I have a 2017 with almost 140K on it and started using Opti Lube XL shortly after I bought the truck (new) for the lubricity. I don't have any comparisons, but with the XL and 15K fuel filter changes, my Commanded and Actual Fuel Rail pressures are within a couple hundred PSI of each other.

The only other additive I run is anti-gel when it occasionally gets cold here in TX.

 

So, after another trip, nearly identical to my last job, I have not had any increase in fuel economy from the use of this Archoil additive.
The only change that I have seen at all has been the regen cycles, up around 1000 miles in between cycles when running without a load or trailer.
I have pretty much decided that after I use up the remainder of the Archoil, I will be switching back to the Opti-Lube XL for the increased lubricity and much lower treatment cost per gallon of fuel.

 

marvel mystery oil scores bad on scar type lube test. the solvent componet in the product breaks down lube value to below untreated fuel levels.

 

Sulfur in and of itself wasn't the lubricant rather it is a co-solvent with other materials in the fuel (I think it was nickel) that provided the lubrication. If you remove the sulfur, the chemical reaction doesn't happen and you lose lubrication. So sulfur is a facilitator of the lubrication but not the lubricant itself. As noted above MMO didn't do that hot in the diesel site additive study from a million years ago.

Soot is unburnt fuel, has nothing to do with sulfur content. ULSD was rolled out cause LSD would have damaged the after-treatment systems (DPF and later SCR/DEF) in MY2008 emission systems.

 

Were you running any sort of additive before your original CP4 went?

 

Nope, never have run any before either, in any of my previous diesel trucks.

 

I wish I could say the same, but having a 2024 MY it regens at 496 miles on the nose. I have one a week regens regardless of soot levels, which seems to always stay under 40% max. Thankfully they only last 5 miles or less so really not consuming as much fuel as the 2019 did during a regen. As far as MPG goes, its not as good as EDT was. IOW unless I can disable the auto 496 mile cycles, running Archoil does me no good for DPF cleaning, so not worth the price. I can reuse the bottles though and refill to .02 cents per gallon.

 

It's great to hear real results on the Archoil, at least in terms of increased mpg. It's the one thing that was kind of making me think about trying it out... well, that and just having one bottle to pour from. At this point though, I think I am going to stick with my EDT and FBC since it has been "working" for me and comes out less $$ per tank.

Also, this video was shared over in the 6.7 section. An OG CP4 pump at 900k with only additives.

 

I got a gallon of EDT and read the label. Looks like Hot Shots has an independent lab do tests on it to back up their claims. I didn't see that on the archoil package. There is also no mention on the archoil bottle on removing water, which is one of the important reasons I use EDT, it demulsifies water so it can be removed.

EDT label states verified by 3rd party ASTM D-6079 testing

Good enough for me.

 

The majority of the 300k miles I've run without additives, but I have run them mostly out of curiosity to verify some of their claims.

Here's a 6.7 PSD with over a million miles and the hot shot driver uses Stanadyne fuel additive.

 

Makes me think that most all of these more well known additives with added lubricity will likely do the job of at least adding enough extra lubrication, which is what the CP4 needs. It's all the other claims and costs that the various additive's state that we have to decide if it's something that helps us sleep better. I would also say that not running the fuel too low, and at least trying to fill up at high use stations are the other 2 big key factors...

 

Interesting results

 

Just curious from a data point perspective, who does your fuel filter changes? I know some of the less knowledgeable mechanics will start the truck to purge the fuel system vs cycling the ignition switch (my last change took 12 cycles to get the cavitation to stop). The higher end BMWs use the CP4 and their post filter change procedure is quite extensive, requires OBD access and software.

 

I have suspected all along the issue with these pumps has been inadvertent introduction of air into the system. Running low fuel while on inclines, offroad, fuel exhaustion, improper filter changes, etc. I wouldn't believe the later except I stop by my local dealer on my usual bicycle ride and saw a mechanic finish up the upper filter and immediately attempt to start the truck... YIKES.

My .02, it's Ford's franchised, lack of experience dealer network killing these pumps as the unknowing spend real money to prevent the opposite.

 

As you can see XPD provided a significant decrease in the wear test. It was followed by Archoil. Note: all tests were performed at Southwest Research.