When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
In my other diesels I chose a fuel/injector additive and stuck with it every other tank. Should I follow the same regiment on this 2011 6.7l? I know the fuel system is quite a bit more sensitive on these.
Thanks just strokin. I saw you posted that for another gentleman earlier this afternoon. Been reading my *** off. A lot to get through to find the pertinent answers.
For me, the key is an additive labeled as a demulsifier. one that separates the water from the fuel and lets your water separator (DCFM on the frame) collect the water. Most all are cetane boosters and add some lubricity.
Additives are like bread. Everyone has the bread of their choice. Some like white, some wheat, some want pumpernickel. Then you get the ones who want to slather it with mayo or peanut butter or butter. Make your mind up what each will do for you and not what other think is best for them. Go to the websites and contact the makers of the additives and ask them what process they use to rid your fuel system of water.
I use this at every fuel up 2oz diesel kleen and 1oz essential Lube and this is the full synthetic oil that I use as well I know that since the company has started using their 15 years ago they went from changing oil every 250 hours to every 1,000 . This is what we put in all our work truck I drive for a garbage company .
If you ever put additives in a common rail, only use those that promote lubrication and cetane boost (such as PM-22 or similar).
Never use additives that contain products designed to "clean" or that "emulsify" or "demulsify" or "disperse" water.
Products that contain cleaning agents can reduce lubricity at key components, such as the HPFP, under certain conditions. Also, products that claim to demulsify/emulsify/disperse water can actually allow larger quantities of water to bypass the F/W separator, causing rust/corrosion issues within the fuel system.
If you ever put additives in a common rail, only use those that promote lubrication and cetane boost (such as PM-22 or similar).
Never use additives that contain products designed to "clean" or that "emulsify" or "demulsify" or "disperse" water.
Products that contain cleaning agents can reduce lubricity at key components, such as the HPFP, under certain conditions. Also, products that claim to demulsify/emulsify/disperse water can actually allow larger quantities of water to bypass the F/W separator, causing rust/corrosion issues within the fuel system.
Curtis,
Specifically, what products beside PM22 meet your requirement of "promote lubrication and Cetane boost" and not "clean", "emulsify" or "demulsify" or "disperse" water?
Personally, I am deathly afraid of screwing up that contraption Ford was forced to install by the EPA on a perfectly well engineered drive train. I can tell you seem to have thoroughly analyzed this and have experience with Ford's whole 6.7 system (key factor here). What are the other competitive products that meet your spec? Personally, I am not convinced that some folks aren't damaging that science project of an exhaust system, in addition to engine damage from water carry over, with some of the additives they use.
I see this as more than what I prefer. I see this as preserving a huge (for me!!) investment I want to keep on the road for a long, long time into my retirement. I don't buy the argument to just keep taking it back to the dealer under warranty. I will do that if I have to, but I sure don't want to screw up this complex machine by picking the wrong additive, or even using any additive at all.
According to my Dealer, Ford is now asking dealers to send in fuel samples from the tank as well as the rail for analysis before authorizing work to be done on the fuel system and parts of the exhaust system.
Presumably, they will only authorize repairs for those trucks which have not had additives other than the pm22 / pm23 in them. Apparently many of the additives will entrain or emulsify moisture and that poisons the HPFP and Injectors. I found this out when I asked about running a Biocide in the fuel during long term storage due to the new ULSD having a propensity to attract moisture and grow bacteria.
The service manager has friends / family working for GM and RAM that said they are starting to do the same.
It may not be like this across the board, but it does make sense from the manufacturers perspective.
Curtis,
Specifically, what products beside PM22 meet your requirement of "promote lubrication and Cetane boost" and not "clean", "emulsify" or "demulsify" or "disperse" water?
The best way is to compare MSDS sheets of the various products to the PM-22. Much of that can be done by doing a quick internet search of the product in question.
Products that contain alcohol or similar should be avoided. Likewise if the product claims on the bottle to emulsify, demulsify, or disperse water, keep away. The chemicals used vary, and on a forum it's not really easy to list since there are so many different products out there. Plus I'm no expert in chemicals. I just know the reason why Ford and other manufacturers like Chrysler and GM do not recommend products that contain alcohol or water dispersement agents.
The PM-22 contains mostly petroleum distillates, and the rest is aromatic hydrocarbons. There isn't anything contained that is alcohol related or water displacement.
Originally Posted by my50F1
Personally, I am deathly afraid of screwing up that contraption Ford was forced to install by the EPA on a perfectly well engineered drive train. I can tell you seem to have thoroughly analyzed this and have experience with Ford's whole 6.7 system (key factor here). What are the other competitive products that meet your spec? Personally, I am not convinced that some folks aren't damaging that science project of an exhaust system, in addition to engine damage from water carry over, with some of the additives they use.
I see this as more than what I prefer. I see this as preserving a huge (for me!!) investment I want to keep on the road for a long, long time into my retirement. I don't buy the argument to just keep taking it back to the dealer under warranty. I will do that if I have to, but I sure don't want to screw up this complex machine by picking the wrong additive, or even using any additive at all.
Any and all suggestions are appreciated!!
It's not really the emissions so much, it's the nature of common rail injection systems. Fuel contamination issues have been around long before DPF's. Picking the correct additives have also been around for quite some time, and for years manufacturers have stated which additives they recommend.
I tend to disagree on an additive such as Stanadyne blue or red and its ability to demulsify since it does add lubricity also. I have been running it in my truck for 30,000 miles. Granted this isn't a high amount of miles, but so far I have not had any regen problems, jack hammer problems nor other related engine problems. With the dually and 3.73 gears, I average 17 to 18 mixed mileage not towing and 10 to 11 when towing.
Also, Keith, Ford Doctor, has suggested, if one uses an additive, a demulsifier is a good choice.
FWIW I have been using Archoil fuel and oil additive since my first tank full. Just passed 47K, hoping for a LOT more, and no issues or any hint of issue.
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalytic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Slideshow: Called the Fortress, the 850-horsepower pickup combines Raptor underpinnings with military-inspired features, survival equipment, and a starting price of $285,000.
