Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-10-2015, 01:39 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 78
Bio-diesel

On our recent vacation while looking for fuel what we encountered was that 5 percent bio... (max) diesel was nowhere to be found. Probably half the pumps had no labeling other than low sulfur diesel. The rest said the pump dispensed diesel that was between 5 and 20 percent bio...
Naturally when I went in to ask the answer ranged from shrugged shouders and " I don't. Know" to "whatever it says on the pump" HELP !!!
__________________

__________________
john.tucson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2015, 01:48 PM   #2
2012 Solera
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 983
Recent forum comments on this issue - see posts 22-25 on this thread:
Solera vs View/Navion
__________________

__________________
JLeising
2012 Solera "S"
Calif SF Bay Area
JLeising is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2015, 07:03 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,748
Ok, call me skeptical, but the oil level in the engine increases (post 24 I think). Now that seems hard to swallow. Anybody out there think thats possible. If it is, then your mobil 1 esp oil is contaminated, and that doesn't sound good. By the way, your MB has a sensor to tell you if your engine oil level is beyond spec, and will give you a dash warning indicator.

Way too much government IMO.
__________________
Still Kickin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2015, 07:24 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Still Kickin View Post
Ok, call me skeptical, but the oil level in the engine increases (post 24 I think). Now that seems hard to swallow. Anybody out there think thats possible. If it is, then your mobil 1 esp oil is contaminated, and that doesn't sound good. By the way, your MB has a sensor to tell you if your engine oil level is beyond spec, and will give you a dash warning indicator.

Way too much government IMO.
Yes, I'm afraid it is possible. You referenced Post #24...

Actually, I think it was Post #25, and I wrote it. It was informed (as I said) by other information, such as this thread from the sprinter-source.com forum:

Biodiesel - Sprinter-Forum

This thread contains links that also illustrate Mercedes' evolving position on this.

Yes, it is not only possible that your oil level could rise from extended use of certain bio-blends, it's fairly likely.
__________________
jdyson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2015, 09:14 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,748
Thanks, that forum post is quite enlightening. So much so I will re-post it here for Sprinter owners. AGAIN, it too much government. Leave us alone.

Forum post; After careful thought i really like the Unity line i have done lots of research and now have a chance to take the plunge however one issue remains the future of biodiesel <5

Since 2009, the state has required the use of a 2% biodiesel blend in all state-owned diesel-powered cars, and B20 biodiesel has become the rule, not the exception, at pumps around the state. Illinois, incidentally, is not alone in its use of biodiesel fuel. Other states that require a biodiesel blend include Alabama (5%), Colorado (20%), Florida (not specified), Kansas (2%), Kentucky (2%), Maryland (5%), Massachusetts (15%), Minnesota (B20 to B100), Missouri (B20), Nebraska (not specified), New Mexico (5%), New York (not specified), Ohio (not specified), South Carolina (5%), Virginia (2%), and Washington (not specified).

A statement in a Mercedes-Benz Biodiesel Information publication makes the automaker’s position crystal clear: “Diesel fuels containing a higher percentage of biodiesel, (e.g. B6 to B20) according to ASTM D7467 as well as straight biodiesel (B100/100%) ASTM D6751 may cause severe damage to your engine/fuel system and are not approved.” In case there are any lingering doubts, one need only read the last page: “Any damages caused by the use of such non-approved fuels will not be covered by the Mercedes-Benz Limited Warranty.” In the case of Mercedes-Benz, their advanced BlueTEC diesel engines inject some fuel on the exhaust stroke, but since biodiesel has a higher flash point than petroleum diesel, the biodiesel does not combust allowing the biodiesel to collect inside the crankcase of the engine itself. This crankcase sludging is irreversible and over time can lead to catastrophic engine failure.

These symptoms are showing up around 100k + - as i live in Canada the biodiesel is not a issue however the states and mexico are. As time goes by is biodiesel <5 getting hard to find in the states or mexico?
__________________
Still Kickin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2015, 08:54 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Still Kickin View Post
Thanks, that forum post is quite enlightening. So much so I will re-post it here for Sprinter owners. AGAIN, it too much government. Leave us alone.

Forum post; After careful thought i really like the Unity line i have done lots of research and now have a chance to take the plunge however one issue remains the future of biodiesel <5

Since 2009, the state has required the use of a 2% biodiesel blend in all state-owned diesel-powered cars, and B20 biodiesel has become the rule, not the exception, at pumps around the state. Illinois, incidentally, is not alone in its use of biodiesel fuel. Other states that require a biodiesel blend include Alabama (5%), Colorado (20%), Florida (not specified), Kansas (2%), Kentucky (2%), Maryland (5%), Massachusetts (15%), Minnesota (B20 to B100), Missouri (B20), Nebraska (not specified), New Mexico (5%), New York (not specified), Ohio (not specified), South Carolina (5%), Virginia (2%), and Washington (not specified).

A statement in a Mercedes-Benz Biodiesel Information publication makes the automaker’s position crystal clear: “Diesel fuels containing a higher percentage of biodiesel, (e.g. B6 to B20) according to ASTM D7467 as well as straight biodiesel (B100/100%) ASTM D6751 may cause severe damage to your engine/fuel system and are not approved.” In case there are any lingering doubts, one need only read the last page: “Any damages caused by the use of such non-approved fuels will not be covered by the Mercedes-Benz Limited Warranty.” In the case of Mercedes-Benz, their advanced BlueTEC diesel engines inject some fuel on the exhaust stroke, but since biodiesel has a higher flash point than petroleum diesel, the biodiesel does not combust allowing the biodiesel to collect inside the crankcase of the engine itself. This crankcase sludging is irreversible and over time can lead to catastrophic engine failure.

These symptoms are showing up around 100k + - as i live in Canada the biodiesel is not a issue however the states and mexico are. As time goes by is biodiesel <5 getting hard to find in the states or mexico?
To your point about the minutae associated with all of the clean diesel regulation (while I do understand the underlying rationale the govt used relative to reducing soot) the devil is in the details. For example, the computer programming around how DEF is used is in the gov't spec also. If the DEF becomes contaminated and the sensors deem it to be either diluted or of 'low quality' or the system that injects it fails, the result is that the emissions levels rise until it's fixed. We might think that should the DEF system fail, you'd get a non-critical check engine light, and then not be able to pass a vehicle inspection without getting it fixed? I mean, after all, the only thing DEF does is lower emissions levels, it does not affect the running of the engine or safety in any way.

We've all seen smoking gasoline engine cars polluting their way down the highway, right?

But, no sir, if our DEF systems fail the gov't spec requires that the vehicle be placed into limp-home-mode and /or disabled, necessitating a tow. Overkill, IMHO. But that has been debated and discussed at length to no avail.

On the subject of DPF, I suspect the next generation Sprinter will use a DEF injection system like the one Isuzu builds for GM to sell as the Duramax. This design injects a more closely metered amount of Diesel fuel directly into the DPF, thus avoiding the imprecise method from the original gov't spec of injecting it into the engine cylinder on the exhaust stroke and letting it wash thru the exhaust to settle in the DPF. The injection method greatly reduces (or maybe eliminates entirely?) the excess diesel fuel that gets drawn back into the engine oil - causing the oil level to rise when >5% biodiesel is used. So, in part, we're the victim of older DPF technology from the original spec (and we're not the only ones, other diesels use the design from the original spec also). Further engineering is needed to take this biodiesel issue off the table.

I've read that biodiesel actually has greater lubricity than ULSD, but with direct injection engines I'm not sure how much of a benefit that would be, compared to the earlier injector pump-style engines.

Other thoughts on this would be welcome and interesting to read...
__________________
jdyson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2015, 11:47 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,748
I disagree with several of your assumptions and will offer insight;

The Germans (Rudolf Deisel) invented the diesel engine, and they, the Germans, along with others of course, have been actively improving on it ever since. Daimler Benz, not the gov't ,developed blutec, in response to government emmision requirements beginning around 2009.

Now the facts; DEF is injected into the "exhaust" stream in the following way; " Exhaust leaves the engine and passes through a Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC), which reduces carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust. Next is the NOx Absorber Catalyst, or NAC, which removes and traps oxides of nitrogen (NOx is one of the chief elements in diesel pollution). During periods of lean operation (low fuel-to-air ratio) NOx is stored; under richer operating conditions (which can be created by manipulating the fuel injection) the NAC undergoes a regeneration process and releases ammonia into the exhaust. The ammonia is stored downstream in the Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) catalyst which uses it to further reduce NOx."

Then, "In between the NAC and SCR catalysts is a particulate filter that traps particulate emissions (soot). As the particulate filter becomes full, the engine computer manipulates the fuel injection process to raise the exhaust gas temperature, which in turn burns off"

MB's technology in BlueTec vehicles includes a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system that uses diesel exhaust fluid, and a system of NOx Adsorbers the automaker calls DeNO x , which uses an oxidizing catalytic converter and diesel particulate filter combined with other NO x reducing systems.

Then, the government decides to pay farmers to grow soy beans (the bio part of diesel for the most part) to add to good old fashion low sulpher diesel, and screw up what private industry spent millions developing for a cleaner burning engine. I repeat my stance, leave us alone.

As for a choice of an Isuzu diesel in a GM or MB, easy choice IMO.
__________________
Still Kickin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2015, 09:02 AM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Still Kickin View Post
I disagree with several of your assumptions and will offer insight;

The Germans (Rudolf Deisel) invented the diesel engine, and they, the Germans, along with others of course, have been actively improving on it ever since. Daimler Benz, not the gov't ,developed blutec, in response to government emmision requirements beginning around 2009.

Now the facts; DEF is injected into the "exhaust" stream in the following way; " Exhaust leaves the engine and passes through a Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC), which reduces carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust. Next is the NOx Absorber Catalyst, or NAC, which removes and traps oxides of nitrogen (NOx is one of the chief elements in diesel pollution). During periods of lean operation (low fuel-to-air ratio) NOx is stored; under richer operating conditions (which can be created by manipulating the fuel injection) the NAC undergoes a regeneration process and releases ammonia into the exhaust. The ammonia is stored downstream in the Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) catalyst which uses it to further reduce NOx."

Then, "In between the NAC and SCR catalysts is a particulate filter that traps particulate emissions (soot). As the particulate filter becomes full, the engine computer manipulates the fuel injection process to raise the exhaust gas temperature, which in turn burns off"

MB's technology in BlueTec vehicles includes a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system that uses diesel exhaust fluid, and a system of NOx Adsorbers the automaker calls DeNO x , which uses an oxidizing catalytic converter and diesel particulate filter combined with other NO x reducing systems.

Then, the government decides to pay farmers to grow soy beans (the bio part of diesel for the most part) to add to good old fashion low sulpher diesel, and screw up what private industry spent millions developing for a cleaner burning engine. I repeat my stance, leave us alone.

As for a choice of an Isuzu diesel in a GM or MB, easy choice IMO.
We make a couple of similar points, I think, relative to the gov't's involvement. They supplied the specs (design points) that the engineers had to use in designing the system. Some of those specs seem unreasonable, such as requiring a limp-home when the sensors detect poor DEF quality, or completely disabling the vehicle for DEF issues. We know the system can function without it, because DEF (being water-based) will freeze when the vehicle is parked for an extended time. The spec allows for operation for a time while the heaters in the DEF tank thaw out the fluid.

I think they should have spec'd it such that a generous 'number of starts remaining' approach was used for DEF quality issues, failed DEF sensors, etc as they did for low-fluid warnings.

But that's neither here nor there. Just, as you were, making a point about the gov'ts involvement in this. You about their hand in bio-diesel, me about some of the design points.

Your disagreement with my assumption about how the engine oil level rises was correct (I was mistaken about the details) and caused me to do further research, resulting in this link:

Do 2007+ OM642 Diesels have post combustion fuel injection for the DPF? - Sprinter-Forum

In post #2, direct injection into the DPF is mentioned as a cure, thus my comment about the isuzu design - in agreement with what you said, I don't hold the position that the duramax is an overall better diesel than MB. That's not what I said, just that the dpf injector seems like a better design than post combustion injection. The first DPFs from Ford (prior to DEF) came out in 2008 models of an F-250 that I owned, so I think that's around the time this started.

Post combustion injection caused fires from the exhaust, and a recall:



In the early models like mine the programming would start a regen of the DPF even if you were idling with the truck in park. After the recall, it would not regen unless you were running 45+ mph, and the dash display would tell you when a regen was needed, and when one was in process while you were driving.

We agree on one point for sure... The Gov't needs to Leave us alone. In this, and many other ways. We recognize the good and the bad from them.
__________________
jdyson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2015, 12:34 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,748
Thumbs up

MB designed a pieso ceramic injector that introduces more diesel "during", not after combustion at 23,000 psi. Yep, 23,000.

The government didn't and I repeat didn't spec anything. They mandated cleaner buring diesels in progressive stages. The government couldn't engineer themselves out of a room, even if the plans said it contained 10 doors.

Lets look at several examples of " psst performance". Forgive me from drifting off bio, but these go to the topic in an abstract way I think.

To manufacture Ethenol, the process generates more emissions to plant, fertilize, harvest, distil than the resulting energy derived, when compared to the refining and burning of petroleum. And, most don't know that there is less stored energy in ethenol that gasoline, resulting in less fuel economy. That in turn, results in burning more fuel to achieve the desired result. The government AGAIN at work.

Here is the greatest thing to happen in the area of petroleum;

That gentlemen from Oklahoma figured out how to drill deeper, and then turn the drill sideways at depthes never imagined, we, the good old USA, now produce more oil than Saudia Arabia. The Government had nothing to do with that. And the best part, we even havn't begun to drill federal controlled lands yet, but we will pretty soon.

Don't even get near "electric vehicles" as most don't even know 40% of the electric grid comes from COAL. So, when the tree huggers plug in, they think they are saving the enviroment. Ignorance truly is bliss in that senario, wouldn't you agree. I still say, leave us alone. Thank you and go RVing. We do like our fossil fuels, don't we.
__________________
Still Kickin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2015, 07:15 PM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Still Kickin View Post
MB designed a pieso ceramic injector that introduces more diesel "during", not after combustion at 23,000 psi. Yep, 23,000.

The government didn't and I repeat didn't spec anything. They mandated cleaner buring diesels in progressive stages. The government couldn't engineer themselves out of a room, even if the plans said it contained 10 doors.

Lets look at several examples of " psst performance". Forgive me from drifting off bio, but these go to the topic in an abstract way I think.

To manufacture Ethenol, the process generates more emissions to plant, fertilize, harvest, distil than the resulting energy derived, when compared to the refining and burning of petroleum. And, most don't know that there is less stored energy in ethenol that gasoline, resulting in less fuel economy. That in turn, results in burning more fuel to achieve the desired result. The government AGAIN at work.

Here is the greatest thing to happen in the area of petroleum;

That gentlemen from Oklahoma figured out how to drill deeper, and then turn the drill sideways at depthes never imagined, we, the good old USA, now produce more oil than Saudia Arabia. The Government had nothing to do with that. And the best part, we even havn't begun to drill federal controlled lands yet, but we will pretty soon.

Don't even get near "electric vehicles" as most don't even know 40% of the electric grid comes from COAL. So, when the tree huggers plug in, they think they are saving the enviroment. Ignorance truly is bliss in that senario, wouldn't you agree. I still say, leave us alone. Thank you and go RVing. We do like our fossil fuels, don't we.
Very true... Thanks for the insight.
__________________

__________________
jdyson is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diesel

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




ForestRiverForums.com is not in any way associated with Forest River, Inc. or its associated RV manufacturing divisions.


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 PM.