Never really been a additive person.

​And i think that we have "better" fuel in general ,than you guys in the US..(some members has mentioned your dirty fuel)

​​​​​I fill up from company fleets 3000liter (792.5gal) tank,always..
And im sure that it leads me to more water and dirt in fuel,compared to filling up from station.

Also there's been talk about OptiLube etc..

I tried to search but i don't have an access to OptiLube from Europe.
But RedLine RL-2 is what i can get from nearest Motonet store,for example..

Don't really expect to gain any "noise reduction" or fuel mileage..
Just trying to compensate the filling from fleet container..??

All opinions and experiences are very welcome!




I failed to upload this as an PDF..



OptiLube XL has superior lubricity vs XPD,but lacks with other goodies..



Stydy PDF attached below from Diesel Place,this chart has been seen in the forum before.

 

Our fuel is better than yours is any day! And the only additive I use is Power Service Diesel Fuel Supplement. And I only use that if I have summer blend in the tank when winter hits due to low truck use in the fall or if it's going to drop below about 15F here.

 

Just filled up yesterday and I am trying this Hotshot Secret Diesel Extreme in my tank, It's an injector cleaner and cetane booster that is supposed to be used every 6mo.
We'll see if I notice any differences or increase in mileage after this tank.

https://www.hotshotsecret.com/diesel-extreme/

I personally think the diesel fuel lubricity study from 2007 is now outdated and a new study needs to be performed, if they dare.
Comparisons and tests are hard to find on any of these additives

For lubricity comparison on Hotshots LX4, this is all I found on there website vs Optilube. I don't put a lot of stock in it, but it's all I have to go by without some independent testing.
https://www.hotshotsecret.com/wp-con...port-1-LX4.pdf

As much as I fill up, the cost is negligible.

 

Our trucks rely so much on fuel lubricity and cleanliness, I add PWS at every fill and change fuel filters every 10k. Super easy and super cheap on these trucks!

 

TLDR: The science and results of fuel additives is irrefutable and does benefit even the 7.3L. Do fuel additives make a difference, YES. Do they make a big difference, SOMETIMES.

10 Paragraphs Version: I get long winded at times because when discussing complex or detailed subjects, the context of the message requires more than "ya brah" or "legit ma dude"... Yesterday, I asked Finnishstroker (The Finlander) via PM if he would like my input or if he just wanted me to stand back (not stand-by) and he requested the I include any and all information I felt was pertinent to the discussion he started.

Here it is...

I am neither a proponent or opponent to fuel additives. Over the past 30 days, my viewpoint on fuel additives has changed regarding the 7.3L, but I am still undecided on whether I will run any or not. If I do, it will be Opti-Lube XPD bought through @Bitterroot Diesel . Matt is a site sponsor and very active on our sub-forum and many other sub-forums throughout the FTE.

The science behind fuel additives is irrefutable, even for those with "years of experience" and a "finely tuned butt-dyno". We simply cannot ignore the laboratory analysis of the elements within the fuel additives and the wear patterns of hard surfaces between the various samples. The Finlander posted a colorful chart, which has been available to us since 2007 and made public by dieselplace.com.

The chart breaks things down for the layman (like me) to understand and know what the science behind the fuel additives is telling us. It also attempts to break it down for those with a "finely tuned butt-dyno" to understand, even though the message may fall upon deaf ears. In order to not paraphrase, miss something or make a mistake while repeating what I had learned and portrayed, I will simply quote myself from post #76 in the thread created by jstihl.


Now, these are not COVID facts or myths, these are not UFO facts or myths, these are not forum lore facts or myths, these are verifiable and undeniable results from tests that were conducted on everything from pump ULSD to the worst possible additive available to us as consumers and diesel truck owners. I too was of the impression that the 7.3L had little to benefit from a fuel additive and thought I had seen this first hand for myself. I ran Stanadayne Lubricity Formula, which is #8 on the list above for several years. When my supply ran out, I stopped putting the additive into the fuel and did not notice any difference in idle, noise, at speed or any other condition. My uneducated "butt-dyno" told me it was a waste of money.

Putting the fuel additive in the tank (both tanks) was easy and even a toddler could do it, so the time and effort involved was not a concern. The cost was a concern as we were headed toward a new lifestyle and would be on a strict budget, but we would make room for things we "needed" by removing something we "wanted", if required. I stopped using Stanadyne and didn't look back, until recently... Turns out, even the 7.3L, Duramax, 6.7L and just about any other diesel engine can and will benefit from some sort of additive in the ULSD. If you refer back to items #1, 2 and 3 above in the chart, you will see "desired, standard and baseline" of the ULSD available to us as consumers on a regular basis.

In the thread by jstihl, Matt from Bitterroot Diesel is quoted as saying...

Quote source= https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...l#post19642852

This was after some back and forth about butt-dyno versus science and real world observations took place. I feel this was the breaking point of the back and forth because another irrefutable statement was made by Matt, who is considered an authority and reputable source of knowledge when looking at injectors from most platforms of diesel injectors, not just 7.3L.

Seeing FTE'rs like Kbeefy chime in on this thread holds a lot of water to me as well. I respect his opinion and thoughts on many things diesel and 7.3L.

Hootr mentioned the 2007 study being outdated, and there certainly is some merit to that. But, considering the "desired, standard and baseline" of the ULSD probably hasn't changed much since 2007, simply going by the date may not make the study as out of date as we layman suspect. According to the EPA, the United States went to ULSD in 2006 from the previous blend of diesel fuel available to consumers. This to me means that the date alone should not be the only qualifying factor in the study being considered out of date since the fuel content of ULSD appears to be the same. Perhaps when the EPA mandates we use "Super Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel" (SULSD), another study could be accomplished with varying degrees of results.

Seeing FTE'rs chime in on the other thread by jstihl with their own personal results seen, heard or felt also lends to verifying the results of the study. Seeing people like Matt that has thousands of hours tearing into injectors also lends to verifying the results of the study.

Each person should do what is right for their budget, application and what makes them feel good about what they put in their fuel tank.

Getting back to our Finnish friend... Something that may or may not pertain to The Finlander is the amount of bio-diesel mixed in with the pump ULSD. Referring back to the colorful chart above, you can see item #1 is 2%. This means that any pump ULSD that is B2 or more is at the top of the list regarding fuel additives and ULSD. Even above the revered Opti-Lube XPD in the #2 spot. Remember, the lower the HFRR figure, the better it is for our engines and injectors. Seeing that the "desired, standard and baseline" pump ULSD is double or triple the HFRR rating is staggering. Continuing on as if the diesel engine is somehow in the thoughts of the EPA regarding lubricity and longevity is... well... like believing a butt-dyno results over facts.

Going back to the bio-diesel blended ULSD. People like FordTruckNoob up in MN have a mandated bio-diesel blend of B20 where people like jstihl in FL and me in GA do not have any mandate at all. Companies are provided tax incentives to run a blended fuel, but based on my research the fuel is more difficult to have brought in, so the tax incentive does not outweigh the additional costs involved. For my own application, SC does have a minimum requirement of B5 in their ULSD. It works out for me as there is a SC Love's station 25 miles up the road that I usually fill up at since I have 75 gallons of fuel capacity.

For those interested in finding a bio-diesel blended ULSD near them, refer to the link below.

U.S. Department of Energy Alternative Fuels Center:https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/laws/BIOD

Those with a B2 or more bio-diesel blended ULSD will not benefit from a fuel additive as much as those that only have access to ULSD as described in item numbers 1 - 3 above. I have no idea what the bio-diesel content of the fuel is for The Finlander, or if there is any at all or if it falls within the same HFRR ratings above or something different. I don't know if he has the ability to research what his government mandates or does not mandate as a standard for fuel imported or produced there in Finland.

Regrettably, I do not see the Red Line fuel additive The Finlander is inquiring about. I see that Red Line RL-2 is available here in the United States, but could not find a HFRR number anywhere or where it was compared to some of the other fuel additives in a laboratory or lubricity evaluation setting. This only leads us to going off the literature from Red Line, which can be very subjective. I am a fan of Red Line products, I like using their High Temp ATF in my ZF6 transmission, but I am not a "go blindly" type of person. Although, I cannot say that the Red Line fuel additives available to The Finlander would help or hinder lubricity in his 7.3L in anyway. It would be a WAG (wild *** guess) at best and I don't think that is right.

Perhaps he can find some detailed lubricity facts about the products available to him before moving forward and committing funds to purchasing a product. I would offer to send him some Opti-Lube XPD, but it would not doubt have to go surface mail and would be ridiculously priced by the time it arrived, if it arrived.

 

I poured in a bottle of straight rubbing alcohol mixed with 8 oz. of jet fuel. Got 30 mpg, yes I did. The truck is so quiet, I couldn't even hear it idling.


Rubbing alcohol for the win.




















But seriously, what are we going to find new in this thread that hasn't already been argued to death in the other additive threads?

 

I have never used a fuel additive and have nearly 500,000 miles on the 7.3. Valve covers never off, stock fuel pump, no in tank mods. We believe maintenance is the real key. Secondly, Florida is well known internationally, for it’s quality fuel!

 

Yo! Get outta heah, everybody knows it's all refined in Philly. South Philly at that.

 

Sir, you are 100% right! Maintenance is key and the #1 priority to a well running vehicle in every respect. No one discounts that, but what about the FTE'r that sees that the ULSD lubricity properties are lacking and are considering a fuel additive as a maintenance item?

This should be a place where they feel free to discuss their concerns and learn from other that have been there or done that.

-------------
Deleted response to Bbslider001 at 0209 5 Jan. Not worth it to muddy up the thread with a ridiculous rant. Insomnia is a bitch...

 

I like how the marvel mystery oil actually made it worse lol.

I thought the used motor oil would do better but then again treating at a 200:1 ratio is hardly anything. If you dump a quart of ATF or used oil into a 26 gallon tank and fill it up you've got more like a 100:1 ratio. (I didn't see ATF on there though).

Everyone seems to agree XPD is one of the better ones. back when I filled my tank once a month I'd dump a dose of that stuff in and also dump a 4oz dose of Optilube "Boost" in there for good measure. That should have been good for an 8-10 point cetane rise the way I calculated. From what I read minimum pump cetane has to be at least 40 and ideal is closer to 60, so figured that should have been enough to turn a mediocre tank of fuel into a passable one, and a passable one into a very good one. Nowadays it's not uncommon to fill up 3 times a week so that would all become a little cost prohibitive.

 

Based on my understanding, a Cetane booster is not the same as a lubricity additive, I could be wrong though. I have not done any research on minimum cetane numbers required by refineries, so I will have to take your word for it on those numbers. The study, images and testimony above in this thread and linked in the other threads is regarding lubricity only.

Perhaps there should be another thread with laboratory analysis of cetane boosters and if the EPA mandates certain levels from different refineries. I don't have any of that information and I don't know where to retrieve it from. I am always willing to learn from someone that knows more than I do as I feel once we stop learning, we are dying.

As I said earlier, I am neither a proponent or opponent of fuel additives, but I am always willing to learn and listen to those wiser than I am about the subject in case I ever want to try a fuel additive again. Frankly, I think I will purchase a gallon of XPD from Bitterroot before we set out on our cross country trip next summer as I am unfamiliar with the ULSD/bio-diesel blends throughout the country. It will just be easier to put some XPD into the tank and the cost will still be in the black due to fuel savings cards like the TSD Logistics card.

I look forward to what The Finlander comes up with and how we as a community may be able to help him address his concerns.

 

I believe the Phillips 66 cogen plant in Linden, NJ is only major refinery on the east coast.

 

I read a paper posted online a couple years back regarding the cetane. The chemical that boosts the cetane (whatever it is) is what would make the average person's butt dyno say "wow, this makes my truck run better!" You will notice many of these fuel additives have a similar smell to them.

XPD is their flagship product which does a little bit of everything, but it is probably a waste of money in the summer since the anti-gel is not needed. They make a lubricity-only product "XL" as well as a cetane boosting product "Boost!" as well as a "Winter" and "Summer" branded bottle. I suspect there is quite a bit of overlap.

Edit: Optlubes handy little table comparing the products

https://opti-lube.com/diesel-fuel-additives/

 

I agree with this completely Kerry. Just because the information was published 13 YEARS ago doesn’t necessarily mean the results are still relevant today. Even if the products are still available and do work, chances are that technology has made substantial improvements in the past 13 years and these technological advanced products don’t even appear on this chart. Yet, as evident here and other threads because someone put it in a chart it must be important so let’s keep posting it...

Take our trucks for example, they still do a great job, but the new ones are leaps and bounds ahead of them in every way. Go ahead an argue that point but the reality is we modify our trucks to get some of the performance and creature comforts of the new ones. Now Googling a particular product will typically result in the information provided by the manufacturer and end users aka reviews. The manufacturer isn’t going to give you any proprietary information that isn’t already available to the public. The manufacturer or retail seller has an agenda: to sell their product and make money. They do extensive marketing, design impressive packaging and don’t forget the power of suggest that this product works wonders. Amsoil is an example of a Company that does this quite well and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with it.

End users on the other hand can often be categorized into several groups; The first is simply going to give you their HONEST OPINION, rarely are they performing any controlled studies that provide other than SOP perceived improvements AKA their BUTT DYNO. The second end user is trying to justify their own purchase by repeatedly forcing their opinions on others. Since they decided to buy the product it’s the best there is and there’s no denying they know best. The last group of End user often has an agenda of their own, they tried a product and realized the manufacturer or vendor offers “kickbacks” for referrals. We see this more and more where a customer is paid to promote a particular product, think Amazon for example. Unfortunately these reviews are more for the benefit of the Vendor and the referring customer and rarely do either have the integrity to clearly state they are getting paid or paying for the review or referral.

A classic example of the Vendor/Customer relationship was recently posted up by a member with an issue he was having with his trucks, multiple suggestions were made based on our personal OPINIONS and own butt Dyno performance meter, it is unlikely any of us conduct our own scientific studies on whether a particular product actually works.
Eventually a Vendor showed up with the latest and greatest performance product. They talked about how good it works, (power of suggestion) posted a few pictures of parts showing extensive wear, however, did NOT provide specifics like; mileage, hours idling and a host of other variables (no controlled studies)that potentially contributed to the wear. BOTH, parties had an agenda; the end user wanted his trucks fixed, the Vendor wanted to sell their products. The decision was made and the member bought the product based on the “marketing” by the vendor AND the hope that the product would fix the issue with his trucks. This happens every single day we all do it whether we are the Vendor or the Customer.

The member got the product, used it and reported his OPINION and gave us his Butt Dyno thoughts on whether he thought it worked. I’m guessing here but I doubt that this member asked for scientific studies, asked what controls were used by the manufacturer etc before the purchase nor did he conduct his own controlled studies. He did what most of us do; He made a damn decision bought the product and moved forward. He may try the product again or may try something else but he made a decision. And keep in mind that this product was NOT even on this chart that was apparently handed down by the Lubricity gods of the diesel kingdom!

What fuel additive do I use? I previously used Archoil 6200 in Summer and 6300 in Winter and recently switched to their new AR6500 diesel specific fuel additive, which I’ll use in the Summer. Why Archoil? Because my experience with their line of products show they work, based on what you ask? My personal Butt Dyno, it’s all that matters! I did not conduct controlled studies nor did I do hours of research...I have a life after all. I asked a FEW questions and wait for it …Made a damn decision! And If you happen to disagree with my decision I’m fine with it, I won’t personally attack you or ask others too. This is what it comes down to, making a decision and accepting the consequences whether it turned out good, bad or WTH was I thinking!
‘Now, If you’re wondering whether I’m secretly getting kickbacks for referring Archoil, I’ll also clear that up. Archoil will not ask you “who referred you to our product” when ordering.

All that and still under 10 paragraphs.

 

Shtt brah, bacon grease ftw yo