Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Fuel and Oil Additives

1356744

Comments

  • yzfyzf Posts: 65
    Chevron's Techron additive (found in most auto stores and big retailers with auto sections like Target) is the only stuff I've found that really works - at least on my motorcycles. I've definitely noted increased fuel economy and smoother function. Things like that are very noticable in motorcycles because of the proximity of rider to engine. That and the fact that I tend to do all the maintenance on my bikes whereas the shops get the cars.
  • jmsintxjmsintx Posts: 41
    BMW did studies way back when I was still young and hands down the Techron removed carbon from valves, pistons and opened up fuel injectors. Now, this was 10 years ago and there might be some that work just as well. I have used Techron since I can remember and have cured many a starting-rough idling problem.
  • ywilsonywilson Posts: 135
    I drove across country in a SAAB 900 I used to own. I used nothing but Chevron gas during the whole trip. When I got to Oregon the car was running better than it was when I left. I was familiar with the Techron in the fuel and I was convinced of it's abilities after my trip. I now use it in my trucks twice a year to keep the fuel system clean. I have no complaints on it's ability to do the job.
  • armtdmarmtdm Posts: 2,057
    I use Techron once in a while and on three cars I put the concentrate Amsoil PI in every tank. Does it work?

    Who knows,

    Never had an issue with fuel sytems on any car in last 6-8 years but would I have had any anyway?
  • I've tried many of the cleaners available. A couple of weeks ago I tried a bottle of Texaco's synthetic cleaner. It seemed to have worked very well. The engine seems to idle smoother and start quicker. Just a thought...
  • I've used Marvel Mystery Oil for years and have been very happy with the results. I do agree that Chevron's Techron additive is also good.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    whenever my old 95 tbird used to start to idle sloppy and hard and suck a bit more fuel, and run tough......one tank with concentrated additive and a long drive did the trick. Sometimes a second treatment was necessary. But then after that the rough idle was gone and the mpg was back up where it should be.

    Never any related reliability issues etc.

    I highly recommend a treatment 2 times a year.....
  • Another reason to run an upper cylinder lubricant / cleaner in the fuel on a regular basis. Fuel system components (carbs, fuel injectors and pumps), need lubrication along with the valve guides and rings. In addition, the tips of the fuel injectors need to be kept clean. Any "baked on deposits" will alter the spray pattern on the injector. The fuel today is "dry" in terms of a lubricant. As I have stated on earlier postings, I use "Marvel Mystery Oil" (4 ounces to each 10 gallons of fuel) on a regular basis. I use this product because it is "reasonable in price", ($3.00 a quart K-Mart / $4.00 a quart in Pep-Boys), in my area of the country, and it does the job. I have used this product in all my Honda vehicles, (1997 Accord, 2000 Accord, 2000 Civic, 2003 Accord & 2004 Civic), and I have never had a fuel injector / fuel related / valve problem. YES, it is safe for the 02 sensor and the Cat converter. I also use this product in the fuel my 1999 MerCruiser 7.4 V8 marine engine and my 9 hp snow thrower. I have friends that use this product in the fuel of big oil injected outboard motors. I am not trying to start a debate over this issue, because I know that many people feel that this type of product is not needed, and a waste of money. I am just offering this information as a public service. My Honda dealer will add a fuel additive for the injectors at certain intervals of service. In addition, it is very important to use gas stations that pump "quality fuel", and sell "large quantities" quickly. Never purchase fuel from a station that is getting a fuel delivery. The incoming fuel from the tanker truck is churning up the tank in the station. You could be getting all kinds of contaminents in your vehicle's tank. -----Just my opinion. ----Greg
  • nw1997nw1997 Posts: 227
    Greg,

         Great post. I totally agree with you in regards to using a quality grade gas. I mostly purchase from name brand stations, such as Mobil, Shell, etc. I also agree with you on not getting gas from a station that just got a delivery of gas. Now, getting back to Marvel Mystery oil. I have used that on our previous 89 Chrysler and after about 1.5 years I had to change the throttle body/injector and the O2 sensor. Not smashing on the Marvel Mystery oil, it may have been a fluke. From what I have read about the Mystery Oil is that it is great for vehicles with carbeurators, moving linkages, etc. However when we did receive our vehicle the dealership warned us not to use any additives in the fuel, cause it could damage the injectors. What they did recommend was to use a couple of tanks full of a high octane, high detergent gas to clean the system out. Next, I have read many posts about the rotten smell/odor, sulfur burn. It had not happen to us until I went from 89 octane to 87. I used 89 for about 4 tank fulls and wanted to see the difference with the 87 octane. Well I know now, my wife was in the car and it can make a person feel to throw-up. Well, thats my two cents.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,179
    The additives in all gasolines are supposed to be the same. If anyone has a statement from a major brand that they have a different, more effective additive package in their 91 92 93 octane I'd like to know.

    A discussion on a knowledgeable car talk program said the premium fuel burns cooler in a car designed for regular, and leaves more residue than the regular fuel. In a car designed (compression-wise?) for premium it burns hotter and doesn't leave the carbon. They mentioned the temperatures involved.

    The sulphur difference between regular and midgrade might exist. But I understand the sulphur smell is mostly from low throttle driving for a time and a buildup in the converter of the molecules; then with harder acceleration the converter is cleaned out. Therefore the smell occurs more when you start driving aggressively.

    Was there a different in driving patterns when you had midgrade vs regular?
  • nw1997nw1997 Posts: 227
    imidazol97,

        Actually, the car is still in the break in period. We got about 1000 miles on it, to me my break in period will be around 5000 miles. Then will I punch the vehicle and drive aggressive on occasions. I drove the vehicle the same way I did with the 89 octane, smooth acceleration, avg 55 - 65 MPH, nothing change. The Sulfur smell never happened until I put a tank full of Mobil 87 octane a couple of weeks ago. I will not do that again, I will use 89 or higher octane from now on. Many companies are stating that the vehicle runs OK with 87, but to me I believe its a marketing scam for people to buy the vehicles in these high priced gas wars. For example, my dad's CRV say's 86 or higher octane recommended. When we used the 87 we got about 200-250 miles out of a tank. When we went with the Mobil 93 Octane we were getting 300-330 miles out of a tank. Same driving conditions. How could one explain that.
  • Just a point of information. Fuel injectors do have moving parts that need to be lubricated. I am not trying to sell anyone on the use of this product. But rather, I am just sharing some basic information with some "GREAT People" on this board. Four ounces of MM oil to each 10 gallons of fuel would not even be noticed. (Picture pouring four ounces of orange juice into 10 gallons of water. You would not see the orange juice in the water).---Greg
  • nw1997nw1997 Posts: 227
    Greg,

         Doesn't the high detergent gasolines have there own additives that would lubricate the injectors., keep them cleaned, etc? From the dealership's opinion this would make sense. What does Honda state about adding additives to the fuel system? The only feed back I got was the use of dry gas, to remove moisture from the tank. This was the only additive I was told that could be used when needed.
  • If you truly feel that way about the components of the fuel injection system, then by all means DO NOT use anything in the fuel of your vehicle. Fuel injectors are worth about $100.00 each. So if they malfunction, I will either have to have them cleaned,(if that is possible), or have them replaced. Either way that is an expensive / time consuming process. Now a quart of fuel additive (32 ounces) costs $3.00 to $4.00 dollars. At 4 ounces to 10 gallons of fuel, I can treat 80 gallons of fuel. Assuming the higher price of $4.00 dollars, the cost of this preventive maintenance per 10 gallons is 0.125 per ounce X 4 = 0.5. That is truly cheap preventive maintenance. At 4 ounces to each 10 gallons, you would not even see the product in the fuel. Anything moving needs lubrication. In the fuel system you have the electric fuel pump, the injectors, the intake and exhaust valves & valve guides and the piston rings in their grooves. No one is forcing anyone to use this product, and I am sure if you do some investigation you will find people who agree wil you and with me about this concept. So I guess it is a personal thing. In any case, I am just sharing some information from my experience and point of view. I have used this product in marine and land based engines for years, and I have never had valve or fuel related component problems. Now this might just be "luck" or it might be that products such as this really do something in the fuel. I guess the only way you will know is if you try it! ----Have a nice day. -----Greg
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,179
    Greg. Since you seem to enjoy having a dialogue about this topic, I'll take an analytical tact.

    In 120000 miles of typical driving I calculate about $272 spent on this fuel additive at the higher price you supplied.

    If I'm driving a quality built engine, the injectors probably wouldn't show wear until 50% longer than the mileage I used (180000). If the gasolines are quality products with proper additives after the BMW influence in the late 80s, they have additives to stop the olefin formation during heat soak when the engine is turned off that clogged the injectors.

    Most people are going to have traded their vehicle after 100K. The additive may work. The additive may not help avoid a problem that wouldn't happen anyhow.
  • I enjoy having a discussion about this topic, because I see a lot of damage on marine engines because of the quality of the fuel today. A marine engine shows the wear faster, because it is always working very hard to keep the boat "on plane". (It is always going "up hill" and never is in a "cruising mode of operation"). For every 100 hours on a marine engine, that is equal to 10,000 miles on a land based engine. Marine inboard and I/O engines are suffering from valve and valve guide problems,(carbon build up), and the outboards are suffering from seized piston rings on pistons,--- both due to carbon problems related to the fuel,(not the lubricating oil). In terms of replacing fuel injectors on Honda vehicles, I would guess that the dealer does not see this service because either the customer is doing his / her own work, or they are taking this servce to a local repair shop, or a speciality shop. There are many fuel additives on the market today. If you look at a "trucker's web site" you will see that fuel additives are a major part of the trucking preventive maintenance industry. They must be using these products for a reason? ----Greg
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,179
    "...injectors wear out over time, (lack of lubrication in the fuel)."

    Can someone cite a Honda repair or Book of Honda saying injectors just plain wear and need to be replaced?
    Can someone cite a Honda repair or Book of Honda saying injects need additional lubrication that the liquid fuels don't supply today?

    "...small quantities of gum are present in gasoline..."

    Can someone document for me that these are present in the normal, fresh high volume gasoline supplied from major brands? I'd really like to see the list of "gums."
    Additives in gasoline handle the breakdown of the hydrocarbons left at the tip at shutoff in some vehicles. The decomposition of the moleculars leads to deposites at the tips. This was a problem in the 80s with BMW's injectors. And was fixed after BMW listed gasolines by brand that contained the necessary 'detergents.'

    Today, not needed. Name brands, high volume, unleaded regular if that's what your engine was designed for.
  • No manufacturer will admit to the need for an additive in the fuel. That would destroy their sales. Remember, once the vehicle passes 3 years or 36,000 miles, the entire responsibility of maintenance is in the hands of the owner of the vehicle. If a fuel additive is not important, then why are marinas in the New York / New Jersey area selling a fuel for both gasoline and diesel boats call "ValveTech"? This fuel contains an upper cylinder fuel lubricant. The fuel is being used in outboards, (2 & 4 cycle engines), inboard engines,(4 cycle), I/O engines, (4 cycle) and they have a diesel formula.----Greg
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,179
    The thesis that auto manufacturers build to last only through warranty is contraindicated by Hyundae then. Since their warranty is 5 and 100k, they obviously would recommend additives for their engines. Anyone know that they do?

    The thesis that a Honda is built to last only through 3/36 warranty goes against most people's opinion here that Honda is an engine company and build the best engines in the world. They would cut corners on their injectors so their engines aren't long enduring? Response?

    Marine use has no relationship unless you plan to drive your car through high water a lot. Here in Ohio I try not to do that, so marine useages don't appeal to me. I hate being on a bridge over water, like the one at Washington's Crossing last summer over the Delaware!!! I always worry the bridge will fall.
  • inkieinkie Posts: 281
    A CAS number is a unique number which relates to a chemical substance. They identify that specific chemical for reference and are copyrighted by the American Chemical Society. This society publishes many pages of CAS numbers which are used to identify chemicals in many industries.

    Sorry everyone, I did not mean to start this MSO B.S. over again. I only showed the MSDS data to reveal the contents of MSO. This sheet was supplied by Marvel Oil Co.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,829
    Someone asked if fuel injectors wear out? Yes, they do, like any device, they age from use.

    MODERATOR

  • swschradswschrad Posts: 2,171
    I think wood alcohol (methyl or methanol) is one that raised some hob with GM injectors in the late 80s or early 90s. dissolved the enamel off the injector coil windings, and they shorted out and died. back then injectors were new, and over $200 each. the wire is better enamelled now ;)

    other than that... there is a federal standard for gasoline additive cleaners that must be added to fuel, and all brands sold will meet this minimum standard. there are something like a half-dozen commercial additives. this resulted from the old "BMW test" in which 4-bangers were run for 50,000 miles on a test bench... and the engines disassembled and all parts scoped and weighed, to determine the amount of gunk collecting and the wear. you had to use a BMW-approved gasoline to keep your warranty in those parlous times. that's when Techron got its gold star.

    there should be enough cleaner in gas to handle the old BMW test as it comes from the nozzle.

    if you gunk up the injectors, the on-car decarbonization kit method is preferred by all the tech writers I see in this neck of the woods. Two systems, 3M and Wynns, are generally mentioned.. in both, you pull the fuel pump fuse, connect the pressurized can of magic-gas with a measured but hellish amount of industrial-strength cleaner, and start the engine. when it runs out of gas and dies, you should be good to go if it was varnish/dirt deposits from aging and decomposing fuel gooping the inside of the fuel system. the cans of magic gas are supposedly in the $40-50 range, and the initial injector kit in the $100 range. these decarbonizers are supposedly OK by all major manufacturers for serious performance issues.

    I would expect 'em to seriously stink up the shop and set asthmatics in the cloud outside the door wheezing. maybe not as bad as the cummins garage looked one night a year ago when I drove by as they were cleaning out a truck diesel... thought they had a fire, and hopped a couple curbs to get close and see if I should call the red-hats... and then I noticed, in the billowing clouds, pure hell coming out of the stacks on that truck's exhaust. I thought using the pour-and-stall method of cleaning the valves on older cars with liquid carb cleaner was a choker... this was pure evil. the 3M or Wynns systems should be someplace in between, from what I read, in attracting clean-air picketers.

    I would be a little leery of doing this every 15,000 miles "because I can", due to the strength of the chemicals.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    Hey gang, we've been having a healthy row over in the Synthetic Oil topic regarding "Fuel and Oil Additives", and while it was a good discussion while it lasted, it seems that this is a better forum.

    I have been following the additive argument for over thirty years now, and IMHO, due to all of the evidence supporting additives, which are anecdotal at best, the complete lack of readily available scientific evidence supporting additives, and my own personal research, additives like MMO and even Techron from a bottle for that matter are the same thing as Snake Oil.

    Does anyone have any scientific information to suggest otherwise?

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • swschradswschrad Posts: 2,171
    well, I always liked Cobra oil treatment and Diamondback fuel cleaner.....

    oh....

    those are snakes, aren't they?.......
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    I just received a rather angry sounding E-Mail (I assume from someone who read this thread) calling yours truly a "Troll" because I dared to suggest that Tecron was Snake Oil. I think that I need to set the record straight.

    I never said that Tecron was Snake Oil, I did however say that Tecron from a bottle was Snake Oil. So, what's the difference? To me at least, the difference it enormous. Chevron fuels with Tecron as an integral component of the fuel is designed by petroleum engineers to meet the standards set forth by the World-Wide Fuel Charter (WWFC). Said standards were developed by representatives from automobile manufacturers America, Europe and Japan, and their purpose is to assure consistent fuel quality standards around the globe.

    All major motor vehicle manufacturers including those from Canada, Korea, China, and South Africa, support the Charter and agreed to its adoption as a means to achieve the following goals:

    1) Reduce the impact of motor vehicles on the environment immediately through reduced vehicle fleet emissions;
    2) Consistently satisfy customer performance expectations; and
    3) Minimize vehicle equipment complexities with optimized fuels for each emission control category, which will reduce customer costs and facilitate the development of fuel efficient technologies.

    Another way of looking at this is that, assuming all of the major petroleum producers selling gasoline in the Unites States adhere to the charter, adding anything to their specific formulations (ie. Tecron or MMO or anything else for that matter) is almost guaranteed to generate results other than the desired result, even if it's simply to thin out your wallet.

    In summary, I maintain that the Tecron that is native to Chevron fuel is good. I also maintain that Tecron, MMO, KEM-O-PRO, AMSOIL P.I., STP, Fuelon, Gunk or any others of that ilk, added to gasoline that already adheres to the WWFC, is snake oil.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • You may want to step back, reflect again about
    your statement, quote, "additives like MMO and even Techron from a bottle for that matter are the same thing as Snake Oil. Does anyone have any scientific information to suggest otherwise?"

    1. Techron in a bottle has directions for usage.

    2. Do you have any "scientific information"
    yourself that could be presented ? Otherwise
    you have no support.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    Actually I have all of the proof that I need. The manufacturers of two of our cars expressly state that additives should not be used. The third makes no statement at all (contrary to another post that claims that BMW recommends Techron). In fact, I have read many owner’s manuals over the years and I have NEVER seen a manufacturer recommend any additives.

    I absolutely believe that with the collective billions of dollars spent on engine development by the world's auto makers, that if a product like MMO offered some benefit as either an oil or a gas additive that they would ALL recommend it. So far, after thirty years of looking, I have yet to see a single manufacturer even hint that any additives (other than say for cold weather diesel operations) could be helpful.

    Just because some folks want to believe that adding stuff to their oil and gas is going to make their engine run better, longer and with less maintenance, and just because they claim that these things have come to pass because of the use of their favorite oil of snake, that doesn’t make it so.

    So far all I have heard on the "Pro" side is anecdotal evidence and marketing hype. On the "Con" side however, is the vehicle manufacturers with their billions of dollars of research saying in essence, "don't use additives."

    I choose to believe the manufacturers.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • The publication, CONSUMERS RESEARCH BULLETIN went
    out of business prior to the advent of the Internet.

    I have only found reference to their volumes that
    are stored in places like university libraries.
    None of the texts seem to have made it to the WWW.

    Anyway, they were the only commonly read research
    that I can recall that actually did laboratory
    tests on automotive products like motor oils and
    additives.

    For motor oils they would test the different
    brands for adherence to SAE specifications, pour
    point, ash deposits, anti-oxidation, and such
    things. Then they would list the brands as
    "Recommended", "Acceptable", and "Not Recommended".

    I remember that Montgomery Wards' oils always
    were not recommended.

    When they occasionally tested motor oil additives
    it was to see if they could find any kind of
    benefits, or not. Then they gave their honest
    opinion.

    As I remember, there was only one occasion when
    they were unable to find any kind of benefit.
    This was a product called "Casite". They had
    determined that it was "greenhouse drip", a
    waste product from kerosine and diesel fuel
    refining. I think Casite was marketed by a
    company called "Hastings". Anyway, "Casite"
    soon disappeared.

    Even though it has been many years since the
    "days of CONSUMERS RESEARCH BULLETIN", I still
    maintain the attitude of being open minded,
    not skeptical of every last one of the additives.

    The ones that are popular appear to be beneficial
    otherwise they would probably disappear like
    happened to "Casite".
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    Hmmm, well, that stuff is ancient history. Even then, I still get the distinct impression that the manufacturers themselves did NOT recommend any of the products.

    Nuff said.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
Sign In or Register to comment.