Hi all, 1st time poster but been viewing for a while. Good site Mopar :thumbsup . I've got 3 qts of this Valvoline Marine dino left over from the summer (for the boat) and I was thinking of burning it up in the 6.0. It has pretty decent looking specs. for a dino and the description of its mixability sounds good too. What the heck right? Gotta use it in something. http://www.valvoline.com/products/Outbo ... MMA%20(BIA)%20Certified%202-Cycle%20Engine%20Oil.pdf Anyways what do you all think. snoboy

Fixed you double post there Keydl.. LOL But its true the standards of fuel change on us and they would never say anything negative to hurt business so of course ULSD is suggested for use in all diesel fuel engine regardless of the fact you engine was designed for LSD (500 ppm sulfur). Of course the labs would never waste money on testing if they don't have to... :wow

I think that the design of both engines fuel systems predates limitations on how to make diesel from the government other than that they post the cetane in some states.Most of the design changes in mechanical injection were pretty well set by the middle 60's with only refinements for longer life and cheaper manufacture cost.They got a dose of 3rd world reality with the GM 5.7, not a large safety factor and most that worked on them did not follow the book. Even at the dealers shop - I was in a Buick shop in the early 70's and moved on to an AC tractor shop when the EPA sent a letter promising a $2500 fine for making the cars run well at over 5000 ft altitude. Each car. The next 10 years the air pollution got a lot worse, was the letter part of the cause? It made a difference in the shop where it was posted, the dyno was traded for a 3 gas analyser. Dad closed his shop and worked as shop forman for Chev until he retired. He took 11 of the 14 help with him to Chev. Between 72 and the early 80's there was no altitude compensation for gas engines, just turboed diesel would run properly. By the mid 90's the fuel injection computers worked correctly at 10,000 ft.If I have to buy replacement parts and they are current production, they will probably work with the current fuel and have a normal service life. But if they are old inventory.....When the LSD came it mostly only did in the high hours pump seals - the competence and honesty of the shop was the difference between a $200 seal and a $5000 bill for the same seal and the pump it was in. Local shop and a out of state dealer.You followed the dealers advise and bought a pump but then the connection with the safety sheets pointed out the advertising that the additive makers was deceptive - as proved by the thedieselplace tests that you post. I read a little of the posts ( I paid a lot of money for this mouse milk because of the advertising and I can't be wrong - so you are insane ). If that had not got your competitive spirit up I would probably not found the 2 cycle posts.I still need to get a paste piece to answer the - 2cycle is not designed for diesel - stuff. 2 2cycle is designed for reciprocating engines. Diesel reciprocates as opposed the the Mazda rotary. It may have worked for the short seal life on the rotary engine as well.My opinion is still that the increased fuel mileage comes from better lube on the upper piston ring and that engines with moly rings will not show much increase but chrome rings will.keydl

Keydl, the last sentence in your above post about the chrome vs moly rings, brings up a past memory from a thread I asked in thedieselgarage some time ago. I went into the GM Duramax section and asked those guys if they were running 2cycle in there Dmax's. Most responded saying they lost mpg's running 2cycle. A very few responded saying they run it for lubricity purposes. I wonder if the Dmax engine is moly ringed? My opinion is the 2cycle is good for everything in the fuel system and cylinders. It seems that the most popular users of 2cycle are us Cummins and Powerstroke owners. All I know is, 2cycle makes a seat of the pants difference in the way my truck runs. HarryUpdate=I went back and checked that thread in TDG, MoparMan enlightend them later in the thread, suggested they try a lighter dose of 2cycle, like 200:1, one guy tried it and responded with positive results. So 2cycle is good, even in the Dmax. Harry

Chrome is a hard material and not very slippery, cast iron rings are a specialty for racing and other problem applications, moly rings are a little higher priced, the kind of perk that you would expect in a high priced engine ( maybe ).Chrome color on the rings means that, they are not quite so shinny after use and when the chrome wears off the cast iron color shows - I am not aware of any engine new from the factory with cast iron rings.Molly rings are black and turn over during assembly with less effort, the last 300 Ford that I put togather had a little difference on the cam and a 2 deg key for cam timing and molly rings. In just under 2k miles the fuel mileage had come up about 2 mpg form 9.1 to 11 on a ton truck. I replaced the engine because the front main was shimmed, all the bearings gaged out with plastigage except the front. Feeling poor and needing the truck I bought 2 sets of mains and shimmed the bearing and got a core to rebuild so I could just swap engines. The molly rings were $15 more but I think that came back in fuel savings in 4-5 months.keydl