Boxes of cereal got smaller too. Why do they gotta **** with my Lucky Charms?

I don't think any of us have a problem using the Shaeffers stuff, its just that, its impossible to find in some areas.

I already have to order filters off the internet, now I gotta have my additive shipped to me too?

 

They sell the mini cans now, they are the same size as the mini sodas they started selling a littlw while back. I think they are 8 oz

Thanks Ill look into that.

 

I thought something on the bottle looked funny. Didn't realize till I got home that the bottle on the shelf says "treats 250 gallons" and the on I have on my truck says 300. Maybe its time to look for some Schaffers.

 

I hear ya Lisa, but I never mentioned Schaeffer's in my post (but I guess it is implied ). There are other options until it is available - even though as you know, Schaeffer's is the preferred.

How far are you from Fort Lupton? 30 miles? Rockin' S Diesel Perfromance is there and you can grab some Stanadyne lubricity formula from Rocky. I know driving 30 miles for some fuel additive sounds a bit much, but he's got a great Diesel Performance shop up in your area and has a great name in the Diesel Community, one of the few guys BTS trust to be a installer/dealer on their infamous trannies. He's also part of the Colorado Powerstoke Association - great bunck of folks like FTE. Might be worth the trip to check out one day.

lik to Rockin S Performance

Colorado Powerstrokes

If you like you can PM me you zip code and I can find out Monday where the closest sales rep is in your area?

 

DK, Schaeffers, etc...
too expensive..

just get a case of ashless TCW-3 outboard oil..
run it empty before refueling, and 1qt per tank..

better lubricity, lower cost.

 

where is DK on that list?

 

Its at #10. Power Service is the company who makes it.


Anybody ever try the FPPF Fuel treatment thats there at #3? I found some at the local gas station and thought it might be worth a try.

 

Thanks Rich.

I am actually a member of the Colorado Powerstroke Club, and have spoken with Rocky a few times.

As a matter of fact, once I sell the house and get packed up to move, the truck is going to go to Rocky's for a full transmission service before I hook up the trailer to tow.

Longmont is a ways away, its all the way on the North side of the Denver Metro area, and I am on the far South side.

 

Miller Lite just came out with 16oz cans. That really eases my mind, with all the other stuff going up.

 

I've been living in the country for the past 4 years, 30 miles takes @ 20 minutes. I forgot that in a place like Denver I bet it could take at least twice that amount of time depending on the time of day and all.

That's cool you already know Rocky and the CPS crowd. Wish I could have made it out this past July during the Diesel races and all, unfortunately my youngest had to have her tonsils taken out......

 

I can get four 16oz cans or Miller High Lifefor $3 back by my place in FL.

 

Yep, Denver can be a bear. Part of the problem is that the only way to really get North or South is on the Interstate, which, at anytime during the week (id probably have to go after work) is gridlock.

I live out here and I still haven't been able to make Ford Fest the past couple of years. Something always comes up.

 

Like others here, I DONT use it.

 

But why would you??

 

Yep. That is the rubbish that I have seen all day long. Stupid "study" that has no real answers. All anyone needs to know from that study is "more is better". Don't need to know why or how.

PURPOSE:
The purpose of this research was to determine the ability of multiple diesel fuel additives to replace the vital lubricity component in ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel) fuel.

Not one word about the score of LSD though. That is what we need to know so that we can see how much more lubricity is needed. Yet they didn't even think to include that in their "study". What a load of crap.

CONTENT:
In this study we will test multiple diesel fuel additives designed to replace lost lubricity.

Really? How will you do that when you don't even know how much you "lost"? How do you know how much you lost when you don't even know how much you had to begin with? Did you test pre-LSD fuel? If so, I didn't see it in the "study".

The Engine Manufacturers Association had requested a standard of a wear scar no greater than 460 microns, typical of the pre-ULSD fuels. Most experts agree that a 520 micron standard is adequate, but also that the lower the wear scar the better.

Manufacturers want score X? WGAS what they want. They want you to make the engine last till it is out of warranty ON YOUR DIME. Sure, they can advocate a 300 HFFR score. Why? If you get 101000 miles instead of 99000 miles, they are off the hook (assuming 100K is the warranty). Now, to add all the lubricity agents to get that 300 score, it might cost YOU $2000. OTOH, it cost them NOTHING. If it gives you 2000 miles more, they are home free. Whether that 2000 miles is worth the $2000 you spent is another story. Again, it is ON YOUR DIME, not theirs. Hell, I can advocate you wash your car every day in the winter. Your dime, not mine but if I am saving on paint warranty, it is good for me. Practical? Who knows. Good for the manufacturer? Sure. They can't lose so they can recommend the stars and the moon. What "experts"? Cite source, please.

Lower wear scar is better? To what point? With everything there is a point of diminishing returns. If it is mentioned in that rubbish study, that note escapes me. If I am hungry, I eat some food. Food is good. Does 30 plates of food fill me up any more than 1 meal where I eat till I can't eat any more? Probably not. At what point do you get the most bang for your buck? Again, missing in the "study". Does it make any difference to spend $10,000 to coat your door to make it last 500 years when the house itself will probably last say 50 years? I suppose if you love your door that much.

Documented cases of not having enough lubricity? Where? Cite source. Woefully absent. Sure, if you talk about the first days of LSD to ULSD conversion, possible. Is it still happening? Who knows. I do know this. There are tons of diesel vehicles out there that are smart enough not to fall for a stupid "study" like this. Most of them are still running on the streets. If it were that bad, most of them would be part of the lines to the diesel repair shops. Talking to the shops, I see that ULSD in fact, did have an issue. My own diesel MB had leaks in the IP. Why? Because ULSD was leaching the sulfur out of the O-rings and shrinking them. Is that lubricity related? Not at all. Unless their snake oil puts sulfur back in the fuel, it is probably still going to happen.

The cost of the research was paid for voluntarily by the participating additive manufacturers.

I wonder if they have an ax to grind.

This fuel was determined to have a very high HFRR score of 636 microns, typical of an untreated ULSD fuel.

And how typical is this sort of fuel? If it is so common, why aren't trucks lined up at the repair shops? When did you do this random test? During the first days of ULSD?

So, if I bring the score down from 520 to 460 like they want, how much money would I save in the end? Maybe they won't know but perhaps they can tell me how much more life it gives the average engine? That way I can calculate how much it costs me to get each mile out of it? Why is 460 the "gold standard"? Why not 350 or 300? Why not 400? Where is the graph that even shows wear increment from 520 to 460?

Sorry, to call this a study is to give it some sort of respectable name and is like calling the housewife a "domestic engineer". Sounds real good but actually meaningless. If we took this rubbish to any PhD student who will undoubtedly have done some research methods schoolwork, I'll bet they could rip it a new one. As far as I am concerned, that study is for morons to look up to. It isn't even worth the paper it is written on. Hell, even as toilet paper it would be useless since it would scratch my ***.