Shearing doesn't cause deposits, even with coking that really isn't what you could call technically shearing either and that would be the closest to what he is talking about. Even coking can be either mitigated by watching a pyrometer or damn near eliminated with synthetic oil.

 

I agree 100%... that's why I support the use of synthetic oil usage in the 6.0L... and synthetic oil has a cleaning affect upon the motor to remove some of the effects of coking and sludge... but clearly is a lube oil and not an additve (synthetic oil that is).

Coking is a burnt type discoloration of the bearings and not really a build up or deposit (as I have come to understand it)?

I used their product and found no harm in using it... but everytime Supertruck60 posts... I loose faith in the company as he is just the salesman and internet forum guy... and is really not in the "know" at Lubrication Specialties!!!

I know he trys, but he is not well informed or trained... and his posts do more harm than good... but that is my opinion only!!!!

 

It did not help my truck, but they did issue a refund minus shipping after a few weeks...

 

I use Rotella Synth 5w-40. Two Winters ago there were a couple of cold mornings in the upper 20's and the truck ran rough on start up for just a few minutes then cleared up. I ran a full dose of HSS that summer for approx 5,000 miles and this past Winter there were a few mornings with temps in the 20's and I had zero issues. The initial cold start issues, in my opinion, were very minimal. I didn't see any fuel mileage gain. I will be ordering another bottle for the next oil change to run as preventitive maintenance. Do you know what is so great about this Country? Everyone has a right to an opinion; Slowmans... stand behind your argument. Dan... keep on advertising, I'm sure there are plenty of guys on here that are not annoyed! In my opinion, HSS will sell itself. Tex, without you this forum would be boring (my opinion...of course). Oh, I voted "Yes".

 

I don't know if that's a good thing or not. However, I just try to spread sunshine into everyone's life.

 

Definitely a good thing Tex!! I always enjoy reading your posts.

 

Same here! Keep up the good work Tex! And I voted " can't tell"

 

pjwoolw,

yes sir......'05 Sunesta 232. Best boat I have ever owned.....only after I installed trim tabs!!!!

 

I do not work for Lubrication Specialties; I have no interest in the company or its parent.

I thought I went through a scientific test when I had my problem last fall. If you have a question for me I will try to answer it.

 

My question has to do with the ringleman chart(sp I'm sure is off) and that is when you compare it to what your seeing with the chart, how is what you were getting from the vehicle "measured" in other words, thru your own judgement or was something else used?

Let me try to explain it better with something that I deal with. I use what's called Pearson's Square to balance feed rations for horses. You take the horses weight, convert it to kg, cross mult. with the DE of their feed and their pasture and/or hay and determine how much feed and hay you need to feed a day in lbs.

Now in order to get the horses weight, since I don't have scales either myself or the owner(if it's thru a call) as to take a couple of measurements from the horse(girth and length) and put those into a formula and spits out a weight. If the measurements are good, the weight can be accurate plus or minus 100 lbs, if not accurate, everything is shot to crap.

Point is, if everything is done correctly, it can be a fairly good useful "in-the-field" tool that gets you close enough, but it's still up to how good the person is that's getting the weight measurement(I'm just going to assume that math was done correctly), which I would make the analogy to the chart that you use if you are eyeballing the comparision between the chart and what your truck is spewing out. Now you can take averages of all the measurements as well, but then again you introduced another type of error.

What I'm trying to figure out is when you use this chart do you use "scales" or do you use a "weight formula"(I know you truly don't use scales or weight formula for your situation, I'm just trying to determine the accuracy of what you do use)?

 

If you are a diesel enthusiast (like most on this site), take proper preventative measures, have all the add-ons that most of you have in your signatures, and have no problems with your engines, odds are HSS isn't going to do anything for you. You shouldn't expect it to - it's like running clean dishes through a dishwasher.

HOWEVER - If you service your 6.0L "by the book" and at the Ford dealership, (as the case with my company vehicle) then HSS is an excellent suppliment and actually does work. (cleaned up three injectors and increased/restored fuel mileage beyond single use of treatment)

So here is the marketing delimma posed with HSS right now IMO - only people "in the know" have knowledge of this product even existing - and it will probably do nothing for them. The "average" 6.0L owner knows nothing about HSS and knows only what the dealership tells them - and those are the people that could see the most improvement.

My .02

 

The Ringelmann Smoke Chart, giving shades of gray by which the density of columns of smoke
rising from stacks may be compared, was developed by Professor Maximilian Ringelmann of Paris.
Ringelmann, born in 1861, was professor of agricultural engineering at l'Institute National
Agronomique and Director de la Station d'Essais de Machines in Paris in 1888, and held those
positions for many years thereafter.

The Ringelmann system is virtually a scheme whereby graduated shades of gray, varying by five
equal steps between white and black, may be accurately reproduced by means of a rectangular grill of
black lines of definite width and spacing on a white background. The rule given by Professor
Ringelmann by which the charts may be reproduced is as follows:
Card 0—All white.
Card 1—Black lines 1 mm thick, 10 mm apart, leaving white spaces 9 mm square.
Card 2—Lines 2.3 mm thick, spaces 7.7 mm square.
Card 3—Lines 3.7 mm thick, spaces 6.3 mm square.
Card 4—Lines 5.5 mm thick, spaces 4.5 mm square.
Card 5—All black.

USE OF CHART
Many municipal, state, and federal regulations prescribe smoke-density limits based on the
Ringelmann Smoke Chart, as published by the Bureau of Mines. Although the chart was not originally
designed for regulatory purposes, it is presently used for this purpose in many jurisdictions where the
results obtained are accepted as legal evidence.
While the chart still serves a useful purpose, it should be remembered that the data obtained by
its use is empirical in nature and has definite limitations. The apparent darkness or opacity of a stack
plume depends upon the concentration of the particulate matter in the effluent, the size of the
particulate, the depth of the smoke column being viewed, natural lighting conditions such as the
direction of the sun relative to the observer, and the color of the particles. Since unburned carbon is a
principal coloring material in a smoke column from a furnace using coal or oil, the relative shade is a
function of the combustion efficiency.
3
While the Ringelmann Smoke Chart has many limitations, it gives good practical results in the
hands of well-trained operators. However, it is questionable whether results should be expressed in
fractional units because of variations in physical conditions and in the judgement of the observers.
To use the chart, it is supported on a level with the eye, at such a distance from the observer that
the lines on the chart merge into shades of gray, and as nearly as possible in line with the stack. The
observer glances from the smoke, as it issues from the stack, to the chart and notes the number of the
chart most nearly corresponding with the shade of the smoke, then records this number with the time of
observation. A clear stack is recorded as No. 0, and 100 percent black smoke as No. 5.

 

Like the weight of a horse, it is subjective.

But you can get close.



BTW, can you use the weight formula on women ??

 

I gotcha. Thank you for that explanation.

Somehow I wouldn't be surprised if you could use a type of formula for women. I'm sure if it was the same formula structure, the dominator would be different and maybe where the measurements are taken(but maybe not). I eyeball that myself.

 

WOW! KRDiesel, rep sent just for knowing something like that! Quite impressive.