Quote from: billswan on February 22, 2015, 01:03:50 PM
cujet
I don't post much anymore but do try to read at least some of what is posted and this thread sure brings back memories. Went back and reread the first few posts and noticed that was when spencer was still posting. He sure was adamant with the fact as he seen it that WMO was a better fuel for waste oil fired heaters than diesel engines. And I see it about the same way. I sure won't argue like he did but he was right at least in slow speed lister like engines.
Not sure why some engines seem to tolerate WMO better but lister-oids sure don't. At least not the ones that are pushed to the limit. as I did with both of my single's.
I will say that posters like rbodell do seem to have better luck but he was treating his oil to reduce acid as best as i can remember and after seeing a video of his engine running I will say it was running at a lower power out put level. I am thinking that is causing his better results.
MY ENGINE RUNS AT FULL POWER WHEN GENERATING ELECTRICITY OR IT WOULD NOT PRODUCE ADEQUATE POWER. I DO RUN IT SLOWER WHEN JUST CHARGING BATTERIES
Now back to my experience with burning wmo in my boiler that heats my farm shop. I go through about 1400 gallons a year and I can attest to the fact that there is sure a lot of ash in 1400 gallons. I remember the post that spencer put up showing the bucket fulls he pulled out of his boiler, it works the same for me on this side of the pond.
I CAN NOT "SPECULATE" ON HEATING WITH WMO, I HAVE NOT DONE IT AND IT HAS NO CONNECTION TO RUNNING AN ENGINE ON IT.
I will speculate that if a car type of diesel was run on a high % of wmo and was driven casually it might work. But take the same engine bolt a gen head to it and push it to 80 to 90 % full out put it might suffer the same fate as the single's I spoke of above.
WHEN PEOPLE "SPECULATED" WITHOUT ACTUALLY RUNNING IT ON WMO, THEY SAID I WOULD RUIN MY ENGINE. AFTER ABOUT 8 OR 9 YEARS WHEN I PULL THE HEAD EVERYTHING HAS FACTORY SPECS. THE FUEL SYSTEM HAS HAD WMO IN IT FOR THE SAME LENGTH OF TIME. IT WORKS PERFECTLY.
THE ONLY THING DIFFERENT IS THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE TO REMOVE THE HEAD AND SCRAPE THE CARBON OFF THE PISTON AS RECOMMENDED BY THE MANUFACTURER. IT NOT ONLY DOES NOT FORM, BUT THE CARBON IN THE WMO (WHICH MAKES IT BLACK) IS ALSO BURNED.
DURING MY RESEARCH I CAME ACROSS A GUY THAT WAS RUNNING A GM 671 DIESEL TRUCK ENGINE ON WMO FOR OVER 30 YEARS. IN THE BEGINNING, HE DID NOT TREAT THE WMO OTHER THAN A RAG FILTER AND THE PH CAUSED DAMAGE TO THE INJECTORS AND HIGH PRESSURE PUMP AFTER ABOUT A YEAR. ONCE HE TREATED THE PH HE HAD NO MORE PROBLEM WITH THE INJECTOR PUMP AND INJECTORS.
I WON'T BE "SPECULATING" ABOUT RUNNING IT IN A VEHICLE EITHER, AS SOON AS I GET MOVED TO ALASKA, I WILL BE GETTING A DIESEL VEHICLE AND TRYING IT MYSELF.
WHEN THE "SPECULATORS" SAID I COULDN'T RUN AN ENGINE ON WMO I PAID 3,000 DOLLARS FOR AN ENGINE TO FIND OUT WHY. NOW WHEN "SPECULATORS" SAY I WILL RUIN A CAR ENGINE WITH WMO, I WILL BE SPENDING ANOTHER COUPLE THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR A DIESEL VEHICLE TO FIND OUT WHY. UNLIKE THE "SPECULATORS", I WILL KNOW WHY.
But as others have argued they have had better results..................
Billswan