of fuel consumed. Only fairly precise numbers for both will provide a meaningful result.
But even if you use a wild guesstimate like 15-16 gallons for a tank fill-up, even your usual mileage is pretty bad. 240 miles over 16 gallons is 15 MPG. Def. something to look into, separate from whatever additive(s) you choose to use. But again, that's based on an assumption (15-16 gallons) that may be significantly off, in either direction. To coin a phrase, "your mileage may vary...."
Yes, winter blend fuel is less efficient.
But even if you use a wild guesstimate like 15-16 gallons for a tank fill-up, even your usual mileage is pretty bad. 240 miles over 16 gallons is 15 MPG. Def. something to look into, separate from whatever additive(s) you choose to use. But again, that's based on an assumption (15-16 gallons) that may be significantly off, in either direction. To coin a phrase, "your mileage may vary...."
Yes, winter blend fuel is less efficient.
#51
"The deal" is that "tank" is a meaningless unit of measure. Fuel economy is defined as distance driven divided by volume of fuel consumed. Only fairly precise numbers for both will provide a meaningful result. But even if you use a wild guesstimate like 15-16 gallons for a tank fill-up, even your usual mileage is pretty bad. 240 miles over 16 gallons is 15 MPG. Def. something to look into, separate from whatever additive(s) you choose to use. But again, that's based on an assumption (15-16 gallons) that may be significantly off, in either direction. To coin a phrase, "your mileage may vary...." Yes, winter blend fuel is less efficient.
#53
This is pretty interesting. Thanks for the insight. I always want to know what's going with the fuel I put in my truck. I always make sure I get it from a place that goes through quite a bit so that its as fresh as can be.I saw some guys talk about this on a truck show I watch occasionally. Its supposed to be pretty good stuff, but I have not tried it. On another note, I put some silver bottle pS thsi last fill-up that I ahd leftover from the summer trip. I might get flamed for this,but I really did get lower mileage than I usually get. I know I get 220 on the rear tank and 240 on the front tank, give or take 5 miles. Well, yesterday, on my way back from John's place, my rear tank only got 185! I am not sure what the deal is there, but....hmmmm
I usually get less fuel taking the 8 back home due to all the grades and I'm rushing to get home after a long hunt.
#54
I did, which as you know, goes over the worst passes in the world. LOL... I hear everyone talk about how bad the Grapevine is, but that initial climb going west out of El Centro is brutal. I am sure that affected the MPGs. I also got into it ooccasion with the new transmission
#55
#56
I agree. 15 seems pretty good to me for my set up. I have gotten is good as 18.3 hand calced, but that was with the tailwind on the highway doing 65 the entire time.
#57
.... On a 50 degree day, with fresh fuel, fresh fuel filter, fresh oil, new injectors, new wheel bearings, 55 psi in all tires, new gear oil, new center bearing..... Lol just kidding Byron... I couldn't resist....
#58
But seriously, I got that mileage back in Jan when we went to Texas and I drove one leg with the CC on set at 65 and didn't budge. It was near perfect conditions...flat, tailwind, sunny, no A/C running It worked, but man it took FOREVER to get to the next fuel stop it felt like! Needless to say, I did the rest of the trip at 70-75 and got 15 pretty consistently. I always hand calc it to. I just take miles divided by gallons used every time. That's how I know that getting 225 on the rear tank is what it should get....SHOULD get. It always takes right at 15 to fill up and 16 for the front. I could squeeze 17 in the front I guess, but never do. I go 225 on the rear tank and 240 on the front every time. I guess that' about to change though with winter blends
#59
#60