Mcdaniel: I was doing some prying around and stumbled across this thread on another site... I'm sure dnewton3 would not mind me sharing his findings...He made a phone call to Powerservice to ask a few questions and he shared his answers that he received... But! Here are my thoughts... The Powerservice rep was going to tell him what he wanted to hear... Mutual attempt to brain wash into buying their products... Which is What our government does every day... We are just good little sheep...But anyway he posted some good info... Even a paragraph on using 2-stroke oil... whether or not he is talking about just plain 2-stroke oil or TC-W3? I have know idea... Makes for some good reading...
I just got off the phone with "Chris" at PowerService, and got some good information. Unfortunately, it may not satisfy every. Here's the skinny on the reality, according to him ...
He said too many people get caught up in the debate of emulsify, demulsify, solubilize, etc. They are all means to a similar end. A-HA! I can actually accept that. It makes sense, and here's why.
Just like with most any other products, there is always a compromise of all the components. The "best" result is achieved when the greatest good is done with the least harm. To that end, it's very similar to oils. We all see great UOA
results from many different brands, even though one may use more Ca and less Mg, while another last more boron and less moly, etc etc etc. Chris said that it really does not matter if the product either emulsifies or demulsifies; either way it helps reduce water in heavy dosing.
He said the typical ppm for water in diesel fuel is around 80-100ppm, but can be less, but at these levels the engine systems can tolerate the percentage. That level is considered a max saturation level for typically fuel. He also said "bad" fuel will have 200-300ppm of water, and will likely cause problems assuredly.
So, in essence, there really isn't a "best" method. Both emulsifiers and demulsifiers achieve a similar result.
But, because these products are NOT ONLY dealing with water, but also cetane, detergency, anti-gels and anti-icing, lubricity, etc, they have to compromise the total additive package to get the desired result. That again makes sense. He also said that moisture is actually less of a concern than is detergency and lubricity; those are more important. (Apparently today's fuels need those topics addressed more-so than water.) And because they are, those characteristics get priority in the additive package, and they emulsify/demulsify issue becomes secondary. So, if they tailor the package to have one element really strong, it might limit the choices for other constituents in the overall package. Again - it makes sense, and it's very similar to the way oils/lubes are constructed. IOW, base products are complimented by a variety of approaches, and there is no "best". In fact, Chris said that detergency, lubricity and cetane are paramount with ULSD; not so much water.
Further, he said the "better" way to deal with water is to make sure to use a biocide (something I've done for a long time). He said that some amount of water will always be present, and it's important to deal with the effects of slime, etc. He said preventative use of a biocide is MUCH more effective than trying to treat for water after the invasion has happened.
Also, he said that guys who add two-stroke oil are fooling themselves into a false sense of “lubricity”. He acknowledged that 2-stroke oil is slick, but it has adverse issues as well. Specifically, it can actually start to form small areas of accumulation in the injector by “sticking” to the hot spots before getting injected, thereby forming a micro-deposit. And, there are issues with the combustion byproducts getting more soot than normal. Makes sense, and I’ve noted this in other conversations here. Those of you that worry about EGR
clogging should not be using 2-stroke oil. Those of you that worry about sticking injectors should not be using 2-stroke oil. Chris said their additive for lubricity (as well as their competitors) is tailored for the use specific to the task; I believe that. Two-stroke oil may have performed well in the “lubricity study” but as I’ve said before, that study ONLY addressed what the lube does on the affected part as far as friction goes, and does not address other side effects such as combustion byproducts, fuel economy, etc. Take what you will away from that. I think it’s a valid concern.
Lastly, regarding cetane, he indicated that you want to use a product year round for this. Apparnetly the industry ASTM standard is a cetane rating of 40 for ULSD. The industry average is 45. But, the OEMs want to see the cetane around 50 or more. So, using one of the PowerService or Stanadyne products will help with this.
In short, it matters not that you emulsify or demulsify. Treat your fuel with a quality brand name that is well rounded for all the criteria, and you’ll be fine.
Which is just about the same approach you should take with oil.