Mopar1973man

2 Cycle oil will not harm you fuel system at all...As a matter of fact 2 cycle oil test much higher that most additives... But I see several people are mixing PS and 2 cycle oil. All your doing is shooting yourself in the foot...

Now if this was the results of the orignal test...


Now watch what happen when you mix then together... These are calculated averages of HFRR.


Take notice that most combination tend to make the HFRR higher and lubricity worse!

So if you going to mix additives mix with the lowest one possible...

Philabuster

How about 2 cycle oil at 100:1 instead of 200:1 ratio? That is closer to what people here are running. What would the micron number be for 100:1?

bentwings

Pretty interesting. I had not seen the part about mixing additives. I had a feeling that the reduction might happen.

So the bottom line is that possibly adding another 2-3 % Bio Diesel might be the best and cheapest way to go.

So far this winter I have not used any anti gel like PS and have not had any trouble down to -15 F. We do have full winter fuel so us locals should not have to use anti gel. I have kept samples of fuel in the back of the truck to look at at various temps and have yet to see any sign of gelling even down to -20 F last year.

The Walmart 2 stroke stuff definitely quiets the motor and injector pump down but apparently it doesn't do the HFRR any good.

I think I'm going to search harder for a supplier of heavy Bio even if I have to go out of the way and get say 50 gallons.

Mopar1973man

So if 200:1 now list and your drop down to 100:1...

200:1 = (35 Gallons / 22.4 Ozs) 162 Point Increase (474 HFRR)
100:1 = (35 gallons / 44.8 Ozs) 324 Point Increase (237 HFRR)

2% Bio Diesel = 221 HFRR

Not bad...

MAX340

I'm curious, where did you get these results? The original test did not mix any of the additives, let alone the vast number of tests suggested by your table.

MAX340

According to the results of the test by the Dieselplace guys, it reduces the HFRR by 20% or better.

So I'm confuised by your statement, on what do you base it?

MAX340

Again, I'm curious as to the source of your information.

b4wheeler

If you can apply straight math to these numbers, this is where I see my usages....

I never put 16 oz of TCW-3 in my tank, it comes in an 8 oz bottle, so I use 8 oz.
Power Service comes in simple 16 oz bottles, so I use 16 oz per 36 gal tank.

With these numbers .......


Attitive HFRR HFRR Diff Imp > Base Ratio Oz Used
Power Service 575 0 61 400:1 8.32
Power Service 514 -61 122 200:1 16.64
TCW-3 474 0 162 200:1 16.64
TCW-3 555 +81 81 400:1 8.32

Mopar1973man

Calculated averages of 2 HFRR scores... As you notice it appear to be right on the money...

Mopar1973man

First of your 2 cycle oil...
(36 x 128) = 4608 ozs of fuel
4,608 Ozs of fuel / 8 Ozs of oil = 576:1 ratio (Way too low you need much more! Should be 128:1 ratio normally!)

576 / 200 = 2.88 (162 / 2.88) = 56 HFRR Increase (Calculated)

now PS... It suppose to be mixed 400:1
4608 / 16 = 288:1 ratio (Nearly double dose)

288 / 400 = 0.72 (61 / 0.72) = 84 HFRR Increase (Calculated)

Now to bind them together (avverage).

56 + 84 = 140 / 2 = 70 HFRR Increase total (Calculated)

The above figures show improper mixing of additives and you net gain was very little. So at this point it wasteful mixture...

Now to show the proper mixture and what would of happened...

2 cycle oil mixed at 128:1 ratio.
4,608 Ozs of fuel / 36 Ozs of 2 cycle oil = 128:1 Ratio

128 / 200 = 0.64 (162 / 0.64) = 253 Point Increase (Calculated)

Then using PS Properly at 400:1 ratio which is a increase of 61 HFRR.
4608 / 11.52 = 400
400 / 400 = 1 ( 61 / 1) = 61 <- double checking formula

253 + 61 = 314 / 2 = 157 HFRR Point increase (calculated).

So it goes to prove measure and use your additive properly and they will work for you. But if your careless and not mixing properly it just a waste of money...

Now if you dropped the PS out of the figures and used only 2 cycle oil you would have a 253 HFRR increase... This is why I always SUGGEST NOT to mix other additive with 2 cycle oil UNLESS the other is LESS HFRR SCORE that 2 cycle oil. Better improvement is note then!

Formula...
Figure ozs of fuel
x Gallons fuel * 128 = Ozs of Fuel

Figure ratio of mixture
Ozs of fuel / Ozs of mixture = Ratio of mixture

Figure Change Value
Calculated ratio / Baseline Ratio = Change Value
(Baseline Ratio = from the HFRR test results from dieselplace.com)

Figure HFRR change
Baseline Increase / Change Value = HFRR Increase

Figure Average HFRR Score
HFRR Increase1 + …2 + …3 = Total
Total / (Number of values) = Average increase HFRR score

Boilermaker08

why does everyone want to quiet the motor down??...I like the noise personally!!

Mopar1973man

Noise from the tailpipe is fine...

But tapping and knocking noise from your fuel system is not good...

wcbcruzer

I haven't noticed ANY difference when I run 2-cycle oil in the tank. Maybe it's because CA diesel is higher quality and has higher cetane numbers than the rest of the US.

Mopar1973man

Well here you go...
I ran the dyno with a mixture of 105:1 ratio in my fuel and I ran 381/826 and 379/831 with a Edge Comp on 5x5... 2 Cycle Oil was SuperTech Outboard.

My dyno sheet
http://mopar.mopar1973man.com/2002%2...no%20sheet.pdf

So I know that 100:1 to 128:1 ratio is not going to rob you of power...

As for high cetane haven't you notice the higher cetane in the winter you always see lower MPG's then in the summer when cetane levels are lower the MPG's rise again... I don't consider high cetane a good thing...

My first winter on ULSD 47 Cetane... My MPG have drop more this year than previous years... This is my second year of 2 cycle oil...

Graph of MPG's
http://mopar.mopar1973man.com/2002%2...PG%20Graph.pdf

Fuel Records (20K to current)
http://mopar.mopar1973man.com/2002%2...%20Records.pdf

As for my power I check against my ScanGauge II often to verify that my HP hasn't decreased. I'm still able to hit 350-380 HP on the ScanGauge II even with winterized diesel here in Idaho.

ScanGauge II
http://www.scangauge.com/

Extra Gauges for ScanGauge II
http://www.scangauge.com/support/pdfs/XGAUGE.pdf

So I know the 2 cycle oil is NOT effecting my fuel system. But the lower BTU content from the high cetane fuels is effecting my MPG's for sure...

I start using 2 cycle oil just about 2 years ago at 85K miles and you'll notice a marked improvement till this winter. Then a fell from what I found out that the process of making ULSD fuel has incresed the cetane a few points more than typical so now with winterized fuel 47 Cetane (or Highier) here in Idaho we are all seeing a loss in MPG's even my buddy that wasn't using 2 cycle oil he's down about 3 MPG's...

Cetane rating of Chevron Fuels
http://www.cpchem.com/enu/tds_unsecu...el_summary.pdf

I know what there using for winterizing fuel up here...Anti-gel is actually called "Pour point depressant" and here is a MSDS sheet on it...

Pour Point Depressant (MSDS)
http://www.setonresourcecenter.com/m...7/wcd007de.htm

Quote:

KEROSINE, PETROLEUM and LUBRICATING OIL

I know that kerosene has a lower BTU value 134,000 BTU's compared to summer diesel at 147,000 BTU on average. So the cetane rating is increased for easy starting but the BTU content is reduced...

I'm going to quit for now...

NoSeeUm

Mopar,

Still not understanding why the HFRR drops when you mix 2-stroke oil and PS. It is not making sense to me for some reason.

For example your calculation:
Why are you taking the average? It only seems reasonable that each would add its lubricational component seperately based upon the ratio it is mixed into the diesel, not the ratio if it was mixed together.

To me that is like saying, for example only:
30w oil where HFRR = 200
10w oil where HFRR = 100

I can see how the combined HFFR of those oils, if they were mixed 1:1, would be 150. But this is not really what is happening when an additive is mixed into diesel is it? Each should had a seperate component value of HFRR and the values should simply be summed up.

So in your example it should be:
56 + 84 = 140

Jim