Green Tractor Talk banner
1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
My 3720 manual says to drain water from the fuel tank and replace filter yearly as well as every 400 hours.

Is this the metal spin on filter or the little white plastic filter in the water separator that is being referred to? Or is it both?

Thanks,
Scott
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yank

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,698 Posts
According to your manual, the sediment filter only needs replacing when dirty. Here is that section.
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,564 Posts
The metal filter will last a long time. It does not hurt to clean out the water separator (white plastic) once a year. I change my filters often on everything diesel, but I would not change the tractors filters until at least 200 hours. I do run shaffers soyshield as a treatmemt to help keep the water in the fuel.

There are two types of additives to control water: emulsifiers and de-emulsifiers. Emulsifiers break the water into microscopic droplets and prevent the droplets from joining together. The water is suspended in, and carried along with, the fuel. The volume of droplets is not great enough to block lines or damage injectors. FPPF is a typical emulsifier.

De-emulsifiers work the opposite way. They modify the diesel so it cannot hold water. The water, being heavier than the fuel, drops out and settles at the bottom of the tank. It cannot travel through the system to do damage, unless its level builds to where it is up to the level of the fuel pick-up tube. When using a de-emulsifier, such as Howes, it's a good idea to check the water level in your tanks with water-detecting paste on a stick. If there's an inch or less, no problem, but more than that, you should siphon the water out or drain it.

Our tractors have a very low fuel pressure in the injectos so the water does not hurt them. You do NOT want to use the emulsifying type in a high pressure injector system. If the water gets to the injectors, it will flash into high pressure steam and tear the injector tips to pieces in very short order. Its not a good idea to use an emulsifier in the new trucks.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,698 Posts
Thanks Brian, very informative.:good2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Yes, thanks. I had been wondering the same thing about changing the sediment bowl filter, what with cold weather settling in. Thought I had read and re-read my owner's manual but missed the part about the red ring floating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
733 Posts
Excellent info Brian,
I do have a question for you....the Fuel supply line for cabbed 3x or 4x machines is right on the bottom of the tank....that being said, which method of water control would you reccomend?
I've been running power service in my fuel for ages...even run power service in my heating oil .

I changed the spin on fuel filter and drained the sediment bowl last year at this time, I was actually just debating mentally if I should again this fall.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,564 Posts
Dave,
The guys at Power Service are pretty cool! Unfortunatly, they make a so-so product.

I used to be into all this stuff a ton more while I messed with diesel trucks. We had a few different additive guys show up at Dyno Days and it was all interesting to listen, learn, and try to figure out the truth.

I started out doing pop bottle tests to see what kind of fuel I was buying. To me, thats more important than the additive you buy. Some station in my area sold fuel full of water and the local truck stops seemed to have better fuel 90% of the time.

So, what to use in our small tractors that ussually see a wide range of tempuratures? I would get a emulsifier. I do not want water in the bottom of my tank long term for one reason. Algea. Thats not fun to get rid of! Since our tractors do not have have pressure injectors, the little water in the fuel has no adverse issues.

I would try to pick an additive that helps in lubricosity and with water. There are very few good ones out there!

I will post a test I helped out with a bit ago in my next post. Its long!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,564 Posts
I participated in this so:

The following are the preliminary results of a research study on diesel fuel Lubricity Additives. There is likely to be further commentary and explanation added at a future time.

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this research was to determine the ability of multiple diesel fuel additives to replace the vital lubricity component in ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfer Diesel) fuel.

HISTORY:

ULSD fuel is the fuel currently mandated for use in all on road diesel engines. This fuel burns cleaner and is less polluting than it’s predecessor, called Low Sulfer Diesel Fuel. Low sulfer fuel contained less than 500 ppm of sulfer. ULSD contains 15 ppm or less.
As diesel fuel is further refined to remove the polluting sulfer, it is inadvertently stripped of its lubricating properties. This vital lubrication is a necessary component of the diesel fuel as it prevents wear in the fuel delivery system. Specifically, it lubricates pumps, high pressure pumps and injectors. Traditional Low sulfer diesel fuel typically contained enough lubricating ability to suffice the needs of these vital components. ULSD fuel, on the other hand, is considered to be very “dry” and incapable of lubricating vital fuel delivery components. As a result, these components are at risk of premature and even catastrophic failure when ULSD fuel is introduced to the system. As a result, all oil companies producing ULSD fuel must replace the lost lubricity with additives. All ULSD fuel purchased at retail fuel stations SHOULD be adequately treated with additives to replace this lost lubricity. The potential result of using inadequately treated fuel, as indicated above, can be catastrophic. There have been many documented cases of randomly tested samples of diesel fuel. These tests prove that often times the fuel we purchase is not adequately treated and may therefore contribute to accelerated wear of our fuel delivery systems. For this reason it may be prudent to use an after market diesel fuel additive to ENSURE adequate lubrication of the fuel delivery system. Additionally, many additives can offer added benefits such as cetane improver, and water separators or emulsifiers.

CONTENT:

In this study we will test multiple diesel fuel additives designed to replace lost lubricity. The primary component of this study is a side-by-side laboratory analysis of each additive’s ability to replace this vital lubricity. Additionally, claims of improving cetane, water separation or emulsification, bio-diesel compatibility and alcohol content will be noted. These notes were derived from information that was readily available to consumers (via the label and internet information) and none of this information has been evaluated for validity and/or performance. Cetane information has only been noted if the word “cetane” was used in the advertising information. The words “improves power” has not been translated to mean “improves cetane” in this evaluation. Information on alcohol content is provided by indicating “contains no alcohol”. Omission of the words “contains no alcohol” does not imply that it does contain alcohol. This information was simply missing in the information available to a consumer. However, the possibility of a form of alcohol in these products is possible. Additionally, information on dosages and cost per tankful are included for comparison purposes.

How Diesel Fuel Is Evaluated For Lubricating Ability:

Diesel fuel and other fluids are tested for lubricating ability using a device called a “High Frequency Reciprocating Rig” or HFRR. The HFRR is currently the Internationally accepted, standardized method to evaluate fluids for lubricating ability. It uses a ball bearing that reciprocates or moves back and forth on a metal surface at a very high frequency for a duration of 90 minutes. The machine does this while the ball bearing and metal surface are immersed in the test fluid (in this case, treated diesel fuel). At the end of the test the ball bearing is examined under a microscope and the “wear scar” on the ball bearing is measured in microns. The larger the wear scar, the poorer the lubricating ability of the fluid. Southwest Research runs every sample twice and averages the size of the wear scar.
The U.S. standard for diesel fuel says a commercially available diesel fuel should produce a wear scar of no greater than 520 microns. The Engine Manufacturers Association had requested a standard of a wear scar no greater than 460 microns, typical of the pre-ULSD fuels. Most experts agree that a 520 micron standard is adequate, but also that the lower the wear scar the better.

METHOD:

An independent research firm in Texas was hired to do the laboratory work. The cost of the research was paid for voluntarily by the participating additive manufacturers. Declining to participate and pay for the research were the following companies: Amsoil and Power Service. Because these are popular products it was determined that they needed to be included in the study. These products were tested using funds collected by diesel enthusiasts at “dieselplace.com”. Additionally, unconventional additives such as 2-cycle oil and used motor oil were tested for their abilities to aid in diesel fuel lubricity. These were also paid for by members of “dieselplace.com”.
The study was conducted in the following manner:
-The Research firm obtained a quantity of “untreated” ULSD fuel from a supplier. This fuel was basic ULSD fuel intended for use in diesel engines. However, this sample was acquired PRIOR to any attempt to additize the fuel for the purpose of replacing lost lubricity. In other words, it was a “worst case scenario, very dry diesel fuel” that would likely cause damage to any fuel delivery system. This fuel was tested using the HFRR at the Southwest Research Laboratory. This fuel was determined to have a very high HFRR score of 636 microns, typical of an untreated ULSD fuel. It was determined that this batch of fuel would be utilized as the baseline fuel for testing all of the additives. The baseline fuel HFRR score of 636 would be used as the control sample. All additives tested would be evaluated on their ability to replace lost lubricity to the fuel by comparing their scores to the control sample. Any score under 636 shows improvement to the fuels ability to lubricate the fuel delivery system of a diesel engine.

BLIND STUDY:

In order to ensure a completely unbiased approach to the study, the following steps were taken:
Each additive tested was obtained independently via internet or over the counter purchases. The only exceptions were Opti-Lube XPD and the bio-diesel sample. The reason for this is because Opti-Lube XPD additive was considered “experimental” at the time of test enrollment and was not yet on the market. It was sent directly from Opti-Lube company. The bio-diesel sample was sponsored by Renewable Energy Group. One of their suppliers, E.H. Wolf and Sons in Slinger, Wisconsin supplied us with a sample of 100% soybean based bio-diesel. This sample was used to blend with the baseline fuel to create a 2% bio-diesel for testing.
Each additive was bottled separately in identical glass containers. The bottles were labeled only with a number. This number corresponded to the additive contained in the bottle. The order of numbering was done randomly by drawing names out of a hat. Only Spicer Research held the key to the additives in each bottle.
The additive samples were then sent in a box to An independent research firm. The only information given them was the ratio of fuel to be added to each additive sample. For example, bottle “A” needs to be mixed at a ratio of “480-1”. The ratio used for each additive was the “prescribed dosage” found on the bottle label for that product. Used motor oil and 2-cycle oil were tested at a rationally chosen ratio of 200:1.
The Research Laboratory mixed the proper ratio of each “bottled fluid” into a separate container containing the baseline fuel. The data, therefore, is meaningful because every additive is tested in the same way using the same fuel. A side-by-side comparison of the effectiveness of each additive is now obtainable.

THE RESULTS:

These results are listed in the order of performance in the HFRR test. The baseline fuel used in every test started at an HFRR score of 636. The score shown is the tested HFRR score of the baseline fuel/additive blend.
Also included is the wear scar improvement provided by the additive as well as other claimed benefits of the additive. Each additive is also categorized as a Multi-purpose additive, Multi-purpose + anti-gel, Lubricity only, non-conventional, or as an additive capable of treating both gasoline and diesel fuel.
As a convenience to the reader there is also information on price per treated tank of diesel fuel (using a 26 gallon tank), and dosage per 26 gallon tank provided as “ounces of additive per 26 gallon tank”.

In Order Of Performance:

1) 2% REG SoyPower biodiesel
HFRR 221, 415 micron improvement.
50:1 ratio of baseline fuel to 100% biodiesel
66.56 oz. of 100% biodiesel per 26 gallons of diesel fuel
Price: market value

2)Opti-Lube XPD
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, demulsifier
HFRR 317, 319 micron improvement.
256:1 ratio
13 oz/tank
$4.35/tank

3)FPPF RV, Bus, SUV Diesel/Gas fuel treatment
Gas and Diesel
cetane improver, emulsifier
HFRR 439, 197 micron improvement
640:1 ratio
5.2 oz/tank
$2.60/tank

4)Opti-Lube Summer Blend
Multi-purpose
demulsifier
HFRR 447, 189 micron improvement
3000:1 ratio
1.11 oz/tank
$0.68/tank

5)Opti-Lube Winter Blend
Muti-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver
HFRR 461, 175 micron improvement
512:1 ratio
6.5 oz/tank
$3.65/tank

6)Schaeffer Diesel Treat 2000
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, emulsifier, bio-diesel compatible
HFRR 470, 166 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.87/tank

7)Super Tech Outboard 2-cycle TC-W3 engine oil
Unconventional (Not ULSD compliant, may damage 2007 or newer systems)
HFRR 474, 162 micron improvement
200:1 ratio
16.64 oz/tank
$1.09/tank

8)Stanadyne Lubricity Formula
Lubricity Only
demulsifier, 5% bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 479, 157 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.00/tank

9)Amsoil Diesel Concentrate
Multi-purpose
demulsifier, bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 488, 148 micron improvement
640:1 ratio
5.2 oz/tank
$2.16/tank

10)Power Service Diesel Kleen + Cetane Boost
Multi-purpose
Cetane improver, bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 575, 61 micron improvement
400:1 ratio
8.32 oz/tank
$1.58/tank

11)Howe’s Meaner Power Kleaner
Multi-purpose
Alcohol free
HFRR 586, 50 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.36/tank

12)Stanadyne Performance Formula
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, demulsifier, 5% bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 603, 33 micron improvement
480:1 ratio
6.9 oz/tank
$4.35/tank

13)Used Motor Oil, Shell Rotella T 15w40, 5,000 miles used.
Unconventional (Not ULSD compliant, may damage systems)
HFRR 634, 2 micron improvement
200:1 ratio
16.64 oz/tank
price: market value

14)Lucas Upper Cylinder Lubricant
Gas or diesel
HFRR 641, 5 microns worse than baseline (statistically insignificant change)
427:1 ratio
7.8 oz/tank
$2.65/tank

15)B1000 Diesel Fuel Conditioner by Milligan Biotech
Multi-purpose, canola oil based additive
HFRR 644, 8 microns worse than baseline (statistically insignificant change)
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$2.67/tank

16)FPPF Lubricity Plus Fuel Power
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
Emulsifier, alcohol free
HFRR 675, 39 microns worse than baseline fuel
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.12/tank

17)Marvel Mystery Oil
Gas, oil and Diesel fuel additive (NOT ULSD compliant, may damage 2007 and newer systems)
HFRR 678, 42 microns worse than baseline fuel.
320:1 ratio
10.4 oz/tank
$3.22/tank

18)ValvTect Diesel Guard Heavy Duty/Marine Diesel Fuel Additive
Multi-purpose
Cetane improver, emulsifier, alcohol free
HFRR 696, 60 microns worse than baseline fuel
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$2.38/tank

19)Primrose Power Blend 2003
Multi-purpose
Cetane boost, bio-diesel compatible, emulsifier
HFRR 711, 75 microns worse than baseline
1066:1 ratio
3.12 oz/tank
$1.39/tank

CONCLUSIONS:

Products 1 through 4 were able to improve the unadditized fuel to an HFRR score of 460 or better. This meets the most strict requirements requested by the Engine Manufacturers Association.
Products 1 through 9 were able to improve the unadditized fuel to an HFRR score of 520 or better, meeting the U.S. diesel fuel requirements for maximum wear scar in a commercially available diesel fuel.
Products 16 through 19 were found to cause the fuel/additive blend to perform worse than the baseline fuel. The cause for this is speculative. This is not unprecedented in HFRR testing and can be caused by alcohol or other components in the additives. Further investigation into the possibilities behind these poor results will investigated.
Any additive testing within +/- 20 microns of the baseline fuel could be considered to have no significant change. The repeatability of this test allows for a +/- 20 micron variability to be considered insignificant.

CREDITS:

This study would not have been possible without the participation of all companies involved and dieselplace.com. A special Thank You to all of the dieselplace.com members who generously donated toward this study and waited longer than they should have for the results. You folks are the best. Arlen Spicer, organizer.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
According to your manual, the sediment filter only needs replacing when dirty. Here is that section.
Thanks Randy I completely glossed over the section regarding the red ring. Good information to know!!

Scott
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,698 Posts
Being new to diesel, I have just started to use Opti-Lube in my machines.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,564 Posts
If you machines do not get much use, I would stop using Opti-Lube and go with one of the top 7 that are emmulsifiers.

The last thing you want is watter just sitting at the bottom of the tank for long peroids of time.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,698 Posts
If you machines do not get much use, I would stop using Opti-Lube and go with one of the top 7 that are emmulsifiers.

The last thing you want is watter just sitting at the bottom of the tank for long peroids of time.
The winter can be the most idle time. What is a long period of time. I was thinking that I was getting the most bang for the buck with this one.:unknown:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
213 Posts
The winter can be the most idle time. What is a long period of time. I was thinking that I was getting the most bang for the buck with this one.:unknown:
I run my tractors year around, but not a huge number of hours. My 5525 is 5 years old and it has almost 1000 hours on it.

4520 is 2 years old with 255 hours on it.

I change the filters once a year. Sounds like I could stretch that out some.

D.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,564 Posts
The winter can be the most idle time. What is a long period of time. I was thinking that I was getting the most bang for the buck with this one.:unknown:
Randy,
A ton of this depends on the fuel quality that you purchase. But lets play worse case here. You get a slug of water in your tank. (dooms day senario would be that it had alge in it. Lets not go there) With opti-lube, you will have to rely on your fule pick up to suck it out of your tank and get it to your fuel filter. Once there, it would sit there until you drained it or changed the filter.

I have doubts that the fuel pickup line is at the rock bottom protion of the tank, so I believe you will always have water in your tank with opti-lube. IMHO, not good.

If you were to run soy shield or FPPF, it would pick up that water and run it through your system. In our tractors, there is little issue with that due to our low pressure injectors. There is no extra wear due to it and it keeps your tank clean.

I think your better off with that senario in a tractor. If it were used daily, I would say your ok as long as you watch your fuel filter bowl for water weekly.

Most people do nit run an additive at all, so you guys that do are ahead of the game, but...... You can also shoot yourself in the foot.

I suggest you look for this Randy, its easier to find than soy shield.

FPPF RV, Bus, SUV Diesel/Gas fuel treatment
Gas and Diesel
cetane improver, emulsifier
HFRR 439, 197 micron improvement
640:1 ratio
5.2 oz/tank
$2.60/tank

Those numbers are based on a 35 gallon tank.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,564 Posts
Bad question to ask Dave....

In all our tractors, including old ones, I use Soy Shield by Schaeffer's
http://www.schaefferoil.com/soy_shield.html

With that said, I avoid the Premium Soy shield because that is meant for vehicles like over the road trucks that have water repelling fuel filters.

IF, I cannot take the time to get my winter fuel from a truck stop, I double up on the soy shield and add a 1/2 treatment of FPPT.

Knock on wood, I have never had a water related issue in any of our storage tanks at the farm or our Farm Semi that sits all winter.

My goal is to prevent water and lube the fuel up to save pumps and valves.

Schaeffer's is not easy to buy and if many people are interested, maybe we could work out a group buy? I normally buy a case of gallon containers of it at a time.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,698 Posts
Randy,
A ton of this depends on the fuel quality that you purchase. But lets play worse case here. You get a slug of water in your tank. (dooms day senario would be that it had alge in it. Lets not go there) With opti-lube, you will have to rely on your fule pick up to suck it out of your tank and get it to your fuel filter. Once there, it would sit there until you drained it or changed the filter.

I have doubts that the fuel pickup line is at the rock bottom protion of the tank, so I believe you will always have water in your tank with opti-lube. IMHO, not good.

If you were to run soy shield or FPPF, it would pick up that water and run it through your system. In our tractors, there is little issue with that due to our low pressure injectors. There is no extra wear due to it and it keeps your tank clean.

I think your better off with that senario in a tractor. If it were used daily, I would say your ok as long as you watch your fuel filter bowl for water weekly.

Most people do nit run an additive at all, so you guys that do are ahead of the game, but...... You can also shoot yourself in the foot.

I suggest you look for this Randy, its easier to find than soy shield.

FPPF RV, Bus, SUV Diesel/Gas fuel treatment
Gas and Diesel
cetane improver, emulsifier
HFRR 439, 197 micron improvement
640:1 ratio
5.2 oz/tank
$2.60/tank

Those numbers are based on a 35 gallon tank.
Thanks Brian, it looks like I am going to have to make a change. You've got me nervous now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,325 Posts
Brian,

I went to the FPPF site and this I believe is the additive you have recommended. I can purchase this online. I don't know if it is sold locally yet but I have not tried to find it.

http://www.fppfsales.com/index.php/diesel-products/rv-bus-suv-formula-12oz.html

You also said you use the soy Shield found here. They do not sell some of their products on line and this is not one of them. Did you ever get others who would want to go in on a buy with you when you suggested it back in 2010?

http://www.schaefferoil.com/soy-shield.html

rob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,325 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,564 Posts
Yes on the FPPF. I will also sometimes use Total Power if they are out of the other stuff. I have it local.

As for the Soy Shield, I did buy some in 2010. Its not cheap to ship! I buy it from Speed Wrench and they send it to me.

I can help you out if you want. I might be getting more this spring.
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top