Do you guys put anything in you fuel,to help out,I was reading this is bad for old diesels? Iam using at little bit 2 cyc ashless oil in more fuel for lube.

As little as 2% BioDiesel added to the ULSD makes up for the lack of Lubricity.

EDIT:
As you'll note on reply #11 below 2Cycle ashless is number seven on the list
as opposed to BioDiesel being number one.

__________________
'84 300SD sold
124.128

Per ASTM requirements, ULSD has the same lubricity as LSD before it. Its a non-issue.

__________________
Terry Allison
N. Calif. & Boca Chica, Panama

09' E320 Bluetec 77k (USA)
09' Hyundai Santa Fe Diesel 48k (S.A.)

I've been running ULSD for two years now, with zero issues so far.

[ALERT this is a RePost] [All Ostriches to conceal craniums]

ULSD NRC Findings (1)
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001
October 12, 2006
NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2006-22: NEW ULTRA-LOW-SULFUR DIESEL FUEL OIL
COULD ADVERSELY IMPACT DIESEL ENGINE
PERFORMANCE
ADDRESSEES
All holders of operating licenses for nuclear power reactors, except those who have
permanently ceased operations and have certified that fuel has been permanently removed
from the reactor vessel.
PURPOSE
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this information notice (IN) to alert
licensees to the potential for new ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel oil to adversely impact
engine performance. It is expected that recipients will review the information for applicability to
their facilities and consider actions, as appropriate, to avoid similar problems. However,
suggestions contained in this IN are not NRC requirements; therefore, no specific action or
written response is required.
DESCRIPTION OF CIRCUMSTANCES
In January 2001 and in June 2004, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized
the Clean Diesel Trucks and Buses Rule and the Clean Nonroad Diesel Rule, respectively, with
more stringent standards for new diesel engines and fuels
(http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/fuels/diesel/diesel.htm). The EPA rules require a reduction in the
sulfur content of highway diesel fuel from its current level of 500 parts per million (ppm) (low
sulfur diesel, or LSD) to 15 ppm (ULSD). Refiners were required to start producing the
cleaner-burning diesel fuel ULSD, for use in highway vehicles beginning June 1, 2006. The
EPA requires sulfur reductions for land-based nonroad diesel fuel to be accomplished in two
steps, with an interim step from currently uncontrolled levels to a 500 ppm cap starting in
June 2007 and the final step to 15 ppm in June 2010. Although the EPA requirements for the
15 ppm ULSD do not take effect until 2010 for nonroad diesel fuel, several nuclear power plant
licensees have received shipments of ULSD. The California Air Resources Board regulations
require that all California users of diesel fuel oil transition to ULSD fuel oil by June 1, 2006.
Some licensees have already received (and all licensees will eventually receive) ULSD fuel oil
from petroleum product refiners, distributors, and wholesalers and may have started using this
fuel in diesel engines that provide functions important to safety. Examples of diesel engines
ML062710079

__________________
'84 300SD sold
124.128

ULSD NRC findings (2)
IN 2006-22
Page 2 of 5
providing functions important to safety include: Emergency diesel generators (EDGs), dieseldriven
fire pumps, diesel-driven auxiliary feedwater pumps, diesel-driven essential service water
makeup pumps, diesel-driven instrument air compressors, security diesel generators, safe
shutdown facility diesel generators, diesel generators for emergency preparedness and
response functions, and station blackout diesel generators.
There are several diesel fuel properties other than sulfur concentration that change as a result
of moving to ULSD that may adversely effect the engine performance including:
Energy Content
In general, the processing required to reduce sulfur to 15 ppm also reduces the aromatics
content and density of diesel fuel, resulting in a reduction in volumetric energy content
(BTU/gallon). The expected reduction in energy content is 1.2 percent or more. Less energy
content of the fuel can reduce the instantaneous output rating of the diesel engine. The
reduced output rating may be less than the value specified in the plant’s design and licensing
basis, potentially rendering the diesel inoperable.
The reduced energy capacity of the ULSD may result in increased fuel consumption such that
the onsite diesel fuel storage capacity for the emergency diesel generators may be insufficient
to satisfy the plant’s design and licensing basis for diesel operation duration before offsite
replenishment is needed.
The reduced energy capacity may also lengthen the amount of time needed for the emergency
diesel generators to reach the required speed and voltage.
Fuel Particulate Build-up Increases
Additives to increase lubricity and to inhibit corrosion used by different refineries and wholesale
suppliers can react or become unstable in storage, which can result in increased fuel
particulates that may foul or plug filters and fuel injection equipment, and can affect suitability of
some testing methods. Some nuclear plant licensees using ULSD have observed an increase
in the rate of particulate buildup in samples from their diesel fuel oil storage tanks.
Fuel System Seal Leaks
Non-nuclear industry operating experience using ULSD shows an increased incidence of fuel
system leaks at points where elastomers (O-rings) are used to seal joints, with most leaks
occurring at the fuel pump and injectors. The evidence to date suggests the problem is linked
to a reduction in the aromatics content of the ULSD which affects seal swelling, as does seal
material and age of the material.
Compatibility with Lubricating Oil
As discussed in NRC IN 96-67, “Vulnerability of Emergency Diesel Generators to Fuel
Oil/Lubricating Oil Incompatibility,” lubricating oil contains an additive package that neutralizes
the products of combustion, most importantly sulfuric acid, to prevent engine corrosion. With

__________________
'84 300SD sold
124.128

ULSD NRC findings (3)
IN 2006-22
Page 3 of 5
reduced amount of sulfur, there is more unreacted additive in the lubricating oil, which may
result in the formation of deposits when some of the oil is burned. These deposits can build up
behind the piston rings, forcing the rings to extrude and come into contact with the cylinder liner
wall, resulting in scuffing.
Microbial Growth
Diesel fuel that was desulfured at the refinery through hydrocracking (versus hydrotreatment)
may have a greater propensity for microbial growth due to an increased concentration of
n-alkanes (linear molecules).
Incompatible Metals
There are no known compatibility issues with aluminum, carbon steel, stainless steel, and
bronze. However, copper and zinc are incompatible with ULSD because both are oxidative
catalysts that will accelerate the formation of sediments, gels, and soaps (American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) D975, Appendix X2.7.2).
Lubricity
Lubricity is a measure of the fuel’s ability to lubricate and protect the various parts of the
engine’s fuel injection system from wear. The processing required to reduce sulfur to 15 ppm
also removes naturally-occurring lubricity agents in diesel fuel. Rotary and distributor type fuel
pumps are completely fuel lubricated resulting in high sensitivity to fuel lubricity. Refiners treat
the diesel fuel with additives on a batch to batch basis to ensure adequate lubricity. Therefore,
receipt of ULSD with inadequate lubricity is possible but unlikely.
BACKGROUND
Applicable Regulatory Documents
General Design Criterion (GDC) 17, “Electric Power Systems,” of Appendix A, “General Design
Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants,” to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part
50, “Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,” requires that an onsite electric
power system and an offsite electric power system be provided to permit functioning of
structures, systems, and components important to safety. In addition, GDC 17 contains
requirements concerning system capacity, capability, independence, redundancy, availability,
testability, and reliability. Appendix B, “Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and
Fuel Reprocessing Plants,” to 10 CFR Part 50 establishes overall quality assurance
requirements for the design, construction, and operation of structures, systems, and
components important to safety.

__________________
'84 300SD sold
124.128

ULSD NRC findings (4)
IN 2006-22
Page 4 of 5
Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.137, Revision 1, “Fuel Oil Systems for Standby Diesel Generators”
dated October 1979, describes a method acceptable to the NRC staff for complying with the
Commission’s regulations regarding diesel fuel oil systems for standby diesel generators and
assurance of adequate diesel fuel oil quality. RG 1.137 states that Appendix B to American
National Standards Institute (ANSI) N195-1976 should be used as a basis for a program to
ensure the initial and continuing quality of diesel fuel oil as supplemented by eight additional
provisions described in the RG for maintaining the properties and quality of diesel fuel oil.
Related NRC Generic Communications
NRC IN 96-67, “Vulnerability of Emergency Diesel Generators to Fuel Oil/Lubricating Oil
Incompatibility,” dated December 19, 1996. This IN alerted addressees to a finding involving
degradation of the power block assembly of two EDGs caused by an incompatibility of the
lubricating oil with a low-sulfur-content diesel fuel oil.
NRC IN 91-46, “Degradation of Emergency Diesel Generator Fuel Oil Delivery Systems,” dated
July 18, 1991. This IN alerted addressees to potential inoperability of multiple EDGs resulting
from common cause degradations: (1) degraded diesel fuel oil delivery systems and (2) failure
to meet technical specification (TS) testing requirements intended to detect potentiallydegraded
quality of the diesel fuel oil stored onsite.
NRC Generic Letter (GL) 83-26, “Clarification of Surveillance Requirements for Diesel Fuel
Impurity Level Tests.” This GL provided licensees revised surveillance provisions for diesel fuel
oil impurity level tests to clearly reflect the relationship between the Standard TS testing
requirements for diesel fuel oil impurity levels; guidance given in RG 1.137, Revision 1, and
ANSI N195-1976 (ASTM D270, ASTM D975 and ASTM D2274); and the NRC staff review
performed in accordance with Standard Review Plan Sections 9.5.4 through 9.5.8.
DISCUSSION
In January 2001 and in June 2004, the EPA finalized the Clean Diesel Trucks and Buses Rule
and the Clean Nonroad Diesel Rule, respectively, with more stringent standards for new diesel
engines and fuels that require a reduction in diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm. Some
licensees have already received, and all will eventually receive, this ULSD. As described
above, the ULSD has a number of properties that have the potential to degrade or render
inoperable the associated diesel engine or may create a condition that is inconsistent with
current plant design and licensing bases. This ULSD issue is of particular concern because it
effects all licensee diesel generators that are safety-related and/or important to safety, thereby,
presenting a possible common mode failure. Licensees can evaluate the potential impacts of
ULSD and can take measures to ensure the plant is consistent with the current design and
licensing basis and prevent the diesels from being rendered inoperable or significantly
degraded.

__________________
'84 300SD sold
124.128

ULSD NRC findings (5)
IN 2006-22
Page 5 of 5
CONTACT
This information notice requires no specific action or written response. Please direct any
questions about this matter to the technical contacts listed below or the appropriate Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) project manager.
Ho K. Nieh, Acting Director /RA/
Division of Policy and Rulemaking
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Technical Contacts: Patrick Finney, RI Robert Wolfgang, NRR/DCI
610-337-5344 301-415-1624
E-mail: pwf@nrc.gov E-mail: rjw1@nrc.gov
Timothy Mitts, NRR/DIRS Max Schneider, RI
301-415-4067 860-447-3170
E-mail: tmm5@nrc.gov E-mail: sms2@nrc.gov
Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site,
http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections.

__________________
'84 300SD sold
124.128

Credit to "Gunship Pilot"
of Rawalpindi,Lahore,Pakistan

gentlemen ! here is a study which scientifically proves that whether the oil should be added or not......I think this will clarify many of the doubts which we have.......

Study
The following are the preliminary results of a research study on diesel fuel Lubricity Additives. There is likely to be further commentary and explanation added at a future time.

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this research was to determine the ability of multiple diesel fuel additives to replace the vital lubricity component in ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfer Diesel) fuel.

HISTORY:

ULSD fuel is the fuel currently mandated for use in all on road diesel engines. This fuel burns cleaner and is less polluting than it’s predecessor, called Low Sulfer Diesel Fuel. Low sulfer fuel contained less than 500 ppm of sulfer. ULSD contains 15 ppm or less.
As diesel fuel is further refined to remove the polluting sulfer, it is inadvertently stripped of its lubricating properties. This vital lubrication is a necessary component of the diesel fuel as it prevents wear in the fuel delivery system. Specifically, it lubricates pumps, high pressure pumps and injectors. Traditional Low sulfer diesel fuel typically contained enough lubricating ability to suffice the needs of these vital components. ULSD fuel, on the other hand, is considered to be very “dry” and incapable of lubricating vital fuel delivery components. As a result, these components are at risk of premature and even catastrophic failure when ULSD fuel is introduced to the system. As a result, all oil companies producing ULSD fuel must replace the lost lubricity with additives. All ULSD fuel purchased at retail fuel stations SHOULD be adequately treated with additives to replace this lost lubricity. The potential result of using inadequately treated fuel, as indicated above, can be catastrophic. There have been many documented cases of randomly tested samples of diesel fuel. These tests prove that often times the fuel we purchase is not adequately treated and may therefore contribute to accelerated wear of our fuel delivery systems. For this reason it may be prudent to use an after market diesel fuel additive to ENSURE adequate lubrication of the fuel delivery system. Additionally, many additives can offer added benefits such as cetane improver, and water separators or emulsifiers.

CONTENT:

In this study we will test multiple diesel fuel additives designed to replace lost lubricity. The primary component of this study is a side-by-side laboratory analysis of each additive’s ability to replace this vital lubricity. Additionally, claims of improving cetane, water separation or emulsification, bio-diesel compatibility and alcohol content will be noted. These notes were derived from information that was readily available to consumers (via the label and internet information) and none of this information has been evaluated for validity and/or performance. Cetane information has only been noted if the word “cetane” was used in the advertising information. The words “improves power” has not been translated to mean “improves cetane” in this evaluation. Information on alcohol content is provided by indicating “contains no alcohol”. Omission of the words “contains no alcohol” does not imply that it does contain alcohol. This information was simply missing in the information available to a consumer. However, the possibility of a form of alcohol in these products is possible. Additionally, information on dosages and cost per tankful are included for comparison purposes.

How Diesel Fuel Is Evaluated For Lubricating Ability:

Diesel fuel and other fluids are tested for lubricating ability using a device called a “High Frequency Reciprocating Rig” or HFRR. The HFRR is currently the Internationally accepted, standardized method to evaluate fluids for lubricating ability. It uses a ball bearing that reciprocates or moves back and forth on a metal surface at a very high frequency for a duration of 90 minutes. The machine does this while the ball bearing and metal surface are immersed in the test fluid (in this case, treated diesel fuel). At the end of the test the ball bearing is examined under a microscope and the “wear scar” on the ball bearing is measured in microns. The larger the wear scar, the poorer the lubricating ability of the fluid. Southwest Research runs every sample twice and averages the size of the wear scar.
The U.S. standard for diesel fuel says a commercially available diesel fuel should produce a wear scar of no greater than 520 microns. The Engine Manufacturers Association had requested a standard of a wear scar no greater than 460 microns, typical of the pre-ULSD fuels. Most experts agree that a 520 micron standard is adequate, but also that the lower the wear scar the better.
__________________

__________________
'84 300SD sold
124.128

Credit to "Gunship Pilot"
of Rawalpindi,Lahore,Pakistan


METHOD:

An independent research firm in Texas was hired to do the laboratory work. The cost of the research was paid for voluntarily by the participating additive manufacturers. Declining to participate and pay for the research were the following companies: Amsoil and Power Service. Because these are popular products it was determined that they needed to be included in the study. These products were tested using funds collected by diesel enthusiasts at “dieselplace.com”. Additionally, unconventional additives such as 2-cycle oil and used motor oil were tested for their abilities to aid in diesel fuel lubricity. These were also paid for by members of “dieselplace.com”.
The study was conducted in the following manner:
-The Research firm obtained a quantity of “untreated” ULSD fuel from a supplier. This fuel was basic ULSD fuel intended for use in diesel engines. However, this sample was acquired PRIOR to any attempt to additize the fuel for the purpose of replacing lost lubricity. In other words, it was a “worst case scenario, very dry diesel fuel” that would likely cause damage to any fuel delivery system. This fuel was tested using the HFRR at the Southwest Research Laboratory. This fuel was determined to have a very high HFRR score of 636 microns, typical of an untreated ULSD fuel. It was determined that this batch of fuel would be utilized as the baseline fuel for testing all of the additives. The baseline fuel HFRR score of 636 would be used as the control sample. All additives tested would be evaluated on their ability to replace lost lubricity to the fuel by comparing their scores to the control sample. Any score under 636 shows improvement to the fuels ability to lubricate the fuel delivery system of a diesel engine.

BLIND STUDY:

In order to ensure a completely unbiased approach to the study, the following steps were taken:
Each additive tested was obtained independently via internet or over the counter purchases. The only exceptions were Opti-Lube XPD and the bio-diesel sample. The reason for this is because Opti-Lube XPD additive was considered “experimental” at the time of test enrollment and was not yet on the market. It was sent directly from Opti-Lube company. The bio-diesel sample was sponsored by Renewable Energy Group. One of their suppliers, E.H. Wolf and Sons in Slinger, Wisconsin supplied us with a sample of 100% soybean based bio-diesel. This sample was used to blend with the baseline fuel to create a 2% bio-diesel for testing.
Each additive was bottled separately in identical glass containers. The bottles were labeled only with a number. This number corresponded to the additive contained in the bottle. The order of numbering was done randomly by drawing names out of a hat. Only Spicer Research held the key to the additives in each bottle.
The additive samples were then sent in a box to An independent research firm. The only information given them was the ratio of fuel to be added to each additive sample. For example, bottle “A” needs to be mixed at a ratio of “480-1”. The ratio used for each additive was the “prescribed dosage” found on the bottle label for that product. Used motor oil and 2-cycle oil were tested at a rationally chosen ratio of 200:1.
The Research Laboratory mixed the proper ratio of each “bottled fluid” into a separate container containing the baseline fuel. The data, therefore, is meaningful because every additive is tested in the same way using the same fuel. A side-by-side comparison of the effectiveness of each additive is now obtainable.

THE RESULTS:

These results are listed in the order of performance in the HFRR test. The baseline fuel used in every test started at an HFRR score of 636. The score shown is the tested HFRR score of the baseline fuel/additive blend.
Also included is the wear scar improvement provided by the additive as well as other claimed benefits of the additive. Each additive is also categorized as a Multi-purpose additive, Multi-purpose + anti-gel, Lubricity only, non-conventional, or as an additive capable of treating both gasoline and diesel fuel.
As a convenience to the reader there is also information on price per treated tank of diesel fuel (using a 26 gallon tank), and dosage per 26 gallon tank provided as “ounces of additive per 26 gallon tank”.

In Order Of Performance:

1) 2% REG SoyPower biodiesel
HFRR 221, 415 micron improvement.
50:1 ratio of baseline fuel to 100% biodiesel
66.56 oz. of 100% biodiesel per 26 gallons of diesel fuel
Price: market value

2)Opti-Lube XPD
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, demulsifier
HFRR 317, 319 micron improvement.
256:1 ratio
13 oz/tank
$4.35/tank

3)FPPF RV, Bus, SUV Diesel/Gas fuel treatment
Gas and Diesel
cetane improver, emulsifier
HFRR 439, 197 micron improvement
640:1 ratio
5.2 oz/tank
$2.60/tank

4)Opti-Lube Summer Blend
Multi-purpose
demulsifier
HFRR 447, 189 micron improvement
3000:1 ratio
1.11 oz/tank
$0.68/tank

5)Opti-Lube Winter Blend
Muti-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver
HFRR 461, 175 micron improvement
512:1 ratio
6.5 oz/tank
$3.65/tank

6)Schaeffer Diesel Treat 2000
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, emulsifier, bio-diesel compatible
HFRR 470, 166 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.87/tank

7)Super Tech Outboard 2-cycle TC-W3 engine oil
Unconventional (Not ULSD compliant, may damage 2007 or newer systems)
HFRR 474, 162 micron improvement
200:1 ratio
16.64 oz/tank
$1.09/tank

8)Stanadyne Lubricity Formula
Lubricity Only
demulsifier, 5% bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 479, 157 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.00/tank

9)Amsoil Diesel Concentrate
Multi-purpose
demulsifier, bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 488, 148 micron improvement
640:1 ratio
5.2 oz/tank
$2.16/tank

10)Power Service Diesel Kleen + Cetane Boost
Multi-purpose
Cetane improver, bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 575, 61 micron improvement
400:1 ratio
8.32 oz/tank
$1.58/tank

11)Howe’s Meaner Power Kleaner
Multi-purpose
Alcohol free
HFRR 586, 50 micron improvement
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.36/tank

12)Stanadyne Performance Formula
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
cetane improver, demulsifier, 5% bio-diesel compatible, alcohol free
HFRR 603, 33 micron improvement
480:1 ratio
6.9 oz/tank
$4.35/tank

13)Used Motor Oil, Shell Rotella T 15w40, 5,000 miles used.
Unconventional (Not ULSD compliant, may damage systems)
HFRR 634, 2 micron improvement
200:1 ratio
16.64 oz/tank
price: market value

14)Lucas Upper Cylinder Lubricant
Gas or diesel
HFRR 641, 5 microns worse than baseline (statistically insignificant change)
427:1 ratio
7.8 oz/tank
$2.65/tank

15)B1000 Diesel Fuel Conditioner by Milligan Biotech
Multi-purpose, canola oil based additive
HFRR 644, 8 microns worse than baseline (statistically insignificant change)
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$2.67/tank

16)FPPF Lubricity Plus Fuel Power
Multi-purpose + anti-gel
Emulsifier, alcohol free
HFRR 675, 39 microns worse than baseline fuel
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$1.12/tank

17)Marvel Mystery Oil
Gas, oil and Diesel fuel additive (NOT ULSD compliant, may damage 2007 and newer systems)
HFRR 678, 42 microns worse than baseline fuel.
320:1 ratio
10.4 oz/tank
$3.22/tank

18)ValvTect Diesel Guard Heavy Duty/Marine Diesel Fuel Additive
Multi-purpose
Cetane improver, emulsifier, alcohol free
HFRR 696, 60 microns worse than baseline fuel
1000:1 ratio
3.32 oz/tank
$2.38/tank

19)Primrose Power Blend 2003
Multi-purpose
Cetane boost, bio-diesel compatible, emulsifier
HFRR 711, 75 microns worse than baseline
1066:1 ratio
3.12 oz/tank
$1.39/tank

CONCLUSIONS:

Products 1 through 4 were able to improve the unadditized fuel to an HFRR score of 460 or better. This meets the most strict requirements requested by the Engine Manufacturers Association.
Products 1 through 9 were able to improve the unadditized fuel to an HFRR score of 520 or better, meeting the U.S. diesel fuel requirements for maximum wear scar in a commercially available diesel fuel.
Products 16 through 19 were found to cause the fuel/additive blend to perform worse than the baseline fuel. The cause for this is speculative. This is not unprecedented in HFRR testing and can be caused by alcohol or other components in the additives. Further investigation into the possibilities behind these poor results will investigated.
Any additive testing within +/- 20 microns of the baseline fuel could be considered to have no significant change. The repeatability of this test allows for a +/- 20 micron variability to be considered insignificant.

CREDITS:

This study would not have been possible without the participation of all companies involved and dieselplace.com. A special Thank You to all of the dieselplace.com members who generously donated toward this study and waited longer than they should have for the results. You folks are the best. Arlen Spicer, organizer. Flying is my passion.

Replied on January 16, 2009

__________________
'84 300SD sold
124.128

http://www.redlineoil.com/whitePaper/7.pdf

__________________
'84 300SD sold
124.128

You were told wrong. There is no problem with ULSD.

Using additives is a total waste of money and does nothing useful.

Sorry FI, but my experience is otherwise. Redline 85 significantly reduces nailing in one of my engines. Its the cheapest remedy I have found short of rebuilding the IP.

__________________
'95 E320 Wagon my favorite road car. '99 E300D wolf in sheeps body, '87 300D Sportline suspension, '79 300TD w/ 617.952 engine at 367,750 and counting!

Sorry, that is in no way related to ULSD. Nailing is affected by timing, injector spray pattern, pop pressure, fuel cetane and temperature. Rebuilding your IP would do as little as Redline does.

Nailing has nothing to do with lubricity or sulfur.