2 Stroke in Diesel. Test car - BMW 320d.

[NHK244V]

ZeeTacoe said:

And yet here you are after 3500+ posts.


So oh wise master what will be in the fuel tank of a car that has only ever had fuel in?

Water, petrol laquer, fungi maybe ?, dirt, all sorts, depends on how clean the fuel storage tanks are at the fuel station ? weather, how long the vehical sits and it's use and fill paterns ect
If it was "only fuel" we wouldn't need fuel filters.
When you work on cars you see all sorts in there, diesels are the dirtyest IME

have a look here

http://www.diesel-fuels.com/

and here

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f55/diesel-fue...

Edited by NHK244V on Tuesday 22 November 00:29

[NHK244V]

What no appologies redgriff500, "you was right there is a black growth in diesel tanks"?
No, "you was right 2 stroke does increase fuel millage" ??
poor old redgriff he's one of the very few NON bullstters on PH and he gets no pat on the back, no acknowledgment for simply stating a fact or the "truth" as non PHers call it ??

come on get your heads out your arses and admit he was right

[NHK244V]

No? gonna hide and sulk then i take it

[Marquis Rex]

80sboy said:

I was used to the silky smooth petrol six in my Z4 before swapping it for a BMW 320d. This was a 'sensible' (eco) choice, but to keep a bit of a grin on my face the car is mapped, has a straight through exhaust, and filters.

As 4-pot diesels go it's pretty good, but I obviously found it to be rough and lumpy in comparison to the straight 6. How I miss it!

Anyway, I've been reading in a few forums about the benefits of adding 2-stroke mineral oil (low ash) to your fuel tank before filling the car with diesel. I couldn't find any negatives or dangers in doing so, only positive feedback and some pretty convincing evidence.

It's important that the oil is Jaso FB spec compliant, low ash, and not fully synthetic - because this does not burn well.

This 2-stroke/diesel blend apparently brings the following benefits.

1. 2-stoke burns better and more cleanly than diesel. This means more complete combustion of your diesel fuel.

I've calculated the completeness of burn of the 'combustion efficiency' of a few diesel engines analysing the emissions from dyno tests- modern diesel engines are up at 99.9% combustion efficiency. So this 'complete combustion' is a red herring. Much like when journalists band about the term 'throttle response' without realising it's a real measureable metric

80sboy said:

2. Helps to initially clean out the engine internals, and keeps them clean.

More bks to me- a diesel engine will carbon up as internally as soon as you fire it up

80sboy said:

3. Restores missing lubricants (and more) from low sulphur diesel.

Oil companys come up with lubrication properties in league with the manufacturers and legislation, carefully. If something was 'missing' they'd know about it.

80sboy said:

4. The engine runs much more smoothly and is much quieter.

Smooth running of a diesel engine is more to do with restricting the maximum rate of pressure rise-usually using pilots of some form of injection rate shaping.

80sboy said:

5. Significant reduction in smoke from exhaust (due to better combustion). Applicable for cars with no DPF

The best way to do this simply is to substitute usual diesel with Bio-Diesel

80sboy said:

6. Keeps the DPF cleaner.

7. Increases the life of the engine, including injectors, fuel pump, etc.

bks and more bks.

[ZeeTacoe]

NHK244V said:

What no appologies redgriff500, "you was right there is a black growth in diesel tanks"?
No, "you was right 2 stroke does increase fuel millage" ??
poor old redgriff he's one of the very few NON bullstters on PH and he gets no pat on the back, no acknowledgment for simply stating a fact or the "truth" as non PHers call it ??

come on get your heads out your arses and admit he was right

1.That's a boat.
2. You've still got fk all evidence of 2 stroke oil improving empeegee when fed into a modern diesel.

"truth" indeed

[cptsideways]

I was told many years ago that bacteria & other organisms grow rather well in Diesel fuel tanks, my own experience would agree with this. Some quick googling reveals its perfectly true.

I also remember from a story told years ago that a good route out of being a conscript in various armies during WW2 was to drink the stuff!

http://www.debugamericalatina.com/bacteria-in-dies...


http://www.dieselbugbusters.co.uk/index.php?option...

[80sboy]

Marquis Rex said:

80sboy said:

I was used to the silky smooth petrol six in my Z4 before swapping it for a BMW 320d. This was a 'sensible' (eco) choice, but to keep a bit of a grin on my face the car is mapped, has a straight through exhaust, and filters.

As 4-pot diesels go it's pretty good, but I obviously found it to be rough and lumpy in comparison to the straight 6. How I miss it!

Anyway, I've been reading in a few forums about the benefits of adding 2-stroke mineral oil (low ash) to your fuel tank before filling the car with diesel. I couldn't find any negatives or dangers in doing so, only positive feedback and some pretty convincing evidence.

It's important that the oil is Jaso FB spec compliant, low ash, and not fully synthetic - because this does not burn well.

This 2-stroke/diesel blend apparently brings the following benefits.

1. 2-stoke burns better and more cleanly than diesel. This means more complete combustion of your diesel fuel.

I've calculated the completeness of burn of the 'combustion efficiency' of a few diesel engines analysing the emissions from dyno tests- modern diesel engines are up at 99.9% combustion efficiency. So this 'complete combustion' is a red herring. Much like when journalists band about the term 'throttle response' without realising it's a real measureable metric

80sboy said:

2. Helps to initially clean out the engine internals, and keeps them clean.

More bks to me- a diesel engine will carbon up as internally as soon as you fire it up

80sboy said:

3. Restores missing lubricants (and more) from low sulphur diesel.

Oil companys come up with lubrication properties in league with the manufacturers and legislation, carefully. If something was 'missing' they'd know about it.

80sboy said:

4. The engine runs much more smoothly and is much quieter.

Smooth running of a diesel engine is more to do with restricting the maximum rate of pressure rise-usually using pilots of some form of injection rate shaping.

80sboy said:

5. Significant reduction in smoke from exhaust (due to better combustion). Applicable for cars with no DPF

The best way to do this simply is to substitute usual diesel with Bio-Diesel

80sboy said:

6. Keeps the DPF cleaner.

7. Increases the life of the engine, including injectors, fuel pump, etc.

bks and more bks.

Blimey, you really don't like this idea do you?!

The majority of the information I've gathered is from secondary resources. These being tests, reviews, and other peoples personal experiences.

I'm just giving it a go to see if there is any truth behind it all.

After half a tank, my findings are:

1. The car is definitely quieter and smoother under idle, cruise, and acceleration. My girlfriend immediately noticed the same thing and she didn't even know anything about my little 2-stoke experiment!

2. Performance is marginally improved. The car isn't faster but seems to pull better below 1500rpm.

3. MPG is seems to be the same. I'll test this properly soon.

4. The car now produces NO black smoke whatsoever.

Since you're an expert on the subject, what do you make of this?

[Marquis Rex]

80sboy said:

Blimey, you really don't like this idea do you?!

The majority of the information I've gathered is from secondary resources. These being tests, reviews, and other peoples personal experiences.

I'm just giving it a go to see if there is any truth behind it all.

After half a tank, my findings are:

1. The car is definitely quieter and smoother under idle, cruise, and acceleration. My girlfriend immediately noticed the same thing and she didn't even know anything about my little 2-stoke experiment!

2. Performance is marginally improved. The car isn't faster but seems to pull better below 1500rpm.

3. MPG is seems to be the same. I'll test this properly soon.

4. The car now produces NO black smoke whatsoever.

Since you're an expert on the subject, what do you make of this?

Well what do I know? I'm only involved in design and developing engines.
Your evidence is anecdotal- I suggest you remove the engine from the car and put it on a dyno, at say, Ricardo and have them measure the BSFC, and emissions 'improvements' directly using chemiluminescence emissions equipment and NDIR etc. That's the only real scientific and repeatable way.

[ZeeTacoe]

cptsideways said:

I was told many years ago that bacteria & other organisms grow rather well in Diesel fuel tanks, my own experience would agree with this. Some quick googling reveals its perfectly true.

I also remember from a story told years ago that a good route out of being a conscript in various armies during WW2 was to drink the stuff!

http://www.debugamericalatina.com/bacteria-in-dies...


http://www.dieselbugbusters.co.uk/index.php?option...

My point made in a bad way was that one wont be pulling apart a working car to find tonnes of the stuff in the tank nor will adding 300ml of oil to a 60 litre tank disperse. If the stuff does get into to your tank do you really want to run it through 5 grands worth of machinery?

I still doubt you'd find that much , if any crap in a road going diesel. I'm kinda tempted to pull apart my 70k mile 306 deasel filter now.

[80sboy]

Marquis Rex said:

Well what do I know? I'm only involved in design and developing engines.
Your evidence is anecdotal- I suggest you remove the engine from the car and put it on a dyno, at say, Ricardo and have them measure the BSFC, and emissions 'improvements' directly using chemiluminescence emissions equipment and NDIR etc. That's the only real scientific and repeatable way.

Okay, well done. I'm not doubting you in any way, but how are you involved in engine design exactly? Purely out of interest.

Yes, I could do all of that, but it's not possible since I sold all of chemiluminescence emissions equipment and NDIR's on eBay last year...

I'm not trying to prove this scientifically anyway... I'm just trying to make sense of it and reporting my findings.

I can SEE that there is no black smoke. I don't need a machine to tell me that. Explain?

My uninformed girlfriend immediately noticed a quieter smoother car. Explain?

It is pulling better below 1500rpm. Explain?

So far I'm pleasantly surprised, I didn't expect any noticeable results.

[Marquis Rex]

80sboy said:

Okay, well done. I'm not doubting you in any way, but how are you involved in engine design exactly? Purely out of interest.

The last time someone asked me what I did and where I was, I responded and then got called an ahole and attacked by jealous PHers with their pitchforks- so I'm not going there.
I don't speculate on data that hasn't been arrived at under controlled laboratory conditions- there are too many variables. The biggest being the placeobo effect.

[ZeeTacoe]

80sboy said:

Marquis Rex said:

Well what do I know? I'm only involved in design and developing engines.
Your evidence is anecdotal- I suggest you remove the engine from the car and put it on a dyno, at say, Ricardo and have them measure the BSFC, and emissions 'improvements' directly using chemiluminescence emissions equipment and NDIR etc. That's the only real scientific and repeatable way.

Okay, well done. I'm not doubting you in any way, but how are you involved in engine design exactly? Purely out of interest.

Yes, I could do all of that, but it's not possible since I sold all of chemiluminescence emissions equipment and NDIR's on eBay last year...

I'm not trying to prove this scientifically anyway... I'm just trying to make sense of it and reporting my findings.

I can SEE that there is no black smoke. I don't need a machine to tell me that. Explain?

My uninformed girlfriend immediately noticed a quieter smoother car. Explain?

It is pulling better below 1500rpm. Explain?

So far I'm pleasantly surprised, I didn't expect any noticeable results.

So how else do you intend to prove it?

[80sboy]

Marquis Rex said:

80sboy said:

Okay, well done. I'm not doubting you in any way, but how are you involved in engine design exactly? Purely out of interest.

The last time someone asked me what I did and where I was, I responded and then got called an ahole and attacked by jealous PHers with their pitchforks- so I'm not going there.
I don't speculate on data that hasn't been arrived at under controlled laboratory conditions- there are too many variables. The biggest being the placeobo effect.

Wow, called an ahole because they are jealous? Sounds odd, I'm intrigued now.

I was waiting for you to say the words "placebo effect"... Seriously, you can't help me out better than that? There is no placebo effect going on here. Positive results are clear, so far. As I said, my girlfriend noticed a difference without even knowing that I'd added anything to the fuel.

Outside temperature and humidity was similar, same diesel fuel used, same driving style.

Since you're an expert, you must be able to suggest something more than "variants, or placebo effect"?

[80sboy]

ZeeTacoe said:

80sboy said:

Marquis Rex said:

Well what do I know? I'm only involved in design and developing engines.
Your evidence is anecdotal- I suggest you remove the engine from the car and put it on a dyno, at say, Ricardo and have them measure the BSFC, and emissions 'improvements' directly using chemiluminescence emissions equipment and NDIR etc. That's the only real scientific and repeatable way.

Okay, well done. I'm not doubting you in any way, but how are you involved in engine design exactly? Purely out of interest.

Yes, I could do all of that, but it's not possible since I sold all of chemiluminescence emissions equipment and NDIR's on eBay last year...

I'm not trying to prove this scientifically anyway... I'm just trying to make sense of it and reporting my findings.

I can SEE that there is no black smoke. I don't need a machine to tell me that. Explain?

My uninformed girlfriend immediately noticed a quieter smoother car. Explain?

It is pulling better below 1500rpm. Explain?

So far I'm pleasantly surprised, I didn't expect any noticeable results.

So how else do you intend to prove it?

Uhh, I'm not trying to prove anything. Just trying to make sense of some very positive results that I've had. I don't necessarily need to remove my engine and use hi-tech equipment to notice a real difference.

I'm posting on here, to discuss my findings and to hopefully encourage others to give it a go and report back.

Simply suggesting that it's a "placebo effect" and saying that the rest is rubbish isn't particularly useful.

[Adam205]

Marquis Rex said:

The last time someone asked me what I did and where I was, I responded and then got called an ahole and attacked by jealous PHers with their pitchforks- so I'm not going there.
I don't speculate on data that hasn't been arrived at under controlled laboratory conditions- there are too many variables. The biggest being the placeobo effect.

Dont mention it in the first place then. Slightly hypocritical, accusing someone of not providing enough evidence and then not providing enough evidence yourself wouldn't you say?

[Deva Link]

80sboy said:

After half a tank, my findings are:

1. The car is definitely quieter and smoother under idle, cruise, and acceleration. My girlfriend immediately noticed the same thing and she didn't even know anything about my little 2-stoke experiment!

2. Performance is marginally improved. The car isn't faster but seems to pull better below 1500rpm.

3. MPG is seems to be the same. I'll test this properly soon.

4. The car now produces NO black smoke whatsoever.

Much of that could be due to colder weather!

I don't know, I have a diesel Merc and some people swear by Miller's - I used several bottles over a few mths and I couldn't tell any difference. I do think mine (C270CDi) runs best, and produces best MPG, on Sainsbury's 5% bio citydiesel though.

[Marquis Rex]

Adam205 said:

Dont mention it in the first place then. Slightly hypocritical, accusing someone of not providing enough evidence and then not providing enough evidence yourself wouldn't you say?

What evidence? I didn't take the engine to a dyno and add this snake oil to undertake a laboratory test. This has been the gist of my posts-which the OP can't comprhend. Or are you too stupid to understand as well?
Judging by your caterfield-esque choice of cars, highly likely.

I know you spotty faced children WANT to believe that some magical snake oil will add 20 % better fuel economy, reduce emissions and grow hair also but it ain't happening. No matter how much anecdotal evidence you and your girlfriends give.

[Rollcage]

Surely, if it was this simple, the oil companies would do it?

[Adam205]

Marquis Rex said:

What evidence? I didn't take the engine to a dyno and add this snake oil to undertake a laboratory test. This has been the gist of my posts-which the OP can't comprhend. Or are you too stupid to understand as well?
Judging by your caterfield-esque choice of cars, highly likely.

I know you spotty faced children WANT to believe that some magical snake oil will add 20 % better fuel economy, reduce emissions and grow hair also but it ain't happening. No matter how much anecdotal evidence you and your girlfriends give.

If you look back I am sceptical too. My point is, don't point out your expertise if a) you have none or b) you aren't willing to back it up. It means nothing, makes you look a bit insecure (as indeed does your post above).

[Marquis Rex]

Adam205 said:

If you look back I am sceptical too. My point is, don't point out your expertise if a) you have none or b) you aren't willing to back it up. It means nothing, makes you look a bit insecure (as indeed does your post above).

I am very insecure :nods:
I also have facial twitches