Unnecessary quote removed


ok - no probs. DandyLandy is spot on and I am off to gardening now its stopped raining

regards Up the Cobblers

Hello,

Another update. Driven 100KM today, so total of 180KM since yesterday top up of 2SO.

Car is really really smooth, morning startup injector noise is much much less, it sounds like a damped banging instead of a metal banging before the 2SO. Like the engine is covered in a blanket.

By the end of the day, power is broader so better acceleration/response in the low and mid RPM. I can now feel minute change in small throttle changes. The car pulls stronger when clutch is disengaged and no throttle applied.

The liqui moli purge I did 1000KM back, restore a lot of power from the engine, but it does so in a 'peaky' way, in the top RPM. Now its really really pleasant to drive, it must drive like this when new, i dont even remember how it feels at that time.

Vibration is much much less, like I've described before, I dont feel hard vibration in the seat anymore, just at the firewall and when pressing the pedals. Might be some cleaning process happening in the engine. Idle is glass smooth inside the car.

I will visit the fellow enthusiast that I shared this info with, sometime next week, since he has the same car but 7000KM only, for comparison of the sound and how the car is driven, his brand new, mine 200,000KM. I will keep you guys updated. It will be interesting to have him check since he is a Toyota repair shop owner, and has been servicing my car.

In my experience, the d4d engine, engine noise or rather injector noise, are directly related to the quality of the diesel that I put in in the car. With the local brand diesel (diesel+bio), used as is, its always a bit noisy and rough, with diesel additive, or mixed with the Shell diesel, power response always better and quieter. Pure Shell diesel is always the best but the price is twice.

Also re the d4d, In MY OWN experience, i can tell you that the Toyota d4d engine is very very reliable up to this point, i've run it with minimum maintenance (late oil change here and there), regular quality engine oil (Repsol SHPD), regular (bad?) quality subsidized diesel with intermitent injector cleaners added (i think max 15 bottles for the life of the car), and 1 diesel purge. Look at how the car feel now, almost brand new, but next week when I compared directly, I will know. Engine never been rebuild, all injector/pumps are original.

Please note, I am not here to endorse or persuade others to try 2SO. I have researched for quite some time in various forums, so I make an informed decision to try, as expected from others who will make such decision as well. Others people experiences plays a big role for my decision to be frank, hence this post. Hope I am not stirring up a debate.

Kind regards,

Ben

Toyota D-4D injector failure is a global issue and hotly debated on many forums. Just Google it. Thousands of owners suffered damage.


As the use of 2SO may result in a voided warranty, best advice is to refrain from using it unless you are prepared to finance your own repair bill - this is general advice to all readers.


My uncle's two Isuzu pickup trucks covered well over a million km without any repairs, towing the biggest Boer horse across South Africa. The 1600cc diesel did the bulk of that and was an easy starter even beyond 700,000km.


My own Merc 240DA W115 went beyond 720,000km without a hiccup and the two 300D's did a combined >650,000km. The 240 towed a 16' caravan over two decades, during hot African summers. It was abused and used as an off-road vehicle. Reliable to the point of boredom, perhaps.


None of these vehicles ever had a sip of any fuel additives.

[quote="issus"]

DandyLandy wrote:

defkalion wrote:

yf
................................ Don't ever do this unless you have it pre-approved by landRover in writing - not from a service station but from the manufacturer.

If you had bothered to read Yamaha's thread I doubt if you would have come up with such outlandish comments/ views. In theory you can run your diesel engine entirely on 2s without any ill effects. For those with DPF you just need to use the recommended grade and dose. The only reason we don't use 2s is purely based on cost - at approx £6/ltr!! Best quality diesel in the UK is approx £1.50/litre
There is no way LR or even BMW could trace use of 250ml of 2s in a full tank of Diesel - as the s2 additive fully combines with the diesel....again read Yamaha's thread on this and/or least "Google it" for technical info on the internal "mixing" properties. Your message and earlier messages are deeply misleading and full of unsupported doomsday claims. Only come back on this subject when you have a clearer understanding of the subject and better appreciation of Yamaha's views on the use of 2s.

DandyLandy wrote:

As the use of 2SO may result in a voided warranty, best advice is to refrain from using it unless you are prepared to finance your own repair bill - this is general advice to all readers.

I doubt that will happen as I would be supprised if someone who has added 2so has brought it up and asked "do you think my engine is because of the 2so I've been adding"

Only an idiot would be that daft no matter how much they think 2so is helping Former Mod/Member, with the most post & Chicken George Arch nemesis

This thread had got a little stale so spicing it up has been very enjoyable.

My view: adding an automotive lubricating oil, designed to be burnt in a modern internal combustion engine, to a fuel oil designed to be burnt in an internal combustion engine, will make it oilier, a little simplistic but unassailably true and demonstrated by the tests carried out on a HFRR (high frequency reciprocating rig) where we are told that friction was reduced. Users also claim that diesel clatter is less - evidenced by listening. MPG is improved - some members claim. Engines are cleaner on strip-down, again claimed by members and put forward as evidence.

Evidence is the key. There is no proof. You cannot demonstrate that you prevented a failure; however, you should be able to show that you caused one, but unrelated engine failures in other cars cannot be attributed to a single cause. So, would all opponents of using 2SO please post evidence of it causing problems or failures. Hearsay is not good enough and statements from oil company executives rate as highly as promises from politicians.

If you like it use it - if you don't - then don't.

npinks wrote:

I doubt that will happen as I would be supprised if someone who has added 2so has brought it up and asked "do you think my engine is because of the 2so I've been adding"

Only an idiot would be that daft no matter how much they think 2so is helping

quite so - only idiots argue with Moderators  Up the Cobblers

Ben Twillie wrote:

This thread had got a little stale so spicing it up has been very enjoyable.

So, would all opponents of using 2SO please post evidence of it causing problems or failures. Hearsay is not good enough and statements from oil company executives rate as highly as promises from politicians.

If you like it use it - if you don't - then don't.

...........trust a Suffolk man to tell it as it is  Up the Cobblers

QUOTE
As far as I am aware, there is no need to put any form of additive into the low sulphur diesel. The reasoning is, as you already previously mentioned, that the major fuel refineries compensate for the lack of lubrication, that would have previously been provided by the sulphur, with additives.


The removal of the sulphur also alters the viscosity of said diesel, making it “thinner” if you like. This 50ppm diesel has also been developed around/for common rail diesel systems, where the tolerances are closer than ever before, to handle the very, very extreme conditions that these new systems operating under, and this 50ppm diesel certainly assists with the lubricating of all the tiny moving parts of the common rail fuel injection system. To give you an example, operating pressure of the common rail diesel system is anything from 1350bar to 2200bar, depending on the vehicle, and the tolerances of the moving parts of the injectors is measured and altered in microns!


Getting back to your 2 stroke oil now, from personal experience, I have seen how 2 stroke oil has caused major component damage to a fully reconditioned common rail diesel fuel system. The 2 stroke oil appeared to have prevented the 50ppm diesel from lubricating the components effectively and thus, causing said moving parts to wear prematurely to the point of failure. The reason you will not find any documentation regarding 2 stroke oil as an additive is because, not one fuel supplier will back these claims.


These fuel suppliers and the diesel component manufactures spend millions upon millions of dollars, and euros, developing these fuel injection systems together, so that they do work/operate as intended, with the correct fuel, naturally.


Another thing to bear in mind is that the main objective of these highly advanced fuel systems, and the 50ppm diesel, is emission control, and trust me when I say this, these fuel injection systems are becoming more and more advanced with every new vehicle model that is released. As I previously mentioned, the operating pressure of some of these diesel common rail systems is 2200bar, well, this is already being pushed to 3000bar. That is a lot of pressure for something that is not even 20mm in diameter to handle.


Shawn Coetzee

Diesel Fuel Injection Technician

tel : +27 31 705 8516

fax : +27 31 705 8824
UNQUOTE

Ben Twillie wrote:

This thread had got a little stale so spicing it up has been very enjoyable.

My view: adding an automotive lubricating oil, designed to be burnt in a modern internal combustion engine, to a fuel oil designed to be burnt in an internal combustion engine, will make it oilier, a little simplistic but unassailably true and demonstrated by the tests carried out on a HFRR (high frequency reciprocating rig) where we are told that friction was reduced. Users also claim that diesel clatter is less - evidenced by listening. MPG is improved - some members claim. Engines are cleaner on strip-down, again claimed by members and put forward as evidence.

Evidence is the key. There is no proof. You cannot demonstrate that you prevented a failure; however, you should be able to show that you caused one, but unrelated engine failures in other cars cannot be attributed to a single cause. So, would all opponents of using 2SO please post evidence of it causing problems or failures. Hearsay is not good enough and statements from oil company executives rate as highly as promises from politicians.

If you like it use it - if you don't - then don't.

My point exactly. As there is very little scientific evidence to support the use of 2SO, it really isn't true to state that any margin of success resulted from the use thereof. I just hope that my brazen approach will serve to deter some newcomers from adopting this practice. My interest herein is to help others prevent unwanted damage and repair costs. After all, as a former forensic auditor, I prefer to deal with fact and not opinion. I am only saying this to state how I approach any subject; working from case reports and source documents weed out hearsay. Many people will take advice from polls and the opinions of others, without ever researching the facts. Therein lies the danger of being deceived. This is why I have researched this first, for almost a decade, or at least since around 2007, before I even posted anything anywhere.

From the first day, when I bought my FL2, I add regularly 2sO at ratio adviced by YF. The car has 50 TKm on the clock. For me the benefits are evident, I don't need a research paper, if I my eyes see and ears hear Recently, I did a flash-tuning upgrading power to 170 PS and 493 Nm. After doing dyno-test I asked a Bosch-technician to do a smoke-test, since I wanted to be sure that the additional power didn't come at cost of increased sooth values in the exaust. My car has the DPF removed since this piece was a constant source of trouble. So, the technician was very sceptical I would pass the test. The value mesured was 1,05 compared to the maximum limit allowed 1,50. The Bosch-man was quite surprised about the outcome. I mentioned that I've got 2sO in the tank. He shaked his head telling that in his wiew it is not a good idea to do that. I replied that he has just got the evidence and I rely on my senses to judge if it is worth of doing this or not.. The engine runs very quitely and smoothly and pulls like a train.. Espacially, after the power upgrade

Greetings from Riga,

atrix

Unnecessary quote removed
Please don't use the Quote button to Reply to the directly previous post - No Point in Repeating it



So your subjective "research study" on a single vehicle with no control test unit overshadows the good advice from thousands of engineers around the globe as well as that of your qualified Bosch technician? This is no sienctific testing but a subjective result. 50,000km is still very low mileage. If a group of vehickles were being tested over 500,000km each and with a similar group doing so without 2SO, we could possibly start considering the results. There are too many variables. Read what Shawn Coetzee of McKenzie's in Durban had written, just go back a page or so.

DandyLandy wrote:

QUOTE
As far as I am aware, there is no need to put any form of additive into the low sulphur diesel. The reasoning is, as you already previously mentioned, that the major fuel refineries compensate for the lack of lubrication, that would have previously been provided by the sulphur, with additives. ................total tosh again only BP Ultra and Shell Nitro may offer this on these two grades only

Getting back to your 2 stroke oil now, from personal experience, I have seen how 2 stroke oil has caused major component damage to a fully reconditioned common rail diesel fuel system. The 2 stroke oil appeared to have prevented the 50ppm diesel from lubricating the components effectively and thus, causing said moving parts to wear prematurely to the point of failure. The reason you will not find any documentation regarding 2 stroke oil as an additive is because, not one fuel supplier will back these claims. .................this is more circumstantial than a "who dunnit" play.

These fuel suppliers and the diesel component manufactures spend millions upon millions of dollars, and euros, developing these fuel injection systems together, so that they do work/operate as intended, with the correct fuel, naturally. ..............dream on

Another thing to bear in mind is that the main objective of these highly advanced fuel systems, and the 50ppm diesel, is emission control, and trust me when I say this, these fuel injection systems are becoming more and more advanced with every new vehicle model that is released. As I previously mentioned, the operating pressure of some of these diesel common rail systems is 2200bar, well, this is already being pushed to 3000bar. That is a lot of pressure for something that is not even 20mm in diameter to handle..................technical twaddle
Shawn Coetzee

Diesel Fuel Injection Technician

tel : +27 31 705 8516

fax : +27 31 705 8824
UNQUOTE

The exact can be said to you Issus, where's your proof  Former Mod/Member, with the most post & Chicken George Arch nemesis