Does anybody use fuel additives to 93 octane gasoline to keep the fuel system clean?

__________________

Not I. There is enough of that stuff in the fuel already. I change brands every couple months as the stuff like Techron does leave deposits that the additive within Shell, Citgo, whatever eats and vice versa.

__________________
*******************************
The search tool is your friend. It is very
likely that your question has already been
answered countless times.Very,very likely.
*******************************
*******************************
Cayman S - a portable amusement park

- 2006 Cayman S
- 2003 Dakota SXT
- 1963 Studebaker Avanti, R2, 4-Speed
*******************************

LL

Do you have a preference of fuel brands. I like BP and I think that shell is OK too. Is there a good way to rate the products against each other?

__________________

Hey FMarshall,

Just curious as to how you determined that the cross use of different gasolines and their additives have a "self canceling" effect on deposit buildup. I've never heard this before and I'm interested in better understanding how you came to this conclusion.


Thanks,

__________________
Tracy
San Jose, CA
2007 Cayman S
Artic Silver/Black

I know a little bit about fuel...

One of the properties of fuel additives used in name brand gas is definitely neutralizing potential contaminants.

However, to my knowledge there is no negative build up from any one type of gas and likewise there is no canceling out by switching gas brands.

Its possible that by switching brands, you do get more overall benefit. For example, if one brand uses more lubricating and cleaning agents, then using that brand once and a while may help engine life. But another brand may have more additives to reduce knock or include oxygenating elements and you might get better performance using that brand more regularly.

Sadly there is no way short of a chemistry lab to say how different brands formulate their additives. I can tell you that they are all more or less the same, just different proportions. I can also tell you that its worth it to buy name brand gas with additives over no-name gas.

Thanks for that. I try to stick with either BP or Shell but I don't have a really good reason. Amoco had always had a reputation of being a clean gas so when they became BP I bllindly followed. Appreciate the info

__________________

I use the product in the link below as an additive to 93 octane. I don't use it necessarily for cleaning effects nor do I use it for the supposed fuel efficiency increase that they claim (I haven't noticed an increase). I am using in for improved break-in of my engine. In my truck and SUV I can tell a difference in the car when I have added the product vs. not. I haven't had my CS long enough to do a comparison. I am not saying there is a horsepower increase or anything like that (though between you and me I'm pretty sure it adds 80 hp at the wheels ). The product isn't available at any retailers and is hard to come by. The company primarily deals in industrial applications (fleets of trucks, etc.)

American Clean Energy | Product Line | Gasoline Catalyst

I learned about the product from an article on breaking in race engines. Below is the relevant excerpt:

"Cylinder Bore Specific Break-In Lubes. Now that we've handled the flat-tappet cam situation, it's time to consider the source of the engine's greatest frictional losses-the bores, rings, and pistons. A steady and lengthy break-in helps cut the final frictional level where the parts stabilize, and the same procedure also leads to the best cylinder seal. But there is something of a compromise going on here. We need a lube on the bores to cut friction and wear, but we do not need lots of oil in the upper cylinder or on the cylinder walls because the octane value of the fuel can be compromised and unwanted additional drag on the rings is produced. But the bores will experience more friction and wear without adequate lubrication, and we don't want that, either.

Here, it's worth taking a few pages out of Caterpillar's test portfolios. Quite a few years back, an experimental marine-sized diesel was giving the company severe problems with bore and ring wear. A rather unique and effective upper cylinder fuel additive was used, and the problem simply went away. I did some 250 hours of A-to-B tests on this additive about 15 years ago for an EPA report and found that in a worst-case scenario for the test engines concerned, ring and bore wear was axed by no less than 600 percent!

Here is how it apparently works. First, this additive (now commercially known as American Clean Energy Systems or ACES) must be mixed in very low concentrations with the fuel. When the combustion cycle takes place, the additive burns into a high-grade synthetic lube that coats the cylinder walls from the topside down with a lube layer just a few molecules thick. Remember, on the way down, the rings scrape much of the oil off the bores. The lube component is spread thinly on the bores with this additive, so on the way up, pistons and rings should not even touch the bores.

Over the years I have found this additive to be highly effective at prolonging the life of rings and bores. Given a top-notch air filter, 2,000 racing miles result in near-zero wear on rings and bores. Last year, I tore down the engine from my GMC Sierra tow truck. The intent was to install a valve train and heads to complement the Magnusson supercharger that was to be subsequently installed. This engine had 106,000 hard miles on it (and I mean hard). I followed my own advice here, and as with all my other engines, the result was near-zero wear. This engine went back into the truck with the original factory rings and bearings!"

Disclaimer: I am not making any claims about this product, nor am I associated with the referenced company in any way other than having purchased one of their products. I am just reporting on an additive that I use in conjunction with 93 octane fuel.

In Canada the brands are somewhat different, I think that a couple of companies highly advertise that their gas "cleans" your engine (eg. Petro-Canada) while others advertise performance (eg. Shell's F1 tied advertisements). Its likely that their formulas do actually follow their advertising, simply because it would be a PR nightmare if someone did a test and found out that the brand advertising "clean" is less-clean, or that the brand advertising performance had the worst performance.

Emissions is a big deal these days so I think that the trend in gasoline now and in the near future will be to provide fuel which lowers emissions (however slightly).

I'm skeptical about the product linked above simply because they make "too many claims". Generally I would say that like many things, there is a trade-off. If you want lower emissions or want to add lubricants or other things, you will actually be trading off performance. Likewise, if you increase performance you often do so at the expense of something else. Any product that tells you that it improves all areas is very often bunk. They also make some strange claims such as MMT being an inert ingredient.

http://vettenet.org/octane.html

I knew I had read this before here.
I try to change up my brand every 3-4k...figure it can't hurt.

Great info thanks.

__________________

__________________
*******************************
The search tool is your friend. It is very
likely that your question has already been
answered countless times.Very,very likely.
*******************************
*******************************
Cayman S - a portable amusement park

- 2006 Cayman S
- 2003 Dakota SXT
- 1963 Studebaker Avanti, R2, 4-Speed
*******************************

LL

I use Shell and Chevron, but I think any of the big name ones are good.

__________________
*******************************
The search tool is your friend. It is very
likely that your question has already been
answered countless times.Very,very likely.
*******************************
*******************************
Cayman S - a portable amusement park