Adding 2 stroke oil to fuel - Interesting reading!!

[Diesel_vert]

I know people keep saying that two stroke oils are safe for emissions devices, but so far I personally remain cautious on its use on Euro4/5 diesel engines.

But as for the universal recommendation of increased cetane rating in this forum, there are other forums where they state that cetane ratings higher than required cause increased engine wear (due to more rapid pressure build up) so are additives that boost cetane really good for our cars? Maybe our ECUs are good enough to retard the injection timing in this case so this is not an issue - can anyone comment?

Higher cetane leading to increased wear? My initial thoughts are that I'm sceptical, but who knows?

I think just about everyone here is concerned that this is very much a minimum requirement specification.

Lower is better of course, but at this point in time I don't feel that the 460 micron limit is something to be overly concerned about.

Otherwise, why do almost all diesel fuel additives shout out about increased lubrication as one of the benefits.

To sell more product? No one is doubting the benefits of increased lubricity, just depends on how low you need to go (wear limit) before you feel comfortable.

Sure, if you lease a car for 3 years and return it, then you wouldn't care but many of us intend to keep out cars longer than that and may have bought a diesel with that in mind - I know I did.

It's not inconceivable that modern diesel engines will outlast the chassis even if you don't use any additional additives.

I could level the same doubt towards diesel fuel additives. How many of them explicitly state that they will not clog DPFs? Some do, some don't.

We don't know (or I don't know), that's the (my) problem.

The DPF debate is a reasonable one. But to bring in doubts about catalytic converters and EGRs is FUD

In light of the information currently available to me, I thought they were valid concerns.

But you didn't comment on the poorer performance of many diesel fuel additives (which was my observation).

I thought the results were pretty self explanatory.

And to say that 2 stroke oil came 7th is a pretty selective statement - from 3rd to 9th, the difference was 49 ( 197 - 148 ) microns with 10th being WAY lower (61 microns) and 19 additives in total being tested so in that light, the 2 stroke oil did pretty well.

I thought a 162 micron improvement was decent, even if it wasn't as good as some other products.

Plus the fuel tested had an HFRR score of 636 microns while US requires 520 microns (to our 460 microns). So the 2 stroke oil would have gotten US Spec fuel down to European/Australian standards.

I recall that the reason why untreated fuel was used was to see the effects of the additives in isolation. There are endless debates on whether the effects would have been any different if treated fuel was used, but let's not go there.

[kaanage]

Nope. The current belief on failure mode is the insulation around the pizeo actuator / wires in the loom break down under oil/heat and earth out, causing injector and thus engine shutdown. Has nothing to do with the injector part per say, and is not anywhere near fuel. Needs beefed up insulation for the wire sin the loom, and revised insulation in the pizeo module, but no-one is sure outside Siemens themsleves I'd say.

I'm not relating lubrication to the PD Piezo injector failures but just asking for general wear reduction in the injectors (I've pretty much read everything I can find about the PD Piezo injector failures in various forums and sites). But then if you're getting you injectors replaced anyway...

[kaanage]

I recall that the reason why untreated fuel was used was to see the effects of the additives in isolation. There are endless debates on whether the effects would have been any different if treated fuel was used, but let's not go there.

Actually, it seems some people on TDiClub are trying to go there by seeing if they can fund a repeat of the Spicer test with current additives and using a stock pump diesel rather than the pure distillate base used in the original test. Hopefully they can get it organised.

As for the rest of our debate, I agree that neither of us have enough sources nor personal observations to be able to make definative statements. But I'll report back on what findings I can make when I trial with my PD engined Polo (the 2 stroke oils that I have around are only JASO FC)

[Diesel_vert]

As for the rest of our debate, I agree that neither of us have enough sources nor personal observations to be able to make definative statements.

Pretty much sums up 99% of internet forum discussions.

[Transporter]

Nice discussion.

IMO,
the personal observations from using any additive or 2stroke oil doesn't mean anything from the engine perspective. You can feel that the engine has more power and that there is much less smoke from the exhaust, yet still cause some damage to the engine or shorten it's life. Unfortunately, all I could read on the net about using 2 stroke oil as an additive was not supported by any known test results that would be backed up by any reputable company. For me the unknown affect that 2stroke oil could have on the engine and fuel system components is way to much risk, ...and all that for what?

I just may add that, if you use additive in a common rail engine make sure that it is made for CR fuel systems. The CR high pressure pump will render any other additive useless.

[kaanage]

Long term mileage is not a bad indicator but we need figures from a reliable source to be sure.

DiscoGeorge on the Freelander thread has been delayed so the comparitive pics of the CR HPFPs won't be up until around March 16

Do you think the injector pics + comments posted by DiscoGeorge in this page in the Freelander thread are meaningful, Transporter?

[Diesel_vert]

Apparently, BP Diesel with up to 5% biodiesel has been available for over a year now (wish I knew earlier ). Anyway, this is welcome news for those of us with diesel cars (especially those fitted with a DPF), as this should alleviate most of our concerns on lubricity.

Some select quotes:

Is BP Diesel with up to 5% biodiesel covered by the BP Fuels Guarantee?

BP Diesel with up to 5% biodiesel conforms to the Australian Diesel Specification and, as with all BP fuels, is backed by our BP Fuels Guarantee. We guarantee that our fuels are fit for purpose and, if the conditions of our fuel guarantee are met, will not cause system problems.

Where is BP Diesel with up to 5% biodiesel sold?

Commencing January 2010, BP Diesel with up to 5% biodiesel will gradually replace standard mineral diesel at both BP branded retail sites and BP Truck Stops that are currently supplied from the Parramatta terminal.

List of current sites stocking BP Diesel with up to 5% biodiesel:

BP 2Go Canterbury
BP Haberfield
BP Connect Macarthur
BP Connect Eagle Vale
BP Connect Naremburn
BP Connect Rosehill

As it's now March 2011, hopefully more sites will have B5 by now. I suppose this makes up for the lack of BP Ultimate Diesel in Sydney.


EDIT - Volkswagen approves the use of biodiesel blends of up to 7% for all vehicles, including those fitted with particulate filters (PDF, 56 KB).

[kaanage]

Just make sure you fill at a station with high turnover since biodiesel is hygroscopic, so the longer it's stored, the greater the possibility of microbial growth in your fuel tank and/or corrosion of the fuel system components (pumps, injectors etc).

[Diesel_vert]

That's true, but for 5% blends, I think the issue isn't as acute when compared to higher blends.

In any case, if all else fails one still has BP's fuel guarantee as a last line of defence. But that's not to say ordinary diesel (or petrol) isn't subject to poor storage issues either, so it would be prudent to follow kaanage's advice for any type of fuel bought from a servo.

[Transporter]

To be honest, I don't like the idea of adding bio to the diesel. I've tried B20, 2 tanks in my T5 and I could feel less power and the engine used more fuel, so there was no saving at all. As far as visible soot reduction from the exhaust goes; I could see more reduction when I started to use Morey's Diesel Engine Smoke Killer, back in 2006.

[Diesel_vert]

Though I wish your experience of using B20 was more positive, I still think that using high quality B5 blends is a cheap, effective, and safe way of increasing lubricity, with very few disadvantages, IMO.

Well, at least B5 has the blessing of the vehicle and FIE manufacturers, if that counts for anything.

[kaanage]

B5 should make far less difference to performance than B20, given the large difference in ratios.
And there shouldn't be enough ethanol to damage the seals.

[Diesel_vert]

Do mean methanol? Because AFAIK, most manufacturers only permit biodiesel blends derived from FAME (fatty acid methyl ester) as opposed to FAEE (fatty acid ethyl ester) unless specified, e.g. the Brazilian market.

In any case, the European, American and Australian standard for biodiesel limits methanol content to 0.2% (which works out to be 0.04% for B20 and 0.01% for B5) so it's a non-issue, really.

[gldgti]

To be honest, I don't like the idea of adding bio to the diesel. I've tried B20, 2 tanks in my T5 and I could feel less power and the engine used more fuel, so there was no saving at all. As far as visible soot reduction from the exhaust goes; I could see more reduction when I started to use Morey's Diesel Engine Smoke Killer, back in 2006.

I don't want to really try and change the subject here - but T, 2 tanks isnt a very good test.

I've used more biodiesel in cars than I have any other fuel, and I can tell you 4 things for sure -

> biodiesel doesnt have any inherent problems, apart from approximately 6% reduced chemical energy content %v/v, compared with dino diesel
> like anything in the real world, to get the best out of biodiesel in any diesel engine tuned for dino diesel, you need to alter the tuning of the engine to run it at peak efficiency (in my experience this is as much as 10% difference in fuel economy between stock tuning for dino and optimised tuning for bio). This affects power, economy and soot.
> if you take care, and put in the effort, you can see benefits over running dino diesel.
> its better for the environment

You ofcourse are very experienced with diesels but i don't think its fair to write off biodiesel as "no improvement" based on a 2 tank test

[gldgti]

Do mean methanol? Because AFAIK, most manufacturers only permit biodiesel blends derived from FAME (fatty acid methyl ester) as opposed to FAEE (fatty acid ethyl ester) unless specified, e.g. the Brazilian market.

In any case, the European, American and Australian standard for biodiesel limits methanol content to 0.2% (which works out to be 0.04% for B20 and 0.01% for B5) so it's a non-issue, really.

Good point - you might be interested to know that its actually very sensible for the producer to remove as much ethanol/methanol as possible from the fuel, since it is a constituent component in the manufacturing process and any reclaimed alcohol can be used again.