Fuel additives?
#41
08-14-2017, 09:13 AM
Veteran Member
The following users liked this post:
JagRag (08-14-2017)
#42
08-14-2017, 09:17 AM
Veteran Member
While I like this forum, I particularly love three types of threads: oil, additives, and tires. It's like the Kardashians on TMZ: grab the popcorn and sit back. Anyway, two thoughts:
This is funny but very true!
Q&C: as you know, I'm the guy who, LITERALLY, drives from LA to NYC and back, and puts about 15K a year on my car. Do I use Techron or not? And I sue someone? Why??
This is funny but very true!
Q&C: as you know, I'm the guy who, LITERALLY, drives from LA to NYC and back, and puts about 15K a year on my car. Do I use Techron or not? And I sue someone? Why??
#43
08-14-2017, 09:24 AM
Veteran Member
As for driving distances and time...so also does atmospheric conditions such as humidity, rain, dusty roads, elevation, smog, stop-and-go vs highway, idling, cold-weather starts, etc. have an effect on the combustion process.
But 5000 miles driven in one trip or at 1000 per month (apples to apples per above) is quite equal. When the car is not running the engine is neither combusting fuel (creating carbon build up) nor cleaning carbon build up.
#44
08-14-2017, 10:03 AM
Veteran Member
#45
08-14-2017, 10:18 AM
Senior Member
Allow me to explain why you should use Techron and add it separately.
Techron has universally been accepted as the detergent that works. That's why its in many brands of gasoline.
Unfortunately its strength is its weakness.
It works because it can clean like many other things- but is unique in being able to survive the combustion cycle. Oil for example, does not clean your piston heads, and even if it could it would burn in the combustion chamber and create buildup. Now because Techron can survive it can accumulate.
So if they used Techron in the strength that actually allows it to clean the piston heads the following would happen: the guy that drives 1000miles a month, would see cleaner pistons and more power. The guy that drives 5000 miles roundtrip NY to CA would endup with 1quart extra oil in the crankcase. And he would sue one of the wealthiest companies in the world.
So they have to use a very safe and conservative amount. And if you only drive few miles a year, like we XK owners do, you are not getting the same benefit as the guy putting 15k miles a year.
And because they have reduced efficiency- they call it a fuel system cleaner and valve cleaner. It can be the best thing to clean piston heads and the crankcase.
Do you need it?
I have never seen an engine that I have taken apart where things were things were as clean as they should be. In fact I have a very unique example. One engine that has 8 injectors mounted in the intake manifold, basically its like throttle body injection, only x8, was one of the filthiest power-robbing things I have ever seen, baked on fuel deposits that changed the physical dimensions of the intake! And I had used only name brand gasoline.
Will Techron be enough- who knows, It better than nothing.
I think the only argument I have seen here is- you could save $1.20 per fillup by using something cheaper. I totally respect that, I know some folks who will drive 20miles roundtrip to save $1.20.
Techron has universally been accepted as the detergent that works. That's why its in many brands of gasoline.
Unfortunately its strength is its weakness.
It works because it can clean like many other things- but is unique in being able to survive the combustion cycle. Oil for example, does not clean your piston heads, and even if it could it would burn in the combustion chamber and create buildup. Now because Techron can survive it can accumulate.
So if they used Techron in the strength that actually allows it to clean the piston heads the following would happen: the guy that drives 1000miles a month, would see cleaner pistons and more power. The guy that drives 5000 miles roundtrip NY to CA would endup with 1quart extra oil in the crankcase. And he would sue one of the wealthiest companies in the world.
So they have to use a very safe and conservative amount. And if you only drive few miles a year, like we XK owners do, you are not getting the same benefit as the guy putting 15k miles a year.
And because they have reduced efficiency- they call it a fuel system cleaner and valve cleaner. It can be the best thing to clean piston heads and the crankcase.
Do you need it?
I have never seen an engine that I have taken apart where things were things were as clean as they should be. In fact I have a very unique example. One engine that has 8 injectors mounted in the intake manifold, basically its like throttle body injection, only x8, was one of the filthiest power-robbing things I have ever seen, baked on fuel deposits that changed the physical dimensions of the intake! And I had used only name brand gasoline.
Will Techron be enough- who knows, It better than nothing.
I think the only argument I have seen here is- you could save $1.20 per fillup by using something cheaper. I totally respect that, I know some folks who will drive 20miles roundtrip to save $1.20.
I agree. My 96 Jag mileage has improved and runs smoother with Techron treatment at least 4 or 5 times a year. My fuel sending unit was erratic and bouncing and fuel gauge was all over. Two bottles of Techron fixed it, which I read in other posts.
The following 2 users liked this post by aacpa15215:
Queen and Country (08-14-2017),
ralphwg (08-14-2017)
#46
08-14-2017, 10:20 AM
Veteran Member
Therefore my opinion, (just like your own and everyone else's) is as valid as the next as to whether or not they are wasting their money on something that may or may not be necessary. Does the owner's manual recommend it? No. (Full stop.) In fact the owner's manual specifically states against any fuel or oil additives (see warranty.)
My car has ~62K KM's (~39K miles) on it. Would it benefit from a complete engine and drive-train tear-down? Would this increase the HP, TQ, & Fuel efficiency? Of course it would do all those things. Is it worth the cost for that benefit? Of course not at this mileage.
Such is the case with many of these products. They cost money, and have no beneficial cost effect improvement vs not using them.
To each his own, spend the money if you prefer, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion. And that was what the OP was asking was it not?
#47
08-14-2017, 10:52 AM
Veteran Member
Owners manuals have no way of being revised. Therein lies its ability to be the last word. And flawed logic to use it as the 10 commandments.
Jaguar subsequently has specifically identified the use of fuel additives as the thing to do, and namely BG44. Proving neither the book nor Jaguar had it right the first time a decade ago when the book was printed. But unlike you, Jaguar is acknowledging they were wrong.
#48
08-14-2017, 10:58 AM
Veteran Member
There is something scientific here. We are seeing how opinions are formed.
For some its a matter of principal.
For people like me, who have no experience, nor knowledge of BG44, I blindly accepted it works based on the tiny knowledge that several institutions use it and they would expose themselves to needless legal liability if it did not.
For some its a matter of principal.
For people like me, who have no experience, nor knowledge of BG44, I blindly accepted it works based on the tiny knowledge that several institutions use it and they would expose themselves to needless legal liability if it did not.
#49
08-14-2017, 11:09 AM
Veteran Member
Are you able to post (at least part of) that advice? Which engine(s) does it apply to? How often should it be used and in what quantity? Any other info from Jaguar about it?
#50
08-14-2017, 11:18 AM
Veteran Member
Again that is not opinion- rather Alarmingly wrong statements. And you are leveraging authority- in this case the great book called the owner's manual.
Owners manuals have no way of being revised. Therein lies its ability to be the last word. And flawed logic to use it as the 10 commandments.
In fact my owner's manual has 3 supplementary updates.
Jaguar subsequently has specifically identified the use of fuel additives as the thing to do, and namely BG44. Proving neither the book nor Jaguar had it right the first time a decade ago when the book was printed. But unlike you, Jaguar is acknowledging they were wrong.
Owners manuals have no way of being revised. Therein lies its ability to be the last word. And flawed logic to use it as the 10 commandments.
In fact my owner's manual has 3 supplementary updates.
Jaguar subsequently has specifically identified the use of fuel additives as the thing to do, and namely BG44. Proving neither the book nor Jaguar had it right the first time a decade ago when the book was printed. But unlike you, Jaguar is acknowledging they were wrong.
#51
08-14-2017, 11:47 AM
Veteran Member
#52
08-14-2017, 12:10 PM
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Perth Ontario Canada
Posts: 11,058
Received 2,255 Likes
on
1,840 Posts
BP Australia found out the hard way what happens when you try 'the more is better' silliness.
#53
08-14-2017, 12:11 PM
Veteran Member
Important
Those of you who agree with using fuel additives.
If you look at the JLR suggestion to use BK44- the only thing in bold is do not use more than 2 cans per oil change. Which underscores my point that it accumulates in the oil. Which is a good thing, but one has to be cautious of thinning oil, as I had mention with Techron in the very first post.
This is also why they cant have the recommended dosage mixed in with fuel because some people consume more fuel and some less. The issue is not the guy who consumes less, but the legal liability of over-diluting the oil of the guy that uses a lot of fuel- and potentially causing him engine damage.
Hope that explains at least to some why its a logical impossibility to mix proper amounts of detergent with gasoline. It does not burn off.
If you look at the JLR suggestion to use BK44- the only thing in bold is do not use more than 2 cans per oil change. Which underscores my point that it accumulates in the oil. Which is a good thing, but one has to be cautious of thinning oil, as I had mention with Techron in the very first post.
This is also why they cant have the recommended dosage mixed in with fuel because some people consume more fuel and some less. The issue is not the guy who consumes less, but the legal liability of over-diluting the oil of the guy that uses a lot of fuel- and potentially causing him engine damage.
Hope that explains at least to some why its a logical impossibility to mix proper amounts of detergent with gasoline. It does not burn off.
#54
08-14-2017, 02:01 PM
Veteran Member
#55
08-14-2017, 02:22 PM
Veteran Member
I believe the difference is that BG44K is a "dump in the tank" product and the product you're referring to is used as part of the service they perform on your car at one of their service locations.
The following users liked this post:
pwpacp (08-14-2017)
#56
08-14-2017, 02:25 PM
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Perth Ontario Canada
Posts: 11,058
Received 2,255 Likes
on
1,840 Posts
There is no recommendation from Jag to use it in any car. It was a Land Rover issued document and only for certain models under certain circumstances. There is no recommendation for regular usage as a preventative measure.
#57
08-14-2017, 02:28 PM
Veteran Member
I researched the BK44 after PK4144 introduced it to us.
Glad I kept an open mind and actually looked it up.
They are showing some very good results.
https://www.bgprod.com/bgfueltest/th...s-to-the-test/
I will have to ask around about how good it works on pistons. According to JLR it should work on pistons.
Glad I kept an open mind and actually looked it up.
They are showing some very good results.
https://www.bgprod.com/bgfueltest/th...s-to-the-test/
I will have to ask around about how good it works on pistons. According to JLR it should work on pistons.
#59
08-14-2017, 02:31 PM
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Perth Ontario Canada
Posts: 11,058
Received 2,255 Likes
on
1,840 Posts
There is also no recommendation from Jaguar to use it at a service location.