Fuel and Oil Additives

imidazol97 · March 2008

Is Techrolene an earlier name for Techron additives for Chevron (Texaco) fuels?

I use it a couple times each year in each car. Sometimes I don't put it in full strength. I still think it makes a difference after a couple of miles in the running. The injectors shouldn't be a problem in my recent GM cars but I still think something changes.

isellhondas · March 2008

No recent cop problems and I hope it stays that way.

I can tell you some ARCO stories based on my personal experiences and from a couple of my customers. Others may do better with the stuff.

That STP may have made your lifters quieter but I can tell you, it seure didn't "free" anything up!

bradguy · April 2008

I live in California where I filled the tank this morning for $4.09 for 87. Does anyone know about this Ethos FR? It sounds like it is too good to be true, which it usually is...

texases · April 2008

Took a look at their web site - seems oriented towards commercial vehicles and diesels, but does claim results with cars. I have no experience with it (a mix of esters, not sure why that would be any better than gas), but, like you said, it does sound too good to be true.

Karen_S · May 2008

A reporter would like to talk with anyone who recently have used aftermarket products that provide better fuel economy, such as the Tornado Fuel Saver and fuel-line modifications like air bleeders and magnets. The reporter would also like to hear from people who have tried oil and fuel additives or exhaust-system modifications as well. Please respond to ctalati@edmunds.com with your daytime contact information and what you used no later than Tuesday, June 3rd.

kikizoo · June 2008

So I read an email today about this product and I'm still trying to find just one person who can either say "yah"or "nay".

Have you had any luck

Kiki

shipo · June 2008

Nay.

texases · June 2008

No, I've not heard anything factual, but I would just go to Walmart and buy Techron or STP gas treatment instead. I've had good luck with Techron reducing the ping in my carboned-up '95 Chevy, so it must be doing some cleaning.

texases · June 2008

"I know of a better product that I am using and having success with. It is called eeFuel, made by H2OIL. It is used in 70% of the cars in China. It is registered with the EPA and first choice with the United Nations. "

Boy, my BS meter just pegged! "Used in 70% of the cars in China" Right! Prove it! Same goes for "registered with the EPA and first choice with the United Nations." Yeah, I can see the UN shipping crates of this stuff to Bosnia for their trucks. Don't think so.

repoman1 · June 2008

"I know of a better product that I am using and having success with. It is called eeFuel, made by H2OIL. It is used in 70% of the cars in China. It is registered with the EPA and first choice with the United Nations. "

My BS meter just blew up. Save the $20 you would be wasting on a bottle of this snake oil and go buy five gallons of gas.

Mr_Shiftright · June 2008

Post removed for soliciting products. No soliciting is allowed in the Carspace Forums.

thank you

MrShiftright
Host

shipo · June 2008

I'm thinking that this discussion should be closed as it has simply become a place for every snake oil salesman to post his or her bogus sales stuff. :mad:

texases · June 2008

Also the link in the above spam is nasty, makes you jump through hoops just to close it.

ray80 · June 2008

'I'm thinking that this discussion should be closed as it has simply become a place for every snake oil salesman to post his or her bogus sales stuff

Naw , this is the only place people can come to find out things that don't work and why.

Besides the spam gives Mr Shifty something to do other then real answers to things

Mr_Shiftright · June 2008

We must not cave in to terrorism :mad:

Yeah I think the topic might still have some value, presenting links to factual data.

But we'll see how bad it gets, now that everyone is hysterical about gas prices.

0patience · June 2008

Well, to put my 2 cents in.
Remember that very few additives on the market have ever had to back up their claims. Slick 50 and other additives with PTFE made a lot of claims that it adhered to the cylinder liners and bearing surfaces to coat them.
Dupont (they invented Teflon) and NASA both have made comments that in order for PTFE (teflon) to adhere to anything, special primer agents are required.
Some light reading. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1996/07/slick.shtm

As for oil, synthetic is actually pretty good. If you use it, there really isn't any reason to use an additive, if you give your engine proper maintenance.
Older engines, synthetics have a tendency to locate minor leaks and make them larger, mainly because synthetics have a tendency to flow better. In those cases, use organic oil. Nothing wrong with organic oils.

As for fuel additives. There is only one that I ever use. Lucas products.
And I've tried a ton of them. Usually I only use their product to try on an injector that is giving me problems. Often it will help clear it up.

As for any products that extend fuel economy. HA HA!! funny.
If there were such a thing that actually worked, you would find it in every gas station, market place and garage. Why? Because anything that actually works sells well and these places know that.

Then there are those that say that they will make the engine burn cleaner and pass DEQ inspections. Wanna know a secret?
If you change your oil before a DEQ inspection, your chances of passing have greatly increased. Used oil in the engine is contaminated with HCs, CO2 and CO. All of which your O2 sensor reads and can fail you on the DEQ test.

Another example is the new claims of the HHO kits for vehicles.
They claim they make the vehicle run on hydrogen. That it increases horsepower, makes them run quieter and extends fuel economy.
All of this off your vehicle's 12V system. For those who don't know. Using electricity to split water molecules from electrolysis requires a bit more than your 12V system can put out. Is it possible that these kits will actually produce some useable hydrogen in addition to regular fuel? Yes. Not saying that it is enough to meet their claims, but it will produce a minute amount of hydrogen.

So, don't believe all the claims you see that these companies make. A lot of people seem to think that they have to be true for them to make the claims.
Quaker state made claims that were false for years, before the FTC nailed them on it. How many people believed the hype?

Ok, that's my 2 cents. Consider it for what it is worth. Nothing. Just my opinion.

isellhondas · July 2008

Given your background, your opinion means a lot.

I once used a Lucas additive as a last resort when I had a power steering rack leak. I had that car three years afterwards and it never leaked again.

I have seen Rislone remove carbon deposits that have restored compression. I woldn't have believed this but I have seen it work many times. Add a quart of Rislone and drive the car HARD for ten miles or more.

Nothing will improve gas mileage but people will believe what they want to.

texases · July 2008

"I have seen Rislone remove carbon deposits that have restored compression. I woldn't have believed this but I have seen it work many times. Add a quart of Rislone and drive the car HARD for ten miles or more. "

You got my attention - are you talking in the combustion chamber? If so, how'd you use it? I've just added Rislone to the oil, wouldn't think that'd help in the combustion chamber. :confuse:

edit - let me ask the more general question - my '95 Suburban knocks on regular due to carbon buildup. Techron helps some, but I've always wondered if there's something else that might do more. Suggestions?

isellhondas · July 2008

You can do a "carbon blast" where you introduce a strong solvent through the intake system. I've seen old timers use a water bottle with AMAZING results too

And a quart of Rislone poured in the motor oil works too but I'm not exactly why?

Opatience?

imidazol97 · July 2008

Rislone is a thin oil base with additives. I'm not sure if it has more additives than today's oils and synthetic oils or not. But I believe the additives and thin oil got into the rings and loosens up the rings that are stuck in letting more gases blow by them. That is how it helps compression.

For deposites inside the combustion chamber it would have to be something added to the intake stream or fuel. Top oils have been used in the past. People even dribbled them directly into the air stream to saturate the deposits. Then let it sit and when restarted the deposits will blow out.

GM has a chemical for that they sell over the counter IIRC.

Or you can just take it on a good long drive at good speed to burn away the deposits.

ex_tdier · July 2008

I've been lurking in some gas talk forums and also speaking to an acquaintance who is a Volvo mechanic. Everyone seems to agree not to waste your money on any fuel additives. If you plan to sell your car, go ahead and use them, otherwise don't because it causes a lot of gumming up. It also makes no difference in cleaning out any gum or varnish that may accumulate...the same with carbon. Apparently, even Techron that you buy at Chevron in a bottle is not the same formulation as the Techron that is in the pumps.

This info kinda sucks because my Mazda has had it's intake cleaned a few times already under warranty. I don't know why it keeps gumming up, except for the fact that I occasional have used some Redline fuel additive whenever I gassed up at cheaper (no name) stations that just so happen to have a higher sulfur content than those like Shell, Chevron, or Texaco. I was also told to stick Top Tier fuels and every once in a while add some premium with added detergents, but the latter in my car won't do anything because the PCM will adjust for the premium fuel, supposedly.

0patience · July 2008

Water works great, because it actually blasted the carbon from the valves.
It act like a jack hammer. But if a person doesn't know what they are doing, they can bend a rod or valve in a hurry with water.

Risilone has some pretty hefty solvents in it that are pretty good at eating away at carbon deposits.

Generally, we don't see a lot of carbon problems on the newer vehicles, unless they have had problems with the emissions, PCV system or lack of maintenance.

I've seen a lot of confusion about additives and actual cleaners.
3M makes a great injector cleaner, but it isn't something you just add to the fuel. You run it through the fuel lines.
And GM makes a pretty good intake cleaner (GM Top Engine Cleaner), that is designed to clean the intake system. And it isn't just something you spray into the intake and drive away.

dandyone · July 2008

I'm hearing about an additive that was developed by NASA and is marketed as an engine treatment which can reduce repairs by 85% and increase gas mileage by up to 20%. It's called Motor Silk. It comes in a kit to treet the engine, transmission and fuel system. It is suposed to treat the metal and last for 100K miles.
My local dealers service manager has never heard of it. Have you any knowledge of it, its performance or its honesty in the claims made?

texases · July 2008

hmm, dandy, I just replied to this under 'answers' - now you're getting me more concerned about this being spam, rather than a question, here's what I said there:

"I looked into it (which you could have done, making me suspicious of your question), and it looks like it was originated by a former Nasa employee, not by Nasa. Hard to judge the honesty of claims, at least the discriptions weren't out in left field. No third-party test results were easily viewed, further raising my concern, but I don't know. I'd be surprised if any kind of treatment could increase mileage that much - of course, you said 'by up to 20%", which means from 0-20%. Gotta watch that 'up to'."

Mr_Shiftright · July 2008

The hyperbolic nature of these claims alone suggest to me that it is worthless....as if every taxicab company, truck and commercial fleet wouldn't leap on this immediately and save hundreds and millions of dollars. Must be an oil company conspiracy?

0patience · July 2008

Yeah, I replied too.
He closed the question.

Wonder if he is on commission. :surprise:

dandyone · July 2008

I posted the original inquiry in good faith that you people would give an honest opinion. Only one gave a straight answer and I really appreciate that, the rest of the posts were laced with smart [non-permissible content removed] sarcasum. And you wonder why I closed the question.

Mr_Shiftright · July 2008

Well you shouldn't take the response personally; after all, it is directed at the claims of the manufacturer not you; given all the fuel/oil scams that have surfaced, and how so many (if not all) of them have been tested and found to be fraudulent, it's very difficult for you (or even me) to present any product with such sweeping claims as having any credibility anymore.

It's almost like someone sincerely asking if this pill will make you younger, that cookie will make you slimmer, or this liquid drink will make you smarter. When the claims are "lose 50 lbs in one week" that's not the same as more modestly claiming "you may lose 2 lbs a week if you follow up with exercise".

One claim (the latter of course) is reasonable and bears investigation and could be supported by science, the other is pretty unbelievable and will attract scorn I'm afraid.

The facts seem to be that these claims are not reproducible and the "testing laboratories" are either falsified or conducted in a way to distort real world conditions.

It simply makes no sense that auto manufacturers would not have dumped a can of "Magic Motor Medicine" into each and every one of their cars, and achieve for $10 per car what they cannot yet achieve even if they had spent $1000 a car.

Why spend hundreds of millions developing a hybrid car that gets 45 mpg when you could have dumped Slick 50 into your Corollas?

texases · July 2008

I aplogize for coming across as suspicious. You, as a new poster, were not aware that the favorite tactic of the charletans that sell this snake oil is to post an innocent-sounding question that prompts readers to investigate one of these items. After a few question and answer posts, it then becomes obvious that the poster is adtually a sales agent for the item. As a new member, your post (coincidentially) fit this description.

0patience · July 2008

Excuse me?
Be specific when you say that. Who exactly posted sarcasm?
I'll be honest, I read the replies and my own reply to you and the only people that would view that as sarcastic would be someone who has a vested interest in the product.

Understand that many of us see tons of these so called miracle oils, additives or what ever. Usually the only one who benefits from these products is the people selling them. So yes, a lot of us are fairly jaded towards them.

We watch people, time after time, waste their money on these "cure-all, do-all" products and then we are considered sarcastic when we post our views of them?

Thanks, we so appreciate that.

tlworkroom · August 2008

So is a spark plug a spark plug a spark plug?

I have a beat-up 1991 Geo Prizm with 240K miles, got it with 120K on it in 2001.
Had been using simple plugs (ie: cheap) all its life with me. Had started with about 27 mpg highway, and eventually got up to 30 mpg city after spending years cleaning out engine.

Recently tried Bosch +2 plugs, and my mileage went up to 35 mpg hwy, with slightly better acceleration all around. In my automotive simplicity, I would say that the gas mixture is being burned more completely, but I'm not an authority. I had also used synthetic for first time, at same time as changing to +2 plugs. I can still get 32 mpg city now, even after I've gone back to normal oil.

I wonder whether such a response depends upon how old and worn an engine is. I don't think that a new car within first few years of use would get same response as I did because the engine is very new, very tight. It's combustion chamber would be very clean and sealed properly for ultimate combustion as designed and developed by the manufacturer.

But would/could an aged and well used car in which the engine is very well worn without any major parts replaced (top end or bottom end) allow such a reaction as this?

Do you think a spark plug is a spark plug? I doubt it because you have already mentioned that you prefer some plugs over others. So there are differences in plugs and their design and performance. Perhaps the difference in performance is dependant upon specific cars and their conditions and even how the cars are used by the drivers.

I know that American automobiles have great tolerances built into them. That's why they can last nearly forever before they completely die an nasty death from malfunction. My father has a 1995 Buick LaSabre bought in about 2000, with less than 90K miles now. Has never changed the spark plugs, so they were used by previous owner, and have no idea how long that was either!! Car wtih V6 was able to get up to 30 mpg on highway. Pretty amazing and very commendable for GM.

However, when I checked the plugs, the electrode post was almost burned off, almost down to rim on most of plugs from overuse. The gap was .8 instead of .6. So car was getting great mileage even with greater-than-normal gap. Performance was okay.
But upon installing new plugs, the performance shot up about 300% (descriptive figure only), allowing instantaneous starting instead of little bit of starter cranking. And driving acceleration was obviously hugely better. That V6 now pulls that almost ton of metal like it almost nothing.

But I bet that the gas mileage won't be up to that 30 mpg that my dad greatly admired and bragged about. So even tho' the old plugs were obviously greatly worn, they gave wonderful gas mileage. But the new plugs were more desirable for proper maintenance, and will undoubtedly give less mpg. So where do we choose?

Is it simply that the larger gap of the older plugs burned the mixture more? So would gapping the new plugs larger achieve the same?

Does a new car have less allowance for "tolerances" built into it with a new engine, being "tighter"? Does an old car have a greater chance at such a change of mpg when its engine is "looser". I use those terms generically, and don't even know if they can be consider real. But that's how I've described it otherwise.

I'd appreciate your take on this.

basspro · August 2008

Hi Guys, this is my two cents worth on this subject. My back ground includes, machinist (engine rebuilding too) and a twenty year Catalytic Cracking unit operator (made gasoline from cracked hydrocarbons). But I will still say as a novice in the internal combustion process of the gasoline engine,I stay confused about a great many claims of truth and fact.
Now for my OPINION on fuel additives, I drive 50,000 miles a year in my work. In 2005 I received my first new car (i am 52) and I wanted to buy the vehicle after it met the exchange process of the company I work for. I wanted the engine and related systems to have the least wear possible when I bought it. With that in mind and the limited knowledge I had on the particulars of Gasoline I made the decision to use fuel additive in my vehicle. The reason I chose to use fuel additive was to hopefully lubricate the fuel pump, electro mechanical injector, and possibly, the valve to valve guide contact point area in the fuel intake area.
This is the interesting point,I feel, I could find NO fuel additive that backed up any of the criteria I had with TEST's or FACT's Everything was just claims as far as I could see(read). So why did I use additive anyway? I know that the modern fuel systems of gasoline engines have mechanical contact areas and current newer fuels have less and less lubricating value. I wanted some lubrication, so the only way I knew to do it was use an additive that made some claim to do that. At 100,000 mile I had as extensive a diagnostive test as could be preformed by the repair shop that did all my work on the vehicle. They found no problems and the motor operated within the new engine parameters set by the manufacturer.
I had the plugs and wires changed but only as a preventative. They tested all good and there was no improvement in gas mileage and the motor ran just the same as before the change.
With all that said, the bottom line is, if the claim of the lubricating value is true on the fuel additive, I should not have to change the injector, fuel pump, or a valve job on the heads. It appears it is not needed at this time and I will have to let you know at 150,000 miles and 200,000 mile if I get that far whether or not I blew the money.
Another aspect of fuel is, any additive, changes the burn characteristics in the combustion chamber. Fuel mileage can be helped or hurt. I would want to know that. Also the additive could contaminate the catalytic converter and or O2 unit.
I have had no problems so far and will get back to you if I ever find any fuel additive that backs claims with fact. But I will continue to use them until it is PROVEN they absolutely do not work for what I use them for which is again lubrication. Many of the false claims revolve around improved gas milage, which I doubt.

shipo · August 2008

You're trying to prove a positive (the effecacy of the additives) with a negative (the lack of any discernable problems). Unfortunately that doesn't add up.

FWIW #1, you and I are about the same age (I'm a year younger), and over the years I've driven over a million and a half miles and have run a number of cars up into the mid to high one-hundred thousand mile range and two over two-hundred thousand. None of them have ever had any fuel additives used, and yet, none of them have ever needed a fuel pump, fuel injector, or valve job. Personally, it is my bet that you've wasted your money.

FWIW #2, due to a coolant leak into the oil, I pulled the cylinder heads off of one of our cars last summer (the leak turned out to be a five cent "O" ring in the timing chain cover). The combustion chambers were nice and clean, the intake ports (down stream of the injectors) were actually glittering the metal was so shiny, and the cylinder walls still had all of their honing marks intact. Miles on the engine at the time of the work? 143,625

Best Regards,
Shipo

basspro · August 2008

I am not trying to prove anything, It is only an OPINION as I had stated. If this particular board, of many boards, do not want opinions then it should be stated and I will not post here again. It would would also serve others for you not to continue to post what I consider your opinions often not backed up with unbiased facts.

Best Regards, Basspro

Mr_Shiftright · August 2008

Okay let's not start an argument please.

That is correct, opinions are most welcome. Certainly one can challenge opinions but this isn't a court of law and I don't see anyone trying to make it one here.

I have found over many years of hosting that it is not necessary to correct what one perceives as "wrong' information. Generally the flow of the discussion straightens everything out cordially.

If you'd like to counter someone's opinion, posting a source for your ideas is a great way to de-personalize debates.

This is how we all learn from one another.

Thanks for your continued courtesy,

MrShiftright
Host

oldfarmer50 · August 2008

I use mostly no-brand name gas because of the 20 cent per gallon difference between it and so called "top tier" brands. Never had any problems I could trace to the fuel.

I wonder though if the lack of additives that are put into the higher priced fuel could have some long term concequences to my engine such as carbon build-up.

Is there something I should be adding to my tank to make up for the lack of additives?

dtownfb · August 2008

In my area you will be hard pressed to find "top tier" gas. We're dominated by places like Rutters, Sheetz, Tom's, giant, etc. All gas has to meet the EPA minimum standards. No one has ever shown me that my 2000 Oldsmobile INtirigue or 2004 Nissan Quest need anything other then the EPA minimum standards. So I will keep filling up at the least expensive gas station. Today it is at Rutters at $3.47...

isellhondas · August 2008

With customer's cars that are running poorly. When we can't find anything that is apparent we will ask them..." Do you use a certain bargain brand gas? If the answer is yes, we tell them to quit buying that brand.

The troubles usually disappear.

I had the same thing happen when we had our boat. It quit in the middle of the lake and I got towed in. First question was the same one we ask...yes!

Never used it again and never anymore problems.

ex_tdier · August 2008

Yes, all gas has to meet "mininum" standards as does food, vitamins, and food quality. however we all know that doesnt mean much except the standards may be way too low.

better gasolines have added detergents and lower sulfur content which i was told makes a difference. people like to think that cheap gasoline is good for their car, but they may not notice the consequences such as poor gas mileage or performance until it's too late. besides, whos to know if the gas stations add this or that in their tanks to reduce the amount of fuel they have to buy from the refinery,

imidazol97 · August 2008

>better gasolines have added detergents

Do you have any support to that concept other than advertising? E.g., Shell may advertise that their superhotrodpremiumluxurycargasfor wealthyspenders has more detergents. Is there any benefit to more detergents? The minimum has been mandated for all fuels since some day in the past when it was determined fuel injectors and other things were affected by deposits. Is there a benefit to the additives or is it like vitamines in cereals?

I asked some stations about additives in various grades in the past. One manager checked his delivery sheets and showed that the same detergent additive package was added to all three grades.

>lower sulfur content

Again do you have support for this? It's my understanding that all fuels have the same base stock. Additional chemicals are added to control the burning properties under compression and temperatures in the combustion chamber. The higher octane rating on the pump does not mean the fuel contains more energy and will make you sporty gomobile run faster; rather the higher octane means the fuel burns slower. That slower burning reduces knock during the explosion process in the small number of cars that need it.

The same base stock means the same sulfur content for that fuel delivered through the pipeline from some remote refinery. Indeed a few summers back when a couple of regions had problems with higher sulfur in fuels from certain stations, they didn't say it was premium or regular; it was just the fuel at some stations. Also it was at more than one brand's stations. That supports the idea that brands get their fuel from the same depot. Back in the 70s tankers pulled out of a depot in Northern Kentucky and they had all kinds of brands on the tankers as well as no names on many taking fuel from the depot for delivery.

More recently a delivery driver would call in to an auto repair show. He said now the difference is in the alcohol content. I do not know if that's mixed at the depots or at the refinery before it goes into the pipes. He was naming that a few stations still sold 100% gasoline and they were a name brand in a higher quality area. The other deliveries for the brand that he delivered all contained alcohol. He also talked about the additive package for a particular grade that was dumped into the tank in the truck that mixed as he put the fuel in and drove to the station.

texases · August 2008

"better gasolines have added detergents"

"Do you have any support to that concept other than advertising?"

Have you looked around the Top Tier web site? Seems like they do require more than the base level of detergents, after discussions with a number of car manufacturers.

dtownfb · August 2008

I have viewed the Top Tier website and find it all very suspect since this idea of Top tier gas came from the auto manufacturer (not all but a select group) and not the oil companies. It was in response to the lower quality gas that began popping up after Katrina (it appears to have disappeared just as quickly) and several companies were seeing more fuel related issues. Companies like Shell have turned it into a marketing strategy. The website offers no evidence that "cheap" gas or more importantly, gas meeting EPA standards can cause damage to your car. There are a lot of gas companies that are not on that list.

The only Top Tier gas company that operates in my area is Shell under the Texaco name. They only have a handful of stations here. I guess BMW and Honda should stop selling cars in the York (PA) since there is no gas in this area that can run their cars. Oh wait, Turkey Hill does operate here.

imidazol97 · August 2008

I thought the top tier group had been around before the Katrina event.

I like the idea that someone is aware of fuel quality, but I view the group as something like the car dealers with their gold star dealer award--the only one in the state of Ohio. Of course the next dealer is a blue star dealer award winner.

I have every belief that my Mobile at the local UDF store is as good as the BP and Shell even though it's not paying the membership fee to the top tier group.

dtownfb · August 2008

It could have been after 9/11. It's been a couple of years since I researched Top Tier gas. Haven't really read of anyone discussing this with gas over $3.

I like your analogy. I don't buy it either. I have an Oldsmobile Intrigue (GM product; one of the founders of the Top Tier gas group) with 164k miles, still averaging between 24-26 mpg. All I use is "cheap" gas.

imidazol97 · August 2008

I buy gas mostly at brand stations including Kroger stores. I changed the fuel filter at about 100K miles. I put in a fuel system cleaner, Techron by Chevron, widely available and recommended in the days of poor gas by BMW and others for cleaning injectors of the soapy long chain carbon compounds that collect on them when the car is turned off. That has long been taken care of by the fuel additives that were required in all fuels. But I still put it in. However when they dumped the fuel from my tank to replace the rusted pressure line, and fuel pump, the contaminants had collected in the bottom and the gas was unuseable. That stuff is kept out of the car's fuel pump by a sock-like filter inside the tank. Apparently somewhere I've gotten some bottom of the tank goop sold to me during the 10 years.

tlworkroom · September 2008

This sounds like the "Flat Earth Society: Automotive Division".

lmacmil · January 2009

The whole fuel additive topic seems to be "hot" right now. For those that are believers in the benefits of fuel additives, I have a question.

I typically dump in a bottle of Techron after each oil change (typically at 4-5000 mile intervals). I have read that premium gas contains more additives, detergents, etc. If that is true, would running a tank or two of premium once in a while have the same effect as a bottle of injector cleaner? The car is a Camry SE-V6 with 3.3 liter engine. Have the same engine in the wife's Highlander.

shipo · January 2009

Running fuel additives (Techron or otherwise) and/or Premium fuel in a car that specifies Regular is an absolute waste of money. Period, full stop, the end.

Your Camry, your Highlander, and virtually every other late model car on the road is designed from the outset to run on the additives that are already included in the recommended fuel, and as such, you can expect an easy quarter of a million miles from your fuel system with little or no remedial maintenance WITHOUT the use of extra additives.

If you don't believe what I've said, hey, no problem, just look at your Owner's Manuals. If you don't believe them, call Toyota, they'll all tell you pretty much the same thing.

Best regards,
Shipo

Mr_Shiftright · January 2009

I think the effect of additives in gasoline is quite cumulative and quite subtle over many thousands of miles. I doubt that an occasional tank of "premium" fuel has any measurable effect. You are probably wasting your money here. The techron at oil change intervals might not be a bad idea; however, I can't say that it really does any good in the long run either.

My response to additives is that I don't use them unless I need something to clean up a bad injector, and then I buy stuff that is far more potent than off-the-shelf additives you get at the supermarket. And even that works only once in a while.

basspro · January 2009

I do understand your confusion. Most of the time a off the shelf fuel system cleaner will not do a whole lot because the ratio of additive to fuel does not reach a level that will make a real difference.
The products that lubricate a fuel system and if you plan to keep a vehicle for many mile or a long time, might provide some improvement in injector and or fuel pump life.
I know I will get many "do not do it" statements. The only place that I have seen any real trials is consumer report and they say do not do it.
As you may or may not know the fuel touches the valves and therefore the valve guides can be affected due to close tolerance's. Fuel injector are a close tolerance's part of the fuel system too.
Fuels today have changed in the last few years and will continue to do the same.
The fuels of the past due to lead additive and sulfur did lubricate and protect valve/vale seat surfaces.
The newest additive, Ethanol can cause problems in fuel systems and I assume there will soon be a fuel additive label with some reference to their product stopping phase separation, water suspension, clean ,lube and polish your tail pipe too!
But all that said, I am sure there is a product or two that have double blind tests and laboratory proof that there product will do what is claimed, I wish I could find it.
If you do, tell us, and I will be open minded enough to look into it.
I for one appreciate you question and the conversation.

Fuel and Oil Additives

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles