CP4 Changes - additives discussion

[mostcorey95]

BTW, for the northern guys: HSS's Diesel Winter Anti-Gel is the same product as EDT with the anti-freeze added. So, during winter time, you simply switch over to the DWAG and you are still fully protected.
That was confirmed by their customers support team.

Yeah I love the edt especially with going up to the up and Minnesota for ice fishing and snowmobiling and never have to worry about gelling. I was up there when they had -50 without windchill and I could plug in so I just nosed it to my cabin. Unless I could keep my generator running.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MikeXM]

Yeah I love the edt especially with going up to the up and Minnesota for ice fishing and snowmobiling and never have to worry about gelling. I was up there when they had -50 without windchill and I could plug in so I just nosed it to my cabin. Unless I could keep my generator running.

Just so we are on the same page, are you using EDT or DWAG? (cuz EDT has not the anti-gelling added)

 

[mostcorey95]

Dwag is what I was using at that time. Now I’m just running optilube xdp.
Here is an old study that was done I’ll find the forum link.

https://www.jatonkam35s.com/DeuceTechnicalManuals/Diesel_fuel_additive_test.pdf

Info: - Lubricity Additive Study Results

www.dieselplace.com

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brutal_HO]

Dwag is what I was using at that time. Now I’m just running optilube xdp.
Here is an old study that was done I’ll find the forum link.

https://www.jatonkam35s.com/DeuceTechnicalManuals/Diesel_fuel_additive_test.pdf

Info: - Lubricity Additive Study Results

www.dieselplace.com

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That study and testimonials are why I switched from PS to XDP.

 

[mostcorey95]

That study and testimonials are why I switched from PS to XDP.


View attachment 6971

Yeah when I started doing my own research and asking others they pointed me to optilube and Hot shot secrets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rich]

I didn't see hot shot LX4 on the list so I thought that I would add this, I just learned today. Looks like per the lowest number score, it's one of the best.

 

[MikeXM]

I didn't see hot shot LX4 on the list so I thought that I would add this, I just learned today. Looks like per the lowest number score, it's one of the best.

Thanks Rich, good find.

 

[mostcorey95]

Here is some data on optilube.

https://opti-lube.com/downloads/Opti-LubeGasInDieselTest.pdf

https://opti-lube.com/downloads/intertektesting.pdf

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MikeXM]

Here is some data on optilube.

https://opti-lube.com/downloads/Opti-LubeGasInDieselTest.pdf

https://opti-lube.com/downloads/intertektesting.pdf

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I find it weird that under the same ASTM D6079 test, the numbers don't match at same concentration of Opti-Lube XL. They are not even close. In the link shared by Rich, Opti-Lube does not perform as good as the report linked just above.

One test is dated 2014 and the other 2019. Did they change the product formula in between? Looks like it doesn't perform as well recently as it did a while ago. Cost saving, improved margins? No idea, just speculating.

 

[mostcorey95]

I find it weird that under the same ASTM D6079 test, the numbers don't match at same concentration of Opti-Lube XL. They are not even close. In the link shared by Rich, Opti-Lube does not perform as good as the report linked just above.

One test is dated 2014 and the other 2019. Did they change the product formula in between? Looks like it doesn't perform as well recently as it did a while ago. Cost saving, improved margins? No idea, just speculating.

They didn’t just test the xl they also tested xdp. And in the one test they did 5% gasoline contamination if you read that. They updated the formula in 2019 to be better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MikeXM]

They didn’t just test the xl they also tested xdp. And in the one test they did 5% gasoline contamination if you read that. They updated the formula in 2019 to be better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you read the other test comparing XL to LX4? If they updated the XL formula in 2019, it didn't performed as well in that test (also made in 2019).

I'm not sure who to trust with those reports... Even if they are "3rd party tested", they ended up with different results for sure...

 

[Brutal_HO]

I find it weird that under the same ASTM D6079 test, the numbers don't match at same concentration of Opti-Lube XL. They are not even close. In the link shared by Rich, Opti-Lube does not perform as good as the report linked just above.

One test is dated 2014 and the other 2019. Did they change the product formula in between? Looks like it doesn't perform as well recently as it did a while ago. Cost saving, improved margins? No idea, just speculating.

XL and XPD are different blends.


I don't even see XL in the image I posted, which was a much older test I believe.

Here's the report based on Pump ULSD. While the one Rich posted shows impressive numbers, it was not ULSD pump based fuel. I forgot I had these on my computer from my own research back in March when I prepared to take delivery.

I like that XPD provides a blend to reduce lubricity, control deposits, manage water and potential gas contamination in small amounts. As a plus I can run it year round in the event it ever gets cold enough here to gel fuel. We have wide temp swings - it was 91* today and we're getting snow tomorrow.

 

[Brutal_HO]

Did you read the other test comparing XL to LX4? If they updated the XL formula in 2019, it didn't performed as well in that test (also made in 2019).

I'm not sure who to trust with those reports... Even if they are "3rd party tested", they ended up with different results for sure...

Here's my take away.

For pure lubricity improvements I see the numbers as this:

Opti-Lube report (high axis):

Pump fuel = 580
XL 1:512 = 260
Net improvement = 320

HSS report (high axis):

Pump fuel = 399
HSS (1:512) = 225
Net improvement = 174

XL (1:512) = 369*
Net improvement = 30*

* Yea, not buying this. I think you're going to see bigger improvements in garbage fuel (Optilube test) and less in better pump fuel samples (HSS test).

I believe both products are the top 2 and whichever one chooses to use is a good choice. I have some history running XPD in my 5.9L and trust it in my new 6.7L.

 

[Rich]

like brutal replied, the one I posted was not based on ulsd pump based fuel. I had several trial schematics snd had only posted the pine because honestly I don't really know that much about this whole clean fuel deal. Here's the graph using ulsd. Also extremely impressive. I don't think anybody can go wrong with either dura lube or hot shot blend. Of coarse our best bet would be for a recall of the cp4 to be replaced with the legendary tried and proven cp3, but until then we better do better than the Wal-Mart blend of water

 

[MikeXM]

XL and XPD are different blends.

True. The XL and LX4 are their "lubrifiant" products while XPD and EDT are their "multi-tasks" products.

I do agree that both products (EDT and XPD) look like they are the top 2 "multi-tasks" products out there.
The main difference comes into cost to treat 32 gal of fuel, based on their respective recommended blend ratio (using their prices for 1 gal of product):

XPD (summer) 8oz = $3.38
XPD (winter) 16oz = $6.75
EDT (summer) 2.6oz = $1.52
DWAG (winter version of EDT) 4.2oz = $1.87

So winter XPD treatments are 3.5X more expensive while summer are 2.2X. That is one hell of a difference.

 

[carlrx7]

3:42 talks about lubricity of diesel fuels

 

[MikeXM]

3:42 talks about lubricity of diesel fuels

This is the video that introduced me to HSS. I wish Opti-Lube would had been part of that test too.

 

[Rich]

Found my hot shot edt in the 16oz measuring bottle at oreileys today for the internet price. I did want to order the lx4 by the gallon and eventually switch to that but I wanted the measuring bottle for easy measure and fill first and then ill just refill it as I go. Hot shot did get back with me on the amount of lx4 ingredient in the edt. They would not give me a %% ouf increased lubricity like the 56% for the stand alone lx4, but said it would get the wear scar rating down to within specs but would not lubricate as well as the stand alone lx4. Wich is all what I figured, just wanted to hear it from the horses mouth. So this will last for 8 tank fills before I need to by the gallon lx4 refill. sorry brutal, i should of put this in the additive discussion portion, maybe you can move it for us, thanks

 

[John Jensen]

Hot shot did get back with me on the amount of lx4 ingredient in the edt. They would not give me a %% ouf increased lubricity like the 56% for the stand alone lx4, but said it would get the wear scar rating down to within specs but would not lubricate as well as the stand alone lx4.

That's a disappointing answer to EDT lubricity. That means to get the benefits of EDT and better lubricity one has to use both EDT and LX4. That gets expensive. I wonder what " within specs" means?

 

[MikeXM]

It doesn't mean EDT lacks in lubrification qualities! After all, the video linked above showed that EDT had the best lubrification properties of all products tested. If you feel like you need to add LX4 to EDT, what does it say about the other products?!
If they say EDT has enough LX4 to bring the worse diesel to within good specs, it must be enough.