Recent Topics
Grease for injector seals?
by Spetz
09/20/14 09:04 PM
Record player needle help.
by SEMI_287
09/20/14 08:51 PM
Is THIS too much Oil Consumption?
by SumpChump
09/20/14 07:48 PM
Banner seen on Pharmacy Sign:
by MolaKule
09/20/14 07:25 PM
Why all the fuss over NOACK?
by JHL88
09/20/14 07:17 PM
NAPA Silver Oil Filter - How Many Miles To Run ?
by ChrisD46
09/20/14 07:06 PM
MY Corolla CVT
by Jimkobb
09/20/14 07:04 PM
2004 Nissan Titan - one BITOG owner
by sasilverbullet
09/20/14 06:56 PM
B&S Opposed Twin oil choice
by TriMoto
09/20/14 06:52 PM
Crazy Ivan - Russian 6 vs 2 F-22's 55 miles Alaska
by LoneRanger
09/20/14 05:52 PM
2014 Sonata Turbo First Oil Change
by WCW1
09/20/14 05:50 PM
Pat Goss on Motorweek TV show torn filter
by sprite1741
09/20/14 05:12 PM
Newest Members
35ruger, pp4, WCW1, BamBam849, aerogt01
51361 Registered Users
Who's Online
112 registered (74DartSport, 95busa, 123Saab, 901Memphis, 05LGTLtd, 2010_FX4, 12 invisible), 1534 Guests and 177 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
51361 Members
64 Forums
219551 Topics
3465215 Posts

Max Online: 2862 @ 07/07/14 03:10 PM
Donate to BITOG

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#3395359 - 06/12/14 06:54 AM A chemists view on gasoline additives
Eosyn Offline


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 357
Loc: Michigan
This chemist writes a very interesting and informative paper on gasoline brands, octane and additives. I was unpleasantly surprised about using the same brand of gasoline because of the deposits that are left from that brands additive package. Gonna try his suggestion about switching brands every 5k. If the following site has been linked to before, my humble apologies.

A chemists view on gasoline brands, octane and additives.
_________________________
05 Toyota Corolla LE: 98k, Maxlife Silver Bottle/Napa gold filter.
02 Toyota Celica GT: 147k, Maxlife Silver Bottle/Napa gold filter.

Top
#3395378 - 06/12/14 07:18 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
Turk Offline


Registered: 02/03/06
Posts: 8018
Loc: MN
This is an interesting statement....

"What about fuel injector additives?
Give the money to charity where it'll do some good; your fuel injectors will never know the difference. Other than a narrow window in 86-87 where some fuel injectors fouled, the modern (meaning post 87) injectors are of a design that won't foul unless you put some really old rotten gas through them. We had one guy in our group whose job it was to test our gas and competitors brands for injector fouling. He couldn't do it with '88 and newer injectors (with any brand of gas!). I mean he couldn't even get these injectors to foul a little.
"


So, why, or how, do we see videos of fouled injectors and after adding cleaners, we see them spraying better??
_________________________
03 GMC Sierra 4x4 200k, M1 TDT
00 Saturn SL2 89 YO Lady Car. 79k Miles! PU
98 Saturn SC2 "Red Hot" PYB + LubeGard + Kreen
97 Camry 207k Maxlife


Top
#3395387 - 06/12/14 07:31 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
Trav Offline


Registered: 11/20/06
Posts: 9634
Loc: MA, Mittelfranken.de
Interesting if you like tripe. LOL
_________________________
ASE L1, Master. Deutsch Meisterbrief.

Top
#3395389 - 06/12/14 07:35 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
badtlc Offline


Registered: 06/08/06
Posts: 3699
Loc: KC
This guy is using his "title" to spew a bunch of his opinions and thinking people will not question him because of his background.
_________________________
2007 Ford Escape XLS 2.3L ATX Kendall 5w-20, MC Fl910s, 110k+
2012 Mazda 3i Skyactiv PP 5W-20, 6spd MTX Redline MTL, 35k+

Top
#3395403 - 06/12/14 07:49 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
yvon_la Offline


Registered: 05/20/14
Posts: 740
Loc: quebec canada
so basicly this guy is saying ,find the local rafinerie brand then play switcheroo between those!nice trick!
_________________________
Truck driver
Nissan versa note s 2014
Mechanicly inclined

Top
#3395406 - 06/12/14 07:56 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
gregk24 Offline


Registered: 04/13/13
Posts: 2725
Loc: FL, USA
Not sure I agree with anything he has stated.
_________________________
2006 Honda Accord LX 2.4 i-vtec 124K
HGSB 0w20 Fram Ultra
NXT: M1 0w20

2005 Chevy Uplander 3.5 116K
Castrol Edge EP 10w30 Fram Ultra
NXT: M1 HM 5w30

Top
#3395412 - 06/12/14 08:04 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
demarpaint Offline


Registered: 07/03/05
Posts: 21098
Loc: NY
But wait, he's a "Chemist."
_________________________
GOD Bless our Troops


Top
#3395437 - 06/12/14 08:28 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
datech Offline


Registered: 01/14/14
Posts: 412
Loc: KS
He doesn't say anything about 2 stroke oil.. 3 WC. It's an additive.

Why go 5000 miles on one brand? why not switch more often?

Top
#3395468 - 06/12/14 09:14 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
Benzadmiral Offline


Registered: 10/12/05
Posts: 3612
Loc: New Orleans
I read this on the Mercedes Mailing List about 1998. It's good to see it again, but I have no idea if his ideas work in practice.
_________________________
* *
-- Paul W. (The Benzadmiral)
('11 Buick Regal CXL, charcoal/cream, 2.4L NA)

Top
#3395478 - 06/12/14 09:20 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Trav]
DaHen Offline


Registered: 03/26/10
Posts: 381
Loc: Massachusetts
Originally Posted By: Trav
Interesting if you like tripe.


Tripe is good, just hard to find.
_________________________
Stock '06 Altima

Top
#3395495 - 06/12/14 09:38 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
Doog Offline


Registered: 10/24/11
Posts: 3450
Loc: Ohio
I agree with him after logging over 540,000 miles on 87 octane in cars that are labeled for 91 or higher. Never one ping.
_________________________
The difference between a beer and your opinion is that I asked for a beer...

Top
#3395498 - 06/12/14 09:39 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: badtlc]
BMWTurboDzl Offline


Registered: 04/15/10
Posts: 1234
Loc: Atlanta,GA
Originally Posted By: badtlc
This guy is using his "title" to spew a bunch of his opinions and thinking people will not question him because of his background.


Kinda like Doug Hillary???? *eyes rolling*

Like everything in this world context matters. If you do that the article makes a lot of sense and doesn't necessarily says additives are worthless. Hint. I believe he's referencing Techron in his last paragraph.


Edited by BMWTurboDzl (06/12/14 09:48 AM)
_________________________
'10 335d (Castrol Edge 5w-30, LL04)
'15 435i - German Elves building.

Top
#3395499 - 06/12/14 09:40 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
Vikas Offline


Registered: 07/22/05
Posts: 8105
Loc: NorthEast
Are you going to believe Trav who has before and after pictures and flow rates of the injector or this chemist? Has this chemist published any papers in peer review journals?

Top
#3395524 - 06/12/14 10:12 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Vikas]
BMWTurboDzl Offline


Registered: 04/15/10
Posts: 1234
Loc: Atlanta,GA
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Are you going to believe Trav who has before and after pictures and flow rates of the injector or this chemist? Has this chemist published any papers in peer review journals?


Again context. This article is over 13 yrs old is it not?
_________________________
'10 335d (Castrol Edge 5w-30, LL04)
'15 435i - German Elves building.

Top
#3395528 - 06/12/14 10:20 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
TTK Offline


Registered: 10/23/07
Posts: 320
Loc: TN
I believe him. Each additive leaves its own deposits, and only a different additive can clean previous additive deposits. Thus switching brands periodically is the best way to go.
_________________________
2010 Volvo V70-3.2
Current Fill:Castrol Edge 5w-30
2014 Subaru Forester, 0w-20 Subaru oil
2001 Chevrolet Prism
G-Oil Synthetic 5w-30

Top
#3395537 - 06/12/14 10:30 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
pbm Offline


Registered: 04/19/04
Posts: 5196
Loc: New York
I think he makes some good points (although I think the whole 'deposit formulation' thing is overdone).

I use Techron or Regane once every OCI so I do believe in 'additives' as log as they contain PEA. He's probably correct that 'fuel injector cleaners', the majority of which contain no PEA, are useless....

Top
#3395544 - 06/12/14 10:33 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: demarpaint]
dave5358 Offline


Registered: 04/25/13
Posts: 626
Loc: North Bend
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
But wait, he's a "Chemist."

From the article: "My Corvette is a 1979 that is on its second trip through the odometer (and its second engine...)"

Second engine? Apparently he's not a mechanic.
_________________________
2006 Forester XT
2008 Corolla LE

Top
#3395559 - 06/12/14 10:43 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: TTK]
Tdbo Online   content


Registered: 08/18/09
Posts: 1706
Loc: Ohio
Originally Posted By: TTK
I believe him. Each additive leaves its own deposits, and only a different additive can clean previous additive deposits. Thus switching brands periodically is the best way to go.


Can't see anything to disagree with here.
Can't see the harm in changing up gasoline brands at regular intervals.
As the author stated, use the interval that works best for you.
Gas Buddy and the marketplace determine my interval.
_________________________
2012 Honda Accord LX-P 54K
2008 Ford Mustang Pony Package Convertible 12K
2006 Honda Odyssey EX-L 65K
2003 Ford Ranger 3.0 Supercab 82K

Top
#3395576 - 06/12/14 11:07 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: DaHen]
A_Harman Offline


Registered: 10/01/10
Posts: 4191
Loc: Michigan
Originally Posted By: DaHen
Originally Posted By: Trav
Interesting if you like tripe.


Tripe is good, just hard to find.


Never tried it, but the people who like it say it's an acquired taste.


Edited by A_Harman (06/12/14 11:07 AM)
_________________________
1985 Z51 Corvette track car
2002 Camaro Z28 LS1/6-speed
2001 Dodge Ram 2500 diesel
1972 GMC 1500 shortbed project truck

Top
#3395584 - 06/12/14 11:15 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: datech]
Trajan Offline


Registered: 07/16/05
Posts: 3314
Loc: SE PA
Originally Posted By: datech
He doesn't say anything about 2 stroke oil.. 3 WC. It's an additive.

Why go 5000 miles on one brand? why not switch more often?


Like the guy said "I use the 5000 mile method because it works and because it's easy to remember."
_________________________

Lack of harm does not mean proof of benefit.

Top
#3395596 - 06/12/14 11:32 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Turk]
y_p_w Offline


Registered: 05/06/05
Posts: 2403
Loc: SF Bay Area
Originally Posted By: Turk
This is an interesting statement....

"What about fuel injector additives?
Give the money to charity where it'll do some good; your fuel injectors will never know the difference. Other than a narrow window in 86-87 where some fuel injectors fouled, the modern (meaning post 87) injectors are of a design that won't foul unless you put some really old rotten gas through them. We had one guy in our group whose job it was to test our gas and competitors brands for injector fouling. He couldn't do it with '88 and newer injectors (with any brand of gas!). I mean he couldn't even get these injectors to foul a little.
"


So, why, or how, do we see videos of fouled injectors and after adding cleaners, we see them spraying better??



I'm pretty sure it's easy to get fouled injectors by simply using a non-detergent base fuel. That'll foul it up pretty well given enough time.

As for switching brands, I'm thinking that's probably not needed these days with a properly formulated additive package. I'm pretty sure that additives are better balanced to clean up what they might otherwise leave behind. The real key these days is that they run them through tests with performance standards and quantifiable results showing clean injectors and clean valves. So if detergent A cleans up the injectors really nicely but tends to foul up the valves, then it would have to be balanced with something that cleans up the valves.

I think there was a problem with 80s to early 90s era fuel injector detergents cleaning injectors but fouling valves. That was before Chevron developed PEA detergents. Their brand name at the time was Techroline.

Top
#3395601 - 06/12/14 11:44 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: y_p_w]
TTK Offline


Registered: 10/23/07
Posts: 320
Loc: TN
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
[quote=Turk]This is an interesting statement....

"What about fuel injector additives?
Give the money to charity where it'll do some good; your fuel injectors will never know the difference. Other than a narrow window in 86-87 where some fuel injectors fouled, the modern (meaning post 87) injectors are of a design that won't foul unless you put some really old rotten gas through them. We had one guy in our group whose job it was to test our gas and competitors brands for injector fouling. He couldn't do it with '88 and newer injectors (with any brand of gas!). I mean he couldn't even get these injectors to foul a little.
"


So, why, or how, do we see videos of fouled injectors and after adding cleaners, we see them spraying better??



I'm pretty sure it's easy to get fouled injectors by simply using a non-detergent base fuel. That'll foul it up pretty well given enough time.

/quote]

Okay...now where could one buy such fuel?
_________________________
2010 Volvo V70-3.2
Current Fill:Castrol Edge 5w-30
2014 Subaru Forester, 0w-20 Subaru oil
2001 Chevrolet Prism
G-Oil Synthetic 5w-30

Top
#3395617 - 06/12/14 12:13 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: TTK]
y_p_w Offline


Registered: 05/06/05
Posts: 2403
Loc: SF Bay Area
Originally Posted By: TTK
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: Turk
This is an interesting statement....

"What about fuel injector additives?
Give the money to charity where it'll do some good; your fuel injectors will never know the difference. Other than a narrow window in 86-87 where some fuel injectors fouled, the modern (meaning post 87) injectors are of a design that won't foul unless you put some really old rotten gas through them. We had one guy in our group whose job it was to test our gas and competitors brands for injector fouling. He couldn't do it with '88 and newer injectors (with any brand of gas!). I mean he couldn't even get these injectors to foul a little.
"


So, why, or how, do we see videos of fouled injectors and after adding cleaners, we see them spraying better??



I'm pretty sure it's easy to get fouled injectors by simply using a non-detergent base fuel. That'll foul it up pretty well given enough time.



Okay...now where could one buy such fuel?

I think Costco gets "unadditized" fuel for their stations. They have that system where they have their additive dispensed onsite from their underground additive tanks at the time it's delivered by tanker. So if you can get a wholesale account with a fuel depot, you could probably buy the stuff.

It's pretty obvious that a testing lab can get the stuff. All the detergent manufacturers probably get unadditized gas - to both blend in the additive and to use to determine a baseline performance.

Top
#3395639 - 06/12/14 12:32 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: y_p_w]
dave5358 Offline


Registered: 04/25/13
Posts: 626
Loc: North Bend
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
I think Costco gets "unadditized" fuel for their stations. They have that system where they have their additive dispensed onsite from their underground additive tanks at the time it's delivered by tanker. So if you can get a wholesale account with a fuel depot, you could probably buy the stuff.

It's pretty obvious that a testing lab can get the stuff. All the detergent manufacturers probably get unadditized gas - to both blend in the additive and to use to determine a baseline performance.

Costco is a Top Tier fuel retailer. You may be right about how the additive package gets into their gas - not sure it really matters to the end user.
_________________________
2006 Forester XT
2008 Corolla LE

Top
#3395644 - 06/12/14 12:38 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: dave5358]
y_p_w Offline


Registered: 05/06/05
Posts: 2403
Loc: SF Bay Area
Originally Posted By: dave5358
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
I think Costco gets "unadditized" fuel for their stations. They have that system where they have their additive dispensed onsite from their underground additive tanks at the time it's delivered by tanker. So if you can get a wholesale account with a fuel depot, you could probably buy the stuff.

It's pretty obvious that a testing lab can get the stuff. All the detergent manufacturers probably get unadditized gas - to both blend in the additive and to use to determine a baseline performance.

Costco is a Top Tier fuel retailer. You may be right about how the additive package gets into their gas - not sure it really matters to the end user.

I was just answering the question as to how to get "unadditized fuel". You might have to scroll down the quote box to see the question.

So in short - there are ways to get unadditized fuel if you can demonstrate a need for it.

Top
#3395646 - 06/12/14 12:39 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
raytseng Offline


Registered: 12/11/08
Posts: 417
Loc: CA
what I found interesting and I've done search, is not very much info about actual bench-type testing with the additives by enthusiasts.

What I mean, is people are always testing in their car based on butt dyno, and maybe via mpg readouts but not testing the additives otherwise in a more controlled environment and actually seeing if they do anything.

There is only the one post from 2002
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=261713

that gets floated around where the guy (Sciguyjim) tested a bunch of products against tar goo that he had in his gas tank.

Sure it is not scientific, but it's a step up from butt dyno.
Why have the enthusiasts not done more unscientific home-comparo tests like this?

Otherwise, what happens is people just keep circling back to the very few primary source pieces of information, and repeat what they hear until it becomes the mantra or the flavor of the month.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2014/05/how-a-raccoon-became-an-aardvark.html


Edited by raytseng (06/12/14 12:44 PM)

Top
#3395653 - 06/12/14 12:49 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
Vikas Offline


Registered: 07/22/05
Posts: 8105
Loc: NorthEast
There are couple of youtube videos on home grown injector cleaner procedures

Top
#3395679 - 06/12/14 01:13 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: y_p_w]
dave5358 Offline


Registered: 04/25/13
Posts: 626
Loc: North Bend
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
I was just answering the question as to how to get "unadditized fuel". You might have to scroll down the quote box to see the question. So in short - there are ways to get unadditized fuel if you can demonstrate a need for it.

It may be a bit more tricky than just getting an 'account'. When the Clean Air Act finally got implemented, it required that motor fuels have a minimum additive package. This new standard was rather low - actually less additive than was being used by some retailers. The 'top tier' program was partially in response to this - several European car makers started complaining.

To purchase motor fuel with zero additives would seem to be in violation of the Clean Air Act, much like buying avgas for use in a motor vehicle. Yes, you can probably buy avgas. We used to have a weird gas vendor in the area selling 125 octane leaded gas as motor fuel - it was probably avgas, but who knows?. This sort of thing is frowned upon. It's hard enough to imagine a tank farm selling to an end-user at all. But, to sell the end user something they know is against the rules.

Our local weird gas vendor finally went out of business - not sure why. But he was a very small operator and it may have been a case of just 'slipping through the cracks'.
_________________________
2006 Forester XT
2008 Corolla LE

Top
#3395687 - 06/12/14 01:25 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: y_p_w]
TTK Offline


Registered: 10/23/07
Posts: 320
Loc: TN
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: TTK
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: Turk
This is an interesting statement....

"What about fuel injector additives?
Give the money to charity where it'll do some good; your fuel injectors will never know the difference. Other than a narrow window in 86-87 where some fuel injectors fouled, the modern (meaning post 87) injectors are of a design that won't foul unless you put some really old rotten gas through them. We had one guy in our group whose job it was to test our gas and competitors brands for injector fouling. He couldn't do it with '88 and newer injectors (with any brand of gas!). I mean he couldn't even get these injectors to foul a little.
"


So, why, or how, do we see videos of fouled injectors and after adding cleaners, we see them spraying better??



I'm pretty sure it's easy to get fouled injectors by simply using a non-detergent base fuel. That'll foul it up pretty well given enough time.



Okay...now where could one buy such fuel?

I think Costco gets "unadditized" fuel for their stations. They have that system where they have their additive dispensed onsite from their underground additive tanks at the time it's delivered by tanker. So if you can get a wholesale account with a fuel depot, you could probably buy the stuff.

It's pretty obvious that a testing lab can get the stuff. All the detergent manufacturers probably get unadditized gas - to both blend in the additive and to use to determine a baseline performance.


I am sure you think that, but there are Federal requirements for fuel additives for motor cars. By Federal law it must have a certain level of additives. What you can buy additionally at COSTCO is over and above the Federal additive requirements, and you pay extra for it.
_________________________
2010 Volvo V70-3.2
Current Fill:Castrol Edge 5w-30
2014 Subaru Forester, 0w-20 Subaru oil
2001 Chevrolet Prism
G-Oil Synthetic 5w-30

Top
#3395753 - 06/12/14 02:29 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: TTK]
y_p_w Offline


Registered: 05/06/05
Posts: 2403
Loc: SF Bay Area
Originally Posted By: TTK
Originally Posted By: y_p_w


It's pretty obvious that a testing lab can get the stuff. All the detergent manufacturers probably get unadditized gas - to both blend in the additive and to use to determine a baseline performance.


I am sure you think that, but there are Federal requirements for fuel additives for motor cars. By Federal law it must have a certain level of additives. What you can buy additionally at COSTCO is over and above the Federal additive requirements, and you pay extra for it.

I never stated that anyone off the street can just stop by a fuel depot with a five gallon container and get base fuel without additives. I said an entity obtaining such fuel would need to demonstrate a need for it or would need to indicate that they intend on adding the detergent before it reaches the final consumer. Where would a testing lab get such fuel? Obviously an unadditized fuel is listed as being required for most testing procedures for the baseline as well as for the testing of the additive performance.

The requirement by the EPA and state agencies is that the retail product must contain at least a certain level of detergent additives. However, there's no requirement that it be added at the fuel terminal for wholesale delivery. I'm pretty sure Costco gets an unadditized base fuel at the depot. Their whole model for "Kirkland Signature Gas" is premised on the cost savings they get from buying an additive from Lubrizol and using their automated equipment to meter it into their fuel, rather than paying someone to put it in at the fuel depot. I've heard from some familiar with the industry that some operators get unadditized base fuel from the depot and then dump in additives from a jug at the gas station.

Top
#3395897 - 06/12/14 05:13 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Trav]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 11367
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: Trav
Interesting if you like tripe.

Fill us in, Trav. Your perspective here could be enlightening, considering what you work with each day. I'm beginning to think the idea of switching up on occasion might not be a bad idea, given a recent experience and how far I dug into the matter, and how it was eventually resolved. My reasoning is that not every fuel station (or even not every Top Tier station) uses PEA.
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3395998 - 06/12/14 07:22 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Garak]
Trav Offline


Registered: 11/20/06
Posts: 9634
Loc: MA, Mittelfranken.de
I see lots of injectors everyday. Its very rare to have any come in with higher mileage (80-100K) that flow close to OEM spec and have a decent spray pattern.
This guys theories don't take a few things into account such as the minute dirt particles that inevitably end up in your tank and ethanol laced fuels that are hygroscopic in nature.

Some of these particles are so small they get past the main fuel filter and end up in the injectors internal filer basket or worse in the nozzle where they accumulate and partially clog the flow or disrupt the spray pattern.

At around 30K some deterioration of flow or disruption in spray pattern is common and gradually worsens over time and miles.
Mistakenly most owners/drivers attribute this to the car just getting old or getting high miles and is normal, often it is so gradual it goes totally unnoticed.
Does anyone really remember how their car drove 6 years ago, it still runs good today.

There are many different types of spray pattern depending on engine design. Boosted engines like a atomized straight shot or in some cases almost a needle spray.
Multi valve heads use two distinct spray streams one to each intake valve, if one of these get clogged the injector my flow okay but only one valve will be receiving the fuel causing an unevenness in the cylinder.
This can cause pinging, hot spots and uneven idle.

Poor flow (to much or too little) on one injector can send the whole bank lean or rich as the O2/AFM reads the bank as a whole and tries to correct by metering the others.
The point is keeping them clean is imperative for proper engine function, long cat life, maintaining oil NOACK and fuel dilution.

I have cleaned a few control sets of injectors over the years. I brought them back to OEM spec with the correct degree of spray angle and installed them.
We then used Redline SI-1 in one and nothing in the other. 30K later we pulled them (same car, engine with similar miles and same injector#).

The Redline treated ones maintained their flow and pattern while the untreated lost 10-20% flow and spray pattern was less than optimal.
We did this with a few sets all with similar results, GM, Ford 5.4 2V and Honda V6 were the mules.

If i am going to recommend this to customers i better not be blowing smoke up anyones backside. The once every 3K worked as well as a couple of ounces every full tank.
My good friend Frank (Demarpaint) had trouble with his van for many years, it got to the point he didn't even want to drive it anymore.
Everyone told him it wasnt the injectors that they were fine and didn't cause this sort of problem, i finally convinced him to put some injectors in it. Frank claims a miracle.

He sent me the old ones to test, the flow was miserable with less than 50% of normal flow and terrible spray pattern. They are not repairable to the point i would want them installed in an engine.

The last point is the swapping fuels business. I tested a M35X run on Shell V Power since day 1.
It did keep the injectors relatively clean with less than 10% reduction over 30K (no other additives) but there are no deposits whatsoever on the back of the intake valves or in the combustion chambers.
The other injectors were run on whatever was around at the time of fill but no cheap no name fuel.

Sorry for the long winded post. Thats my take on it.
_________________________
ASE L1, Master. Deutsch Meisterbrief.

Top
#3395999 - 06/12/14 07:24 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: TTK]
dave5358 Offline


Registered: 04/25/13
Posts: 626
Loc: North Bend
Originally Posted By: TTK
I am sure you think that, but there are Federal requirements for fuel additives for motor cars. By Federal law it must have a certain level of additives. What you can buy additionally at COSTCO is over and above the Federal additive requirements, and you pay extra for it.

+1. This captures the situation pretty well. Probably all the gasoline that comes down the pipeline meets the Federal minimum additive standards, or else 'minimum additives' are added by the local tank farm immediately upon receipt. The tank farm operator simply cannot sell it otherwise. Everything else - whether from Costco's own tank, or added due to customer request by the tank farm operator - is over and above the Federal minimums. And, you pay extra for it.
_________________________
2006 Forester XT
2008 Corolla LE

Top
#3396001 - 06/12/14 07:27 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: y_p_w]
dave5358 Offline


Registered: 04/25/13
Posts: 626
Loc: North Bend
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Where would a testing lab get such fuel? Obviously an unadditized fuel is listed as being required for most testing procedures for the baseline as well as for the testing of the additive performance.

Are you sure about that? Wouldn't the test lab want to know how their additive would work when added on top of Federal minimum add packs. That's how it's going to be used.
_________________________
2006 Forester XT
2008 Corolla LE

Top
#3396015 - 06/12/14 07:46 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Trav]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 11367
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: Trav
Sorry for the long winded post. Thats my take on it.

Not at all, Trav, thanks for that! I'm definitely a believer in the Red Line stuff (and other PEA additives). I've got a story I need to run by you later in PM - I'd love to hear your thoughts on it!
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3396093 - 06/12/14 09:55 PM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
gregk24 Offline


Registered: 04/13/13
Posts: 2725
Loc: FL, USA
So would this also be true about motor oils? Additives building up that is?
_________________________
2006 Honda Accord LX 2.4 i-vtec 124K
HGSB 0w20 Fram Ultra
NXT: M1 0w20

2005 Chevy Uplander 3.5 116K
Castrol Edge EP 10w30 Fram Ultra
NXT: M1 HM 5w30

Top
#3396208 - 06/13/14 03:12 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: dave5358]
y_p_w Offline


Registered: 05/06/05
Posts: 2403
Loc: SF Bay Area
Originally Posted By: dave5358
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Where would a testing lab get such fuel? Obviously an unadditized fuel is listed as being required for most testing procedures for the baseline as well as for the testing of the additive performance.

Are you sure about that? Wouldn't the test lab want to know how their additive would work when added on top of Federal minimum add packs. That's how it's going to be used.

I was thinking more in the line of a bulk fuel additive that's meant to be added to unadditized base fuel. Like the Top Tier test or the CARB deposit control test. For Top Tier, they have to have the base fuel tested to establish a baseline that includes a minimum level of deposit formation. I would think the minimum EPA level of detergents would probably prevent this from happening.

Quote:
http://www.toptiergas.com/deposit_control.html

1.3.1.2 Base Fuel. The base fuel shall conform to ASTM D 4814 and shall contain commercial fuel grade ethanol conforming to ASTM D 4806. All gasoline blend stocks used to formulate the base fuel shall be representative of normal U.S. refinery operations and shall be derived from conversion units downstream of distillation. Butanes and pentanes are allowed for vapor pressure adjustment. The use of chemical streams is prohibited. The base fuel shall have the following specific properties after the addition of ethanol:

1. Contain enough denatured ethanol such that the actual ethanol content is no less than 8.0 and no more than 10.0 volume percent.
2. Contain no less than 8 volume percent olefins. At least 75% of the olefins shall be derived from FCC gasoline as defined by CARB (advisory letter, April 19, 2001).
3. Contain no less than 28 volume percent aromatics as measured by ASTM D 1319 or D 5580.
4. Contain no less than 24 mg/kg sulfur as measured by ASTM D 2622 or D 5453. At least 60% of the sulfur shall be derived from FCC blend stock.
5. Produce a 90% evaporation distillation temperature no less than 290F. as measured by ASTM D 86.
6. Produce IVD no less than 500 mg averaged over all intake valves.

Also - minimum add packs can be odd. Not all detergents are the same. I know it's assumed that PEA is the dominant detergent on the market (probably is) but it isn't the only kind on the market. You're probably not going to get much better performance if the detergent in an aftermarket additive is chemically dissimilar to the add pack in the test fuel.

I was just saying that it's possible to get unadditized base fuel and frankly required for some testing purposes, such as testing a bulk fuel additive meant to be added at a fuel depot or otherwise to unadditized base fuel.

Top
#3396210 - 06/13/14 03:40 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
Shannow Online   content


Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 26503
Loc: a prison island
I agree with some of the points in the article, but want to give Trav a big thanks for telling us what he sees "at the pointy" end of the discussion.

Top
#3396267 - 06/13/14 06:42 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
Eosyn Offline


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 357
Loc: Michigan
Nice post Trav. So what is your opinion on his suggestion of switching brands of gasoline to keep the fuel injectors clean of build up? That's what I'm mostly interested in.

Also, GregK24's question is a good one. Would the same issue apply to engine oil additives?
_________________________
05 Toyota Corolla LE: 98k, Maxlife Silver Bottle/Napa gold filter.
02 Toyota Celica GT: 147k, Maxlife Silver Bottle/Napa gold filter.

Top
#3396288 - 06/13/14 07:05 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Trav]
Turk Offline


Registered: 02/03/06
Posts: 8018
Loc: MN
Originally Posted By: Trav
I see lots of injectors everyday. Its very rare to have any come in with higher mileage (80-100K) that flow close to OEM spec and have a decent spray pattern.
This guys theories don't take a few things into account such as the minute dirt particles that inevitably end up in your tank and ethanol laced fuels that are hygroscopic in nature.

Some of these particles are so small they get past the main fuel filter and end up in the injectors internal filer basket or worse in the nozzle where they accumulate and partially clog the flow or disrupt the spray pattern.

At around 30K some deterioration of flow or disruption in spray pattern is common and gradually worsens over time and miles.
Mistakenly most owners/drivers attribute this to the car just getting old or getting high miles and is normal, often it is so gradual it goes totally unnoticed.
Does anyone really remember how their car drove 6 years ago, it still runs good today.

There are many different types of spray pattern depending on engine design. Boosted engines like a atomized straight shot or in some cases almost a needle spray.
Multi valve heads use two distinct spray streams one to each intake valve, if one of these get clogged the injector my flow okay but only one valve will be receiving the fuel causing an unevenness in the cylinder.
This can cause pinging, hot spots and uneven idle.

Poor flow (to much or too little) on one injector can send the whole bank lean or rich as the O2/AFM reads the bank as a whole and tries to correct by metering the others.
The point is keeping them clean is imperative for proper engine function, long cat life, maintaining oil NOACK and fuel dilution.

I have cleaned a few control sets of injectors over the years. I brought them back to OEM spec with the correct degree of spray angle and installed them.
We then used Redline SI-1 in one and nothing in the other. 30K later we pulled them (same car, engine with similar miles and same injector#).

The Redline treated ones maintained their flow and pattern while the untreated lost 10-20% flow and spray pattern was less than optimal.
We did this with a few sets all with similar results, GM, Ford 5.4 2V and Honda V6 were the mules.

If i am going to recommend this to customers i better not be blowing smoke up anyones backside. The once every 3K worked as well as a couple of ounces every full tank.
My good friend Frank (Demarpaint) had trouble with his van for many years, it got to the point he didn't even want to drive it anymore.
Everyone told him it wasnt the injectors that they were fine and didn't cause this sort of problem, i finally convinced him to put some injectors in it. Frank claims a miracle.

He sent me the old ones to test, the flow was miserable with less than 50% of normal flow and terrible spray pattern. They are not repairable to the point i would want them installed in an engine.

The last point is the swapping fuels business. I tested a M35X run on Shell V Power since day 1.
It did keep the injectors relatively clean with less than 10% reduction over 30K (no other additives) but there are no deposits whatsoever on the back of the intake valves or in the combustion chambers.
The other injectors were run on whatever was around at the time of fill but no cheap no name fuel.

Sorry for the long winded post. Thats my take on it.



What a fantastic & informative post, Trav!

You should form this into its own Thread, add a few pictures and have the Mods make it a "Sticky"!

thumbsup

_________________________
03 GMC Sierra 4x4 200k, M1 TDT
00 Saturn SL2 89 YO Lady Car. 79k Miles! PU
98 Saturn SC2 "Red Hot" PYB + LubeGard + Kreen
97 Camry 207k Maxlife


Top
#3396296 - 06/13/14 07:16 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Eosyn]
Trav Offline


Registered: 11/20/06
Posts: 9634
Loc: MA, Mittelfranken.de
I run Shell all the time and rarely use anything else, in Germany i use it exclusively.
I ran a brand new engine on shell V Power for 12 yrs and 240K and had no significant deposits in the combustion chambers or on the valves.

Of course if i am on the road and need gas i use whatever i can find but its rare.
I don't see it making any difference switching between this one and that one in real world use.
Years ago Sunoco was using some additive that caused the plugs to look like they had rust on the them, switching brands removed the color. Turns out it was just harmless discoloration and not deposits.

I don't believe it applies to oil unless you have one that is leaving deposits with normal OCI, i tend to use the same oils and fuels long term.
Engines with 100+ K on them are clean and in good condition.

Guys like Tig1 have been running the same brand of oil since he first used it on his horse drawn buggy axles and has no issues with deposits.
IMHO keeping the oil changed at a reasonable interval, using the correct viscosity that meets the manufacturers spec is more important than the brand.
_________________________
ASE L1, Master. Deutsch Meisterbrief.

Top
#3396428 - 06/13/14 09:57 AM Re: A chemists view on gasoline additives [Re: Trav]
y_p_w Offline


Registered: 05/06/05
Posts: 2403
Loc: SF Bay Area
Originally Posted By: Trav
I run Shell all the time and rarely use anything else, in Germany i use it exclusively.
I ran a brand new engine on shell V Power for 12 yrs and 240K and had no significant deposits in the combustion chambers or on the valves.

I think the most advanced fuel additives packages are probably balanced such that if one component might cause the valves to gunk up, another one is added to prevent that. However, the big deal about PEA was that it was something that didn't specifically create valve deposits and even cleaned them up.

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >