Ultra low sulfer diesel?

[Jack1234]

We have a 2003/4 Cummins ISC which I believe was designed to operate on regular diesel. Now.... Some 7 hrs down the road the only diesel we can find is the new Ultra Low Sulfer (ULS). It is my understanding that this new ULS lacks sulfer which contributed lubrication to the engine. However, I also believe that the Refiners are adding "something...bio-oils" to compensate?

Anyway... is the new ULS diesel providing enough lubrication for older engines and/or is it necessary to use additives?.... If so, what is everyone using as an additive?

Cheers

[RVRon]

The refiners and Cummins will tell you that your engine will be just fine using ULSD. You won't find "low sulfur" diesel fuel easily. Very few if any stations carry it as accidentally putting it in a ULSD engine causes engine issues on the ones designed to run on ULSD and opens the station up for liability too.
The notice on my dispensers is as follows:

"ULTRA-LOW-SULFUR HIGHWAY DIESEL FUEL
(15 ppm Sulfur Maximum)

*Required for use in all model year 2007 and later highway diesel vehicles and engines.

*Recommended for use in all diesel vehicles and engines."

Regards,

[BCooke]

http://cumminsengines.com/every/misc...info_ulsd.page

Provides some info.

[smiller]

The sulfur itself isn't the lubricating agent, but the process used to remove sulfur does decrease lubricity. You can buy additives that will supplement lubricity of the fuel but every comment I've ever seen from every engine manufacturer says that the lubricity characteristics of ULSD are supplemented and adequate for older engines. I tend to believe them since given the enormous number of miles piled onto so many diesel vehicles if the advice was incorrect we'd probably have begun seeing problems by now.

[Brigadoon]

Don't take my word for it, but this is what I've found out. Do your own research to see if you come up with similar info.

The lubricity standard for ULSD was set by the U.S. as adequate if the HFRR wear score was less than 520 microns. In Europe the standard is less than 460 microns. The Engine Manufacturers Assoc. wanted the standard set at 460 or less. Naturally the government decided otherwise. Note that the lower the number, the less wear on your engine components. The government and the fuel suppliers say that the HFRR score of 520 should be adequate.

To find the HFRR (High Frequency Reciprocating Rig) score of a diesel fuel, testers place metal balls in the diesel fuel inside the HFRR and run it for 90 minutes. Then the balls are examined for wear scar size measured in microns. Therefore a smaller wear score number in microns means less wear on the parts. HFRR 460 is less wear than HFRR 520. HFRR 400 would be less wear than HFRR 460, etc.

So is the current HFRR standard of 520 adequate. Maybe. Maybe not. Prior to ULSD, fuels were in the HFRR score of 460 or less.

Another problem is the actual HFRR scores of the fuels being sold. I could not locate the article when prepairing this post, but one test report stated that either 40% passed the government standard or 40% failed the government standard. Either way is not so good. In other words a significant amount of the tested fuel had a HFRR score higher than 520.

I choose to use an additive to increase lubricity.

[smiller]

Also note that if you do want to play engineer and add additives to your fuel be sure to pick the correct product. There are a few tests out indicating that some brands increased lubricity as advertised, some had no significant effect, and some actually did harm to the final number.

[EngineerMike]

The real issue w/older engines on ULSD seems to have been seals on the fuel delivery side, and there pretty much exclusively form my reading the seals (gaskets) on the lift pump for Cummins rigs. If they leak, and they are changed for new, the owner then gets on down the road & forgets that LSD ever existed.
Except those for whom LSD has an alternative meaning. And then diesel isn't much of an issue, unless the guy is huffing it.

[smiller]

Wow man, now they have Ultra-LSD... groovy...

[Jack1234]

Quote:

Originally Posted by smiller Also note that if you do want to play engineer and add additives to your fuel be sure to pick the correct product. There are a few tests out indicating that some brands increased lubricity as advertised, some had no significant effect, and some actually did harm to the final number.

So....if you were going to use an additive.... What would you use & why?

[smiller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack1234 So....if you were going to use an additive.... What would you use & why?

Personally I don't see the need for an additive but you can Google around for more info, here's something to get you started: Lubricity Additive Study Results

Interesting that simply mixing in some biodiesel seemed to do best of all.

[BCooke]

Opti-Lube Advanced Lubricants

Diesel Power Magazine Evaluation on additives.

[Gary - K7GLD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brigadoon Don't take my word for it, but this is what I've found out. Do your own research to see if you come up with similar info. The lubricity standard for ULSD was set by the U.S. as adequate if the HFRR wear score was less than 520 microns. In Europe the standard is less than 460 microns. The Engine Manufacturers Assoc. wanted the standard set at 460 or less. Naturally the government decided otherwise. Note that the lower the number, the less wear on your engine components. The government and the fuel suppliers say that the HFRR score of 520 should be adequate. To find the HFRR (High Frequency Reciprocating Rig) score of a diesel fuel, testers place metal balls in the diesel fuel inside the HFRR and run it for 90 minutes. Then the balls are examined for wear scar size measured in microns. Therefore a smaller wear score number in microns means less wear on the parts. HFRR 460 is less wear than HFRR 520. HFRR 400 would be less wear than HFRR 460, etc. So is the current HFRR standard of 520 adequate. Maybe. Maybe not. Prior to ULSD, fuels were in the HFRR score of 460 or less. Another problem is the actual HFRR scores of the fuels being sold. I could not locate the article when prepairing this post, but one test report stated that either 40% passed the government standard or 40% failed the government standard. Either way is not so good. In other words a significant amount of the tested fuel had a HFRR score higher than 520. I choose to use an additive to increase lubricity.

ABSOLUTELY!

The government "standard" at the refinery has OFTEN found to be way below at the pump - and even at that, I personally don't accept a 20% increased wear factor in untreated ULSD as compared to the previous LSD, and either add a good brand low-ash 2 stroke oil to my diesel fuel to increase lubricity, or else use diesel containing 5-10 percent Bio-Diesel, which HAS been proven to be the best anti-wear additive to standard non-treated ULSD...

Pacific Pride card-lock stations in Oregon are now selling the 10% bio-diesed mix, which I try to use exclusively in my '02 Dodge/Cummins...

[smiller]

The only pertinent question is... how many vehicles have actually been negatively affected by ULSD?

[Brigadoon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by smiller The only pertinent question is... how many vehicles have actually been negatively affected by ULSD?

I'm not sure where you would get such info. From the government that set the "adequate" standard? The fuel makers/suppliers that went along with the standard who people would take to task if they knew their engine was affected? The engine manufacturers that prefer no one know about any short comings in their equipment? Unfortunately, I'm not sure I can accept their position that everything is ok.

You may be right. Time will tell. In the mean time we each have to make our own decision on what course of action we will take.