# Cetane Booster



## Rolandofgilead (Oct 29, 2021)

Hi everybody! Does anyone use cetane booster in their diesel? If so, what benefits do you see?


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

Higher cetane would help but BMW doesn't recommend aftermarket additives as you may know. Spend your money on oil analysis (Blackstone) and branded "top tier" fuel. I like the advantages of 0W30 LL12FE engine oil instead of the common 5W30 LL04 too. Motul and BMW (supplied by Shell) make them. This for the N57 535d (US/Canada) or rest of world 530d.


----------



## Nyc Dito (Jun 11, 2015)

Pierre Louis said:


> Higher cetane would help but BMW doesn't recommend aftermarket additives as you may know. Spend your money on oil analysis (Blackstone) and branded "top tier" fuel. I like the advantages of 0W30 LL12FE engine oil instead of the common 5W30 LL04 too. Motul and BMW (supplied by Shell) make them. This for the N57 535d (US/Canada) or rest of world 530d.


HI Pierre, curious as to the adbvantages of LL12FE over LL04. Im up for an oil change soon and want to know before hand.

Thanks.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

Nyc Dito said:


> HI Pierre, curious as to the adbvantages of LL12FE over LL04. Im up for an oil change soon and want to know before hand.
> 
> Thanks.


After looking at the oil spec inside the engine compartment, speaking with a BMW representative, and knowing the dealer used 5W30 LL04, I found an ad at the parts counter for the 0W30 LL12FE comparing the two: the LL12FE has better wear characteristics. Using such an oil made by Motul got me an extra 1.5 or so mpg's. So far it seems to be a very good oil as Blackstone oil analysis showed excellent characteristic at 10,500 or so miles of oil life.


----------



## alacey (Mar 14, 2018)

I use Hotshot's secret. Tested out Stanadyne, Power Service, XDP, and Hotshot's in both my diesel truck and car. I have an app that record every fill up on in both my diesel vehicles. Noticed the best fuel economy, quietness, and lowest engine vibration with Hotshot's.

The mileage showed no real improvement with Stanadyne, a slight improvement with Power Service, and the best improvement with XDP and Hotshot's according to my averages of several fill ups using each. I drive this car down the same 41 mile roads to and from work and it almost never gets used on the weekends for any other purpose because I generally drive my Jeep or truck on weekends. The quietness was about the same as the fuel economy with Stanadyne having no change and XDP & Hotshot's being the quietest. Vibration is where I really noticed a difference. I always had a slight vibration for a few seconds every time I came to a stop. With the Hotshot's and XDP, this vibration goes away. I chose Hotshots over XDP because it is cheaper and I only have to add an ounce of it per fill up.

My truck is a little harder to gauge since it does not do the same commute like my car does. However, I did notice the same improvements as my car but very slight. Although my truck is designed to operate at a lower cetane level than my car. My truck's engine is design for 45 cetane while I believe the BMW is 51 cetane. My state has a 45 cetane minimum(unlike the federal of 40 cetane that most states are at) so it is very unlikely I will notice much of an improvement in the truck since my state's cetane limit is exactly what my truck was designed and tuned for. My car is way more finicky on it's fuel than my truck, and I will definitely notice vibrations and noise difference with and without certain additives especially at lower temps.

I am sure others will disagree, but my experience from being in the heavy duty diesel industry for over 20 year and working for various diesel engine manufacturers is that additives do work when used properly. The problem with today's cars and why many manufacturers do not recommend them is due to emissions equipment. If you do not use them correctly and add too much then you can damage your emissions devices.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

alacey said:


> I use Hotshot's secret. Tested out Stanadyne, Power Service, XDP, and Hotshot's in both my diesel truck and car. I have an app that record every fill up on in both my diesel vehicles. Noticed the best fuel economy, quietness, and lowest engine vibration with Hotshot's.
> 
> The mileage showed no real improvement with Stanadyne, a slight improvement with Power Service, and the best improvement with XDP and Hotshot's according to my averages of several fill ups using each. I drive this car down the same 41 mile roads to and from work and it almost never gets used on the weekends for any other purpose because I generally drive my Jeep or truck on weekends. The quietness was about the same as the fuel economy with Stanadyne having no change and XDP & Hotshot's being the quietest. Vibration is where I really noticed a difference. I always had a slight vibration for a few seconds every time I came to a stop. With the Hotshot's and XDP, this vibration goes away. I chose Hotshots over XDP because it is cheaper and I only have to add an ounce of it per fill up.
> 
> ...


I guess its nice to know this anecdote but it would be a bit better if you had blinded which additive you were trying and recorded the same fuel station/pump etc.


----------



## Doug Huffman (Apr 25, 2015)

BMW diesel vacuum controlled motor mounts shift from soft to hard RPM dependent.


----------



## alacey (Mar 14, 2018)

Pierre Louis said:


> I guess its nice to know this anecdote but it would be a bit better if you had blinded which additive you were trying and recorded the same fuel station/pump etc.


As of late 2019 when I stopped using this car for anything other than my 41 mile commute, I only get my fuel from one Shell fuel station on my way to work. Mainly due to convenience. So the assumption that there is more than one fuel station is false. In regards to the blind study, I am not a scientist(although my wife is) and my goal was not to disprove any deniers. I already know that additives work from running many dyno cell tests using different fuels and additives when I worked for Cummins so my my goal was to see which one was the better choice.

Based on my time at Cummins, our testing showed that they do improve performance and efficiency over the fuels using the US Federal standards which is every state aside from Texas and California. We even had a third party company pull data samples from pumps across the US to find that most stations(even branded) did not meet the EMA recommendation using ASTM D 975 of a cetane level above 50 and scar rating of 460 WSD. Many only met the bear minimum federal standard of 40 cetane and 520 WSD.

EMA Consensus Position 

"_Cetane Number is a relative measure of the interval between the beginning of injection and autoignition of the fuel. Cetane Number is a year-round concern. The higher the number, the shorter the delay interval. Fuels with low Cetane Numbers will cause hard starting, rough operation, noise and increased smoke opacity. Current commercial fuel cetane requirements may not adequately address these customer satisfaction issues. Generally, diesel engines will operate better year-round on fuels with Cetane Numbers above 50, compared to fuels with cetane numbers of the national average of approximately 45. Cetane Number may be increased through the refining process or the blending of combustion ignition improving additives by fuel suppliers."_

BMW states that our diesels are designed to run on 51 cetane using ASTM D 975-xx (xx is the year it was last updated) standard which most stations in the US do not meet from data I have seen. Extra additives get my fuel to this recommendation. While my BMW can adapt to lower cetane levels just as a gasoline engine with variable timing can adapt to lower octane levels(to a certain point), it does so at the expense of performance and efficiency. 










So as I stated in my initial post, I know others may not agree and will staunchly defend their opinion against additives, but my opinion is based on my own personal and professional experiences. Although I do find it odd how I never comment or quote anyone who has this opinion against additives yet I will get flamed from the usual suspects if I even make one post for additives. Why is that? I am allowing you to have your opinion without debate, but I am not allowed to have mine without being quoted or opined against?


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

This is a sales pitch: Cummins Inc. Officially Recommends Power Service Diesel Kleen +Cetane and Diesel Fuel Supplement +Cetane Boost For Optimized Engine Performance | Cummins Inc.

Outcomes data? Nah.


----------



## alacey (Mar 14, 2018)

It is actually outcomes of data. You don't get to be the largest diesel engine manufacturer in the world without data. 

Due to third party finding that most US diesel does not meet spec, we started performing our own testing on additives. After all, we could not require our customers to meet a certain fuel spec if most of the fuel sold does not meet that spec so we decided to partner with an additive company that could. This was back in the late 2000's and the 2010 emissions regulations kind of put a wrench because we found that additives can effect the SCR and cause increased ash content clogging up the DPF sooner if not mixed properly with the current formulation at the time. It took several more years of testing and dyno hours to ensure the formulation will not harm emissions devices while still offering performance and efficiency benefits to the engine. 

Again, these are my opinion(and actual happenings) based on my personal and professional experiences with hundreds if not thousands of hours in a dyno test cell testing additives and different fuel packages on various engines. I am not sure what scientific engine testing you have performed to come to your conclusion, but it is your full right to have that conclusion just as it is my(and others) right to have our own. 

I am not sure why you hate additives so much that it compels you go out of your way and flame anyone that has a positive thing to say about them. Did additives hurt you or rub you the wrong way when you were younger or something? Why do you care if someone else favors the use of additives? How is it hurting you if someone else wants to use them? I just don't understand why you are so passionate and getting triggered about something out that does not effect you in any way.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

Where do you come from in your conclusions about my goals and biases? Are you projecting? I just want data. Simple as that. Otherwise its just advertising and business hype.


----------



## alacey (Mar 14, 2018)

I gave the OP my own personal data of me testing out four different cetane booster additives in my original which you discontented as anectodical. Since you discounting other peoples data as anecdotal, where is your data showing that additives do not boost engine performance. How many different additives did you personally test to come to your conclusion that none of them increase performance and/or efficiency. Was it using the same fuel? The same route? The same vehicle? 

How about your professional experiences? Have you worked for a fuel company, diesel engine manufacturer, or any other company testing additives to know they don't work? How many hours of testing on a engine dyno cell with these additives did you do to know they don't improve performance or efficiency? I understand that you cannot give me detailed data from work because it is likely proprietary, but you can shine some light on the type of experience and testing you did (if any) to come to your conclusion.

If you answer is no to all of this, then your opinion that additives don't work is just that, an opinion just like every else's. Which you have the right to have without being hassled just like those who have the opinion that additives work have the right to theirs without being hassled. Yet you seem compelled to hassle anyone who does not share your same opinion about additives.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

I don't have an opinion. I just want data. Otherwise its "category C evidence" = expert opinion at best.

It amazes me how many people on such forums buy into the sales hype on additives without experiencing logical conclusions from outcomes data that would tell if something is only marginally effective (if at all - including side effects, which you carefully mentioned can actually happen) vs. "do or die" important.


----------



## alacey (Mar 14, 2018)

Yes, you do have an opinion and you are pulling in any data that you feel confirms that opinion just like the Cummins announcement. One could have read that multiple ways, however, you read it as a sales pitch because it conforms with your predetermined outcome(aka biased opinion).

And I want the same from you. Otherwise its just an opinion just like everyone else's.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

alacey said:


> Yes, you do have an opinion and you are pulling in any data that you feel confirms that opinion just like the Cummins announcement. One could have read that multiple ways, however, you read it as a sales pitch because it conforms with your predetermined outcome(aka biased opinion).
> 
> And I want the same from you. Otherwise its just an opinion just like everyone else's.


Like I said, I don't have an opinion, which scientifically I wouldn't have without some data, which is conspicuously missing. I've always said that if aftermarket additives are so great, why doesn't the consumer ever get any outcome data? 
Obviously you are sensitive to this topic, having no basis for projecting onto me. No thank you.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

_Some "light" reading: The Science of Conjecture: Evidence and Probability Before Pascal_ (2001, JHU)



https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/healthevidence/types


----------



## alacey (Mar 14, 2018)

Pierre Louis said:


> Like I said, I don't have an opinion, which scientifically I wouldn't have without some data, which is conspicuously missing. I've always said that if aftermarket additives are so great, why doesn't the consumer ever get any outcome data?
> Obviously you are sensitive to this topic, having no basis for projecting onto me. No thank you.


Yes, you do have an opinion. Every time the topic of additives comes up in this and other BMW forums you belong to, you are one of the main antagonist arguing against them. You yourself stated in E90post.com that "I consider fuel additives to be more marketing than science." Just Googling "Pierre Louis" and "additives" displays page after page of post from various forums where you are flaming others for even insinuating that additives work. So don't tell me that you don't have a predetermined bias opinion on the matter(which itself is not based on any data other than they did you wrong on the few occasions that you used based on your past comments).

Although, one of your comments in MBworld did strike me as odd. You said "There is no standard for "premium diesel" regarding cetane." in context of saying that you don't need extra additives if you use premium fuel. Well, what makes fuel brand "premium" versus the same base diesel coming from the same refinery going to a non-premium gas station? Additive packages. What scientific data(that you saw before making this comment, not after) has led you to believe that what you consider as "premium" fuel is better than what you consider as non-premium fuel? Probably none, yet you have the opinion that "premium diesel" is better than whatever you consider as non-premium. Funny how you are willing to consider "premium diesel" as better (due to additives) without any scientific evidence, but if the argument is about additional additives, then all the sudden you turn into Bill Nye the science guy wanting to see science equations on how it is better.


----------



## HotGrbg (Apr 23, 2021)

I like ham.
Figured I’d lighten the mood 😁


----------



## alacey (Mar 14, 2018)

HotGrbg said:


> I like ham.
> Figured I’d lighten the mood 😁



You got some scientific data backing that up? Turkey is the only way to go and only my opinion matters!

j/k 😁


----------



## HotGrbg (Apr 23, 2021)

You want scientific data? Check out my waistline.
Also everybody knows that ham goes through a scientifically backed Yumification process during slow cooking.


----------



## Doug Huffman (Apr 25, 2015)

I am amused that some treat patent mixtures, not even compounds, as elemental. As easy as it is, everyone might do it with a bit of study.

Hot Shot’s Secret Diesel Extreme. SDS Number: HSSDE V.5.0 Revision Date: 06/25/2019

Composition / Information of Ingredients

2-Ethylhexyl nitrate. 49%. CAS 27247-96-7
Distillates, petroleum, hydrotreated light. 34%. CAS 64742-47-8
Solvent naptha, petroleum, heavy aromatic. 2 - 5%. CAS 64742-94-5
*Trade Secret. 3%. Trade Secret*
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene. <2%. CAS 95-63-6
Xylene. <1%. CAS 1330-20-7
Solvent naptha, petroleum, light aromatic. <1%. CAS 64742-95-6
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene. <1%. CAS 108-67-8
Ethylbenzene. <1%. CAS 100-41-4
Cumene. <1%. CAS 98-82-8
Napthalene. <1%. CAS 91-20-3
Amine Compounds. <1%. CAS 84605-20-9
1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene. <1%. CAS 526-73-8
n-Propyl benzene. <1%. CAS 103-65-1



https://hss-cdn-lubricationspeci.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/DE-SDS-V5.pdf





http://assets.suredone.com/2158/documents/LubricityFormula_SafetyDataSheet.pdf


----------



## alacey (Mar 14, 2018)

Doug Huffman said:


> I am amused that some treat patent mixtures, not even compounds, as elemental. As easy as it is, everyone might do it with a bit of study.
> 
> Hot Shot’s Secret Diesel Extreme. SDS Number: HSSDE V.5.0 Revision Date: 06/25/2019
> 
> ...



I know that Ethylhexyl nitrate Is the same additive fuel refineries use to boost the cetane levels in their diesel fuel. It will either get added at the refinery if the tanker truck is going to deliver to station that use the same additive packages or it will get added at the time of deliver when the tanker truck pumps the fuel into the fuel station's storage tank. So I am not sure why the big stink about adding a little more when it comes out of that same fuel stations tank(that they just added additives when the fuel went in) if the fuel does meet the minimum cetane number of 51 that our engines where designed to run on. 

Had to get my wife to decipher those compounds. She is the formulation scientist, not me. Although it is for a pharmaceutical company, not petroleum. I know it is common to have "trade secret" ingredients to some of the products her company produces. And yes, the active ingredient that is the "trade secret" can be as little as 1% in some of these products. Yet we take these medicines all the time and no one hardly asks for the science behind why or how it works before taking them.

Same goes with certain fuel brands that people seem to favor. Most people don't know or have ever scene the science behind why these brands are better than all of the other stations other than her-say from other people's experiences, their own experiences, or the fuel brand's marketing. So why is it that one needs the science behind aftermarket additives and not their favorite fuel brand even though it is mostly that companies additives(which are generally added in the delivery process right before they go into your tank) that make that brand different than the others. Doesn't make sense unless one already has a predetermined mindset(biased opinion) that one is bad so they ask for all the proof in the world, and the other is good so they don't need the same proof.


----------



## Doug Huffman (Apr 25, 2015)

Never heard of a <<formulation scientist>>, not even from my Doctor of Pharmacy daughter that compounded at her pharmacy in Maui.

Stuff with no side effects generally has no effect at all.


----------



## alacey (Mar 14, 2018)

Doug Huffman said:


> Never heard of a <<formulation scientist>>, not even from my Doctor of Pharmacy daughter that compounded at her pharmacy in Maui.
> 
> Stuff with no side effects generally has no effect at all.



Wow! Every pharmaceutical company that manufactures drugs has a formulation scientist. The non-technical term is R&D scientist. They are the ones who formulate and develop the drugs. In her case, if it is new drug, then the customer will come to her with an active ingredient and the way they want the medicine delivered(solid, semi-solid, liquid, gas, mint flavored, etc...). Her job is to formulate the drug within those specifications and do stability test to ensure the drug will be stable within the timeframe of the expiration date. If she tasked with knocking off a name brand drug with a generic one, then she will break down the name brand formula percentages and active ingredients to test them until she has the desired result.

There are formulation scientist in many industries, not just pharmaceutical.

WHAT DOES A FORMULATION SCIENTIST DO?

Glassdoor- Formulation Scientists Jobs

Just because one does not know something, does not mean it doesn't exists.


----------

