Wildguzzi.com

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: azguzzirep on December 06, 2016, 01:47:59 AM

Title: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: azguzzirep on December 06, 2016, 01:47:59 AM
Yeah, a gasoline thread.

Someone can end it quickly if there is a link to a previous discussion .

However, I remember a friend who wouldn't put  Arco gasoline into his new H-D bagger. "I only run brand Xxx in my bike"  he says.

So. Besides ethanol gasoline isn't it all the same quality?
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: screamday on December 06, 2016, 05:00:21 AM
I have no scientific evidence, but my vehicles all seem to run better and get better gas mileage when I use Shell gas. I alternate between Shell and Speedway.......don't know who supplies Speedway, those are just the two most prominent stations on my daily routes.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: rocker59 on December 06, 2016, 05:23:15 AM
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Tier_Detergent_Gasoline
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Nic in Western NYS on December 06, 2016, 05:33:58 AM
Top Tier designation for sure.  If available, Chevron because of the Techron additive.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Kev m on December 06, 2016, 05:39:17 AM
All gasoline meets minimum standards. I suspect that's enough for most circumstances and feel a lot of people who claim x runs better on this octane or brand are fooling themselves. That said I'm sure there are exceptions, but it might be more a case of a station where higher octane sirs longer or whose supplier uses more ethanol/oxygenates more than the additive package. I mean hour much of the additive package is detergent and not directly related to combustion properties.

Also, it may vary regionally, but many different gas stations around here are all filled by the products from the same refinery.

Years ago my ex's Dad was a fuel engineer for Sunoco who told us to never waste money on the 89 Octane (they sold 87 Octane as the base fuel around here), because it wasn't worth their effort to have different base stock or additives and the 87 was literally the 89.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: screamday on December 06, 2016, 06:59:51 AM
Just did a little research and found out that Speedway is a subsidiary of Marathon Petroleum Corporation.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Gliderjohn on December 06, 2016, 07:25:54 AM
I think only the additives may vary some by brand. When I was working I frequently drove by a large refinery going into work and gas trucks of all brands were lined up each morning.
GliderJohn
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: drlapo on December 06, 2016, 09:22:19 AM
Mobil is best according to an article in Cycle magazine around 40 years ago
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: cookiemech on December 06, 2016, 09:23:23 AM
OK, not sure why I'm replying to a gasoline thread, because it's a lot like religion . . .

That being said, I always run Top Tier gas in everything here (cars and motorcycles). The ONLY objective evidence that I have indicating a difference is what I see on my Harleys. When I first had my 2007 Road King, I bought gas wherever I happened to be at the time I needed it, paying no attention to brand. And sometimes its idle was crappy and sometimes good. When I would perform each service (at 5K mile intervals), the inside of the throttle body was filthy black.

As I became aware of Top Tier gas (probably the bike had 25K miles or so), I started using it exclusively. Idle quality improved dramatically, and the inside of the throttle body was now nearly clean when I did each service. That part clearly is not imagination. Bike now has 48K.

I do not notice any difference in performance, idle quality, gas mileage or anything else in the other bikes or the cars.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: normzone on December 06, 2016, 09:27:20 AM
Southern California report here - my car and bike are happy with Shell but readily ping on Arco. No clue about Exxon ...
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: TBShorty on December 06, 2016, 09:39:18 AM
I never put ARCO in anything I own.  I had a 55 F100 with a hot small block that just refused to run on the stuff.  Even my new cars felt down on power if I gassed up at ARCO.  I don't think they maintain there equipment as well as other stations either.  I found water in the gas that I filled my lawn mower with.  Besides they're owned by British Petroleum, arseholes.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Kev m on December 06, 2016, 10:51:16 AM



When I first had my 2007 Road King, I bought gas wherever I happened to be at the time I needed it, paying no attention to brand. And sometimes its idle was crappy and sometimes good. When I would perform each service (at 5K mile intervals), the inside of the throttle body was filthy black.

As I became aware of Top Tier gas (probably the bike had 25K miles or so), I started using it exclusively. Idle quality improved dramatically, and the inside of the throttle body was now nearly clean when I did each service. That part clearly is not imagination. Bike now has 48K.



I wonder how the quality of fuel that never gets sprayed in a throttle body keeps it clean? Especially when the primary reason for Harley throttle bodies to gum up are the head breathers vented to the body.

Your 07 didn't have an EVAP system did it?

I had one of the first EFI Harleys back in 96 (EVO RK with Weber-Marelli EFI) and I had to manually clean the throttle body every 10k or so no matter what fuel I used.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Dilliw on December 06, 2016, 11:11:06 AM
I believe that high volume gas stations are more important than the brand of the fuel they sell.  Locally I buy my gas at Sam's because I see the truck there most everyday. Fresh is best.

The Griso gets ethanol free however thanks to the pimples and the bump on the plastic tank.  We have it in 89 octane from Marathon and BP nearby.

Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Haze on December 06, 2016, 11:28:31 AM
I have a 1967 Alfa Romeo. I bring this up because it knocks on anything other than Exxon, Shell, BP. Even Sunoco causes it problems. It was designed for lead and higher octane ratings than anything we have today, so this is what I do. If I want to know if a gas is any good. I take the Alfa down and filler her up, always with Super. This is what I have discovered doing this. Some gas is better than others. The three I listed above work well in the car, but what is more interesting are the lower name brands like Liberty and stuff like that. The car can't run on them without significant overheating, and I think it is this. Ethanol gas has a short shelf life from manufacture to use. I believe that the lower brands are created to help dispose of gas that is reaching its expiration date and started absorbing a fair amount of water and otherwise breaking down.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Tom H on December 06, 2016, 11:40:42 AM
I've been using Mobil for a few years in my bikes. Lately they have been slightly pinging, not bad, just know it's there mainly on the freeway. Thought it was one of the bikes needed a tune up until I noticed it was all three.

Trying different gas for a bit to see if it makes a difference. Might just be the winter mix for SoCa?? Was ok for the summer.

Tom
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: sib on December 06, 2016, 12:00:32 PM
Well (snapping suspenders), I feel better and I think my V7II runs better when I use the cheapest gas I can find.  Often that's Speedway but it can also be gas from a seedy station with rusty, noisy pumps, managed by shifty-eyed English-challenged third worlders.  No offense intended.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: bad Chad on December 06, 2016, 12:04:00 PM
I run both top and non top gas in our cars and have never noticed a difference. I generally only run top in my Gussie but never noticed any variation in brand.   I do however add Sea Foam to all every few months to a tank full.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: cookiemech on December 06, 2016, 12:08:44 PM

I wonder how the quality of fuel that never gets sprayed in a throttle body keeps it clean? Especially when the primary reason for Harley throttle bodies to gum up are the head breathers vented to the body.

Your 07 didn't have an EVAP system did it?

I had one of the first EFI Harleys back in 96 (EVO RK with Weber-Marelli EFI) and I had to manually clean the throttle body every 10k or so no matter what fuel I used.

No EVAP on mine (Pennsylvania). Now I have no idea why the TB used to be filthy on both sides of the butterfly, but no longer is . . . always have used the stock HD air filter and washed it at 5K intervals, and the bike is 100% stock mechanically.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: rboe on December 06, 2016, 12:11:59 PM
Old old data point but back in the early 90's I bought a Suzuki Samurai and it got crappy mileage. Being cheap I'd use what ever gas but for shits and giggles I started to burn Texaco gas. I'd run a tank or two of that and my mileage increased. After a while every third tank I'd put in Texaco gas, the other tanks being whatever was cheap. Arco gas at the time had a very bad rep here in Phoenix so I avoided it for the most part.

Once I upgraded my car to the minivan I stuck with Chevron, Shell or Texaco. Same for the bike (although I'll do Circle K from time to time because they are close). On road trips it's Chevron or Shell, sometimes Mobil. Mileage remains pretty constant now. No more cheap gas unless it's the only station in town.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Kev m on December 06, 2016, 12:19:17 PM
I'm not going to pretend I have the answers. But I have some ideas and maybe those smarter than me about fuels can chime in and help clarify.

I have a 1967 Alfa Romeo. I bring this up because it knocks on anything other than Exxon, Shell, BP. Even Sunoco causes it problems. It was designed for lead and higher octane ratings than anything we have today, so this is what I do. If I want to know if a gas is any good. I take the Alfa down and filler her up, always with Super. This is what I have discovered doing this. Some gas is better than others. The three I listed above work well in the car, but what is more interesting are the lower name brands like Liberty and stuff like that. The car can't run on them without significant overheating, and I think it is this. Ethanol gas has a short shelf life from manufacture to use. I believe that the lower brands are created to help dispose of gas that is reaching its expiration date and started absorbing a fair amount of water and otherwise breaking down.

So we know this about fuels, octane equals stability or a resistance to burning.

So If your Alfa knocks on the others, there's something about the one (could be as simple as actual octane or some other factor that is effecting stability) that helps it run right for the Alfa.

But of course, that doesn't mean the same fuel is "better" for anything else right?

Now the overheating part is funny. It can't be water. Water doesn't help combustion, so it's not going to create additional heat in the combustion chamber right. But ironically Ethanol is an oxygenate. It makes the air/fuel ratio less rich/more lean, and more lean = hotter. So could it simply be a higher content of Ethanol (don't most pumps say language like MAY CONTAIN UP TO 10% Ethanol or the like)? Ethanol should be cheaper, since it's got less bang for the buck, so a higher percentage might mean cheaper right? Just thinking out loud.

Again though, none of this might mean anything to a motor that runs just fine on it, except maybe lower efficiency/fewer mpg.

No EVAP on mine (Pennsylvania). Now I have no idea why the TB used to be filthy on both sides of the butterfly, but no longer is . . . always have used the stock HD air filter and washed it at 5K intervals, and the bike is 100% stock mechanically.

I was in PA too, till 2 years ago, so ok. Sure would like to hear a reasonable explanation of that one. Though just the fact that you can wash the OEM element and don't replace it from oil fouling means your breathers really aren't carrying too much oil mist into that throttle body anymore. Why that would change with fuel boggles my mind. But I'd sure like to know how to have that happen on mine lol.


Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Muzz on December 06, 2016, 12:30:34 PM

I wonder how the quality of fuel that never gets sprayed in a throttle body keeps it clean? Especially when the primary reason for Harley throttle bodies to gum up are the head breathers vented to the body.


Kev, my theory is that although the fuel might not get sprayed in there, because of the valve overlap a small amount of fuel and engine afterburn will get blown back up the induction tract. This gives rise to the black deposits that some are reporting.

As far as gas goes, we have had the Techron out here for years. I can't say I notice any difference between the Shell, Caltex or BP we have out here.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Kev m on December 06, 2016, 01:08:39 PM
Kev, my theory is that although the fuel might not get sprayed in there, because of the valve overlap a small amount of fuel and engine afterburn will get blown back up the induction tract. This gives rise to the black deposits that some are reporting.

Like Direct Injection motors fouling the intake valves. Maybe.

I remain skeptical just because of the amount of oil mist that is usually carried by the breathers (which would coat anything there anyway). But maybe the TC motors are better with that than EVOs. <shrugs>
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Triple Jim on December 06, 2016, 02:00:59 PM
From Wikipedia:  "Techron is available at Chevron, Texaco, and Caltex stations in all three grades of gasoline."
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Arizona Wayne on December 06, 2016, 02:23:05 PM
Arco gas has used ethanol for decades before  other brands were required to use it for Fed. Govt. regulations.  Sam's Club gas is bought only from major brands that give them the best price at the time-Mobil, Chevron, etc.

I like Unocal and use Circle K, 7-ll, or just about any other gas that has the best price.   Some say the independent gas stations get leftover gas and yes, fresh gas has a certain shelf life, so if the gas you buy is stale your vehicle might ping, but closed loop EFI automatically adjusts the timing for such situations too.  In general for sure major brands have better/fresher gas most the time, but some high volume gas/stores get major brands too, I believe.   Nowadays I really can't tell the difference mixing according to what brand/price I can find when needed.  With ethanol gas you lose a couple mpg vs. real gas.  :smiley:
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: azguzzirep on December 06, 2016, 02:47:29 PM
Well, this is fun!

In Germany we have  Shell, Esso, Aral and BP, plus a few other minor players. When I refuel, I always get 95 octane and don't worry about it. My bike runs fine all the time.

Shell does sell a 'racing ' fuel that is 100 octane but it is expensive! I've only put it in a couple times. I don't think they sell gasoline additives here. I haven't seen them at auto parts stores. Only non freeze additives for winter.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: sdhow on December 06, 2016, 05:44:02 PM
I can speak for California; fuels sold in California can only be refined at a California refineries and must meet strict CA Air Resources Board (CARB) blending regulations.  That said, Winter blends will all be an E10...soon to be raised to an E15, from my sources.  This means all your fuel racks (where you see all the delivery trucks lined up) have the same fuels.  Heck, 91 is the highest octane we have available for on-road, unless you get a racing 100 octane unleaded, which Phillips (certain 76 stations) and Sunoco (no retail pumps, specialty distribution only) sell for like $7/gal. out here.

Again, the big issue is how the fuel is handled once it reaches the station.  I used to only use Chevron, until my closest Chevron station screwed me over TWICE.  Every time I filled after a storm, my vehicles (bikes and autos) would start hard or sputter when they got down to half a tank.  Come to find out, their fuel tank covers leaked and I had water in my gas!  Dilliw is right, stations that turn their gas over in high volume have the freshest inventory and that is ALWAYS a good thing!  This is why diesel buyers usually prefer to go to the truck stops rather than the local C-Store.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Aaron D. on December 06, 2016, 06:11:40 PM
Modern combustion chambers do work wonders. though I've ever had a sensitive engine as far as brands of gasoline are concerned.

Seems most of them just request not-too-much water in them..

Frankly if my motorcycle was fussy about gasoline I would get rid of it and find one willing to ride wherever I wanted to go. In near 50 years I haven't had an issue yet.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Haze on December 06, 2016, 11:19:35 PM
I'm not going to pretend I have the answers. But I have some ideas and maybe those smarter than me about fuels can chime in and help clarify.

So we know this about fuels, octane equals stability or a resistance to burning.

So If your Alfa knocks on the others, there's something about the one (could be as simple as actual octane or some other factor that is effecting stability) that helps it run right for the Alfa.

But of course, that doesn't mean the same fuel is "better" for anything else right?

Now the overheating part is funny. It can't be water. Water doesn't help combustion, so it's not going to create additional heat in the combustion chamber right. But ironically Ethanol is an oxygenate. It makes the air/fuel ratio less rich/more lean, and more lean = hotter. So could it simply be a higher content of Ethanol (don't most pumps say language like MAY CONTAIN UP TO 10% Ethanol or the like)? Ethanol should be cheaper, since it's got less bang for the buck, so a higher percentage might mean cheaper right? Just thinking out loud.

Again though, none of this might mean anything to a motor that runs just fine on it, except maybe lower efficiency/fewer mpg.

I was in PA too, till 2 years ago, so ok. Sure would like to hear a reasonable explanation of that one. Though just the fact that you can wash the OEM element and don't replace it from oil fouling means your breathers really aren't carrying too much oil mist into that throttle body anymore. Why that would change with fuel boggles my mind. But I'd sure like to know how to have that happen on mine lol.

I use the Alfa as my test bed because it is operating on the edge of what modern fuels can deliver. My father's Cadillac CTS with direct injection can run on anything because it is direct injected. All machines will use fuel differently depending on their design. The question here is whether some gas is better than others, and I have to say unequivocally that yes some fuel is more stable delivered at the pump, whether that is because of different formulation or post manufacture delivery whose to say. I do also know this. Ethanol fuel is less stable than older formulations with Lead or MTBE as anti-knock compounds. As it breaks down, absorbs water, it lowers its octane leading to knocking. It is the knocking that causes overheating because what is knocking? It is preignition of the fuel so instead of a bang when the spark plug goes off there is this inefficient burn that translates the chemical energy of the fuel to air mixture not into motive force but heat energy. That is why the engine heats up on bad gas, you get less gas mileage, less power ... all that jazz.

Now what is good to use in your motorcycle? Personally I believe that if the bike is injected, then it is hard to screw up as long as you stick with the octane rating, which means staying away from off brand providers because I really don't believe that those companies are reliably providing the octane that is on the sticker by the pump handle. I have no data to support that. It is just my personal opinion.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Kev m on December 07, 2016, 04:07:23 AM
I use the Alfa as my test bed because it is operating on the edge of what modern fuels can deliver. My father's Cadillac CTS with direct injection can run on anything because it is direct injected. All machines will use fuel differently depending on their design. The question here is whether some gas is better than others, and I have to say unequivocally that yes some fuel is more stable delivered at the pump, whether that is because of different formulation or post manufacture delivery whose to say. I do also know this. Ethanol fuel is less stable than older formulations with Lead or MTBE as anti-knock compounds. As it breaks down, absorbs water, it lowers its octane leading to knocking. It is the knocking that causes overheating because what is knocking? It is preignition of the fuel so instead of a bang when the spark plug goes off there is this inefficient burn that translates the chemical energy of the fuel to air mixture not into motive force but heat energy. That is why the engine heats up on bad gas, you get less gas mileage, less power ... all that jazz.

Now what is good to use in your motorcycle? Personally I believe that if the bike is injected, then it is hard to screw up as long as you stick with the octane rating, which means staying away from off brand providers because I really don't believe that those companies are reliably providing the octane that is on the sticker by the pump handle. I have no data to support that. It is just my personal opinion.

I guess I still take issue with "better".

Better for what? More stability is only better if it's needed.

Too high an octane means increased deposits and emissions.

Granted that tends to be "better" then knocking for sure, but still.

Better for one doesn't necessarily translate into better for the next.

The Alfa may just be a needy beeoch.

All that said, I'm not sure I'm buying your ethanol logic regarding water absorption and lowering octane. I mean first off isn't ethanol used to boost octane? And if it absorbs water doesn't that make it HARDER to ignite (not easier) which if true would effectively raise stability not lower it.

<shrugs>

Edit - PS I've wondered what we get at the pumps too. And it may vary by state, but last time I researched it I found articles that suggest NJ is very good about their bureau of weights and measures taking samples to confirm proper metering, octane, and lack of contaminants. I wonder what it's like where you live.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Rough Edge racing on December 07, 2016, 06:48:25 AM

Too high an octane means increased deposits and emissions.


 Interesting claim...you have proof ? 

   
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Kev m on December 07, 2016, 07:39:41 AM
Interesting claim...you have proof ? 

Other than it being taught in tech school, listed in multiple repair manuals, and the base logic (octane = resistance to combustion, and too much resistance to combustion = more unburnt materials)?

I used to have a go to link from a Canadian TV station that did back-to-back testing on a run of the mill sedan (maybe GM product). It was a 20 minute or so segment where they drained the tank, filled it with premium, ran it a bit to allow trim to set, then put it on a dyno and pipe sniffer. The repeated the test with regular. The dyno/exhaust test operator was surprised at the results, higher emissions on the premium.

To be clear this was a mile compression, naturally aspirated motor that was spec'd for "regular" octane fuel. Obviously results could differ with other vehicles, but I think it spoke to the theory well.

Ahh, found it, it's on YouTube now, I think it used to be on the TV station's link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPPkPAbzwbU


Now granted, this doesn't talk about the deposits, but as we know, more unburnt HCs means more deposits.

Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Rough Edge racing on December 07, 2016, 08:01:35 AM
Other than it being taught in tech school, listed in multiple repair manuals, and the base logic (octane = resistance to combustion, and too much resistance to combustion = more unburnt materials)?


Now granted, this doesn't talk about the deposits, but as we know, more unburnt HCs means more deposits.

 This is a often debated topic on racing forums...Higher octane is not an overall resistance to burning, the higher octane prevents premature combustion of the end gasses in the combustion chamber that causes detonation... This is exactly what tetra ethyl lead  does...However I don't have knowledge if the anti knock ingredients in unleaded pump gas function exactly the same..
 
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: sign216 on December 07, 2016, 08:03:26 AM
I talked with the driver of a fuel tanker truck in Massachusetts.  His truck caught my eye when I saw the truck had changeable placards for the brand of fuel he had.  Driver said the distributer uses the same base fuel for every brand, but that every brand has an different additive package.  If he's making Shell deliverys, the truck get's the Shell additives and then puts up the Shell placard.  So on for other brands.  Driver said one brand (I forget which) use their only their own trucks, but other share the same similar trucking services.
 
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: cookiemech on December 07, 2016, 08:21:11 AM
I talked with the driver of a fuel tanker truck in Massachusetts.  His truck caught my eye when I saw the truck had changeable placards for the brand of fuel he had.  Driver said the distributer uses the same base fuel for every brand, but that every brand has an different additive package.  If he's making Shell deliverys, the truck get's the Shell additives and then puts up the Shell placard.  So on for other brands.  Driver said one brand (I forget which) use their only their own trucks, but other share the same similar trucking services.

Wow! I guess in Mass they actually CARE what customers think they're getting when they buy a particular brand. It stands to reason that all gasoline in a particular area comes from the same pipeline . . . and it is my understanding from a number of articles I've read that they just add a different package for each retailer.

Here in western PA there are mostly nondescript tankers delivering fuel to each station, regardless of brand, EXCEPT for GetGo (Giant Eagle supermarket affiliate) and Sheetz (privately held chain). Neither, of course, is Top Tier.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Rough Edge racing on December 07, 2016, 08:23:19 AM
 Kev. I looked at the video and it's seems accurate once past the  "you're getting screwed as a consumer " theme... The owners manual of my 97 Jeep says the same thing." The engine will perform properly on 87 octane and only use a higher grade if it pings..."
  None of this applies to vehicles recommended by the manufacturer to run on higher octane fuel...like many newer sporty cars...And some not so sporty...
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: sign216 on December 07, 2016, 08:26:56 AM
Wow! I guess in Mass they actually CARE what customers think they're getting when they buy a particular brand. It stands to reason that all gasoline in a particular area comes from the same pipeline . . . and it is my understanding from a number of articles I've read that they just add a different package for each retailer.

Here in western PA there are mostly nondescript tankers delivering fuel to each station, regardless of brand, EXCEPT for GetGo (Giant Eagle supermarket affiliate) and Sheetz (privately held chain). Neither, of course, is Top Tier.

Cookie, I was impressed that different brands actually had different additive packs. 
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Kev m on December 07, 2016, 08:44:36 AM
Kev. I looked at the video and it's seems accurate once past the  "you're getting screwed as a consumer " theme... The owners manual of my 97 Jeep says the same thing." The engine will perform properly on 87 octane and only use a higher grade if it pings..."
  None of this applies to vehicles recommended by the manufacturer to run on higher octane fuel...like many newer sporty cars...And some not so sporty...

Sure, I guess everything needs a hook right lol.

But agreed.

And shy of pinging from too low an octane, I suspect most of us worry more than we need to about the RCHs of all these things - oil, fuel, etc.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: rboe on December 07, 2016, 12:13:19 PM
Water should not impede ignition in the cylinder unless you have a ton of it. But water has a very high work function, meaning it absorbs a lot of heat before changing phases. Not sure about today but high performance engines in WWII used water injection during high boost to control the excess heat generated  by all the excitement of battle (and boost....).

I would think water in the gas, for us poor schleps motoring around town, will be a problem when it freezes in the gas line causing starvation, not well mixed so you get too much water going through the injectors messing with the proper fuel air mixture and robbing heat in the combustion chamber during the burn which would reduce power.

If one could keep the fuel water mixture nice and stirred up so you didn't end up with "clumps" of water going through the injection system I bet many problems would go away until the fuel water ratio got really out of hand. I have no idea what level that would be at. Just brain storming here.

If memory serves, lead was also added to lube the valve train in some older motors. Some designs had to use clever designs to deal with excess lead deposits (memory is very blurred on this as I read an article in Wooden Boat over 25 years ago as boaters were very concerned about the new lead free gas and what it would do to old boat motors - it appears lead free was better for them). The aviation industry is going through the same hand wringing now.

I'll go back to wondering where the tinging is coming from.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: rocker59 on December 07, 2016, 12:17:33 PM
Water should not impede ignition in the cylinder unless you have a ton of it. But water has a very high work function, meaning it absorbs a lot of heat before changing phases. Not sure about today but high performance engines in WWII used water injection during high boost to control the excess heat generated  by all the excitement of battle (and boost....).

 

Water Injection Systems were also popular in the Auto Aftermarket in the 1970s and 1980s to help owners deal with pinging.

A quick internet search shows Summit and Jegs still sell them for the drag racers...

Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Kev m on December 07, 2016, 12:24:28 PM
Well both those comments sorta agree that water in the fuel isn't going to CAUSE pinging and overheating. Yes?

Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: rocker59 on December 07, 2016, 12:25:55 PM
Well both those comments sorta agree that water in the fuel isn't going to CAUSE pinging and overheating. Yes?

Water in fuel cools the the charge and reduces pinging/pre-ignition knock...

The water injection systems use a water/methanol mixture.

The injection systems are controlled, though.  Leaving E10 gasoline sitting around absorbing moisture would probably allow it to absorb more than is good, and would rather likely be bad for power and corrosion...
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: normzone on December 07, 2016, 12:30:12 PM
[rocker59], that link goes to a page in limbo, apparently.

Back in the olden days, I saw water injection on turbocharged engines and alcohol/water vapor injection (vacuum insertion, actually) on naturally aspirated engines as a mileage enhancer. Results varied on the latter ...
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Air-Cooled on December 07, 2016, 12:34:03 PM
My experience echoes Kev's remarks. I used to use the highest octane levels in my carbureted bike and was constantly replacing the pilot jet due to clogging. Have not had a problem with the lower octane levels (Honda XR600R). I use 87 in cooler weather and I don't get pinging/detonation. In the summer I have to go up to 89. A kick start bike can be a real pain if you're pilot jet is too lean.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: rocker59 on December 07, 2016, 12:36:45 PM
[rocker59], that link goes to a page in limbo, apparently.
 

Wiki must have hot-linking disabled.  The article is there, if you search "Water Injection"
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: oldbike54 on December 07, 2016, 12:40:51 PM
 It might be good to remember that the octane rating system in place now gives lower ratings than the method used when the Alfa was built . Modern 91 octane equals 96 octane from then . I am curious about the overall health of the Alfa engine . Carbon buildup in the combustion chamber will cause an engine to ping , as will some other factors . Has the engine been apart and rebuilt since the advent of modern unleaded fuels ? What is the static compression ratio , and has that been checked against spec ?

 Dusty
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: rocker59 on December 07, 2016, 12:50:00 PM
It might be good to remember that the octane rating system in place now gives lower ratings than the method used when the Alfa was built . Modern 91 octane equals 96 octane from then . I am curious about the overall health of the Alfa engine . Carbon buildup in the combustion chamber will cause an engine to ping , as will some other factors . Has the engine been apart and rebuilt since the advent of modern unleaded fuels ? What is the static compression ratio , and has that been checked against spec ?

 Dusty

Something tells me HAZE is in Europe and pumping 95 RON into his '67 Alfa.

In North America, it would be (95 RON + 85 MON)/2.  Or, 90 at our pumps.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: oldbike54 on December 07, 2016, 01:18:03 PM
Something tells me HAZE is in Europe and pumping 95 RON into his '67 Alfa.

In North America, it would be (95 RON + 85 MON)/2.  Or, 90 at our pumps.

 He is in Pennsylvania .

 Dusty
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Rough Edge racing on December 07, 2016, 01:25:23 PM
My experience echoes Kev's remarks. I used to use the highest octane levels in my carbureted bike and was constantly replacing the pilot jet due to clogging. Have not had a problem with the lower octane levels (Honda XR600R). I use 87 in cooler weather and I don't get pinging/detonation. In the summer I have to go up to 89. A kick start bike can be a real pain if you're pilot jet is too lean.

  I believe Kev info meant combustion chamber deposits... Many of us run higher octane fuel and don't have carburetor deposit issues..
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Arizona Wayne on December 07, 2016, 01:56:31 PM
If your motor is designed for 87 octane gas and you put in higher octane you are wasting your gas $.   Fuel injected motors with 02 sensor are designed to adjust the timing of ignition to whatever the gas/altitude combination is best for efficient combustion.
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: sdhow on December 07, 2016, 02:01:19 PM
Quote
Here in western PA there are mostly nondescript tankers delivering fuel to each station, regardless of brand, EXCEPT for GetGo (Giant Eagle supermarket affiliate) and Sheetz (privately held chain). Neither, of course, is Top Tier.

What about this place?:


(http://thumb.ibb.co/jk7n6F/5208183.jpg) (http://ibb.co/jk7n6F)


Any idea what kind of additives are in their "package"???
Title: Re: Arco,Shell, Exxon different?
Post by: Arizona Wayne on December 07, 2016, 02:05:11 PM
What about this place?:


(http://thumb.ibb.co/jk7n6F/5208183.jpg) (http://ibb.co/jk7n6F)


Any idea what kind of additives are in their "package"???



Yuck, that additive is too sticky to put in MY motors.  :evil: