Here in Peru I don't have to bother... 5% biodiesel content in all diesel by law.
Hardly an unbiased opinion and a bogus, misrepresented study as well. The people who wrote the 'report' don't seem to understand that North America is not just the United States.
apart from the obvious ego-centrism (forgive them for their misfortune, I've learnt to blame their politically egocentric school curriculum not the person
), what made you think the report was bogus? I'm no expert on petrochemicals (but do interpret lab reports for a living) so I'm just curious which of the information provided is false. But that lab in particular simply wouldn't exist unless there was real world variation in fuel quality, and like any other business, they need to advertise to their potential clients, so that alone doesn't lead me to think its bogus by default... but yes, not completely unbiased.
In regards to the 'independent study' (not sure who gets the money from the purchase links to most products tested) report by the dude on dieselplace.com, I don't want to belittle the great effort that guy put in to do the study, I applaud him, but unfortunately the report itself has a few scientific shortcomings and I wouldn't apply the results except maybe for that of the B2. For example, a highly reputable lab performed the tests and its mentioned that replicate testing was done in another lab, but it never mentions if the results presented were an average of both lab's results or just from their own. To have statistical validity with so many different lubricants, the lab test should be run three to five times per additive at each lab depending on the initial variation found (you never get the same result twice even with standardized tests), but that makes the study 3 to 5 times more expensive. Chemically, the test should repeat all of that effort again with at least two different batches of treated fuel (from a pump), because some of the aftermarket additives would have constituents that could react with the typical additives added by fuel companies, that would interact and could either improve or worsen the results for any of them, as such it's not really applicable to real life because no-one uses those additives with the additive free fuel they mixed with. but that would also increase costs X3.
On top of that, unfortunately I reckon there's a large risk that the study was hijacked by Opti-Lube that we'll never be able to determine. While its clearly stated their product was the only one sent by the company, they could have sent absolutely anything for those tests because it wasn't on the market: a savy business-man could have sent a super mix regardless of whether it was prohibitively expensive to be economically viable, nor would it have needed any prior testing on actual motors... as their chemist would have known which standardized lab tests were going to be performed, so they only had to derive a liquid that mixed with diesel and gave optimum results in that specific test. My suspicion is heightened because their website now promotes that same forum-based test on their home page as its principal testimony. I wouldn't believe any of their product's test results until I saw chemical assay results of the product used in the study pre-sales (now too late for that) and what's now available on the shelf.
the same dieselplace.com guy also arranged an independent air filter study... that one appears to have been fully executed and reported by qualified lab staff and the nature of the test is much less susceptible to variation requiring replication, and it looks really good. it showed that you can't really beat OEM paper filters for filter working life and dust protection. I admire his curiosity, and i can't help but think he might have been a research scientist in another life or set of circumstances. what a legend!
but my mind somehow think it's helping for some sort of lubricity so I'm happy ..
