1. Missed the live Ask the Expert event?
    Catch up on the conversation about fertilization strategies for success with the experts at Koch Turf & Ornamental in the Fertilizer Application forum.

    Dismiss Notice

Off road fuel vs On road fuel

Discussion in 'Tractors' started by o-so-n-so, Feb 26, 2003.

  1. Dirty Water

    Dirty Water LawnSite Fanatic
    Messages: 6,794

    Wa is required to sell low sulfur diesal at all pumps now, even at the offroad ones.
  2. DKinWA

    DKinWA LawnSite Member
    Messages: 76

    Jon, is this new legislation for washington state?, because I've not heard this before. It just so happens my Pettit bill came today and there's lines for both high sulfur off road and low sulfur road diesel. Even the CFN (Pettit is part of CFN) off road pumps I use still say "high sulfur".
  3. Dirty Water

    Dirty Water LawnSite Fanatic
    Messages: 6,794

    Perhaps I'm wrong, I just know that the one station I can get pink at here says "low sulfur offroad" on the pump.
  4. anteater6788

    anteater6788 LawnSite Member
    Messages: 83

    I think that the next set of EPA regulations for '06 or '07 will require the off road diesel to be low sulfur diesel as well. I wouldn't worry about either hurting the engine components, alot of the diesel engines out there are used in both on road and off road applications with the main difference being the difference to meet the difference in EPA regulations.

    UNISCAPER LawnSite Bronze Member
    Messages: 1,426

    Mack will be producing a 16 liter, 700 HP engine developing 1600 ft lbs of torque at 1900 RPM for 2007. It uses a Maxidyne variable pitch turbo that is calibrated to the amount of weight the truck will pull under various conditions.

    They completely redesigned the engine to accept sulfurless fuels without eating the injection pump and valves prematurely.
    We have a dilema upon us with the extraction of sulfer from fuels. The process is similar to the way that coffee is freeze-dryed. The result, is tiny microscopic particles left behind that wear injection pumps and valves faster in engines that were designed with the intent that sulfer would be used as a lubricant. A band-aid fix is to run a good fuel conditioner or a similar additive. What the liberoids in the EPA failed to do once again was add some very important criteria when they pulled their numbers on particulants from diesel exhaust. They tested brand new engines on dynos in laboratory conditions. what they forgot is that by running the engines with the new fuels, they will wear out fster than with sulfer. When you test the same diesel after 300,000miles running sulferless fuels, the additional wear and looser tolerances produced more garbage than the engine running sulfer fuel with the same milage. Now, in reality, you got an independant trucker eeecking out his living with a rig. If his truck is still running well, do you think for a minute, he will down it to exchange a $3,000.00 injector pump? Nope. he is going to keep running it until it shows loss of power. So, once again, our government hard at work to screw up what worked very well.
  6. lb59

    lb59 LawnSite Member
    Messages: 106

    How can switching between paying and not paying tax on it cause a problem?
  7. lb59

    lb59 LawnSite Member
    Messages: 106

    There is no sulfur in the red dye.
  8. lb59

    lb59 LawnSite Member
    Messages: 106

  9. lb59

    lb59 LawnSite Member
    Messages: 106

    1*What it boils down to is there is only one fuel with 2 prices on it.
  10. lb59

    lb59 LawnSite Member
    Messages: 106

    Non taxable

Share This Page