That is true, the ULSD is crap in everyway.
I use additives to make it work in my older engines and get better mileage.
I get 10-20% better mileage when I use the additives depending on which ones I use.
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.
school me on diesel trucks
- Thread starter JUNIOR-K5
- Start date
I use additives to make it work in my older engines and get better mileage.
I get 10-20% better mileage when I use the additives depending on which ones I use.
YUP!!! Stanadyne nets the best results form my experience, and it lubricates in addition to boosting the cetane level! The lack of sulfer decreases diesel lubricity, so you need to the lubricants!
I throw in a bit of 2cycle to every tank to help my injectors last a bit longer.
buffblazer
1/2 ton status
I like my 05 DMAX, but if I could go back I would have bought an 06
Can't beat the 6 speed and no head gasket issues that I'm dreading will catch up to me.
Can't beat the 6 speed and no head gasket issues that I'm dreading will catch up to me.
buffblazer
1/2 ton status
Oh and I'm getting 19 on the highway with 6 inches of lift, 35/12.5/17 mud terrains with edge juice with attitude CTS, AFE dry flow air intake, AFE turbo mouth piece, and 4 inch MBRP turbo back exhaust.
You definitely don't need a 3/4 ton diesel truck to tow a bass boat or a few quads on the weekend. I do understand how somebody may "want" one even if they don't "need" one....kinda' like me having a K5 with 40" tires and 1-ton axles.
I won't get into the ULSD vs. fuel economy debate too much, but I did spend many years doing fuel economy testing for large truck manufacturers, professional organizations, and programs sponsored by the government. I did lots of testing comparing older pre-emissions level trucks compared to new trucks using ULSD and pre-ULSD fuel and never saw any substantial changes in fuel economy that could directly be contributed to the fuel itself. Everything had to do with the emissions level of the truck itself (DPF's, SCR, etc...).
ULSD does have additives in it to make up for the lubrication that was lost by removing the sulphur. These additives are the same thing that Stanadyne and such use. Not saying the additives don't help, but no difference between using them on old school diesel or ULSD.
I won't get into the ULSD vs. fuel economy debate too much, but I did spend many years doing fuel economy testing for large truck manufacturers, professional organizations, and programs sponsored by the government. I did lots of testing comparing older pre-emissions level trucks compared to new trucks using ULSD and pre-ULSD fuel and never saw any substantial changes in fuel economy that could directly be contributed to the fuel itself. Everything had to do with the emissions level of the truck itself (DPF's, SCR, etc...).
ULSD does have additives in it to make up for the lubrication that was lost by removing the sulphur. These additives are the same thing that Stanadyne and such use. Not saying the additives don't help, but no difference between using them on old school diesel or ULSD.
Well when you say not substantial, you are being diplomatic.
On my big rig I did see a change that some would say oh that is not much but I lost about 1 MPG down from 7 to 6.
That is about 15% loss, and when you drive 700 miles a day 4-5 days a week, that is substantial.
And I am not the only one, we have a group of trucks about a doazen, different models different years and all do the same routes and have been for more than 6 years, and the numbers vary between 10-20% loss.
Most of it is gained back by the additives which are costing less than the extra fuel, so 2 benefits.
On my big rig I did see a change that some would say oh that is not much but I lost about 1 MPG down from 7 to 6.
That is about 15% loss, and when you drive 700 miles a day 4-5 days a week, that is substantial.
And I am not the only one, we have a group of trucks about a doazen, different models different years and all do the same routes and have been for more than 6 years, and the numbers vary between 10-20% loss.
Most of it is gained back by the additives which are costing less than the extra fuel, so 2 benefits.
With all due respect, as a diesel tech when the ULSD started being released, you could follow the injector and pump failures dues to lack of lubrication, even on vehicles with low mileage. In addition using stanadyne has proven to increase fuel economy above what the trucks got brand new. There may be additives in the ULSD, however the quantity in the fuel is not sufficient lubrication for a vehicle designed for pre- ULSD, there is a complete different on how the injector/pump veins are engineered for the ULSD.
As far as fuel mileage is concerned the ULSD does decrease fuel economy on trucks designed before the introduction of ULSD. There are little to no emissions devices on pre ULSD trucks to be taken into consideration. If you pull an injector pump of a Ford, Cummins, international etc that was pre ULSD, was run with ULSD even after a brand new pump, in very short time you will see significant wear within the pump that would not have occurred with pre ULSD fuel.
Of course the newer trucks are designed for the ULSD so its not a concern. I can say however that using red diesel in an ag truck extends its life over ULSD as long as the filters are changed regularly as Red diesel tends to be "dirty" in comparison.
texas4x4rebel
1/2 ton status
From the reading I have done while looking around trying to find a new vehicle I would say that the 06-07.5 duramax is the best out there it has the 6speed and is pre emission it only has the egr which can be removed pretty easy.
Those years are very good, having the LBZ engine and the egr is very easy to remove and block off. They will also have a cat, which again is easy to remove.
