I just finished a 2700 mile trip (not towing) from Fl, to WV and Back to Fl. I switch apps to Forscan and Kiwi 3 obd2 scanner. I noticed that the dpf load % and the DPF soot inferred were both dead on. When the % went to 100, and the Soot reached 2.7, my truck went into regen. On the road, it always went to the 500-510 miles then started. So evidently the DPF load is accurate with the DPF soot level... At least with my truck.

 

Better Diesel is not the manufacturer of Enerburn, but one of the distributors. With a doctorate in chemistry, she is not just a seller, but an advocate for improving diesel performance and diesel engine longevity.

 

Thats the ratio I've been using since my initial startup.. It seems to be working well. I also took her advice.

 

I ordered Enerburn through Amazon and I ended up getting a call from Jane. If I'm understanding things correctly, the company that manufactures Enerburn may not be in business for long. The product is good but there is now a better - or alternate - product called Better Diesel FBC (Fuel Burn Catalyst). I don't know all the details but based on my conversation with Jane I switched my order from Enerburn to the new product. Stock quantities of Enerburn may be limited (my assessment) so if you really want that product you better order some soon, assuming the company does indeed go under.

The new product has a similar dose rate and can also be used along with PM22. It was also slightly less expensive than Enerburn.

Web site for the new stuff: https://betterdiesel.com/

 

Thank you HRTKD. I already knew that and since I have a large supply of Enerburn I'll stick to it until I need more. I've quite a few conversations with Jane, and she assured me that Enerburn is still a great product. I use it with Optilube and am very happy with it.

 

Stock price isn't always an indicator of a company's health, but it often is a measure of confidence that investors have in the company. Rumors of their demise may be greatly exaggerated.

You can see the stock price history for EnerTeck Corp here: https://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/chart/ETCK.PK

 

So the new company is Jane also? (or still). So she found a way to get similar results for less money. Nothing wrong with that unless she's closing down the old company to avoid creditors or something. Then I might have an issue with it. But otherwise, someone either improves on their product or finds a way to make something similar for less money, that's a good thing in my book.

 

There is no new company. BetterDiesel has been a distributor of Enerburn, made by EnerTeck or EnerTech for some time. With a Masters in chemistry, Jane (CEO of Better Diesel) developed her own recipe to improve on Enerburn, adding injector cleaners and lowering the price.

 

Right. Jane's company was just one of many distributors of Enerburn. Sorry for any confusion.

 

And you're not thinking she's a tad biased (to sell her own product)?

Mee too!

I hate to say it but this entire thread is a classic example of Testimonial "evidence" for a product.

All the mileage claims are uncontrolled, all the reductions in DPF "Regenerations" are without any control at all, using a dashboard gage or "reader"
(In reality, Regen frequency is almost entirely dependent on driving technique and load on the engine)

The ONLY way to accurately test for reduction in DPF "cleanings" is to put the engine on a DYNO, MULTIPLE separate times and test for hundreds of HOURS at constant and variable power outputs....like FOMOCO and all the other truck manufacturers actually DID.......... THEN with that data, ADD the snake oils and do it all over again precisely the same.

If the snake oil in question was "That Good" and proven by the verifiable tests, the API, SAE and then the ASTM would add it to the standard for ULSD and if that happened, it would not be available over the counter, because all the diesel fuel manufacturers would be buying it from companies like Lubrizol, Shell Chemical, Castrol, and other additive manufacturers (like they do now........not from an over-the-counter distributor with someone named Jane at the top........With all due respect to "Jane" of course!!)

So mark me down as a skeptic too!

Cheers,

Rick

 

I think you may be a bit naive to think diesel fuel producers have our best interests in mind. If so, pump diesel would have a cetane number of 55 instead of 40 and the ASTM recommended scar wear index of 460 instead of 520-800. Those who say our engines are made to run well on US diesel don't realize how poor our diesel is relative to European or even California standards.

 

Actually they do. They want us to buy it.

Cetane number is not only way over rated but most claims (of cetane number) are not verified by companies claiming to increase it and if they do, they calculate it instead of using the standard test

Also if they do it right, it's tested in an indirect injected engine. Is there anyone here running a IDI diesel? (except the people with 6.9/7.3L IHI diesels of course) Direct injected diesels don't have anywhere near the cold starting/running problems with low cetane fuels that IDI engines have......and it's only really a problem for cold starting. Direct injection diesels cold start problems have been largely eliminated with either combustion chamber glow plugs or induction heaters. (which were really added to reduce start-up smoke )

Actually they do. That's why there is an ASTM so the fuels meet a minimum standard. With modern HEUI and (even more modern) common rail injection, they have largely eliminated fuel quality sensitivity as a problem for diesels (other than sulfur levels needed to prevent exhaust system damage in a nightmare system originally designed by those Europeans who also started with cooled EGR.....that was also a real mess......VW didn't help either when their fine engineered system didn't work right, they just programmed it to fool the emission testers.....) I also don't think I would cite Calif for doing anything right. Their "standards" are just about to be squashed. But I digress.....

It's just my humble opinion, but fuel additives other than anti-gel or biocide are simply not needed.

Now OTOH, if boutique Snake oils (additives) make people feel better, I would be the last person to try to talk someone out of using them.....

 

There you have it, folks. Our observed experience is merely an illusion.

 

SkiSmuggs, I'm not throwing out your (and other user's) observations. I realize your comment wasn't directed at me, but I think my point is still valid that 90% + of HD diesel pickup drivers will not run additives of any sort for the life of their vehicle and their engines will perform well.

I do think HT32BSX115 has a valid point about Cetane. I don't think it is nearly the concern it once was. Everywhere in my area the cetane rating is 40. All of my 6.7L diesels run perfectly. I guarantee they run exactly as well as any 6.7L truck in California or Europe. My brand new common-rail direct injection Kubota tractor runs fine on it too. So does my older, IDI Kubota tractor. When I was briefly without a diesel pickup, I dumped an entire bottle of Ford PM22 into the 10 gallon fuel tank of the older IDI Kubota tractor. It did not run any differently than it ever did, even in super concentrated form. So I don't think the cetane argument is valid. That said, I have run PM22 occasionally because supposedly it helps with HPFP lubricity...but given my experience I see many other trucks that never run it with over 100k and zero issues. So I pretty much don't use that either. I will run the Ford anti-gel in the winter if it gets really cold, but last winter even that didn't prevent a freeze-up.

Anyway, carry on. This group's observations with Enerburn are at least interesting for me to read.

 

No, not directed at you, and I understand the placebo effect, but I get a little miffed when it is suggested that our observations are not real. This thread is about our experience with Enerburn, not about the cost of diesel in CA or other things. There is a tendency in forum threads for the harshest critics of anything (Andersen Ultimate comes to mind) to be folks with no experience with whatever is being discussed. Before getting my first diesel truck 3 years ago, I researched heavily and had a jug of Opti-Lube Summer Plus on hand before my truck arrived based on what I had learned at that point. Texas is hardly a hotbed of liberal ideas, but east Texas recognized they had a pollution problem and implemented a minimum of 48 cetane for diesel fuel sold there to help combat the problem as tests have shown less soot with higher cetane.
I have seen lots of posts screaming about DPF problems and the typical answer is "delete". Many of us are not about to do that for any number of reasons so reducing soot is a reasonable solution. We are told we are throwing our money away by people spending $2000-3500 deleting and another $3000 on lifting, wheels and tires.
Since buying the truck 3 years ago, I've monitored fuel mileage and was able to document that not using Opti-Lube for a couple of tanks decreased my fuel mileage. Did I notice anything else? No, but better fuel mileage let me know that my truck ran better whether I could feel it or not, and I share that so others can add that to their personal data base of knowledge. Would I run PM22A? Probably not, because it has very little cetane boost and is mostly for lubricity and I feel OL is a better additive. Do I notice the truck running better with Enerburn? Not if I wasn't logging regenerations to see that I have changed from every 350 miles to every 500 miles since I started using it and seeing a dramatic decrease in soot build up from the PIDs on my CTS. I agree that without evidence, changes can be subjective. Fuel mileage is hard to track if your driving is varied. When I logged differences in additives, I was making the same 76 mile commute daily. Now that I'm not, I can only rely on past experience.