my understanding is that our government here in the U.S. controls requirements for gasoline refinement. this sounds reasonable in that defense forces may depend on local recourses for fuel in the event of invasion, foreign or domestic, thus ensuring quality. and so, all gasoline as it comes out of all refineries is equivalent, at least in the U.S., and it is only after refinement, and before delivery to their respective public outlets, are additives, if any, pumped into tanks.

this means to me that any claims to the superiority of one gasoline over another is most likely a fiction dreamed up by an advertising department and, from a practical POV, worthless.

to confirm my suspicions, i reason that if a claim to the superiority of gasoline due to a proprietary additive WAS valid, then the government would soon demand it be added to all gasoline by reason of the first paragraph in this post. my experience, though anecdotal, during the past half century bears this out.

 

Well they are certainly not the same spec as Chevron/Texaco/Caltex. Our system is proprietary. They are probably using the Lubrizol stuff to make that claim.

 

Certainly not true. We are proven the best with BP very close but let down by combustion chamber deposits. This is regularly benchmarked and research ongoing. I don't want to start a Brand war but this had to be corrected. It goes back many, many years.

 

Back in 1978, partly because I was interested, but mainly because they offered me a well paid employment, I joined a very large and most famous oil company. They had a site employing about 900 people dedicated mainly to fuel and lubricant products. A very small number worked on other related topics such as combustion hazards. I don't believe that you'll find that sort of effort outside large oil companies. I should emphasise that 900 excluded research and development work on manufacturing the fuels and lubricants and other chemicals as that belonged to another site.

There was a period in the late 1970s when, at least in Europe, gasoline was basically sold as a bulk product. The main push was to produce as much as possible from a barrel of oil, 'whitening the barrel,' and selling it as cheaply as possible. Indeed, in the UK, gasoline was often sold by the majors at a loss, profits came from other items in the service station shop such as sweets and engine oil. Partly through the difficulty in competing with supermarkets and certain independents, in the mid 1980s there was a move back to selling gasoline as a premium product as it had been in the 1950s and 60s. Some of the older ones amongst us may recall the likes of Formula Shell and others from those days. And, though the names have changed, that trend hasn't died. Some or many of the majors have sold off their refineries, but the final formulation of the fuel, most importantly the additives, are entirely proprietary to the oil company name on the pump. And, in my opinion, they are worth paying the extra for if -its a big if- if you keep your car for more than a few years. As I've never sold a Jaguar, I buy premium fuel from major oil companies.

 

A friend of mine in the Jaguar club I belong to has a daughter who is a fuel chemist with Shell. She says that Chevron fuel is the best in the industry and she wasn't quite sure how they do it. I don't have Chevron/Texaco fuel in my market, so I stick to a top tier fuel as the best alternative.

 

Yes JB ~ Techron is a closely guarded development. I guess much as the formula for Coke is. etc.

 

i can assure everyone that my post is in need of no correcting. it was written as intended as all my posts, and the majority of most posts on public forums are.

 

There are a couple points of concern with that theory. First is military vehicles are diesel, not gas, so quality of gasoline is irrelevant to the US military. Second, the main driver of gasoline regulation is the EPA, and there are many different regulation for different regions. For example the rules for gasoline composition are different for fuel sold in greater Atlanta than that sold in Alaska and Hawaii, and is different again for Phoenix. Fuel sold in some areas isn't legal for sale in other portions of the country, and this will change with the time of year, as winter fuel is not the same as summer fuel. So by law, gasoline is not uniform across the US.

 

here's are a few sources of information on the quality of gasoline....

Gasoline quality: Is there really a difference? (wbrc.com)

Don't Confuse Gasoline Octane And Quality | AAA Automotive

10 Tips Gas Stations Don't Want You to Know | Cars.com

Do brands use different gas? | wtsp.com

Generic vs. Brand-Name Gas: Are They Different? - ABC News (go.com)

Juanita Firs 76 Blog (gascan.com)

they all conclude that gasoline, regardless of its source is pretty much the same. the last one says it succinctly.

and it follows, if one trusts the content of the various sources listed above, that claims of superiority of one gasoline over another, the main point of my previous post, is a fiction.

 

I've gone through most of Huey's links. As far as I understand them, what they say is that all gasoline should pass some minimum requirements, in particular have a minimum amount of detergent. To me, that's a long way from demonstrating that one fuel is no better than another for engine cleanliness or anything else. You could as well say that all cars are the same as they all have to satisfy minimum regulatory requirements.

As I wrote before, for most people who keep their car a couple of years, better gasoline is a waste of money. For that matter, changing the oil is as well. The long-term consequences are someone else's problem. Ken Jenkins of the UK Jaguar Enthusiasts Club isn't a fuel chemist or a professional engineer, but he's probably taken apart and rebuilt more old XK engines than anyone. He's totally in favour paying the extra for fuels with the additive packages.

Can we believe the advertising claims of Shell, BP, Chevron ... ? In most countries, certainly the UK, you have to be able to prove what you say in adverts, especially if you're a target like an oil company. It's decades since I was close to that part of the oil business, but I can say for sure that a huge amount of road testing went on to prove the fuel consumption claims of Formula Shell. There were also a lot of scientists from the base in the UK and the equivalent in the US working on the chemistry. It would be a lot of effort to produce something that didn't work or is no different from what anyone can buy off the shelf.

The one point I would agree on is that many of the performance and economy gains could as well be achieved by advancing the ignition half a degree or driving more thoughtfully. However, those are different topics from long-term engine condition.

 

Likewise in SA you have to prove what you claim or the Advertising Standards Authority come down on you hard. This is not the US where you can get away with murder. ~ In conjunction with the AA our advertising of Techron has never been challenged because the competition accept it as fact.

Well explained Peter.

 

Which perhaps supports my long held speculation that the vastly disparate experiences with E10 are due to something more than just the mere presence or absence of ethanol.

Cheers
DD

 

That may depend on the stabilisers that are added to the fuel. It's an important aspect for us with old cars that don't do much mileage and quite probably don't even move for several weeks or months.

 

Right. Seems plausible. The different "additive packages" used by gasoline retailers might be part of the problem....or perhaps part of the non-problem for those who who use E10 with no difficulties.

Cheers
DD

 

Here in Canada the pumps say "May contain up to 10% Ethanol". I might be buying fuel with anywhere between 0-10% ethanol, I just don't know. Obviously the car won't be having any detrimental effects if there is no ethanol.

 

The government says otherwise. See here: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/gasoline/
In particular it says: "Some areas of the country are required to use specially formulated gasoline to reduce certain emissions, and the formulation may change during winter and summer months. These area-specific requirements mean that gasoline is not the same everywhere"

 

To be precise, the blogger in that link actually wrote:

<<
Why Additives Matter
The additives in the fuel make the difference between gas that cleans your car while you drive, or gas that allows nasty carbon deposits to build up inside your engine (causing costly repairs down the road). Many cheaper brands of gasoline will only put in the minimum additives required by the government, while higher quality brands will sometimes put close to double, sometimes even five times more than the government's recommendations. Make no mistake - there is a difference between high quality gasoline and the cheaper stuff.
>>

The final commenter, by the name of Doc, claimed all gasoline to be the same and accused the blogger of producing no evidence to the contrary.

 

Well global Advertising Control Entities would beg to differ as would Oilcos. Having been directly involved I know the correct answer. They are well proven not to be all the same. We can produce plenty of evidence. Hence never having been challenged by the opposition.

 

Thought you might have an opinion Glyn and the correct answer.

 

Rob, All oilco's have their strengths. We would not dream of taking on Exxon/Mobil with nuclear as an example. They are the kings of that technology.