Experiences with Biodiesel

After the latest price increase for diesel, I'm considering using biodiesel in my Ibiza 6k (AFN engine), as it's 23 cents cheaper here, which would save me about 30 euros per month!

I would like to gather the experiences of the forum users here, but not in the form of pros and cons, but rather as pure, factual accounts.

I know that I will eventually need to seal the fuel pump and replace the diesel filter; that's not a problem. My car has already run 367,000 kilometers, and it has been running on vegetable oil for 2 years.

I'm particularly interested in whether there have been any problems with the supply line to the tank, such as... 'Leaks at the diesel filter connection, or oil leaks from the injector lines, caused problems, and this occurred depending on the mileage and the amount of biodiesel used.'

Why don't you continue sharing your experiences, especially since you seem to have had (apparently good) ones?

I only used biodiesel once in my G3 1Z, and it resulted in higher fuel consumption.
Poel, with a charge between 50-70%, was cheaper and didn't drive up consumption as much.

m;

'Biodiesel now costs around €1.13 per liter... I removed and sold the dual-tank setup again because, despite a 50:50 mix with diesel, a coolant heater, and a SamHotte electric heater, there were still massive deposits on the injectors and in the cylinder at the reversing point! I didn't want to wait until the piston rings got stuck!' The network of gas stations is quite sparse here.

Weird.

I didn't see anything on the nozzles. And that's with a zero-cost refactoring.

Perhaps there still wasn't enough Poel.
Now (with the DPF), the topic is closed for me.

m;

I have burned approximately 8000 km (roughly 5000 miles) of RME (biodiesel) in a Golf III 1Z. A financial benefit resulted from this.
not, because the 6ct price advantage has been easily offset by the increased consumption .
It might seem more advantageous given the current price difference.
But is it really worth it?

Best regards, Micha.

@Martin

At 100%, there were even more deposits; I mostly drive on the highway (Autobahn) at 120-140 km/h..., it was cold-pressed oil from the oil mill, or sometimes even bottles.... Mileage with Pöl oil is approximately 35,000 km.

I have been using RME (with a 1Z engine) for over 40,000 kilometers, and currently, I save more than 10 euros per tank (with a capacity of 70 liters). Roughly estimating, I've saved over 300 euros in total.
Facts:
- I cannot confirm any increased consumption.
- The pump is still completely leak-proof (I'm not running a mixed fuel system anyway).
- The ventilation is working perfectly.
- Passed the AU exam with top marks (turbidity K=0.07).
- Starts poorly in cold weather and stutters for the first few seconds.
- Produces smoke when cold after a cold start.


Best regards.

Quote:

I cannot confirm increased consumption.

However, this is because the energy content of RME is lower. Then just drive slower.

If you come across affordable replacement pumps or are confident that you can seal the pump yourself if necessary, then go ahead.

Best regards, Rainer.

Quote:

- Passed with excellent results (turbidity K=0.07)

That's also not entirely realistic, at least not for a properly maintained AU with a 1Z engine, which should deliver at least 90 horsepower .

m;

Hello,

I've noticed that there's approximately a 5% performance loss when using RME. From this, I conclude that a similar increase in consumption is likely to occur.

To the extent possible, a financial benefit should remain, as it is sometimes possible to refuel at prices up to 20% lower.

The vehicle produces almost no soot anymore, seems to run a bit smoother, but has difficulty starting in low temperatures.

I drove with the AFN RME system for a long time and never experienced any leaks (the vehicle with 380,000 km was sold).

Best regards,

Bo.

dieselmartin wrote:

That's also not entirely realistic, at least not for a properly maintained AU with a 1Z engine, which should deliver at least 90 horsepower .

Okay, it's a VNT17 turbocharger and a series SG wastegate from AFN. I just checked again. Three acceleration tests were performed with k-values of 0.07, 0.06, and 0.07 --> the average was 0.07. However, I also need to mention that I drive 200 km of highway every weekend, often at high speeds.

Rainer K. wrote:

However, this is because the energy content of RME is lower. Then just drive slower.

"I completely agree with you. There should be an increase in consumption of approximately 8% when you compare the calorific value. I haven't calculated it often enough." Therefore, it might not be truly representative.

Best regards.

I'm not saying that things always have to go wrong. However, with refurbished nozzles, it is often possible to directly infer the fuel level from the readings.

Best regards, Rainer.

Here on Poel, the only (and overpriced) gas station charges 1.29 EUR per liter. Groceries, including tax evasion and bottle deposits, cost 1.15 EUR. The Aral station, which is also generally quite expensive, had biodiesel on offer yesterday for 1.309 EUR. The mineral diesel fuel, with the legally required biofuel blend, then cost only 17 cents more.

Considering that the lower energy content (and the associated increased consumption) of biodiesel further reduces the effective price difference, the risk of technical defects is hardly worth taking, given the negligible savings that remain. Especially if you're not able to do much of the repairs yourself.

The "old diesel" vehicles, which are becoming increasingly rare due to concerns about particulate matter and tax policies, could still be an effective way to save money, as they can, in principle, run quite well on alternative fuels like rapeseed oil under the right environmental conditions. But this loophole is now almost closed.

You save the most money by consciously lowering your expectations, choosing a smaller and lighter vehicle, and when selecting an engine, prioritizing fuel consumption and the resulting emissions over performance figures.


Experiences with Poel among friends:

Audi A6-C4 2.5 TDI - Starting, driving, and fuel consumption were acceptable in summer temperatures with a spirited driving style. The addition of Poel additive to the engine oil caused problems in city driving. Frequent oil changes were necessary to mitigate this issue. Mileage: 140,000 km, 5,000 km on the island of Poel.

Opel Corsa A 1.5 D - It was possible to drive with a 60/40 mixture of Poel/mineral diesel (up to the freezing point), as the vehicle was parked in a garage that was 4-5 degrees warmer. Using pure Poel was only possible with temperatures consistently above 10 degrees Celsius. The engine oil appeared normal. The driver reported increased fuel consumption, and also noted that the engine had noticeably more "low-end" power when running on Poel. There was significantly more black smoke at low RPMs, and blue smoke when revving higher. However, there was a noticeable fuel saving. The vehicle had over 400,000 km (248,000 miles) on the clock, of which almost 100,000 km (62,000 miles) were driven with Poel. However, the body was beyond repair due to severe corrosion, so it was scrapped in January due to an expired technical inspection (TÜV). It would not have been legal to obtain.

Seat Terra 1.4 D - Starts above +8 degrees Celsius are no problem. Below that, it requires "pulling" to start. With a 50/50 mixture of mineral diesel, it is usable up to +4 degrees Celsius. It produces a slightly stronger blue smoke during the (relatively short) warm-up phase, but afterwards, it is only detectable by its characteristic smell. Driving profile: 60% city driving, the rest country roads, almost never highway. No noticeable soot deposits in the engine oil. Engine mileage: 220,000 km - 100,000 km with Poel.

Fiat Fiorino 1.4 D - Fails to start below 8 degrees Celsius when using 100% Poel biodiesel, but starts without issue when using a 50% mineral diesel blend. Allegedly, there is a higher fuel consumption (5-10%) when using Poel. Engine oil appears normal. There is noticeable blue smoke when the engine is cold and in city traffic, which turns into black smoke as the RPM increases. The engine has exceeded 400,000 kilometers.

Passat 3B AFN: (50/50)

"+"
- no increased consumption.
- no Russian
- Improved airflow at lower RPMs.

"-"
- Poorer starting performance in temperatures below 10 degrees Celsius.
- significant carbon deposits on the nozzles (there's a photo of this somewhere).
- Significant mixing of oil ("Öl") into the fuel ("Möl") in urban traffic, leading to more frequent fuel filter changes.

Overall, I ended up paying more in the end. I only use Pöl/Dino mixtures now on long highway stretches, as there are no problems there. However, even that's not worth it anymore with the current Pöl prices. The only way to save money is to drive on country roads.

...my words!! Depending on the aerodynamic capabilities of the body, you can still drive economically and yet quickly, between 110 and 130 km/h in rainy conditions. For longer distances, the choice of route makes a big difference! Prefer routes with less traffic congestion, use bypasses, and even side roads can be advantageous due to lower traffic volume. Basic principle: The cart must keep moving!

Otherwise, I was able to further optimize my already quite economical driving style during the fuel-saving training session near the AMI in Leipzig. A lot of it involves anticipating situations – taking the gear out early before being forced to stop by a traffic light, railway crossing, or even before entering the next town, and using the momentum to your advantage! With fuel consumption of 0.6 to 0.8 liters per hour, the distance covered while idling with full brake and power steering assistance is almost free!! While coasting with a gear engaged consumes no fuel due to the engine shut-off (in vehicles up to Euro 4 standard), the braking effect previously dissipates kinetic energy that has been gained.

Otherwise, you should free your vehicle from unnecessary weight – remove any unnecessary items, set the tire pressure to the "fully loaded" setting, and drive with the windows closed and a very gentle touch on the accelerator. By the way, a well-used air conditioning system often consumes significantly less at higher speeds than the aerodynamic drag caused by even slightly open windows. If you have automatic climate control, you should turn off the climate control function and only activate it when needed. The vehicle heating and ventilation system does not require a constantly running air conditioning system.

Those who, especially outside of urban areas and on country roads, reduce their travel speed can achieve significant fuel savings. In particular, the very short distances between villages (2 to 3 km "outside of urban areas") in my region don't really justify accelerating. Those who are concerned about becoming an obstacle to traffic can stop at 85 to 90 km/h and, on regularly driven routes (e.g. B.) Generally, this does not result in any loss of working time.

When coasting with the gear engaged, the consumption is actually zero (up to Euro 4 vehicles) due to the thrust cutoff.

Does that mean that Euro-5 vehicles no longer have any turbocharger shut-off?

Subject: For those who meet certain conditions, it was actually possible to save money with biodiesel.

- Vehicle is regularly driven, high mileage per year.
- Never mix with mineral diesel, and do not revert to using mineral diesel! (Seals!)
- Only very minimal amounts of sealant should be added.
- Fuel filter converted to a fixed filter housing with a replaceable cartridge (annual filter cost: 7 euros instead of 37 euros).


However, it's unlikely to make much difference now, as the era of biodiesel is coming to an end soon with the gradual equalization of taxation. May my aging car, with its damaged seals, continue to run until its bitter end.

By the way, biodiesel producers claim that the lower energy content of biodiesel is offset by a higher combustion efficiency. (at least the higher NOx levels suggest a different combustion process).