Has there been any updates using two cycle oil as an additive for the diesel fuel have not seen any new topics on whether the two cycle oil does any good or not I have been using the oil in my 2002 7.3 but am unable to tell any gains or losses of any kind I had been using the oil that you get at Wally world in the blue jug. The main thing I would like to know does this oil hurt the injectors in any way thanks in advance of for your help Mike

 

I think this covers everything..

In Order Of Performance:

1) 2% REG SoyPower biodiesel
HFRR 221, 415 micron improvement.
50:1 ratio of baseline fuel to 100% biodiesel
66.56 oz. of 100% biodiesel per 26 gallons of diesel fuel
Price: market value

2)Opti-Lube XPD
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, demulsifier
HFRR 317, 319 micron improvement.
256:1 ratio
13 oz/tank
$4.35/tank

3)FPPF RV, Bus, SUV Diesel/Gas fuel treatment
Gas and Diesel
cetane improver, emulsifier
HFRR 439, 197 micron improvement
640:1 ratio
5.2 oz/tank
$2.60/tank

4)Opti-Lube Summer Blend
Multi-purpose
demulsifier
HFRR 447, 189 micron improvement
3000:1 ratio
1.11 oz/tank
$0.68/tank

5)Opti-Lube Winter Blend
Muti-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver
HFRR 461, 175 micron improvement
512:1 ratio
6.5 oz/tank
$3.65/tank

6)Schaeffer Diesel Treat 2000
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, emulsifier, bio-diesel compatible
HFRR 470, 166 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.87/tank

7)Super Tech Outboard 2-cycle TC-W3 engine oil
Unconventional (Not ULSD compliant, may damage 2007 or newer systems)
HFRR 474, 162 micron improvement
200:1 ratio
16.64 oz/tank
$1.09/tank

8)Stanadyne Lubricity Formula
Lubricity Only
demulsifier, 5% bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 479, 157 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.00/tank

9)Amsoil Diesel Concentrate
Multi-purpose
demulsifier, bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 488, 148 micron improvement
640:1 ratio
5.2 oz/tank
$2.16/tank

10)Power Service Diesel Kleen + Cetane Boost
Multi-purpose
Cetane improver, bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 575, 61 micron improvement
400:1 ratio
8.32 oz/tank
$1.58/tank

11)Howe’s Meaner Power Kleaner
Multi-purpose
Alcohol free
HFRR 586, 50 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.36/tank

12)Stanadyne Performance Formula
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, demulsifier, 5% bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 603, 33 micron improvement
480:1 ratio
6.9 oz/tank
$4.35/tank

13)Used Motor Oil, Shell Rotella T 15w40, 5,000 miles used.
Unconventional (Not ULSD compliant, may damage systems)
HFRR 634, 2 micron improvement
200:1 ratio
16.64 oz/tank
price: market value

14)Lucas Upper Cylinder Lubricant
Gas or diesel
HFRR 641, 5 microns worse than baseline (statistically insignificant change)
427:1 ratio
7.8 oz/tank
$2.65/tank

15)B1000 Diesel Fuel Conditioner by Milligan Biotech
Multi-purpose, canola oil based additive
HFRR 644, 8 microns worse than baseline (statistically insignificant change)
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$2.67/tank

16)FPPF Lubricity Plus Fuel Power
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
Emulsifier, alcohol free
HFRR 675, 39 microns worse than baseline fuel
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.12/tank

17)Marvel Mystery Oil
Gas, oil and Diesel fuel additive (NOT ULSD compliant, may damage 2007 and newer systems)
HFRR 678, 42 microns worse than baseline fuel.
320:1 ratio
10.4 oz/tank
$3.22/tank

18)ValvTect Diesel Guard Heavy Duty/Marine Diesel Fuel Additive
Multi-purpose
Cetane improver, emulsifier, alcohol free
HFRR 696, 60 microns worse than baseline fuel
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$2.38/tank

19)Primrose Power Blend 2003
Multi-purpose
Cetane boost, bio-diesel compatible, emulsifier
HFRR 711, 75 microns worse than baseline
1066:1 ratio
3.12 oz/tank
$1.39/tank

CONCLUSIONS:

Products 1 through 4 were able to improve the unadditized fuel to an HFRR score of 460 or better. This meets the most strict requirements requested by the Engine Manufacturers Association.
Products 1 through 9 were able to improve the unadditized fuel to an HFRR score of 520 or better, meeting the U.S. diesel fuel requirements for maximum wear scar in a commercially available diesel fuel.
Products 16 through 19 were found to cause the fuel/additive blend to perform worse than the baseline fuel. The cause for this is speculative. This is not unprecedented in HFRR testing and can be caused by alcohol or other components in the additives. Further investigation into the possibilities behind these poor results will investigated.
Any additive testing within +/- 20 microns of the baseline fuel could be considered to have no significant change. The repeatability of this test allows for a +/- 20 micron variability to be considered insignificant.

Study organizer, Arlen Spicer
This was found at The Diesel Place.
Reposted with permission.

 

I have just been using DK and ATF in mine for years and in all of the models that I have had.94,97, and 2002...5.9 Dodges as well.I pour a little in with the DK each time.I am bad at not getting the perfect measurment each time.

 

I wouldn't used anything in our engines which was specifically designed for it.. Why take a chance... the engine is very expensive to fix... Stick to the list in Post #2 above for the best result.. IMO

 

I agree Clint, I'd stick with the above listed, injectors are pretty expensive.

 

this needs to be a sticky

nice post

 

There are a couple things about that study that need pointing out, if it's not obvious. I apologize if it is...

First, they used BASE UNTREATED fuel for that study. There were NO lubricity additives in it which is good for that study to give fair, consistent results. However, if you read the last few lines, fuel sold in the US must meet an HFRR score of 520 or lower. The engine manufacturers want the fuel at 460 or lower. I would like to know what each retailer's HFRR score is. Since I haven't been able to find that out, I make an assumption that it must be at least at 520. Using that assumption, PowerService DK brings the HFRR from 520 to about 460, at a minimum. I run a little more than 10oz. per fillup, which is a bit over the 1/3rd oz. per gallon rate specified on the bottle, or ~400:1 the study specifies. Is it necessary? I can't say without knowing the HFRR of my favorite fueling spot. I am assuming the minimum HFRR of 520, and the EMA wanted 460. Since I can get DK very easily (I get fuel at WM, and WM carries DK), that's what I run. If the other better performing stuff was more readily available, I'd run one of them.

You also get a Cetane boost with DK. You don't get that with 2-cycle, even though you get a bigger drop in HFRR. For me, getting to 460 or lower is good enough. Some folks prefer to go lower (like using both 2-cycle AND DK). Nothing wrong with it, IMHO since ashless 2-cycle oil is meant to be burned. I can't say the same thing about ATF. Me? I wouldn't run it...

 

I can not take credit for that Post.. One of our other memebers had located that long ago.. I just saved it incase the question came up again..

To whomever located that in the first place.. I am sorry for not passing on the credit!!!!

 

I know everybody runs different additives and lubricants in their fuel.I was just telling the folks what I have been using(whether right or wrong) and using for a long time.I was told to use the ATF by a Certified Ford Mechanic that I have used many times when I was in a jam and before I started learning from you folks on the forum.He swears by it,runs Powerstrokes himself and does the same thing with the DK and ATF.
Just like when the doctor tells you to do something you do it because he is the one with the M.D. behind his name...Sorry for any bad info.

 

I saw nothing bad with it... You had stated as to what you were using, I was hopping ( as were the others here, including you ) to do my best to give any info we may have.. You sir are not the only one that uses Transfluid as a mixer..

 

Sorry man... Didn't mean to sound like I was snubbing you. I know A LOT of folks have run ATF as an additive for a long time. I just personally believe there are other (possibly better, who knows?) options out there. I think it makes sense that since 2-cycle is meant to be burned, it would be a good additive compared to something not meant to be burned. That's all I was opining on...

Cheers!

 

Pat/Joe....No need for apologies here.Everybody tries to help each other out here and we all were doing the same with different opinions and things we've used.....No big deal...

 

For what reason? To get my truck out of warranty before it breaks down? What more is the cost going from 520 to 460 vs staying at 520, from a breakdown perspective?

As I have said before, all this garbage tells us is which agent gives better lubricity but from a salesman's perspective, it alludes to the buyer that "more is better.". Eating 1 plate of food is good. 5 plates is better, 50 plates is even better and so on.

 

I find more than one source of info if it is "hinky". IOW, 2nd opinion if I don't think it is on the level.


Signed
The Skeptic

 

No, it's not like eating 50 plates. I don't know what each fuel vendor's specs are. Do you? If so, please fill us in. I believe I can safely assume it's at 520 or lower. The EMA wants 460. There's a delta of 60 there. DK makes up that 60 just about on the nose, per an independent study. That's enough data for me, and I choose to run it for that and the cetane boost it provides.

We have seen that you don't like it. That's fine. Don't run any. I and a lot of others choose to for the reasons already given. Besides, if it extends the length of time between failures, I'm all for it. Just like running syn fluids -- I simply choose to because I see immediate benefits doing so, and have for decades.