CAT did some great research on what size particles cause the most fuel system damage, and as a result most of their fuel filters are 2 micron. A CAT filter swap is fairly common for other applications. Ran one on my Mercedes swapped Yota.
Help Support Arborist Forum:
I put over 100,000 miles a year on a truck and that's not hard running. Are you saying you drove your service truck 1,000,000 yr or are you exaggerating to make a point.
Most of the companies I drove for use Luberfiner filters. Better or worse? IDK but there must be something to it but far be it for me to question a company that is the worlds premier heavy equipment maker.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. No matter what CAT says, if you're putting 100k/yr on a truck and not having fuel issues, just keep doing exactly what you're doing.
I don't recall saying I put a million miles on my service truck, 100k a year would have been a pretty accurate average, swapped trucks every 3-5 once we got out of the old f700, typically the trucks had 300-400k miles on them. We frequently got sent out to fix engines that other dealers couldn't fix, work with oem's on prototypes, and one off projects. For a 10-11 year span I basically worked 7 days a week, typically not coming back home for weeks at a time. Nearly cost me my marriage. So no, I was not exaggerating one bit.
It's called a cost point. Every major conoany does it. Luberfiner make good filters. with any sort of contract or high volume purchaser they give discounts that cat, cummins, mtu, volvo etc can't match. So long as the filter had the same specifications as the oem it's no issue.
I think what I am saying is perfectly clear. The vehicle and the sample are long gone, as is the report. So I cannot give you numbers any more. But if you care to get some other numbers, when Todd at Project Farm tested diesel oils, he sent in samples for oil analysis, and the Amsoil product had a higher portion of anti-wear additives and a higher base number than any of the other oils he tested, so that would allow for depletion with age and still meet new oil requirements. It also had less volatility loss.
The additives are in solution; filters will not remove them.
Yes, Amsoil diesel oil isn't certified so it may have had a higher additive treat rate. However, there is no way it was the same after the mileage you quoted as it or any other diesel oil was new.
That is a patently absurd claim on your part. I saw the test data. You did not. More data on their diesel products: https://amsoilcontent.com/ams/lit/databulletins/g3467.pdf
The only absurdity is the claim you made..
Your special and you have guzzled the Amsoil koolaide.. but anyone with even minimal knowledge of oil analysis knows your statement is a joke.
Well I don’t claim to know much, but I have a 06 5.9 Cummins. Run rotalla to 12000 miles, switch to 5-30 royal purple. Sent new sample to Blackstone labs, got new oil numbers, then sent a 15000 mile oil sample, which I changed filters every 5000 miles and topped it back off. Results I could have went to 20000 , but safer at 15000. Numbers changed from new, which they are going to. Use anything it’s going to where out.
Of course the numbers will change from new. This is to be expected by everyone except Hermio and his magic Amsoil.
Additives fall out of suspension and not all additives dissolve
Wr are talking fuel here, which has very little additives in the first place. The additives designed for use in fuels most certainly dissolve into SOLUTION.
If they were a suspension, they would indeed settle out. Try an experiment: put some oil in a clear glass container and put it on a shelf. Leave it there for weeks and see if it settles out.
Some things never change, I see!
Smitty Smithsonite
ArboristSite Operative
I premix my 2 diesels at 200:1. One is a 1968, the other 1993. Both were designed for better diesel fuel, so if I want the pumps to last, it's a prerequisite.
FYI, neither need or require you to do that.
if anything was going to crap out it would have already. We saw a small window of injection components after ulsd was introduced with issues. It was short lived, and most of it wasn't just from the fuel. It was and Continues to be an easy way to get gullible people to blow money they don't need to. Replacing old equipment injection pumps for wear these days if far and few between, and I'm talking about customers that put more fuel through equipment in a week then you will in 5 years with zero additives used working in conditions that rival hell. We replace more injection components on modern equipment because people can't seem to understand they don't tolerate contamination.
