ATF in fuel

[cutter88]

Iv had a few people trell me to put fome ATF in my fuel to keep injectors and pump lubed, can anyone tell me how much and how often in older John Deere engines

[goose63]

Years ago we would put quart to 100 gallons every month that was over the road trucks

[coxy]

I put a quart to every 5 tank fulls 

[cutter88]

Ok thanks

[Southside]

Heck, i throw a quart into my '06 Duramax every couple fill ups and she is pushing 375,000 hard miles and still going strong.

[brendonv]

I've got results from an independent study showing products and lubricity. Don't believe atf came out well. Some made the fuel worse. Like marvel mystery.

I've been using Ashless two stroke oil in my pre emission diesels. Side by side I've heard engine noise difference between two 7.3 diesels. It's not #1 but one of the most affordable and easy to get. (Walmart).  I use it in two 7.3, a cat 3116, kubota 32hp, and a jd 120hp. No issues and good piece of mind.

I'll post it when I get on my other pc.

[brendonv]

Try this. On my iPhone. I use #7. Don't see ATf Must be thinking something else.

http://tribes.tribe.net/dieselpower/photos/ccc96dfb-67e7-47bf-ad7c-b53bc241b89d

[Southside]

I have been tempted to use 2 stroke.  I switched over to Transynd from ATF 6 a while back and had a good charge of ATF 6 left over so I began to use that, figured it was better than sitting on the shelf.  I was leaving a mill one day when I noticed a very noticeable change in the sound of the engine, my 1st though was a sudden exhaust leak, so I opened the hood and looked around, did not see a thing.  So I figured it was an injector that decided to give up the ghost - they are original.  Remembered I had a bottle of ATF 6 in the bed so I figured I would dump it in as the extra lubrication would help on the trip home where I would figure out the issue.  Got about a mile up the road and the sound was gone and never came back.  Not sure if it was the ATF or not.

[ohiowoodchuck]

Standyne is a great additive.

[WmFritz]

One of my kids runs with a large diesel truck group here in Michigan. He has an '05 Duramax for a daily driver that has close to SSlogger's mileage.  I gave up 'lecturing' him on the abuse he put's that truck through. It gets worked HARD between the farm and his construction job. But, on weekends in the summers, he pounds the heck out of it. Sand drags and dune climbing mostly.

The mods he's done are; a tuner, a head stud kit to handle the boost he's pushing and some mods to the Allison transmission to beef it up. He and his buddies swear by ATF to lube the injector's. His are still stock.

I'll ask him tomorrow how much he runs.

[David-L]

I have been running it for 3 years now and have not had any issues in any diesel with injectors. They have taken the lubricity out of diesel and charge us to do it.

                                 

[samandothers]

Is the use of ATF only forbpre emission engines?

[g_man]

Try this. On my iPhone. I use #7. Don't see ATf Must be thinking something else.

http://tribes.tribe.net/dieselpower/photos/ccc96dfb-67e7-47bf-ad7c-b53bc241b89d

Thanks for that chart. I use Stanadyne Performance. Surprised it is so low on the list for lubricity. Looks like I can't go wrong adding a 2.6 oz bottle of 2 cycle per 5 gal of fuel too. Especially for my old dozer.

[beenthere]

I couldn't find out who financed the "independent" study, or anything about how the comparative tests were conducted. I'd be a bit suspicious that maybe the one, or ones, that came out on top were a part of the financial package.
Because such 3rd party testing doesn't come cheap.

[ohiowoodchuck]

Cenpeco outlaw mix is another good one. I ran it in my 5.9 cummins I pulled with. It will definetly make your truck run better and lube all components of the fuel system.

[brendonv]

Here you go beenthere

http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/76-speciality-forums/64-maintenance-fluids/177728-lubricity-additive-study-results.html

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 "dieselplace.com". 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 "dieselplace.com".
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.

[Maine logger88]

Cenpeco outlaw mix is another good one. I ran it in my 5.9 cummins I pulled with. It will definetly make your truck run better and lube all components of the fuel system.

I used to run that in my pulling tractor it did seem to work good

[Stray one]

Hi,

I read a study in progressive farmer (if I remember right) about how D fuel has changed.  The part that really surprised me was the huge difference in the amount of centane from batch to batch.  Not only do you battle lube issues but there can be a big difference in power.  Unlike buying say 87 or 91 oct gas you don't have any real measure of what your getting with diesel.  I will look to see if I still have the article.     

[thecfarm]

Would any of those additives help out the motors in my tractors? I have a 40 and a 30hp. Both get used alot.

[346xp]

My tech at the gm garage puts it in every oil change he says its a cleaner

[ohiowoodchuck]

Cenpeco outlaw mix is another good one. I ran it in my 5.9 cummins I pulled with. It will definetly make your truck run better and lube all components of the fuel system.

I used to run that in my pulling tractor it did seem to work good

it always made mine run with a nice cone flame coming out the hood stack.

[SPIKER]

Wonder if the synthetic/rotella in the used motor oil makes a difference vs a standard SAE30 weight say.   I been adding about a quart or little less to 5 gallons on my farm tractor (along with a  D911 additive) mostly just to use some of the ever growing stock pile of used motor oil.  I can tell that half a quart of oil to the 5 gallon leaves no trace on the exhaust note while much more DOES show up in the "smell and the tone/note" of the engine when running at temps.   I don't ad nearly that much in winter as it does effect starting ability in cold temps & when setting separates some.

The ATF is used in same way all of which is filtered thru a slow drip paper towels into the clean quarts bottles.   I have several OLD Water Filters that I keep saying I'm going to convert into a gallon at a time drip thru system and use one new (cotton wound) water filter element just to make sure no junk makes it into the system.   That so far has not happened as the one think I am really good at is procrastination, one of these days I'll put myself in for a medal (when I get around to it.  :D ;) ;D )



Mark

[Maine logger88]

Would any of those additives help out the motors in my tractors? I have a 40 and a 30hp. Both get used alot.

I believe lubricity additive is good for any Diesel engine whether it be a old Detroit or a new common rail. Another additive I like is cenpeco diesel max I use that some too

[thecfarm]

Maine logger,good to know. I should have mentioned both tractors are about a 2005.

[scsmith42]

An old diesel engine mechanic that I know recommends mixing some 30 wt non detergent engine oil in the fuel tank on older diesel equipment.  The newer equipment is designed for our modern fuel, but the older equipment is not.

I don't think that ATF is as good a lubricant as engine oil.