# 2 Stroke Oil as a Diesel additive, anyone tried it ??



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

Below is a link to a (lengthy) post on another forum that seems to suggest adding 2 stroke oil (300ml per 70 litres) SEEMS to have beneficial effects :? .

Its a looong post so get a coffee and mince pie before you start !!!

http://www.freel2.com/forum/topic878.html

I make no claims or comment, I just thought I would see if anyone has tried it and what the results were.


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

There are many suggestions on the internet on how to very simply and very cheaply improve engine performance and fuel economy.

My questions are these: 

if these improvements are so simple and so cheap why have the fuel producers not incorporated them in their fuels?

Why do they intentionally sell an inferior product?

Why not enhance their product and make a killing on the market?


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

Can't answer you Oldun.
But I have been adding 100ml of Two Stroke oil at each fill up to my 2000 pre electronic Fiat 2.8iDTD for several years now.
To me the engine now runs more an engine and less like a cement mixer. It just seems to rev smoother.

OK it might be my imagination but it keeps me happy.

Ray.


----------



## 747 (Oct 2, 2009)

I do.


----------



## boringfrog (Sep 22, 2006)

*2trokes*

Me do 2.


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

Would that be "Snake" brand oil?? :lol: 

I would have to agree with Oldun.

The fuel companies claim they spend millions on research into better fuels. If it was that easy to enhance performance they would all be doing it . . . after the first one to add it cornered the market with their demonstrably superior fuel.

Not in mine I fear. 8O 

Dave


----------



## Jean-Luc (Jul 21, 2005)

I use Dipetane as prescribed and for me it 'does what it says on the tin' well plastic container actually.

I suspect from its appearance and texture that it as a very close relation to mineral based two stroke oil.


----------



## listerdiesel (Aug 3, 2012)

The oil is in diesel fuel to lubricate the pumps and injectors, so it is diluting the actual fuel that you burn.

If you add yet more oil, you are putting something in that is not a fuel per se, and reducing the volume of fuel injected into the engine at each stroke.

Same in 2-strokes, it is there for lubrication, not for burning as fuel.

Peter


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

I saw someone in front of me at the pump the other month add it.

Dave I can imagine a scenario that would make your theory shaky. MOT emissions tests do not apply as far as I know to motorcycles where 2 stroke oil is mostly used. Supposing that the ingredient that “works” in diesel engines increased the emissions then surely no oil company would add it even if it worked. 

There is no doubt that lead makes petrol engines more efficient! 

Dick


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

Zebedee said:


> Would that be "Snake" brand oil?? :lol:
> 
> I would have to agree with Oldun.
> 
> ...


I would not use 2 stroke or other additives in any later engine Dave. But when I bought my old 2000 Fiat it was a very trucky and noisy engine. But after a couple of fils with 2 Stroke even my wife said it's quieter. 
So I add it now and again to her 20 year old Citroen ZX and that is as smooth as my more modern Golf.

Ray.


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

listerdiesel said:


> The oil is in diesel fuel to lubricate the pumps and injectors, so it is diluting the actual fuel that you burn.
> 
> If you add yet more oil, you are putting something in that is not a fuel per se, and reducing the volume of fuel injected into the engine at each stroke.
> 
> ...


At the concentrations quoted any "dilution" would be so minimal as to be unmeasurable. However 2stroke oils contain various anti coking agents and other (presumably) detergent additives designed to keep inherently "dirty" burn 2stroke engines clean. It is quite possible that these cleaning agents help keep injector nozzles clean and the oil element helps keep the injector pump lubricated now that the sulphur content of DERV is a mega fraction of what it used to be.

Oil companies DO produce diesel fuel with these extra additives included, Shell V-Power (which is also a completely different type of diesel) & BP Ultimate for instance.
The companies fail to "clean up" because they charge up to 10p/litre extra for it.


----------



## listerdiesel (Aug 3, 2012)

My original comment stands, oils that are added to diesel are not going to make any huge improvement, but they may make your engine quieter/smoother, but so would any oil added, not just two-stroke oil as you are affecting the fuel that is injected. 

You don't need huge volumes of oil to make a difference, and Sulphur was never that high in road fuels to start with, only heavy crude contained significant volumes of it. 

I think you'll find that 50ppm in the 1990's reducing to less than 5ppm in the next few years is what is in the pipeline, so 0.00005% reducing to 0.000005%. If you compare that with 200ml added to 90 litres, you get 0.002222% which is a rather larger percentage. 

Ultimately it's your engine to play with. We run high-mileage Renault Trafics, both on original and untouched engines and both up into the hundreds of thousands of km. Never played with additives in the fuel, never needed to and wouldn't in future.

Peter


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

I don't think anyone is quarreling with your point Peter, I think 2 stroke rather than just any oil is specified is because it is supposedly designed to burn with a minimum amount of solid residue unlike a lot of oils.

Dick


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

Glandwr said:


> I don't think anyone is quarreling with your point Peter, I think 2 stroke rather than just any oil is specified is because it is supposedly designed to burn with a minimum amount of solid residue unlike a lot of oils.
> 
> Dick


Exactly 2stroke oil is designed to be burnt, ordinary oil isn't.


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

As I said in my original post, I have no idea if its beneficial or not.

By nature I am suspicious of any "Snake Oil" type claims, thats why I thought I woudl raise the question.

Thanks to all the varied (and of course inconclusive) responses !!


----------



## listerdiesel (Aug 3, 2012)

Stanner said:


> Exactly 2stroke oil is designed to be burnt, ordinary oil isn't.


I suggest you support that with some evidence?

Of course 'ordinary' oil is made to burn, where else would it go once it passed the rings and valve guides?

The base oil in most mineral oils is the same, what makes the difference is the additives.

Peter


----------



## duxdeluxe (Sep 2, 2007)

Modern diesels are designed to run on road fuel to EN590 spec and engine manufacturers spend a large fortune making sure that hey do exactly that....... The testing is extensive. Why then add something to a fuel that is already matched to a engine? It might do something for old engines but not to a modern one. 

Of course the best tuning aid is the seat of the pants - if it feels/sounds better then it is better. Doesn't float my boat but why not?


----------



## 747 (Oct 2, 2009)

duxdeluxe said:


> Modern diesels are designed to run on road fuel to EN590 spec and engine manufacturers spend a large fortune making sure that hey do exactly that....... The testing is extensive. Why then add something to a fuel that is already matched to a engine? It might do something for old engines but not to a modern one.
> 
> Of course the best tuning aid is the seat of the pants - if it feels/sounds better then it is better. Doesn't float my boat but why not?


My 2.8 jtd was assembled in 2002, so was the EN590 around then?


----------



## listerdiesel (Aug 3, 2012)

747 said:


> My 2.8 jtd was assembled in 2002, so was the EN590 around then?


Looks like the starting point was 1993, but it has varied according to the latest emission and low-sulphur ratings since then:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EN_590

Peter


----------



## 747 (Oct 2, 2009)

Thanks Peter.

Todays diesel fuel is NOT matched to the standard at the time my engine was built.

Where's that oil?


----------



## duxdeluxe (Sep 2, 2007)

Thanks - got there before me. Like any commercial standard it evolves and is re-issued at regular intervals. What people do with their own engines is completely up to them. I'll stick to what it was designed for, but its a free country so anyone can do what they want provided it is legal.


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

There seems to be quite a lot of room for "creative flexibility" within that specification Peter. I'd had the impression that it was a definitive recipe when ever I've seen it quoted on here before  

Dick


----------



## listerdiesel (Aug 3, 2012)

Glandwr said:


> There seems to be quite a lot of room for "creative flexibility" within that specification Peter. I'd had the impression that it was a definitive recipe when ever I've seen it quoted on here before
> 
> Dick


Like most EC 'standards', it has a lot of room for manouevre, especially when they are looking 10 years+ down the road on emissions.

Peter


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

I'd look up the Hawthorne Effect before believing any claims - wild or moderate.

It's almost impossible to remain totally objective when you are "_trying something new_".

That's why some people truly believe that performance gadgets of all kinds work - even that one which straps a magnet on the fuel line to orientate all the molecules! 8O :lol: :lol: (_What a load of old claptrap that is_!!)

They are conscious of trying out that "_something new_" and so their behaviour changes - usually in a case like that by being lighter on the accelerator. Whether they realise it or not!

Dave


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

duxdeluxe said:


> Modern diesels are designed to run on road fuel to EN590 spec and engine manufacturers spend a large fortune making sure that hey do exactly that....... The testing is extensive. Why then add something to a fuel that is already matched to a engine? It might do something for old engines but not to a modern one.
> 
> Of course the best tuning aid is the seat of the pants - if it feels/sounds better then it is better. Doesn't float my boat but why not?


So why do Shell produve V-Power and BP produce Ultimate if they are of no use because the engines are,'t matched to them.

However if the engines are matched to those premium fuels (i.e. they meet EN590) just what "extra" are you being asked to pay for?


----------



## listerdiesel (Aug 3, 2012)

747 said:


> Thanks Peter.
> 
> Todays diesel fuel is NOT matched to the standard at the time my engine was built.
> 
> Where's that oil?


That is one of the issues over the 'ultra-low' sulphur fuel, it caused all sorts of problems with injection pumps that had a certain type of seal material in the seals. The mechanical bits were fine, it was the seals, may have been 'Viton'? can't remember now, but it affected the USA worse than Europe as we were already well down that road.

What we now call 'low sulphur' fuel is in fact 'ultra-low sulphur' fuel.

Just for reference, in 1967, Class A1 diesel fuel had up to 0.5% Sulphur by weight, Class A2 had 1%. That is 5000ppm and 10000ppm respectively.

Peter


----------



## DTPCHEMICALS (Jul 24, 2006)

I have nort read all the posts but this was done to death on this forum a couple of years ago.
I have had several company vehicles over the last 30 years. The vans were changed at 150k miles or 3 years whichever came first. I have never used any sort of additiv as I know roughly the content of each. Cheap as chips to manufacture and sold expensively.
I have never had an engine related problem and leave the additives to be put into the fuel by the manufacturers.

I do have a range of Bull Manure products at £15 a litre if any one requires them.
Dave p


----------



## duxdeluxe (Sep 2, 2007)

Stanner said:


> duxdeluxe said:
> 
> 
> > Modern diesels are designed to run on road fuel to EN590 spec and engine manufacturers spend a large fortune making sure that hey do exactly that....... The testing is extensive. Why then add something to a fuel that is already matched to a engine? It might do something for old engines but not to a modern one.
> ...


The premium fuels are designed for tuned or high performance engines, which run better on a fuel with higher cetane/ octane ratings. Some manufacturers of higher performance vehicles recommend their use.


----------



## duxdeluxe (Sep 2, 2007)

listerdiesel said:


> Glandwr said:
> 
> 
> > There seems to be quite a lot of room for "creative flexibility" within that specification Peter. I'd had the impression that it was a definitive recipe when ever I've seen it quoted on here before
> ...


Very true, Peter, but in fact it is quite challenging to economically change the basic brew to give a very different fuel meeting the same basic spec. Easy to exceed the spec but that is expensive

Back to the original post subject, large marine Diesel engines are usually two stroke and need upper cylinder oil to work without damage and one of the major tricks is to get the dosage rate low enough to be economic without damage. Too much and you are wasting oil. Just thought that I would mention it - anything above what is actually required for reliable running is not the best use of money. Having said that, if people perceive that it is better then why not?


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

I think the claim made is that it makes clapped out diesels less annoying noise wise Dave. Certainly the woman I saw using it on the forecourt was using it for that purpose. It was an old landrover held together with baler twine with patches in the canvas.

I don't think she was concerned with performance, more about making it sound less like she was pulling up outside the village shop in an artic  

As you said before if it increased performance WITHOUT increasing emmissions the oil companies would add it. They however as people have said are designing fuel for the shiny new cars.  

Dick


----------



## listerdiesel (Aug 3, 2012)

Excess oil in diesel will soften the combustion process and make it seem quieter.

Old Landies are mostly indirect injection, up to the 200Tdi which was the first direct injection Land Rover produced engine. The 12J n/aspirated and 19J Turbo were both indirect.

Peter


----------



## listerdiesel (Aug 3, 2012)

Stanner said:


> So why do Shell produve V-Power and BP produce Ultimate if they are of no use because the engines are,'t matched to them.
> 
> However if the engines are matched to those premium fuels (i.e. they meet EN590) just what "extra" are you being asked to pay for?


I think this has been answered, but if you put something like the Renault Trafic DCi150 alongside one of the early 2.8TD Fiat engines, you would see that one would possibly benefit from a 'better' fuel, while the other would probably be a waste of money on it.

The DCi150 is a common-rail variable vane turbo engine producing 150bhp from 2.5 litres. Even that is well eclipsed now by Audi/VW.

Car diesels are chucking out 220bhp from 2.2 litres and now 2.0 litres, and those are the engines that you would probably want to be using the 'better' fuels on, not the 'cooking' Fiat engine.

Our Vauxhall Movano 2.8TDi managed 250000 miles in our hands and went on to a new life with another owner, that was only ever run on standard diesel fuel, never anything special.

As I have said before, we run long mileages on our vans and generally never use additives or special fuels, just what comes as standard diesel.

Peter


----------



## grizzlyj (Oct 14, 2008)

Hi

At a point in time when I was doing 150 mile a day commute in an 03 petrol car, I put V-Power in for a few weeks just to see. The mpg went up to exactly cover the increased cost. So if it did a better job cleaning the engine at the same time then a free bonus. I haven't checked since then, but I still put it in sometimes.


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

My V6 24valve 3lt non turbo engine performs better and quieter on the better diesel fuel from the pumps.Cannot say that I have noticed any difference between Shell and Esso brand.
Oh yes it is a 2003 Vauxhall Signum.gives us 42+ on a run and over 30 in town.

cabby


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

cabby said:


> My V6 24valve 3lt non turbo engine performs better and quieter on the better diesel fuel from the pumps.Cannot say that I have noticed any difference between Shell and Esso brand.
> Oh yes it is a 2003 Vauxhall Signum.gives us 42+ on a run and over 30 in town.
> 
> cabby


I think you will find that your engine is both turbocharged and intercooled.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMAX_V6_engine


----------

