Thanks for stating downsides as well as benefits. I think I recall Ford recommends something different for motor oil as well when using biodiesel.

 

Yep. When I read this:

"Why? What's wrong with what few particulates are left in a properly fueled Diesel engine? What do they harm?"

It became painfully obvious this guy is just trolling for an online fight, and will refuse to have a rational discussion. I'm done.

 

A Google search on "harmful effects of diesel particulates" produces 451,000 results.

I don't much care for my DPF either, but they aren't there just on a whim.

 

OSHA only warns about it when it comes to high concentrations in confined spaces, like mines: https://www.osha.gov/dts/hazardalert...ard_alert.html

It remains that particulates aren't a big deal for you or for the environment. But when excessive they can LOOK dirty, so they get attention.

Yeah, if there's one thing that gets me riled up, it's when someone who's become a moderator comes barging in swinging meat and derailing to show how smart they are. If it were just some dude, it would be easier to correct him and let it go, even if he tries to insist repeatedly the diesel particulate filter is the name for all components of the entire emissions system.

 

SCR has nothing to do with particulate matter.

 

Agreed. And particulate matter has nothing directly to do with SCR. Completely independent topics and systems. The only thing they have in common is that they're both separate components of the overall diesel emissions control systems.

 

Alright, time to straighten you out. There's a difference between having a discussion, and attempting to pick an online fight.

I never "insisted" anything that you claim. If you really want to know the truth, it was YOU who ASSUMED I said something that I actually didn't say. Read what I posted earlier in this thread carefully:

"You assume that the DPF is only clearing up the black smoke to make it appear cleaner. While it does trap and eliminate particulates that show up as black smoke, the emissions system also heavily reduces CO2, NOX, and other "invisible" yet extremely harmful emissions that do not show up as black exhaust soot."

Did you see it? I clearly stated what the DPF does, which is clearing up the black smoke. But then in the next sentence I stated that "the emissions system also" cleans up other stuff. The phrase "emissions system" doesn't just have to apply to the DPF only.

So it was YOU who twisted my words around and made a big deal over nothing, and got all snooty about it attempting to call me out. I tried as a moderator to play it off nicely because yes I didn't get overtly technical and attempt to completely and totally be as specific as possible, but you refused to cooperate. And now here you are trying to pick a fight and crying about how it isn't fair because I'm a moderator.

I think that's enough. Try to relax and have a real discussion. This is beyond ridiculous.

 

You need to look a little further than that. OSHA is only concerned with occupational hazards, not air quality hazards in general. There are numerous studies both in the US and Europe detailing the negative health effects of breathing diesel particulates. It doesn't just "look bad". It is bad. There are 10 citations on the first page of search results alone, even a cursory reading of them concludes that the particulates are worse for humans than any of the other pollutants in the exhaust, and are classified by WHO as a "definite carcinogen".

 

Well, right, but doesn't that depend a whole helluvalot on concentrations over time? I mean, I can see where someone who's constantly sweeping up under the cover of a Greyhound depot and getting exposed continually to thick black plumes over many years would be at much greater risk. But my truck cruising down the highway? Is it producing so much invisible particulates that it's causing people or animals to drop dead anywhere nearby?


Such a big man. Swing away

The fact of the matter is this: according to that Motorcraft video I found, it appears that according to Ford, a higher cetane number in diesel fuel decreases particulates by increasing the amount of fuel burned during the power stroke, leaving less particular matter to get pushed out on the exhaust stroke. But it seems like the effectiveness of a cetane booster fuel additive decreases the higher the cetane number is in the fuel it's treating.

They make a pretty good case that it's actually real, so assuming it's not just marketing BS, the take-away from it for me is that a quality cetane booster should help increase mileage not only by helping get a little more power out of the fuel used since it's burning more of the already injected fuel, but by reducing particulates in the exhaust it should reduce the rate at which the DPF gets clogged up. That should mean fewer regens per mile meaning less fuel wasted over time to burn it clean (and less DEF wasted by the SCR treating the byproducts of that extra wasted fuel). Plus it may help keep your EGR cleaner, too, and may extend the life of the sensors, etc.

But it appears your mileage may vary a lot. If you're starting with low cetane numbers (e.g. 37) then a quality booster will make a big difference. But if you're starting with a higher cetane number (e.g. 48) then it may help a little, but the difference will not be particularly dramatic.

 

I used Motorcraft PM22 in every fill up on my '12 F-450 and have used it from the first fill up on my '15 F-450. I'm using it for the lubricity it is supposed to add and the increased cetane. My regens usually occur around 400 miles and last about 20 miles.

 

Out of curiosity, what does do you believe you gain from any increase in lubricity? Since Texas diesel is supposed to have a minimum cetane number of 48 it's not clear what the theoretical cetane increase the PM22 should be, but is there any specific benefit to increased lubricity in a system already designed for the lubricity in standard fuel? Of course it seems like it can't hurt, regardless.

 

It's not your truck and it's not my truck. It is all those other millions of people's trucks. They should put DFPs on them, so I don't have to have one on mine.

Doesn't cause people to drop dead instantly, rather the much more preferable slow and lingering cancer death.

 

Not quite sure where to jump in on this one but I love my emission system on my truck pipe stay clean doesn't smell like a filthy tractor and I can't imagine needing any more horsepower and torque then I have now unless I'm going to drag race. As far as diesel cetane levels you guys have great fuel in your areas New York is barely 40 haven't found any good fuel anywhere ,but I've been adding cetane booster since day one I use power service and I use the Ford when I can get it. I can tell in 2 minutes when it's not running through the truck the rattling and Noise and lack of overall power, I was actually thinking about deleting the emission systems on the truck ,but after riding in a friend's truck with a full delete 6.7 Ford obnoxious diesel smell inside the truck cab and the soot down the back of the truck i will live with the filter cleaning and Def. I have a farm I have a whole summer to smell that and fill my lungs with all the wonderful diesel carcinogens LOL just my two cents take care

 

XXX2 or more. When I was in high school you couldn't see the end of the block because of a brown fog. Mostly clear now. May not like emissions but they do work.

 

There are places that are starting to require older diesels to use DPFs and SOC/SCRs.... So far none in the US are applicable to non-commercial vehicles...

You are welcome for the up and down sides of biodiesel. Overall I like running it in the warm states. I am curious about the other form of "bio diesel" that is made different from trans-testerfication which is what I was referring too. IIRC, right now only California has it. I was trying to find some detailed specs on it. However, I didn't aggressively pursue it, because it isn't like I can get it!

China has seen first hand what emission controls COULD do - for the olympics they banned motorized vehicles and the air cleared up.

I still think diesel emissions controls are in their infancy, unlike on gas vehicles that the emissions control systems have been optimized. Of course with all the "cheating" revelations this could all be a bunch of hogwash.