To me from your quote, this part says it all " Accordingly, the cetane number specified should be as low as possible to insure maximum fuel availability." Basically by putting out the most fuel they can at the lowest Centane number this means more fuel can be sold and that equals more money for someone. Also to me anyway, ASTM looks like it set the Specification so that big oil can make more $$$. It makes a person wonder if ASTM is run an controlled by the oil company's.

Now as for the the lube not being added until fuel is loaded on to the truck, you are correct that screw ups do happen and a lot more then people know about. It not only happens to diesel but to gas as well. The reason I know about this is because I have a relative who delivers fuel from several of the tank farms in the state and several tank farms in surrounding states.

BTW, don't tank my ranting on or about oil company's as an attack on you personally, but I don't trust them and the test can papers they put out can be misleading. I've also learned over the years some of the things big oil has pulled like selling ARCO or Union 76 gas at an Exxon station. Have you even noticed how many tankers trucks are not owned by the oil company's so they can sell what ever fuel that comes out of the pipe line?

 

does the 2 stroke oil have any ill efects on the fuel filter?

 

Just my 2 cents in blue...

 

Does anybody use Lucus fuel treatment claims not only to keep the injectors clean but to lube the pump and injectors themselves and also th cylinder

 

I've used it in both my truck and wifes car and like it very much. In fact it has cleaned up injector sticking problems that I got from 2 cycle oil. I also see an increase in fuel mileage every time I use Lucas in either my truck or her car.

 

Several of the synthetic 2 cycles are tinted red. As to performance guys the 2 cycle is helping because it is a FUEL and a lubricant. Generally oil contains more BTU's than gas. That is why diesel, and Jet-a are called heavy fuels, along with the fact hat diesel is actually heavier. Many manufacturers are setting up planes so that they can run Jet-a (Just like diesel #2 except it has anti gel additives because planes fly high where it get COLD!) The difference in weight is enough to cause different balance than when they are running gasoline.

 

Really shouldn't, it flows threw ever chainsaw,weedeater,dirtbike,etc. out there.

 

With all of the discussion on this board about the issues CJ4 oil is having, what effect if any does 2 cycle oil in the fuel have on the CJ4 oil? I know that using LSD cuts the life of the new CJ oils in half. Does 2 cycle have a similar effect?

 

You shouldn't need to run 2 cycle oil in a 2007 truck. It was designed for ULSD (520 HFRR) fuels. Where my 2002 is designed for LSD (250-350 HFRR) fuels. So we need the extra lube in the fuel.

So there is no need for vehicles designed for ULSD to add 2 cycle oil... It will mess with you smog equiptment too...

 

He has a 2007 5.9l. No DPF or requirement for ULSD.

 

Still in all... The truck was designed for ULSD diesel fuel so there is still no true need for 2 cycle oil in the fuel.

Everything up to 2006 was LSD fuel and now is lacking in lubricants for the IP / LP pumps...

2007+ models where designed around the ULSD so extra lubricant isn't required for it.

 

The 5.9l in the 2007 is no different than the 2006. The only changes were to the ecm. The 6.7l was designed for ULSD, not the 5.9l.

 

yes T-boe is correct

 

I'm giving up on adding 2 stroke oil. I have been tracking my mileage since this became the cool thing to do a couple of months ago. I have increased the amount of 2 stroke oil in every tank, although I still use less per gallon than many here. When I started i was averaging 17.7 mpg. My last tank was 14.1 mpg. This coupled with the fact that a Cummins tech told me that it was not a good idea to add 2 stroke as the injectors do not like it has pretty much closed the case for me.. It may very well have some positives, but there are also some negatives. I'm not going to lube my pump at the expense of my injectors and fuel mileage while paying to do it at $5-$8 per tank.

The way I see it, do whatever you think is best. I would say that 98% of diesel owners have been running the ULSD for well over a year with no ill effects. I don't think there's really ANY proof that we need to due this to keep our trucks running. I think it would have happened by now with all the diesel trucks on the road.

 

Your proabably a little low on that guess too. I have only heard of a couple issues and it cant be pinned directly on the ULSD IMO. If you want to add something, I still stand by Lucas. I have been using it for years in my gassers and for over many months in the CTD.