one could also argue, 500k miles running 2 stroke oil, without any issue .... I am looking for actual recorded DATA that proves either/or .....none of which has been posted lol

 

 

Our injectors are driven by the engine oil and not lubricated by fuel. It's not a theory, but a fact about our HUEI fuel systems. ULSD was an issue way back in 2007 when it was first introduced, but the lubricity content has long been rectified and the diesel we get now has plenty of additives added to it for lubricity. I have a friend in California that works in a refinery and changed my mind a few years back about adding any sort of additive to my diesel fuel. He told me it was just a waste of money and if I felt like making myself feel better, go right ahead, but it was not necessary. IMO, and it's only MY opinion, I think additives are money better spent elsewhere....but I know it makes us all feel better to poor magic potions into our tanks when we are at the pump. That's a hard mindset to change. Been there, but I have been using straight diesel for a few years now and got off of the additive crack pipe. I have no issues to date. Who knows? Maybe The Joke is on me and my injectors and fuel pump will self implode. I'm willing to take that chance because I just don't buy into the additive Theory.

 

Greetings BB
You maybe right about your theory for lubricity additives....""BUT""
There's little argument that most diesel fuel is LACKING the proper amount ....""Cetane'""
The 'Power Service" I ad to my fuel says it'll increase the 'Cetane' by up to 6 points...
Further it says it may increase fuel economy by up to 8%...
They also claim that it may keep my injectors clean....
Their argument sounds good, and that's why I use it....

 

The 2-stroke oil I have stored in the shed will be used for the yard tools I have.

The T-6 and soon to be Triax oil will be used for the engine oil in the truck.

I use Stanadyne lubricity formula when filling up with fuel in the proper quantities. My wife and I have a conversation at 65 MPH in the truck with no problems of hearing each other.

Do as you wish, but 2-stroke oil is not going in my truck.

 

Ford never published any testings with the engine (at least that I know of) and when the ULSD became "the thing" our engines were yesterday's news. Now things are relegated to individuals with the means and motivation to do stuff like that (Bob is the Oil Guy, etc).

What works for one may not work for another. Everybody's needs, wants, and budgets are different. What makes our trucks great is the fact that they are incredibly tolerant to what we do to them. The fact that the 7.3L is a workhorse also hides some of the good things (and bad things) that we do in the name of improvement.

Would my powerplant last longer with 2-stroke oil? Maybe, maybe not. I've done my share of things that were probably for peace of mind more than anything else but to each his own (as Colorado350 said). Many have done additives (2 stroke oil, used oil, lubricity enhancers, etc.) and many have not but both camps claim that their approach is effective. I use Power Service Diesel Kleen every few tanks but cannot bring myself to add oil to my tank (at 315K miles I'm sure the engine adds enough to the cylinders for me). I did see an increase in economy when using PS but it was a little less than 1 mpg. It is your money and your truck so do as you see fit.

I've had some failures that would have put most any other vehicle on the side of the road waiting for a flatbed and mine soldiered on and never skipped a beat. Whether what I've done over the years has contributed to that who knows...but my truck is still running after all these miles so it couldn't have been all bad.

I'll get off my philosophical soapbox now.

 

When ULSD came into being, there were tons of tests done by the US Dept of Energy, DOT, Cummins, and a number of universities both domestic and foreign. The reduction in lubricity from changing from 500 ppm sulfur in LSD to the significantly lower sulfur containing ULSD is a well-documented fact. The impact on OTR engines is also well documented, and additives were recommended by virtually all studies. However, not all additives were recommended because they can be built upon different base chemical "platforms". Those additives which gave the best results were formulated with an ester-based chemistry platform, and not many of the additives are built that way. To know the chemical basis for your particular favorite additive(s), you have to look at the active ingredients which sometimes require digging down into the Safety Data Sheet (SDS) documents for those additives (used to be called MSDS, "M" representing "Material").

Add to the above (different chemistry platforms), we also have an extremely wide-ranging degree of variability in how our trucks are used in comparison to the OTR scenarios. That fact by itself throws a whole slew of monkey wrenches into determining whether or not an additive "works" for any given vehicle, and in some cases whether or not it is even necessary in the long run. We, the general population, simply don't have the tools to truly measure success. A gain in MPG with an additive may well be not only completely unrelated to the issue of lubricity, it can happen while making lubricity WORSE, depending on the additive formulation -- MPG and lubricity are not necessarily co-dependent or correlated characteristics because of different degrees of internal wear, different driving styles, different chemical formulations, etc., etc.

When I researched this issue a number of years back, the conclusions I reached were the following:
1) Lubricity is lower than what our engines were designed for.
2) OTR industry studies demonstrated that additives can be very helpful (in OTR scenarios), particularly in terms of injector life.
3) Extrapolating from #2 above to our trucks and how they are used is not a straight forward effort, nor can the exact same conclusions be assumed as having equal value for our truck use... some can, but not always.
4) Ester-based chemistries have the best overall success at resolving lubricity issues.
5) Aside from formulated additives (which can simultaneously include other helpful things like cetane boosters and cold flow enhancers), both bio diesel and ashless two-stroke oil can be conveniently helpful for lubricity.
6) Although bio diesel is a great lubricity additive, it does hamper MPG with increasing dosages -- I'm personally not sure about the ashless two-stroke.
7) Personally, I choose to run additives most of the time which I've selected based on what is readily available to me, but sometimes just don;t worry about it for a while when I run out. I have not seen a noticeable effect on MPG either with or without additives, aside from the first time I ran Diesel Kleen (indication of a slight increase in MPG with it, but then I began running something available from the company I represented at the time).

With all the above, I have one injector poppet which is slow to "wake up" when cold (below 80°F), and it's been doing that for over 100K miles with no observable impact on overall engine performance or MPG. So, I simply let my GP's do their job, plug in when it's cold (below 35, which is not often here in Birmingham, AL), and my injectors are all firing again within 2-3 miles of the house in the mornings --- I'm now at 300K miles on original injectors.

 

It's the additional refining to comply with the lower sulfur requirement that drives the cost up.

 

Greetings F250;
Thank you for clearing up 'brain fog'
I've been in the HABIT of using the 'Diesel Kleen' and the 'TCW3' 2 cycle oil so long now, [13 yrs ??]
I almost forgot the reasons why I have been using it...
The TCW3, was primarily to lubricate the injector poppets, if I remember it correctly..
And the Diesel Kleen was to try and keep the injectors clean...
Admittedly, the additives add another approximately 20 cents a gallon each time I fill up..
Averages out to more than a penny a mile just for the additives...

 

Years ago when I tried additives, I came to the same opinion. After I got my 6.0 and I experienced stiction, it was easy to overcome that resistance because there is such a marked difference when the cause and effect is rectified with Archoil.

Tons of info here, thanks Pete. And while I trust you, for me it's difficult to spend the money when my rigs don't seem to suffer from the lack of additives.

Stewart

 

With this Stewart, I absolutely agree. Stiction is a proven issue and Archoil is a proven solution. I think with the 7.3, to each his own. If it makes one feel better and the $$$ is a non-issue, then go for it.

 

I cannot find it anymore, but there was a lab test that showed scratch testing with diesel fuel and various additives. TCW-3 was pretty good for the price but there were better additives.

 

A full gallon of TCW3 at walmart is $13, that would probably last me a while. For me, the cost of it would not be a concern.

 

That's basically how I feel to a T.

I think I remember that thread, and I don't think my Search-Fu will work to find it, but I shall try.

Stewart

 

Here ya go....but remember this test is about 12 years old or something like that. This is real world info on real world testing, as best as I can recall.

http://www.jatonkam35s.com/DeuceTech...itive_test.pdf