[TotalPower]

Originally Posted by cssnms

I will trust the engineers at Chevron and even those at Power Service over a self proclaimed internet warrior and product pitch-person like yourself.

all this talk and nothing to back it up. ok

why don't you try googling benzene and environment or naphtalene and environment.

I know it may be tough for you to deal with the facts.
"smarty pants fraud product pitching internet warrior" ( i think i got the all the names you called me)

BTW, santa clauss is real because Disney told you so, and the easter bunny is coming to lay some chocolate eggs for you too.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by TotalPower

all this talk and nothing to back it up. ok

why don't you try googling benzene and environment or naphtalene and environment.

I know it may be tough for you to deal with the facts.
"smarty pants fraud product pitching internet warrior" ( i think i got the all the names you called me)

BTW, santa clauss is real because Disney told you so, and the easter bunny is coming to lay some chocolate eggs for you too.

The only one talking is you. This isn't about benzene and naptha, people can figure that our for themselves; this is about you and your BS that you have been spewing and for that I have provided more than enough information to support my claim that you are nothing but a spammer and a hack who supposedly owns a BMW.

Now take your tree hugging marketing campaign somewhere else, we are all sold out of bullshit here.

[TotalPower]

still waiting for you to show something positive about naphtha or benzene.

This is about additives, not me.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by TotalPower

MPGreen was designed to have all possitive characteristics of a fuel additive-without the toxicicity or hazardous chemicals usually involved (petrolium distilates are VOC, Naphta and aromatics are carcenogenic...etc)
!

I love it! News flash, diesel contains volatile organic compounds (VOC) as well as aromatics!

Hey still waiting on the MSDS for MPGreen.

[TotalPower]

still waiting.

instead of being rude and condescending how about you show any proof that your products are good. i've asked maybe 20 times, and all you do is come back and call me names.

[DnA Diesel]

Originally Posted by TotalPower

...From day 1 all i've said is that there are better alternatives than these benzene and naphta based products...

I wouldn't put jack crap in my engine that the manufacturer refuses to disclose the composition of. Who's to say the stuff isn't loaded with benzene and naphthalene?

No MSDS, no use.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by TotalPower

still waiting.

instead of being rude and condescending how about you show any proof that your products are good. i've asked maybe 20 times, and all you do is come back and call me names.

Let's be clear, I am not attacking you personally just your credibility or lack thereof as the case may be. If you have an environmental agenda of promoting more "green" friendly products that's fine, but do not profress to be the resident expert on the subject, going into a scientific diatribe in an effort to substantiate your claims against any product that does not pass your environmental sniff-test; then chastising anyone who does not agree with your method of thinking.

Originally Posted by TotalPower

how about you show any proof that your products are good. i've asked maybe 20 times, and all you do is come back and call me names.

Now as to your request to provide "any" proof that "my" product is good, I provide the following indepent blind study conducted by Arlen Spicer. Arlen has done more for the diesel community and has far more credibility than you as to the subject. One of the most important traits in an additive in my opinion is improving lubricity of the fuel which is primarily why I use additive with some frequency. And for the record I use Power Service Diesel Kleen w/Cetane Boost not because it is the "best" but because it is good and is readily available at my local auto parts store.

Originally Posted by ;

SPICER
Diesel Specialist


Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 829

View Photos By: SPICER


iTrader Score: 0 reviews

Lubricity Additive Study Results

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following are the preliminary results of a research study on diesel fuel Lubricity Additives. There is likely to be further commentary and explanation added at a future time.

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 Sulfer Diesel) fuel.

HISTORY:

ULSD fuel is the fuel currently mandated for use in all on road diesel engines. This fuel burns cleaner and is less polluting than it’s predecessor, called Low Sulfer Diesel Fuel. Low sulfer fuel contained less than 500 ppm of sulfer. ULSD contains 15 ppm or less.
As diesel fuel is further refined to remove the polluting sulfer, it is inadvertently stripped of its lubricating properties. This vital lubrication is a necessary component of the diesel fuel as it prevents wear in the fuel delivery system. Specifically, it lubricates pumps, high pressure pumps and injectors. Traditional Low sulfer diesel fuel typically contained enough lubricating ability to suffice the needs of these vital components. ULSD fuel, on the other hand, is considered to be very “dry” and incapable of lubricating vital fuel delivery components. As a result, these components are at risk of premature and even catastrophic failure when ULSD fuel is introduced to the system. As a result, all oil companies producing ULSD fuel must replace the lost lubricity with additives. All ULSD fuel purchased at retail fuel stations SHOULD be adequately treated with additives to replace this lost lubricity. The potential result of using inadequately treated fuel, as indicated above, can be catastrophic. There have been many documented cases of randomly tested samples of diesel fuel. These tests prove that often times the fuel we purchase is not adequately treated and may therefore contribute to accelerated wear of our fuel delivery systems. For this reason it may be prudent to use an after market diesel fuel additive to ENSURE adequate lubrication of the fuel delivery system. Additionally, many additives can offer added benefits such as cetane improver, and water separators or emulsifiers.

CONTENT:

In this study we will test multiple diesel fuel additives designed to replace lost lubricity. The primary component of this study is a side-by-side laboratory analysis of each additive’s ability to replace this vital lubricity. Additionally, claims of improving cetane, water separation or emulsification, bio-diesel compatibility and alcohol content will be noted. These notes were derived from information that was readily available to consumers (via the label and internet information) and none of this information has been evaluated for validity and/or performance. Cetane information has only been noted if the word “cetane” was used in the advertising information. The words “improves power” has not been translated to mean “improves cetane” in this evaluation. Information on alcohol content is provided by indicating “contains no alcohol”. Omission of the words “contains no alcohol” does not imply that it does contain alcohol. This information was simply missing in the information available to a consumer. However, the possibility of a form of alcohol in these products is possible. Additionally, information on dosages and cost per tankful are included for comparison purposes.

How Diesel Fuel Is Evaluated For Lubricating Ability:

Diesel fuel and other fluids are tested for lubricating ability using a device called a “High Frequency Reciprocating Rig” or HFRR. The HFRR is currently the Internationally accepted, standardized method to evaluate fluids for lubricating ability. It uses a ball bearing that reciprocates or moves back and forth on a metal surface at a very high frequency for a duration of 90 minutes. The machine does this while the ball bearing and metal surface are immersed in the test fluid (in this case, treated diesel fuel). At the end of the test the ball bearing is examined under a microscope and the “wear scar” on the ball bearing is measured in microns. The larger the wear scar, the poorer the lubricating ability of the fluid. Southwest Research runs every sample twice and averages the size of the wear scar.
The U.S. standard for diesel fuel says a commercially available diesel fuel should produce a wear scar of no greater than 520 microns. 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.

METHOD:

An independent research firm in Texas was hired to do the laboratory work. The cost of the research was paid for voluntarily by the participating additive manufacturers. Declining to participate and pay for the research were the following companies: Amsoil and Power Service. Because these are popular products it was determined that they needed to be included in the study. These products were tested using funds collected by diesel enthusiasts at “diesel**********”. Additionally, unconventional additives such as 2-cycle oil and used motor oil were tested for their abilities to aid in diesel fuel lubricity. These were also paid for by members of “diesel**********”.
The study was conducted in the following manner:
-The Research firm obtained a quantity of “untreated” ULSD fuel from a supplier. This fuel was basic ULSD fuel intended for use in diesel engines. However, this sample was acquired PRIOR to any attempt to additize the fuel for the purpose of replacing lost lubricity. In other words, it was a “worst case scenario, very dry diesel fuel” that would likely cause damage to any fuel delivery system. This fuel was tested using the HFRR at the Southwest Research Laboratory. This fuel was determined to have a very high HFRR score of 636 microns, typical of an untreated ULSD fuel. It was determined that this batch of fuel would be utilized as the baseline fuel for testing all of the additives. The baseline fuel HFRR score of 636 would be used as the control sample. All additives tested would be evaluated on their ability to replace lost lubricity to the fuel by comparing their scores to the control sample. Any score under 636 shows improvement to the fuels ability to lubricate the fuel delivery system of a diesel engine.

BLIND STUDY:

In order to ensure a completely unbiased approach to the study, the following steps were taken:
Each additive tested was obtained independently via internet or over the counter purchases. The only exceptions were Opti-Lube XPD and the bio-diesel sample. The reason for this is because Opti-Lube XPD additive was considered “experimental” at the time of test enrollment and was not yet on the market. It was sent directly from Opti-Lube company. The bio-diesel sample was sponsored by Renewable Energy Group. One of their suppliers, E.H. Wolf and Sons in Slinger, Wisconsin supplied us with a sample of 100% soybean based bio-diesel. This sample was used to blend with the baseline fuel to create a 2% bio-diesel for testing.
Each additive was bottled separately in identical glass containers. The bottles were labeled only with a number. This number corresponded to the additive contained in the bottle. The order of numbering was done randomly by drawing names out of a hat. Only Spicer Research held the key to the additives in each bottle.
The additive samples were then sent in a box to An independent research firm. The only information given them was the ratio of fuel to be added to each additive sample. For example, bottle “A” needs to be mixed at a ratio of “480-1”. The ratio used for each additive was the “prescribed dosage” found on the bottle label for that product. Used motor oil and 2-cycle oil were tested at a rationally chosen ratio of 200:1.
The Research Laboratory mixed the proper ratio of each “bottled fluid” into a separate container containing the baseline fuel. The data, therefore, is meaningful because every additive is tested in the same way using the same fuel. A side-by-side comparison of the effectiveness of each additive is now obtainable.

THE RESULTS:

These results are listed in the order of performance in the HFRR test. The baseline fuel used in every test started at an HFRR score of 636. The score shown is the tested HFRR score of the baseline fuel/additive blend.
Also included is the wear scar improvement provided by the additive as well as other claimed benefits of the additive. Each additive is also categorized as a Multi-purpose additive, Multi-purpose + anti-gel, Lubricity only, non-conventional, or as an additive capable of treating both gasoline and diesel fuel.
As a convenience to the reader there is also information on price per treated tank of diesel fuel (using a 26 gallon tank), and dosage per 26 gallon tank provided as “ounces of additive per 26 gallon tank”.

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.

CREDITS:

This study would not have been possible without the participation of all companies involved and diesel**********. A special Thank You to all of the diesel********** members who generously donated toward this study and waited longer than they should have for the results. You folks are the best. Arlen Spicer, organizer.
__________________
"03 2500 HD, Kennedy Mega Filter, STOCK PAPER AIR FILTER, Oilguard Bypass, Primrose, Baldwin Oil Filter, ARE Camper Shell, Line X Liner, Westin Nerf Bars.

[TotalPower]

perfectly happy to share as soon as cssnms tells us what is great about benzene and naphtha. been waiting all day for this and I have a trip coming up. you're not going to make me wait till I get back are you?


What you posted above is a lubricity test, that's about 1 out of 40 tests that are run on diesel fuel in that test gear oil and biodiesel are significantly better most products. Well DUH.

What about improvement in combustion efficiency? Emissions (soot, pm, CO, NOX), gel point, flash point, etc.

There are many problems diesel cars face like cold temperatures, water, lubricity, emissions, noise...you ranked #10 out of 1/5.

Arlen Spicer? never heard of...Seems like you're awefully happy to try to discredit someone whom you don't anything about and compare me to someone that I know nothing of. That's makes sense...

[DnA Diesel]

Originally Posted by TotalPower

perfectly happy to share as soon as cssnms tells us what is great about benzene and naphtha. I've been waiting days for this

[cssnms]

That's what I thought, nuff said...

[hotrod2448]

Originally Posted by TotalPower

perfectly happy to share as soon as cssnms tells us what is great about benzene and naphtha. been waiting all day for this and I have a trip coming up. you're not going to make me wait till I get back are you?


What you posted above is a lubricity test, that's about 1 out of 40 tests that are run on diesel fuel in that test gear oil and biodiesel are significantly better most products. Well DUH.

What about improvement in combustion efficiency? Emissions (soot, pm, CO, NOX), gel point, flash point, etc.

There are many problems diesel cars face like cold temperatures, water, lubricity, emissions, noise...you ranked #10 out of 1/5.

Arlen Spicer? never heard of...Seems like you're awefully happy to try to discredit someone whom you don't anything about and compare me to someone that I know nothing of. That's makes sense...

And you aren't doing exactly what you are accusing him of?

All you've done is trash products while not even being able to give even one readily available product that doesn't have the same chemicals you've been shitting on in it and fits your god like criteria of boosting cetane without aromatics, is non-toxic, displaces water, adds lubricity, doesn't destroy seals and o-rings, etc....

[DieselDiner]

Is anyone familiar with this company or their product?

http://www.visconusa.com/

[cssnms]

I am not a chemical engineer for a petroleum or additive company nor do I pretend to be, but I did stay in Holiday Inn Express last night. Rather I am simply an educated consumer who recognizes bullshit when I see it. I work with bullshitters all day long, so I have a nose for the stuff.

The fact is, both naptha and or benzene are not only found in call-it 95% of the over-the-counter fuel additives, but they are found in additives that are added at the distribution facilities so it is in the gasoline and diesel that everyone puts in their tank. This includes Techron added to Chevron fuels which contains naptha and benzene, Shell diesel additives which contains among other ingrediants naptha and the list goes on. Even B20 biodiesel contains benezene.

Now I am sure in response this self proclaimed expert on the subject will post all kinds of gobbledgook in an effort to muddy the waters and deflect from the fact that he was nothing more than either the owner of MPGreen or a salesman for the company who despite all of his claims went out of business. He also has yet to post the MSDS that I have repeatedly requested he post up.

I will leave you with this, it boils down to who you think has the most credibility, 1) a product salesman, keyboard warrior who speaks with conviction or 2) the actual chemical engineers at the fuel companies.

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by DieselDiner

Is anyone familiar with this company or their product?

http://www.visconusa.com/

Interesting!

[DnA Diesel]

Originally Posted by Socom

Interesting!

Especially since they publish their MSDS.

Since it's essentially #2 diesel with <5% polyalphaolefins (PAOs are also a base for Group 4 synthetic motor oils), it's a pure hydrocarbon product (less the inherent benzene and naphthalene in D2).

It would be interesting to know what proportion of its benefits are considered to be attributed to the surface tension modification of combustion and what, if any, effect there is on lubricity.

Cheers
D.

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by DnA Diesel

Especially since they publish their MSDS.

Since it's essentially #2 diesel with <5% polyalphaolefins (PAOs are also a base for Group 4 synthetic motor oils), it's a pure hydrocarbon product (less the inherent benzene and naphthalene in D2).

It would be interesting to know what proportion of its benefits are considered to be attributed to the surface tension modification of combustion and what, if any, effect there is on lubricity.

Cheers
D.

I don't remember them touting that as a benefit but your really have to wonder. I watched some of their presentations. The metering system is interesting. I wonder if they'd ship me a few bottle?

[DieselDiner]

Originally Posted by Socom

I wonder if they'd ship me a few bottle?

They show a quart bottle on their purchasing page, and offer "commercial" sales, so I *think* the answer is yes. I've been thinking about the same thing.

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by DieselDiner

They show a quart bottle on their purchasing page, and offer "commercial" sales, so I *think* the answer is yes. I've been thinking about the same thing.

I see. Dosage is 1 oz per 20 gallons of fuel.

Take a look at the HP test and tell me if you see anything strange with regards to their graphs. Also notice that the test engine was run without EGR.

[DieselDiner]

I'm no expert, that's why I asked for opinions. I'm a skeptic about stuff like this, but it at least seems intriguing. I noticed that the tests all seem to be on industrial type engines, versus an engine like ours with DPF, DEF, etc.. Not sure what to make of that, just that it's noticeable.

[cssnms]

You guys might find this product intriguing, I did. I think I am going to order a 5 gallon sample to take with me to the track at the end of the month.

It is popular on the diesel drag circuit since its the diesel version of race gas. The B5 product gained a following on the TDI forum for a variety of reasons to include it is clean burning. One member mixed 50/50 along with a lubrcity additive and was very happy with the results, despite he did notice a slight decline in mpg's over a 1k+ test miles, but could be because of the concoction he is running. Their website mentions nothing of the lubricity properties.

It's expensive, but the price per gallon goes down a bit if you order by the 55 gallon drum. You can buy it at Hyperfuels.com who is also a sponsor on the TDI forum.

http://syndiesel.com/

http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=203587

http://hyperfuels.com/

[hotrod2448]

Originally Posted by cssnms

You guys might find this product intriguing, I did. I think I am going to order a 5 gallon sample to take with me to the track at the end of the month.

It is popular on the diesel drag circuit since its the diesel version of race gas. The B5 product gained a following on the TDI forum for a variety of reasons to include it is clean burning. One member mixed 50/50 along with a lubrcity additive and was very happy with the results, despite he did notice a slight decline in mpg's over a 1k+ test miles, but could be because of the concoction he is running. Their website mentions nothing of the lubricity properties.

It's expensive, but the price per gallon goes down a bit if you order by the 55 gallon drum. You can buy it at Hyperfuels.com who is also a sponsor on the TDI forum.

http://syndiesel.com/

http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=203587

http://hyperfuels.com/

Interesting.

Original SynDiesel S2 formula with added 5% biodiesel made from soybean or canola oils. Added oxygen creates even more cetane power with extremely fast burn. This is the specification fuel used in the VW Jetti TDI Cup racing cars.

I know a guy that used to work for Bosch Motorsports and did the tuning on the TDI cup cars. I'll ask him about it.

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by DieselDiner

I'm no expert, that's why I asked for opinions. I'm a skeptic about stuff like this, but it at least seems intriguing. I noticed that the tests all seem to be on industrial type engines, versus an engine like ours with DPF, DEF, etc.. Not sure what to make of that, just that it's noticeable.

Did a quick google search and this stuff has been around for awhile.