Oil & Fuel Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel

[Lelandwelds]

Why is Lubricity your main concern? Common rail use Piezo injectors, which have no internal piston that needs lubricating. The high pressure oil injection systems, found on CAT and Navistar engines needed the lubricating properties, and even those are not having issues with the low sulfur diesel.

I think you should do what you can to mitigate the water issue if you're buying from low volume sellers, otherwise there is no need to worry.

I am a crappy mechanic. I have to hire most of it done. Have you read all the problems people here are claiming to have? It is approaching deal killer level.

Granted, I have an "unexpected expense" phobia, many Internet experts are liars and posers, and suppliers are selling something or shifting blame. Also, I know I don't know everything and, even worse, I don't know what I don't know.

 

[DieselBound]

Preemptive worrying is a chronic hobby of mine. I can buy nice toys but unexpected major repairs take years to really recover. The current toy is about a 1998 (?) Bobcat. It has had increasing common and expensive repairs but nailing down the exact cause is difficult. My reading about other owners problems and concerns is alarming and hopelessly complicated my search. But, depending on buying order, the tractor purchase is two to seven years out. I have time to not rush into something.

I want to move away from the Bobcat except for high power tasks. Repairing turf and swinging my rear-end into stuff will not be missed.

Did you hear of the one about the atomic physicist who ran around wearing snow shoes for fear of falling through the atomic structure of the floor?:laughing:

I too suffer from analysis paralysis, so I know what you're talking about

Everything is about risk management. Never discount the risk to one's time: if you spend more for/on equipment then you're having to spend more time working for that extra expense. One can hedge a bit by taking some extra cash and stuffing it into a dedicated repair coffer: a CD perhaps. The beauty with this approach is that IF you don't require any substantial costs associated with reduced spending then you'll have that money (with interest, such as it is) to use another day. On a professional-use level the risk is greater, so better equipment/handling is for sure more warranted: don't want to break down on a job.

Fuel lines and such are likely things that a lot of people overlook to change out on a regular basis (I raise my hand here), opting to deal with only after there's a problem. And then there are various seals... Generally, however, higher-priced equipment is likely to utilize better quality parts that will last longer; BUT, ALL parts eventually will wear out.

 

[DieselBound]

I am a crappy mechanic. I have to hire most of it done. Have you read all the problems people here are claiming to have? It is approaching deal killer level.

Granted, I have an "unexpected expense" phobia, many Internet experts are liars and posers, and suppliers are selling something or shifting blame. Also, I know I don't know everything and, even worse, I don't know what I don't know.

"All the people" here are but a small subset. Keep in mind that if one goes to a DIY type of website that one is going to see lots of "problems."

I've had my shares of inept "professionals." No matter if you have someone else do work or if you do it, proper outcomes require due diligence (research). Very few dealerships can competently work on MKIV VW TDIs (which I have 3 of); as such I do all work on them. And, sadly, my Kioti tractor dealer isn't proving themselves at being competent mechanics either.

Newer stuff isn't anything that I really expect to do much work on (other than purely mechanical components). That's why most of my stuff is older. With the NX5510 I'm holding my breath, hoping that regular maintenance will make it last through the rest of my capable days (at my current levels of usage I'm unlikely to reach the hours at which one should regularly start to worry).

Most of today's tractors are reliable. Engine technology is fairly well applied by all. Yes, cutting edge stuff is something to worry about: I'd wait for something to mature before accepting. Most premature failures, as has been shown throughout manufacturing history, occur early on, after which once past such points one can pretty much expect, under the guidance of stated maintenance, that the equipment will last/perform as stated/expected.

 

[Lelandwelds]

I have dodged some major repair bills with research: early 1980s TH700R4, second round of bad plastic water pipe (the first one got me), early aluminum wiring, etc.

A little advance planning and some education works well for me.

 

[finn1]

The Cat/Navistar fuel systems had oil on top of the plunger and operated at a lower pressure than the fuel driven common rail systems. They were less susceptible to poor lubricity fuels than the common rail systems.

Not all common rail systems are piezoelectric Crystal activated. The piezoelectric crystal has a finite life and is used in lower life applications predominantly. It痴 a cheaper system.

 

[klancf51]

Why is Lubricity your main concern? Common rail use Piezo injectors, which have no internal piston that needs lubricating. The high pressure oil injection systems, found on CAT and Navistar engines needed the lubricating properties, and even those are not having issues with the low sulfur diesel.

I think you should do what you can to mitigate the water issue if you're buying from low volume sellers, otherwise there is no need to worry.

It all comes down to fuel standards. Here is why ULSD lubricity is a main concern for some owners (apparently not you):

1. European HPCR engines and pumps are designed to be powered by standard ULSD fuel available on the European market (according to specifications meeting DIN EN 590).
2. American ULSD meets ASTM D975.
3. The DIN EN 590 specification for lubricity is more stringent than ASTM D975.

Thus, owners of European HPCR engines need to be aware that the US-refined ULSD potentially has insufficient lubricity for their engines. They should be be concerned and careful. So what are the alternatives?

• Use Biodiesel (B2)
• Obtain ASTM 6079 result from fuel supplier to verify fuel lubricity
• Use lubricity additive
• Do nothing and hope for the best
• Change the ASTM D975 lubricity requirement to meet DIN EN 590

Each alternative has its pros/cons and questions. Mixed in with this is the fuel tax issue which may limit alternatives (such as Biodiesel). I hope that explains it.

 

[Lelandwelds]

"All the people" here are but a small subset. Keep in mind that if one goes to a DIY type of website that one is going to see lots of "problems."

No argument but they discuss injector pumps more often than my locksport forum.

"Professional" means they do it for a living. It doesn't mean skill or competence. I know some people have an axe to grind or shrine to visit. Some are brand snobs. Some are fools or liars. Some are just . . . difficult.

As long as I don't know enough, I will suffer through it. (Even if they can't quite talking about tractor weight.)

 

[DieselBound]

There's a reason why manufacturers specify and manufacture to differing markets. While one can point out the differences that don't mean that they apply: "European" spec engines might not* be being sold in the US- that only US spec'd ones are, which would make this moot.

* I don't have enough invested in the thread to do research to actual facts here, but suffice it to say that the basic statement holds that manufacturers DO spec for differing markets.

 

[Snobdds]

It all comes down to fuel standards. Here is why ULSD lubricity is a main concern for some owners (apparently not you):

1. European HPCR engines and pumps are designed to be powered by standard ULSD fuel available on the European market (according to specifications meeting DIN EN 590).
2. American ULSD meets ASTM D975.
3. The DIN EN 590 specification for lubricity is more stringent than ASTM D975.

Thus, owners of European HPCR engines need to be aware that the US-refined ULSD potentially has insufficient lubricity for their engines. They should be be concerned and careful. So what are the alternatives?

• Use Biodiesel (B2)
• Obtain ASTM 6079 result from fuel supplier to verify fuel lubricity
• Use lubricity additive
• Do nothing and hope for the best
• Change the ASTM D975 lubricity requirement to meet DIN EN 590

Each alternative has its pros/cons and questions. Mixed in with this is the fuel tax issue which may limit alternatives (such as Biodiesel). I hope that explains it.

He's how you prove your point without having to try and point to a european fuel standard that has no impact on US consumers...

Where are all the failing injector pumps (CP3 or CP4) in the US due to no fuel lubrication?

I'll patiently wait...

 

[Lelandwelds]

The taxed pumps claim all sorts of biodiesel levels. Would adding the occasional gallon or two to red diesel be a good idea? Water, dirt, and cold weather I can handle. I can't filter in lubricity or see it. I am doubtful any report will accurately reflect what I actually load the tractor with. Too much topping off and mixing at each level.