mixing ATF w/ diesel
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: Hawaii
mercedes 300DT 83, 300DT 85, E300D 96
mixing ATF w/ diesel
I was just adivised to mix 1/2 quart of ATF w/ every fill up to kill algae. NEVER heard this one before. I put 463k on a '76 300D, have 401K on my 83 300DT work car. Also run a 85 300DT and a 96 E300D. Is the ATF a good idea? Been using Red Line 85 for years.-----Aloha David D
Newbie
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: Ventura, CA
1978 240D
Aloha David,
I too have been told to put ATF in the tank. However, not to kill algae but for lubrication of the injectors and pump. As a matter of fact, a client of mine told me that he puts ATF in the fuel tank of his big rig. He says be notices better power. Who knows. maybe I'll try it and post any results...
I too have been told to put ATF in the tank. However, not to kill algae but for lubrication of the injectors and pump. As a matter of fact, a client of mine told me that he puts ATF in the fuel tank of his big rig. He says be notices better power. Who knows. maybe I'll try it and post any results...
Super Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 835
Likes: 2
From: Bay Area, CA
09' E320
ULSD meets the same specs for lubricity as LSD did. No additives are needed. Most of the perceived (audible) affect of additives is a result of subtle changes in combustion charectoristics rather than incresased lubrication.
ATF contains friction modifiers that could effect your inj's/IP if used for the long term. Used ATF also has suspended clutch material and metal debris making it a bad chioce.
ATF contains friction modifiers that could effect your inj's/IP if used for the long term. Used ATF also has suspended clutch material and metal debris making it a bad chioce.
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,116
Likes: 5
From: Federal Heights, CO
1982 300D VNT, 1980 240D 3.0T, 1982 300TD
Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 86
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
98 E300
I am fortunate to have quality biodiesel available and use anywhere from B2-B5 for lubricity. I would not use ATF in a fuel system.
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,116
Likes: 5
From: Federal Heights, CO
1982 300D VNT, 1980 240D 3.0T, 1982 300TD
15% is an insignificant difference, especially since your pump is lubricated by engine oil.
Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 86
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
98 E300
The ULSD lubricity that we get here in the US does not meet the lubricity standards of the fuel in use in Europe when the pump was developed.
Trending Topics
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,116
Likes: 5
From: Federal Heights, CO
1982 300D VNT, 1980 240D 3.0T, 1982 300TD
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 86
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
98 E300
not lubricity-wise. what were they using in Europe in 1974- 5000 ppm sulfur? i'm sure lubricity was not a concern then.
what about the internals of the IP- are they lubricated by engine oil as you stated previously? doesn't appear to be by what i can see.
what about the internals of the IP- are they lubricated by engine oil as you stated previously? doesn't appear to be by what i can see.
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,116
Likes: 5
From: Federal Heights, CO
1982 300D VNT, 1980 240D 3.0T, 1982 300TD
Yes, in every aspect.
You need to educate yourself on what Diesel fuel is and how it works. Clearly you lack some necessary knowledge on the role sulfur plays in its production and use.
The entire pump is oil lubricated.
i'm sure lubricity was not a concern then.
what about the internals of the IP- are they lubricated by engine oil as you stated previously
Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 86
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
98 E300
240D 3.0T-
Lubricity did not become a concern until they tried to greatly reduce the sulfur content of diesel. In reducing the sulfur, the natural lubrication of the fuel was also lost. This can only be made up for by adding lubricant to the fuel. I don't know what the sulfur content of diesel was in Europe in 1974 (taking your statement of the era the Bosch IP was developed at face value), but I'm willing to bet that at that time, lubricity was not a concern. Sometime shortly after the attempt at zero sulfur was made in Sweden in the early nineties, a lubricity standard for diesel was established in Europe. A maximum allowable wear scar measured after the standardized test was determined. The US lubricity standard was established around 2005 in advance of the deployment of ULSD. ASTM determined that a larger wear scar was acceptable for US fuel inspite of input from Bosch and other FI manufacturers. This is why many of us choose to use lubricity additives.
In looking at the EPCnet diagrams, I cannot see how the internals of the pump are being lubricated by engine oil. Can you help me out with that?
Lubricity did not become a concern until they tried to greatly reduce the sulfur content of diesel. In reducing the sulfur, the natural lubrication of the fuel was also lost. This can only be made up for by adding lubricant to the fuel. I don't know what the sulfur content of diesel was in Europe in 1974 (taking your statement of the era the Bosch IP was developed at face value), but I'm willing to bet that at that time, lubricity was not a concern. Sometime shortly after the attempt at zero sulfur was made in Sweden in the early nineties, a lubricity standard for diesel was established in Europe. A maximum allowable wear scar measured after the standardized test was determined. The US lubricity standard was established around 2005 in advance of the deployment of ULSD. ASTM determined that a larger wear scar was acceptable for US fuel inspite of input from Bosch and other FI manufacturers. This is why many of us choose to use lubricity additives.
In looking at the EPCnet diagrams, I cannot see how the internals of the pump are being lubricated by engine oil. Can you help me out with that?
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,116
Likes: 5
From: Federal Heights, CO
1982 300D VNT, 1980 240D 3.0T, 1982 300TD
This can only be made up for by adding lubricant to the fuel.
This is why many of us choose to use lubricity additives.
In looking at the EPCnet diagrams, I cannot see how the internals of the pump are being lubricated by engine oil.
Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 86
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
98 E300
That is false. The process that removes the sulfur affects lubrication. Sulfur itself has zero benefits.
This is what i was trying to say.
Which is done for you at the refinery.
no- additives are mixed at the distribution terminal, not the refinery. They can't send additized fuel in the pipeline because they don't want to contaminate other fuels that share the line. The additives are also expensive, so they want to save operating costs by only adding what's necessary to meet spec, which in this country (US) is inadequate.
...
Did you miss the part labeled "oil supply tube"?
This is what i was trying to say.
Which is done for you at the refinery.
no- additives are mixed at the distribution terminal, not the refinery. They can't send additized fuel in the pipeline because they don't want to contaminate other fuels that share the line. The additives are also expensive, so they want to save operating costs by only adding what's necessary to meet spec, which in this country (US) is inadequate.
...
Did you miss the part labeled "oil supply tube"?
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,116
Likes: 5
From: Federal Heights, CO
1982 300D VNT, 1980 240D 3.0T, 1982 300TD
Which is at, guess what, the refinery.
That is false information.
...from the engine oil circuit.
The M-Pump gets its oil directly through the snout via the timing device bearings. The MW gets its oil from the same place, but via an external hose instead of the snout.
which in this country (US) is inadequate.
without putting certain components under significant stress, which is why you'd need adequate lubrication
The M-Pump gets its oil directly through the snout via the timing device bearings. The MW gets its oil from the same place, but via an external hose instead of the snout.
Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 86
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
98 E300
nope. refineries distill crude oil into various petroleum products, then send the products via pipeline to distribution terminals. It is at those terminals where additives are mixed at the loading rack where it is put into tankers for delivery to retail outlets.
according to Bosch, the maximum wear scar allowed is 460 micron, and they desire no more than 400 for long life of the pump components. ASTM allows 520 micron wear scar, so that would be 'inadequate' protection. You can deny and contradict this all you want. but them's the numbers right there...
Thanks for the diagrams. I understand that the drive mechanism is lubricated by engine oil. I'm talking about the internals of the injection pump where the high pressure is made. This would be ONLY lubricated by the fuel.
according to Bosch, the maximum wear scar allowed is 460 micron, and they desire no more than 400 for long life of the pump components. ASTM allows 520 micron wear scar, so that would be 'inadequate' protection. You can deny and contradict this all you want. but them's the numbers right there...
Thanks for the diagrams. I understand that the drive mechanism is lubricated by engine oil. I'm talking about the internals of the injection pump where the high pressure is made. This would be ONLY lubricated by the fuel.
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,116
Likes: 5
From: Federal Heights, CO
1982 300D VNT, 1980 240D 3.0T, 1982 300TD
they desire no more than 400
They cried with "high" sulfur fuel in the 70s, low in the 90s and 06 with ultra low. Nothing has changed. The only thing that hasn't is people's irrationality towards things they don't understand.
The fact is that the whole lubricity "problem" is manufactured by people that make and sell fuel additives as a way to scare people into buying their crap.
so that would be 'inadequate' protection.
The lubricity is fine as-is for every diesel engine ever made.
I'm talking about the internals of the injection pump where the high pressure is made.
Last edited by 240D 3.0T; Mar 29, 2010 at 10:41 PM.
Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 86
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
98 E300
Really no need to go back and forth with you on this. anyone who wants to do their homework can verify how diesel fuel is refined and distributed in the States.
They can also verify the differences between US spec and the rest of the civilized world. The wear numbers I cited above are fact.
Some additive manufacturers are selling products that have data to back up their claims of improved lubricity. I've seen data from Power Service and FPPF proving that they exceed the minimum protection desired by FI manufacturers. I use biodiesel for lubricity additive.
Either you are unwilling or unable to explain how fuel goes from being near atmosphere to a few thousand psi needed to pop open an injector. note that there is a distinction between the mechanism that drives the pump that is protected by motor oil, and the other part of the pump that only sees diesel. The latter is the part that needs adequate protection because of the tight mechanical tolerances of the parts used to create that pressure. Fuel is the only lubricant for these critical components.
They can also verify the differences between US spec and the rest of the civilized world. The wear numbers I cited above are fact.
Some additive manufacturers are selling products that have data to back up their claims of improved lubricity. I've seen data from Power Service and FPPF proving that they exceed the minimum protection desired by FI manufacturers. I use biodiesel for lubricity additive.
Either you are unwilling or unable to explain how fuel goes from being near atmosphere to a few thousand psi needed to pop open an injector. note that there is a distinction between the mechanism that drives the pump that is protected by motor oil, and the other part of the pump that only sees diesel. The latter is the part that needs adequate protection because of the tight mechanical tolerances of the parts used to create that pressure. Fuel is the only lubricant for these critical components.
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,116
Likes: 5
From: Federal Heights, CO
1982 300D VNT, 1980 240D 3.0T, 1982 300TD
Right, you lack the necessary data for a proper debate.
Except that none of it makes a difference.
PS uses alcohol in their products, its worse than normal diesel.
You obviously don't understand what this debate is about.
Oh, you mean like the part of the engine's cylinders that only see air?
Some additive manufacturers are selling products that have data to back up their claims of improved lubricity.
I've seen data from Power Service
Either you are unwilling or unable to explain how fuel goes from being near atmosphere to a few thousand psi needed to pop open an injector.
note that there is a distinction between the mechanism that drives the pump that is protected by motor oil, and the other part of the pump that only sees diesel.
Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 86
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
98 E300
oh. we were "debating"? 
you are losing credibility by the post
Originally Posted by PS website
Do Power Service diesel additives contain alcohol?
The only product manufactured by Power Service that contains the type of non-harmful alcohols recommended by engine manufacturers for removal of water is Power Service Diesel 911. Diesel 911, as its name implies, is used to solve the fuel emergencies diesel engine operators most commonly encounter. In winter, Diesel 911 reliquefies gelled fuel and de-ices frozen fuel-filters in a matter of minutes, eliminating the need for a tow truck. Diesel 911 also removes water from the fuel system to prevent icing problems and extend the life of fuel-filters, fuel injection pumps and fuel injectors.
No other Power Service product contains any alcohols of any kind, including Power Service Diesel Fuel Supplement +Cetane Boost and Diesel Kleen +Cetane Boost.
The only product manufactured by Power Service that contains the type of non-harmful alcohols recommended by engine manufacturers for removal of water is Power Service Diesel 911. Diesel 911, as its name implies, is used to solve the fuel emergencies diesel engine operators most commonly encounter. In winter, Diesel 911 reliquefies gelled fuel and de-ices frozen fuel-filters in a matter of minutes, eliminating the need for a tow truck. Diesel 911 also removes water from the fuel system to prevent icing problems and extend the life of fuel-filters, fuel injection pumps and fuel injectors.
No other Power Service product contains any alcohols of any kind, including Power Service Diesel Fuel Supplement +Cetane Boost and Diesel Kleen +Cetane Boost.
Super Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 835
Likes: 2
From: Bay Area, CA
09' E320
You are concerned over nothing.....ULSD has the same lubricity requirements per ASTM as LSD did previously. This is evidenced by the millions of dead diesels you don't see on the side of the road since the switch occured a few years ago. The same sky is falling arguments were made when LSD came out.
The only issue pertaining to our engines (606.9xx's) is the difference in aromatics used in the two fuels effecting the elasticity of the orings sealing the fuel system causing fuel leaks. For most, that issue showed up within a few months of the switch. For many, it never showed up at all.
To my knowledge, MB has yet to produce an engine that "requires" fuel additives.
The only issue pertaining to our engines (606.9xx's) is the difference in aromatics used in the two fuels effecting the elasticity of the orings sealing the fuel system causing fuel leaks. For most, that issue showed up within a few months of the switch. For many, it never showed up at all.
To my knowledge, MB has yet to produce an engine that "requires" fuel additives.
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,116
Likes: 5
From: Federal Heights, CO
1982 300D VNT, 1980 240D 3.0T, 1982 300TD
You sure are, though its hard for you to lose that which you never had. Only 15 posts and more than half of them are here making poorly backed opinions on a topic you know little more than what you have copy-n-pasted into your posts.
Most of those were simply age and heat stress related, ULSD is/was just a convenient scapegoat. 4 years later, people are STILL blaming leaking o-rings and age-worn injectors on it!
The only issue pertaining to our engines (606.9xx's) is the difference in aromatics used in the two fuels effecting the elasticity of the orings sealing the fuel system causing fuel leaks. For most, that issue showed up within a few months of the switch. For many, it never showed up at all.
Last edited by 240D 3.0T; Apr 4, 2010 at 12:50 PM.
Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 86
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX, USA
98 E300
Good luck
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,116
Likes: 5
From: Federal Heights, CO
1982 300D VNT, 1980 240D 3.0T, 1982 300TD
Super Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 835
Likes: 2
From: Bay Area, CA
09' E320
Orings do wear out so there is some truth to that. There were a rash of bad orings a few months after ULSD came out and there are published reports that the differences in addtives were a contributing factor in orings and seal loosing their elasticity.
