Pretty Neat Additive Video from YouTube

[zakkb787]

Found this pretty cool video testing some of the top branded additives out there for lubrication, corrosion resistance, and anti-gelling, along with some pretty funny stuff at the end. Thought I’d share it here since I know this is a topic that comes up quite a bit.

https://youtu.be/n8gDN_6esfs

I have no affiliation with this guy, just thought it was a good comparison.

 

[Benny315]

I have seen quite a few of his vid's.. He does some interesting testing/comparison's, sounds pretty honest and sometimes the results are not what you expect.

 

[Bdsankey]

We can all agree this lubrication test is bogus.

 

[Benny315]

We can all agree this lubrication test is bogus.

Well that was a quick thumbs down from you. I haven't found your testing video's, so which additive do you recommend for me over here freezing?? Should I use something different for older equipment(like 80's diesel tractor's) or the same you recommend for the Dmax ??

 

[Bdsankey]

Well that was a quick thumbs down from you. I haven't found your testing video's, so which additive do you recommend for me over here freezing?? Should I use something different for older equipment(like 80's diesel tractor's) or the same you recommend for the Dmax ??

I'm saying his lubrication test is bogus. Testing the additives lubricty by itself isn't the best quality as it will NEVER be used as a fuel replacement, it is used to augment/treat/boost diesel fuel. Obviously the amsoil 2 stroke oil will win the "one arm bandit" test as it is legitimately an oil, but a one arm bandit style testing (bearing and rotating race) is not how our fuel systems operate or what we are trying to lubricate.


His videos are generally very informative and offer comparable data. From this video the testing that pertains to clouding/gelling is valid although he has a small group of additives. There are many good additives out there, I personally am an Optilube fan but have also had customers use Hot Shots with good results. I use Optilube XDP year round unless its predicted to get below -20f then I switch to Optilube's Winter formula or add it to my tank on top of XDP if it is a mostly full tank.

 

[Benny315]

I'm saying his lubrication test is bogus. Testing the additives lubricty by itself isn't the best quality as it will NEVER be used as a fuel replacement, it is used to augment/treat/boost diesel fuel. Obviously the amsoil 2 stroke oil will win the "one arm bandit" test as it is legitimately an oil, but a one arm bandit style testing (bearing and rotating race) is not how our fuel systems operate or what we are trying to lubricate.


His videos are generally very informative and offer comparable data. From this video the testing that pertains to clouding/gelling is valid although he has a small group of additives. There are many good additives out there, I personally am an Optilube fan but have also had customers use Hot Shots with good results. I use Optilube XDP year round unless its predicted to get below -20f then I switch to Optilube's Winter formula or add it to my tank on top of XDP if it is a mostly full tank.

Now that's a better response, thanks Bdsankey. :thumb:
There is always hundreds of ways to test products and he could have done more but it looks he only has so much to work with (like some of us). A JB welded crank won't hold long obviously but at least he's not taking an ax and sawzall to a perfectly good Dmax making it into some kinda go-cart. I'm sure some of you have seen them video's floating around.

 

[frankenstien]

I saw that video, it was interesting for sure. he makes a lot of videos and I'm pretty sure he hates his lawnmowers

 

[Bdsankey]

Now that's a better response, thanks Bdsankey. :thumb:
There is always hundreds of ways to test products and he could have done more but it looks he only has so much to work with (like some of us). A JB welded crank won't hold long obviously but at least he's not taking an ax and sawzall to a perfectly good Dmax making it into some kinda go-cart. I'm sure some of you have seen them video's floating around.

I guess I'm trying to say he's smarter than that. Instead of doing a lubricity test that has absolutely zero relative usage to the testing media (IE diesel fuel and how it is used) seems like just a waste of time. I understand he had to do something to keep viewers around but it is an unrealistic criteria.


That's like comparing hammers for which one is the best chair.

 

[2004LB7]

That fact that 2 stroke helped with the cloud point of diesel was surprising

 

[PureHybrid]

I've ran a lot of Howes, recently started using Hotshots to support local business. Never had any trouble with Howes or Power Service as far as gelling

 

[Bdsankey]

That fact that 2 stroke helped with the cloud point of diesel was surprising

A non-synthetic 2 stroke oil is proven to work pretty well for an antigel additive. Non-synthetic 2 stroke oil has pour point depressants that help keep it flowing at cold temps and imparts that onto the diesel fuel when suspended into the fuel.

 

[NC-smokinlmm]

^^ yep, had to start adding extra for the direct injection motors bc they would mysteriously blow in the winter the first few years of production. Had to install 12 volt 50watt bulbs next to all the oil tanks in my customers boats to keep the oil from getting to viscous until the oems figured it out.

 

[zakkb787]

In response to the comments about the lubrication test, I agree the test isn’t EXACTLY how our pumps obtain lubrication. However I still think the test holds quite a bit of ground. How can a substance that lubricates less than straight fuel add to the lubrication properties when added to the tank? I’ve never been in a CP3 before so I had to look it up. Just doing a quick search I found this quote from an old article,

“The lubrication flow is simply a tiny orifice that lets a small amount of fresh fuel enter the bearing housing of the CP3. The CP3 uses this fuel to cool the bearings and lubricate the internal moving components. This bearing housing is ported directly to the fuel return fitting so this fuel which is now hot from the bearings easily moves back to the tank to be cooled.”

So, I could see how an additive that doesn’t add much lubrication by itself could still aid in cooling the bearing, but then are you just throwing money away? I’d much rather put in an additive that shows less resistance and wear in a quick test of metal on metal than one that does worse than straight fuel. After all, bearings are metal on metal usually. I don’t believe that additives give any performance boost at all. I use them to keep my fuel system healthier than they’d be without since new diesel doesn’t lubricate and cool as well, and some guys in colder climates to combat gelling. Yeah we aren’t using it as a replacement. That’s why it’s called an additive. If you don’t care about anything but performance or gelling I could see how his test would be bogus.

Not calling you out Brad, just trying to understand why you think that test isn’t relevant to these engines at all. Maybe we aren’t trying to lubricate the same thing tho (nohomo :roflmao

 

[Bdsankey]

In response to the comments about the lubrication test, I agree the test isn’t EXACTLY how our pumps obtain lubrication. However I still think the test holds quite a bit of ground. How can a substance that lubricates less than straight fuel add to the lubrication properties when added to the tank? I’ve never been in a CP3 before so I had to look it up. Just doing a quick search I found this quote from an old article,

“The lubrication flow is simply a tiny orifice that lets a small amount of fresh fuel enter the bearing housing of the CP3. The CP3 uses this fuel to cool the bearings and lubricate the internal moving components. This bearing housing is ported directly to the fuel return fitting so this fuel which is now hot from the bearings easily moves back to the tank to be cooled.”

So, I could see how an additive that doesn’t add much lubrication by itself could still aid in cooling the bearing, but then are you just throwing money away? I’d much rather put in an additive that shows less resistance and wear in a quick test of metal on metal than one that does worse than straight fuel. After all, bearings are metal on metal usually. I don’t believe that additives give any performance boost at all. I use them to keep my fuel system healthier than they’d be without since new diesel doesn’t lubricate and cool as well, and some guys in colder climates to combat gelling. Yeah we aren’t using it as a replacement. That’s why it’s called an additive. If you don’t care about anything but performance or gelling I could see how his test would be bogus.

Not calling you out Brad, just trying to understand why you think that test isn’t relevant to these engines at all. Maybe we aren’t trying to lubricate the same thing tho (nohomo :roflmao

The testing rig that he uses is horribly unrealistic in regards to the wear seen in our fuel systems, and the additives tested were tested without the presence of fuel. We aren't trying to cool or lubricate a stationary race with anywhere near the force seen in the Timken tester. A CP3's bearing doesn't experience loading anywhere near similar to the way a Timken tester loads the race.

IMO if you're going to test something, test it how it will actually be used. At least if he'd have factored in using the Timken tester with treated fuel it may be a little more realistic.

 

[2004LB7]

I don't think he is trying to test it like it would be in our fuel system. He is just comparing one against another using the same methods. The one that preformed the best on his rig will also likely preform the best on our system

It is not realistic in what the additive is capable of or supposed to do but it gives a direct comparison to each other.

And like Zak said, if it is of less lubrication then straight diesel then it will most likely lower the lubrication when added. If it has better lubrication then adding it to diesel should make an overall improvement. The only issue I see is that different additives had different dosing quantity so that would change the final outcome

 

[Bdsankey]

I don't think he is trying to test it like it would be in our fuel system. He is just comparing one against another using the same methods. The one that preformed the best on his rig will also likely preform the best on our system

It is not realistic in what the additive is capable of or supposed to do but it gives a direct comparison to each other.

And like Zak said, if it is of less lubrication then straight diesel then it will most likely lower the lubrication when added. If it has better lubrication then adding it to diesel should make an overall improvement. The only issue I see is that different additives had different dosing quantity so that would change the final outcome

That is one of the problems IMO, dosing is not considered in this testing. While I agree theoretically lower wear alone should translate to lower wear in our fuel systems.


I'll also point this out, there is a legit reason why the Timken test isn't used as an industry-standard anymore because it isn't anywhere near representative of the load case automotive bearings see. For example, I bet if you compared your favorite engine oil or the most proven engine oil against some off the wall lubricant I bet it will do worse but there are too many other tests that point to a better performing product. Coming from an engineering background loading methods and testing equipment mean more than the actual test. If the information is still relevant to you that is perfectly fine, I am just pointing out the gaping holes in his testing methods in both setup and equipment. The only test I think that should really be considered for lubricity testing is HFRR as it is the standard for common rail style fuel lubricity testing.

 

[Dozerboy]

I'm saying his lubrication test is bogus. Testing the additives lubricty by itself isn't the best quality as it will NEVER be used as a fuel replacement, it is used to augment/treat/boost diesel fuel. Obviously the amsoil 2 stroke oil will win the "one arm bandit" test as it is legitimately an oil, but a one arm bandit style testing (bearing and rotating race) is not how our fuel systems operate or what we are trying to lubricate.


His videos are generally very informative and offer comparable data. From this video the testing that pertains to clouding/gelling is valid although he has a small group of additives. There are many good additives out there, I personally am an Optilube fan but have also had customers use Hot Shots with good results. I use Optilube XDP year round unless its predicted to get below -20f then I switch to Optilube's Winter formula or add it to my tank on top of XDP if it is a mostly full tank.

It’s pretty easy to pick apart someone’s methods. So how should he of demonstrated the lubricity of these additives that everyone would understand the winner and not cost thousands or take a ton of time? Obviously 2 stroke had an advantage, but that doesn’t mean the test didn’t have its merits.

I was pretty surprised by hot shot. I talked a lot of trash about that additive in the past. I know some 6.0 Ford guys that swear by it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bdsankey]

It’s pretty easy to pick apart someone’s methods. So how should he of demonstrated the lubricity of these additives that everyone would understand the winner and not cost thousands or take a ton of time? Obviously 2 stroke had an advantage, but that doesn’t mean the test didn’t have its merits.

I was pretty surprised by hot shot. I talked a lot of trash about that additive in the past. I know some 6.0 Ford guys that swear by it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are correct, it is pretty easy to pick apart other people's testing methods. Obviously he isn't going to go buy a HFRR machine just for one video, but it is the most accurate way to test the lubricity of treated fuel.

 

[Ne-max]

Why they used 911 or 2 stroke mix blows my mind

Could have added optilube or bg to the test.

Also additives act different once mixed with fuel so friction test is not legit.

Optilube is the first additive that I have personally seen real world gains with along with my customers.

 

[Bdsankey]

Why they used 911 or 2 stroke mix blows my mind

Could have added optilube or bg to the test.

Also additives act different once mixed with fuel so friction test is not legit.

Optilube is the first additive that I have personally seen real world gains with along with my customers.

My points exactly. The properties of the fuel change once treated vs raw. Quite a few big names have been left out.