🚀 go-pugleaf

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
> I've never been one for thinking different suppliers have different fuel
> quality, but owning a diesel (hence the "ish") has changed my opinion.
>
> I've been plagued with repeated EML on the Vivaro, ODB reported as EGR
> (Exhaust Gas Re-circulation) valve or sensor issue and I was gearing
> myself up to taking it out[1] (the EGR) and cleaning it.
>
> But then went away for a month in it.
> The EML activated less and less and then not at all for the last 500
> miles or so (still not activated).
>
> The difference, I've not used CostCo "Premium" Diesel in that time. It
> must be cheap for a reason. Also upon research I note they add the
> additives on site, not at supplier.
>
> I might treat the XJR (OB Bike) to some Super High Octane Unleaded :-)
>
> [1] Couldn't do the spray cleaner in method as the MAP sensor would not
> let me run with air filter disconnected.

/delurk/

Yeah, it was always a right royal PITA having all those additives put into
fuels. I remember back when Shell started with the ‘Formula’ stuff many
years ago, we had cars coming in on transporters. A tanker driver told us
they tipped the additives into the tanker and hoped it had mixed by the
time it reached the delivery destination.

Not so bad now I suppose (haven’t been in the trade for a long time now).
However, the additives were always culprits for building gummy soot
deposits on various components (from sticky valves to coated O2 (aka
lambda) sensors, and of course the EGR valves).

A decent fuel cleaner can sometimes help - Fortron and Forte were about the
best we used. Otherwise it’s remove and clean time.

--
Andy H

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:103tf00$2246s$1@dont-email.me:

>
> The difference, I've not used CostCo "Premium" Diesel in that time. It
> must be cheap for a reason. Also upon research I note they add the
> additives on site, not at supplier.
>

that on site additive thing has to be apophrycal surely?

sadly, the person that would know is dead but I am sure he told me the
additives are added at the distribution depot once they know where the
truck is destined when it is a DHL or unbranded truck, rather than a retial
livery that gets the same every time.

Every truck gets the same base fuel and then there are separate feeds for
each brand's additive package. This is to ensure that a) the additive is
metered properly and b) compliance with H&S regs where you do not want
people sloshing around highly toxic chemicals and pouring them into
otherwise sealed bunkers on a retail site.

On 30/06/2025 12:45, Andy H wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
>> I've never been one for thinking different suppliers have different fuel
>> quality, but owning a diesel (hence the "ish") has changed my opinion.
>>
>> I've been plagued with repeated EML on the Vivaro, ODB reported as EGR
>> (Exhaust Gas Re-circulation) valve or sensor issue and I was gearing
>> myself up to taking it out[1] (the EGR) and cleaning it.
>

<snip>

> /delurk/
>
> Yeah, it was always a right royal PITA having all those additives put into
> fuels. I remember back when Shell started with the ‘Formula’ stuff many
> years ago, we had cars coming in on transporters. A tanker driver told us
> they tipped the additives into the tanker and hoped it had mixed by the
> time it reached the delivery destination.
>
> Not so bad now I suppose (haven’t been in the trade for a long time now).
> However, the additives were always culprits for building gummy soot
> deposits on various components (from sticky valves to coated O2 (aka
> lambda) sensors, and of course the EGR valves).

Sooo, you are sugesting don't bother with the "premium" stuff?
>
> A decent fuel cleaner can sometimes help - Fortron and Forte were about the
> best we used. Otherwise it’s remove and clean time.
>



--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
> On 30/06/2025 12:45, Andy H wrote:
>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
>>> I've never been one for thinking different suppliers have different fuel
>>> quality, but owning a diesel (hence the "ish") has changed my opinion.
>>>
>>> I've been plagued with repeated EML on the Vivaro, ODB reported as EGR
>>> (Exhaust Gas Re-circulation) valve or sensor issue and I was gearing
>>> myself up to taking it out[1] (the EGR) and cleaning it.
>>
>
> <snip>
>
>> /delurk/
>>
>> Yeah, it was always a right royal PITA having all those additives put into
>> fuels. I remember back when Shell started with the ‘Formula’ stuff many
>> years ago, we had cars coming in on transporters. A tanker driver told us
>> they tipped the additives into the tanker and hoped it had mixed by the
>> time it reached the delivery destination.
>>
>> Not so bad now I suppose (haven’t been in the trade for a long time now).
>> However, the additives were always culprits for building gummy soot
>> deposits on various components (from sticky valves to coated O2 (aka
>> lambda) sensors, and of course the EGR valves).
>
> Sooo, you are sugesting don't bother with the "premium" stuff?

I certainly don’t bother. I wouldn’t say don’t try it, but don’t be
surprised if you suffer with ‘placebo’ effect. It’s a very dark art, I’ve
only heard anecdotal evidence that premium might do some cleaning. I
personally don’t see it, if it’s just more of the gooey chemicals.

It’s probably more likely to make a difference by reducing the bio
percentage. Unless your engine is capable of retuning for premium, then
you’re just spending 10p/ltr more (or whatever it is at the moment).

I did try a couple of tanks in my petrol ASX during Covid (when it went
down to £1/ltr). It made fuck all difference.

There’s certainly no harm in bunging a couple of tanks through it, but as
you’ve already changed your supply, and seen a change, it won’t be a fair
test anyway.

--
Andy H

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:103uraf$2c5ft$1@dont-email.me:


>> Every truck gets the same base fuel and then there are separate feeds
>> for each brand's additive package. This is to ensure that a) the
>> additive is metered properly and b) compliance with H&S regs where
>> you do not want people sloshing around highly toxic chemicals and
>> pouring them into otherwise sealed bunkers on a retail site.
>
> You've done some research here then :-)
>

when you are drinking beer on SteveH's Shell expenses[1] you become very
tolerant of him droning on about his trade

[1] in the same National Hunt pub in Cheltenham where we last met [2]
[2] your lack of expenses disappointed me

On 30/06/2025 14:19, wessie wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:103tf00$2246s$1@dont-email.me:
>
>>
>> The difference, I've not used CostCo "Premium" Diesel in that time. It
>> must be cheap for a reason. Also upon research I note they add the
>> additives on site, not at supplier.
>>
>
> that on site additive thing has to be apophrycal surely?

Dunno, it was on the internet, so must be true :-)

More research needed, obviously. But it does seem strange that the issue
went away (or seems to) after no longer using CostCo

>
> sadly, the person that would know is dead but I am sure he told me the

You just can't depend on some people.

> additives are added at the distribution depot once they know where the
> truck is destined when it is a DHL or unbranded truck, rather than a retial
> livery that gets the same every time.
>
> Every truck gets the same base fuel and then there are separate feeds for
> each brand's additive package. This is to ensure that a) the additive is
> metered properly and b) compliance with H&S regs where you do not want
> people sloshing around highly toxic chemicals and pouring them into
> otherwise sealed bunkers on a retail site.

You've done some research here then :-)



--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 30/06/2025 08:39, YTC#1 wrote:
> I've never been one for thinking different suppliers have different fuel
> quality, but owning a diesel (hence the "ish") has changed my opinion.
>
> I've been plagued with repeated EML on the Vivaro, ODB reported as EGR
> (Exhaust Gas Re-circulation) valve or sensor issue and I was gearing
> myself up to taking it out[1] (the EGR) and cleaning it.
>
> But then went away for a month in it.
> The EML activated less and less and then not at all for the last 500
> miles or so (still not activated).
>
> The difference, I've not used CostCo "Premium" Diesel in that time. It
> must be cheap for a reason. Also upon research I note they add the
> additives on site, not at supplier.

Bear in mind that the term 'additives' may include water :-/
There was something of a scandal about this a few years ago.
As a general policy I never buy supermarket diesel for this reason
(petrol doesn't seem to have the same problem - or at least not affect
running so badly)

I also never buy the more expensive version of diesel but use my own
additive (from Millers) which works out much cheaper in the long run and
has proven itself in terms of less frequent bursts of 'clatter'
(whatever that signifies but its being doing it 10+ years now in our
van).  It has also proven itself in the much cleaner MoT results when on
test.

HTH

Chris

--
The Deuchars  BBB#40 COFF#14
Yamaha XV750SE & Suzuki GS550T
https://www.Deuchars.org.uk

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:104123b$2ucbm$4@dont-email.me:

> On 30/06/2025 21:46, wessie wrote:
>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:103uraf$2c5ft$1@dont-email.me:
>>
>>
>>>> Every truck gets the same base fuel and then there are separate feeds
>>>> for each brand's additive package. This is to ensure that a) the
>>>> additive is metered properly and b) compliance with H&S regs where
>>>> you do not want people sloshing around highly toxic chemicals and
>>>> pouring them into otherwise sealed bunkers on a retail site.
>>>
>>> You've done some research here then :-)
>>>
>>
>> when you are drinking beer on SteveH's Shell expenses[1] you become very
>> tolerant of him droning on about his trade
>>
>> [1] in the same National Hunt pub in Cheltenham where we last met [2]
>> [2] your lack of expenses disappointed me
>
> Jeez, how long ago was that?
>
>

pre May 2014 when I bought a house on the other side of Cheltenham

On 30/06/2025 21:46, wessie wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:103uraf$2c5ft$1@dont-email.me:
>
>
>>> Every truck gets the same base fuel and then there are separate feeds
>>> for each brand's additive package. This is to ensure that a) the
>>> additive is metered properly and b) compliance with H&S regs where
>>> you do not want people sloshing around highly toxic chemicals and
>>> pouring them into otherwise sealed bunkers on a retail site.
>>
>> You've done some research here then :-)
>>
>
> when you are drinking beer on SteveH's Shell expenses[1] you become very
> tolerant of him droning on about his trade
>
> [1] in the same National Hunt pub in Cheltenham where we last met [2]
> [2] your lack of expenses disappointed me

Jeez, how long ago was that?


--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 01/07/2025 17:42, Ace wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:49:29 +0100, "chrisnd @ukrm"
> <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:

> So how do these additives make an engine run cleaner? I mean, do they
> really? And just one tankful for the emmissions test, or does it need
> to be used over time?

They contain detergents and maybe other stuff that cleans the injector
nozzles. Supposedly, running a tank of premium fuel through the engine
once in a while helps.

When my Fourtrak failed an MOT, the tester suggested running a bottle of
cleaner through it. I did (bought elsewhere - he didn't try to sell me a
bottle) and it passed, but it could just have been luck of the draw if
it was marginal.

Supposedly an Italian tune-up just before the test and getting it really
warm helps.

> It's never ocurred to me that different fuel could affect the
> emissions test; I normally het mine in France where it's q lot
> cheaper, but it makes me wonder if differences in quality between
> there and Switzerland might also be a factor. Thought, anyone?


--

CHUMP #1 (CHarge Up Muppet)

Pip

On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:49:29 +0100, "chrisnd @ukrm"
<chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:


>I also never buy the more expensive version of diesel but use my own
>additive (from Millers) which works out much cheaper in the long run and
>has proven itself in terms of less frequent bursts of 'clatter'
>(whatever that signifies but its being doing it 10+ years now in our
>van).  It has also proven itself in the much cleaner MoT results when on
>test.

Interesting. I don't use any sort of additives in my TD5 LR Defender
but I think the emissions test is overdue. Last time they had to rev
the hell out of the engine to get it clean enough, and that was with
the performace 'chip' disconnected. True, there was a slight manifold
leak that might have effected it too, long since replaced, but...

I would say that the motor runs perfectly, starts first time every
time (as long as the battery's got enough charge) so I don't think
there's any advantage in general... or is there?


So how do these additives make an engine run cleaner? I mean, do they
really? And just one tankful for the emmissions test, or does it need
to be used over time?

It's never ocurred to me that different fuel could affect the
emissions test; I normally het mine in France where it's q lot
cheaper, but it makes me wonder if differences in quality between
there and Switzerland might also be a factor. Thought, anyone?
--
Ace
http://www.chaletbeauroc.com/

On 01/07/2025 19:39, PipL wrote:
>On 01/07/2025 17:42, Ace wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:49:29 +0100, "chrisnd @ukrm"
>> <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> So how do these additives make an engine run cleaner? I mean, do they
>> really? And just one tankful for the emmissions test, or does it need
>> to be used over time?
>
>They contain detergents and maybe other stuff that cleans the injector
>nozzles. Supposedly, running a tank of premium fuel through the engine
>once in a while helps.
>
>When my Fourtrak failed an MOT, the tester suggested running a bottle of
>cleaner through it. I did (bought elsewhere - he didn't try to sell me a
>bottle) and it passed, but it could just have been luck of the draw if
>it was marginal.
>
>Supposedly an Italian tune-up just before the test and getting it really
>warm helps.

For EURO 1-4 diesels I think the emissions test consists of a filter to
 measure the soot particles. The larger chunks are trapped in the filter
 (and measured) while the smaller ones pass through. Successive EURO norms
 use finer filters. The downside of this is that the engines have been
 developed not to produce much less soot just finer particles (eg. by using
 higher injection pressure) so that whereas the larger chunks don't get any
 further than your nose, the finer particles penetrate much further, via
 your lungs and bloodstream into your brain. Maybe getting the engine hot
 improves combustion and reduces the particle size?
>
>> It's never ocurred to me that different fuel could affect the
>> emissions test; I normally het mine in France where it's q lot
>> cheaper, but it makes me wonder if differences in quality between
>> there and Switzerland might also be a factor. Thought, anyone?
>
I've been told the biggest difference between cheap and premium is the
 bio-diesel content. Hence the advice to fill the camper with premium stuff
 before laying up for the winter to prevent algae growth in the tank.
I think a bottle of diesel cleaner now and then serves to clean the
 mechanical internals and keep things working as they should.
As we all know, a car or bike that has just been washed and polished runs
 much better :-)

--
Geoff
NTV 650

geoffC <me@home.nl> wrote in news:1042jfq$3c78u$1@dont-email.me:


> I've been told the biggest difference between cheap and premium is the
>  bio-diesel content.

yet biodiesel tends to have a higher cetane index than dead dino stuff,
which is good apparently

premium fuel claiming a higher cetane level might have more chip fat added

> Hence the advice to fill the camper with premium
>  stuff before laying up for the winter to prevent algae growth in the
>  tank.

and maybe a lack of bunker hygeine is a factor with the Costcutter fuel
station due to their, er, cost cutting :)

> I think a bottle of diesel cleaner now and then serves to clean the
>  mechanical internals and keep things working as they should.
> As we all know, a car or bike that has just been washed and polished
> runs
>  much better :-)
>

On 01/07/2025 17:38, wessie wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:104123b$2ucbm$4@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 30/06/2025 21:46, wessie wrote:
>>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:103uraf$2c5ft$1@dont-email.me:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Every truck gets the same base fuel and then there are separate feeds
>>>>> for each brand's additive package. This is to ensure that a) the
>>>>> additive is metered properly and b) compliance with H&S regs where
>>>>> you do not want people sloshing around highly toxic chemicals and
>>>>> pouring them into otherwise sealed bunkers on a retail site.
>>>>
>>>> You've done some research here then :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> when you are drinking beer on SteveH's Shell expenses[1] you become very
>>> tolerant of him droning on about his trade
>>>
>>> [1] in the same National Hunt pub in Cheltenham where we last met [2]
>>> [2] your lack of expenses disappointed me
>>
>> Jeez, how long ago was that?
>>
>>
>
> pre May 2014 when I bought a house on the other side of Cheltenham

Ah, that would have been Dec 2013 then. When I was doing some work a
Messier, we were about to head off for another extended Chile trip so I
would be in totally wallet clenching mode :-) (also bizarrely, being a 1
man LTD I had no general expense/entertainments account  :-( )


--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 01/07/2025 18:39, PipL wrote:
> On 01/07/2025 17:42, Ace wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:49:29 +0100, "chrisnd @ukrm"
>> <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> So how do these additives make an engine run cleaner? I mean, do they
>> really? And just one tankful for the emmissions test, or does it need
>> to be used over time?
>
> They contain detergents and maybe other stuff that cleans the injector
> nozzles. Supposedly, running a tank of premium fuel through the engine
> once in a while helps.
>
> When my Fourtrak failed an MOT, the tester suggested running a bottle of
> cleaner through it. I did (bought elsewhere - he didn't try to sell me a
> bottle) and it passed, but it could just have been luck of the draw if
> it was marginal.
>
> Supposedly an Italian tune-up just before the test and getting it really
> warm helps.
>
>> It's never ocurred to me that different fuel could affect the
>> emissions test; I normally het mine in France where it's q lot
>> cheaper, but it makes me wonder if differences in quality between
>> there and Switzerland might also be a factor. Thought, anyone?
>
>

I can also confirm that the Wynn's stuff (or equivalent) does also work.
I had a slight misfire on the SO Renault so decided to bung a bottle in
the tank to see if it would clear. It did.

--
/Simon

On 02/07/2025 09:30, Simon Wilson wrote:
> On 01/07/2025 18:39, PipL wrote:
>> On 01/07/2025 17:42, Ace wrote:
>>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:49:29 +0100, "chrisnd @ukrm"
>>> <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>> So how do these additives make an engine run cleaner? I mean, do they
>>> really? And just one tankful for the emmissions test, or does it need
>>> to be used over time?
>>
>> They contain detergents and maybe other stuff that cleans the injector
>> nozzles. Supposedly, running a tank of premium fuel through the engine
>> once in a while helps.
>>
>> When my Fourtrak failed an MOT, the tester suggested running a bottle
>> of cleaner through it. I did (bought elsewhere - he didn't try to sell
>> me a bottle) and it passed, but it could just have been luck of the
>> draw if it was marginal.
>>
>> Supposedly an Italian tune-up just before the test and getting it
>> really warm helps.
>>
>>> It's never ocurred to me that different fuel could affect the
>>> emissions test; I normally het mine in France where it's q lot
>>> cheaper, but it makes me wonder if differences in quality between
>>> there and Switzerland might also be a factor. Thought, anyone?
>>
>>
>
> I can also confirm that the Wynn's stuff (or equivalent) does also work.
> I had a slight misfire on the SO Renault so decided to bung a bottle in
> the tank to see if it would clear. It did.
>

I'm sure the liquid would have worked better than the bottle :-)

I'll get some for the van.


--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

Simon Wilson <siwilson@nodamnspamn.hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 01/07/2025 18:39, PipL wrote:
>> On 01/07/2025 17:42, Ace wrote:
>>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:49:29 +0100, "chrisnd @ukrm"
>>> <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>> So how do these additives make an engine run cleaner? I mean, do they
>>> really? And just one tankful for the emmissions test, or does it need
>>> to be used over time?
>>
>> They contain detergents and maybe other stuff that cleans the injector
>> nozzles. Supposedly, running a tank of premium fuel through the engine
>> once in a while helps.
>>
>> When my Fourtrak failed an MOT, the tester suggested running a bottle of
>> cleaner through it. I did (bought elsewhere - he didn't try to sell me a
>> bottle) and it passed, but it could just have been luck of the draw if
>> it was marginal.
>>
>> Supposedly an Italian tune-up just before the test and getting it really
>> warm helps.
>>
>>> It's never ocurred to me that different fuel could affect the
>>> emissions test; I normally het mine in France where it's q lot
>>> cheaper, but it makes me wonder if differences in quality between
>>> there and Switzerland might also be a factor. Thought, anyone?
>>
>>
>
> I can also confirm that the Wynn's stuff (or equivalent) does also work.
> I had a slight misfire on the SO Renault so decided to bung a bottle in
> the tank to see if it would clear. It did.

Back in the day, I had a conversation with our manufacturer rep (Honda it
was at the time). He said they’d found that the cheaper fuel cleaners had
aluminium particles in as an abrasive. They do clean for sure, but a side
effect was possibly erosion of the injector nozzles.

Probably ok for the occasional fix, but not so good if used frequently.
They only advised the use of Forte cleaner as it was purely a chemical
cleaner (there were no commercial interests between them).

Of course things could have evolved since then, but I’d suspect not.

--
Andy H

On 02/07/2025 11:40, Andy H wrote:
> Simon Wilson <siwilson@nodamnspamn.hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 01/07/2025 18:39, PipL wrote:
>>> On 01/07/2025 17:42, Ace wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:49:29 +0100, "chrisnd @ukrm"
>>>> <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So how do these additives make an engine run cleaner? I mean, do they
>>>> really? And just one tankful for the emmissions test, or does it need
>>>> to be used over time?
>>>
>>> They contain detergents and maybe other stuff that cleans the injector
>>> nozzles. Supposedly, running a tank of premium fuel through the engine
>>> once in a while helps.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I can also confirm that the Wynn's stuff (or equivalent) does also work.
>> I had a slight misfire on the SO Renault so decided to bung a bottle in
>> the tank to see if it would clear. It did.
>
> Back in the day, I had a conversation with our manufacturer rep (Honda it
> was at the time). He said they’d found that the cheaper fuel cleaners had
> aluminium particles in as an abrasive. They do clean for sure, but a side
> effect was possibly erosion of the injector nozzles.

This is the stuff I use in the van:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Millers-Oils-Additive-Treatment-IMPROVED/dp/B089P2PF4J

My car and both bikes (petrol) both need some sort of additive to get
past the E5/E10/E7 (or whatever) 'issue', so I use this:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Millers-Oils-Additive-Octane-Booster/dp/B01KVM2IMY
  (but I think it was somewhat cheaper from somewhere else?)

HTH

Chris

--
The Deuchars  BBB#40 COFF#14
Yamaha XV750SE & Suzuki GS550T
https://www.Deuchars.org.uk

On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 21:16:15 +0100, YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:

>On 30/06/2025 14:19, wessie wrote:
>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:103tf00$2246s$1@dont-email.me:

>>> Also upon research I note they add the additives on site, not at supplier.

>> that on site additive thing has to be apophrycal surely?

>Dunno, it was on the internet, so must be true :-)

Ah, you're using the word 'research' in it's modern context, of
'reading stuff on the internet'.

grrrrr

I'm know I'm just an old fogey moaning about the modern world, but
people saying 'research' when they mean 'reading' really winds me up
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

chrisnd @ukrm <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:
> On 02/07/2025 11:40, Andy H wrote:
>> Simon Wilson <siwilson@nodamnspamn.hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 01/07/2025 18:39, PipL wrote:
>>>> On 01/07/2025 17:42, Ace wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:49:29 +0100, "chrisnd @ukrm"
>>>>> <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So how do these additives make an engine run cleaner? I mean, do they
>>>>> really? And just one tankful for the emmissions test, or does it need
>>>>> to be used over time?
>>>>
>>>> They contain detergents and maybe other stuff that cleans the injector
>>>> nozzles. Supposedly, running a tank of premium fuel through the engine
>>>> once in a while helps.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I can also confirm that the Wynn's stuff (or equivalent) does also work.
>>> I had a slight misfire on the SO Renault so decided to bung a bottle in
>>> the tank to see if it would clear. It did.
>>
>> Back in the day, I had a conversation with our manufacturer rep (Honda it
>> was at the time). He said they’d found that the cheaper fuel cleaners had
>> aluminium particles in as an abrasive. They do clean for sure, but a side
>> effect was possibly erosion of the injector nozzles.
>
> This is the stuff I use in the van:
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Millers-Oils-Additive-Treatment-IMPROVED/dp/B089P2PF4J
>
> My car and both bikes (petrol) both need some sort of additive to get
> past the E5/E10/E7 (or whatever) 'issue', so I use this:
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Millers-Oils-Additive-Octane-Booster/dp/B01KVM2IMY
>  (but I think it was somewhat cheaper from somewhere else?)

Yes, I know Millers well enough, it was the oil I usually used when I did
ride bikes.

I’ve been fortunate enough to own cars that haven’t needed any additives
for the fuel. I think Millers is the only other one I’d trust too.

Although octane boosting isn’t usually the issue (as even standard E10 is
higher than the old 2* anyway - 88 vs 94 IIRC, which most normal family
cars & bikes ran on). I see the Millers additive does have a dual purpose.

Premium has to be watched if that’s your intention, as some only boost by
+2, better brands can add +4 or +5.

Of course I appreciate that not an issue for oil burners.

--
Andy H

On 02/07/2025 07:50, wessie wrote:
> geoffC <me@home.nl> wrote in news:1042jfq$3c78u$1@dont-email.me:
>
>
>> I've been told the biggest difference between cheap and premium is the
>>   bio-diesel content.
>
> yet biodiesel tends to have a higher cetane index than dead dino stuff,
> which is good apparently

Yes - it ignites easier. Which should, in theory, reduce cold diesel
clatter.


--

CHUMP #1 (CHarge Up Muppet)

Pip

On 02/07/2025 07:27, geoffC wrote:
> On 01/07/2025 19:39, PipL wrote:
>> On 01/07/2025 17:42, Ace wrote:
>>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:49:29 +0100, "chrisnd @ukrm"
>>> <chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>> So how do these additives make an engine run cleaner? I mean, do they
>>> really? And just one tankful for the emmissions test, or does it need
>>> to be used over time?
>>
>> They contain detergents and maybe other stuff that cleans the injector
>> nozzles. Supposedly, running a tank of premium fuel through the engine
>> once in a while helps.
>>
>> When my Fourtrak failed an MOT, the tester suggested running a bottle
>> of cleaner through it. I did (bought elsewhere - he didn't try to sell
>> me a bottle) and it passed, but it could just have been luck of the
>> draw if it was marginal.
>>
>> Supposedly an Italian tune-up just before the test and getting it
>> really warm helps.
>
> For EURO 1-4 diesels I think the emissions test consists of a filter to
> measure the soot particles. The larger chunks are trapped in the filter
> (and measured) while the smaller ones pass through. Successive EURO norms
> use finer filters. The downside of this is that the engines have been
> developed not to produce much less soot just finer particles (eg. by using
> higher injection pressure)

The higher injection pressure makes smaller droplets that burn more
fully, I think: larger surface area to volume so they evaporate and burn
to the core more fully. So overall should reduce soot emissions, not
just particulate size. Should also reduce fuel consumption. They also
sometimes use a pre-injection pulse for "conditioning" the air charge,
though I think that's more about making a smoother combustion.


--

CHUMP #1 (CHarge Up Muppet)

Pip

On 02/07/2025 11:40, Andy H wrote:

> Back in the day, I had a conversation with our manufacturer rep (Honda it
> was at the time). He said they’d found that the cheaper fuel cleaners had
> aluminium particles in as an abrasive. They do clean for sure, but a side
> effect was possibly erosion of the injector nozzles.

A quick google reveals that diesel fuel filters are supposed to filter
out particles down to 5 or so microns.

So IWHT that any particles that small would not be very effective.

--
/Simon

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:104419g$3m69m$1@dont-email.me:

> On 02/07/2025 13:10, Champ wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'm know I'm just an old fogey moaning about the modern world, but
>> people saying 'research' when they mean 'reading' really winds me up
>
> But surely research covers reading and listening? And in the reading
> case it is to look at more than one piece of information. A bit like a
> reference library (or UKRM), its just easier to find the the "books"
> these days. Real people to ask questions of verbally seems a bit
> harder.
>
>

As someone who has conducted research to academic standards, I think his
problem is more to do with reading and regurgitating without what I would
call critical thinking. This is what bothers me: fewer people seem to view
the world through a sceptical lens.

The internet is doing much the same as we used to get from the person sat
on a bar stool in the local pub but at a much faster rate. I think this is
a better analogy than reading, due to the toxic influence of reels and
tiktok for mass dissemination of utter bollocks that the populists exploit.

Research is very much about reading as any academic work would involve a
literature review but using a critical or sceptical lens. One would do this
prior to any practical work such as interviews, observations or experiments
to hone one's research questions before designing the methodology.

On 02/07/2025 13:10, Champ wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 21:16:15 +0100, YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 30/06/2025 14:19, wessie wrote:
>>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:103tf00$2246s$1@dont-email.me:
>
>>>> Also upon research I note they add the additives on site, not at supplier.
>
>>> that on site additive thing has to be apophrycal surely?
>
>> Dunno, it was on the internet, so must be true :-)
>
> Ah, you're using the word 'research' in it's modern context, of
> 'reading stuff on the internet'.
>
> grrrrr
>
> I'm know I'm just an old fogey moaning about the modern world, but
> people saying 'research' when they mean 'reading' really winds me up

But surely research covers reading and listening? And in the reading
case it is to look at more than one piece of information. A bit like a
reference library (or UKRM), its just easier to find the the "books"
these days. Real people to ask questions of verbally seems a bit harder.


--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

PipL wrote:

>On 02/07/2025 07:27, geoffC wrote:
>>On 01/07/2025 19:39, PipL wrote:
>>>On 01/07/2025 17:42, Ace wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 11:49:29 +0100, "chrisnd @ukrm"
>>>><chrisnd@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>So how do these additives make an engine run cleaner? I mean,
>>>>do they really? And just one tankful for the emmissions test,
>>>>or does it need to be used over time?
>>>
>>>They contain detergents and maybe other stuff that cleans the
>>>injector  nozzles. Supposedly, running a tank of premium fuel
>>>through the engine  once in a while helps.
>>>
>>>When my Fourtrak failed an MOT, the tester suggested running a
>>>bottle  of cleaner through it. I did (bought elsewhere - he
>>>didn't try to sell  me a bottle) and it passed, but it could just
>>>have been luck of the  draw if it was marginal.
>>>
>>>Supposedly an Italian tune-up just before the test and getting it
>>>really warm helps.
>>
>>For EURO 1-4 diesels I think the emissions test consists of a
>>filter to measure the soot particles. The larger chunks are trapped
>>in the filter (and measured) while the smaller ones pass through.
>>Successive EURO norms use finer filters. The downside of this is
>>that the engines have been developed not to produce much less soot
>>just finer particles (eg. by using higher injection pressure)
>
>The higher injection pressure makes smaller droplets that burn more
>fully, I think: larger surface area to volume so they evaporate and
>burn to the core more fully. So overall should reduce soot emissions,
>not just particulate size. Should also reduce fuel consumption. They
>also sometimes use a pre-injection pulse for "conditioning" the air
>charge, though I think that's more about making a smoother combustion.

Well, I decided to do a bit reading on this, I must admit I struggled
to find anything remotely comprehensible to someone of my limited
knowledge. I did find this however:

https://particleandfibretoxicology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12989-015-0107-3#Fig1

If I understand correctly, EURO6 norm tests only measure particles
>23nm but exhaust gases are suspected of containing huge numbers of
particles <10nm and nobody really knows what effect these have on
health although it is not likely to be overly beneficial.
My feeling is that this will lead to the downfall of the ICE simply
because it will be easier and cheaper to develop EV's and better
batteries rather than equipment to measure sub 10nm particulates and
then technology to reduce them.


--
Geoff
NTV 650

Champ <neal@champ.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 21:16:15 +0100, YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 30/06/2025 14:19, wessie wrote:
>>> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:103tf00$2246s$1@dont-email.me:
>
>>>> Also upon research I note they add the additives on site, not at supplier.
>
>>> that on site additive thing has to be apophrycal surely?
>
>> Dunno, it was on the internet, so must be true :-)
>
> Ah, you're using the word 'research' in it's modern context, of
> 'reading stuff on the internet'.


Excuse me, I made an entire career out of “open source research “

On 02/07/2025 21:25, wessie wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:104419g$3m69m$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 02/07/2025 13:10, Champ wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm know I'm just an old fogey moaning about the modern world, but
>>> people saying 'research' when they mean 'reading' really winds me up
>>
>> But surely research covers reading and listening? And in the reading
>> case it is to look at more than one piece of information. A bit like a
>> reference library (or UKRM), its just easier to find the the "books"
>> these days. Real people to ask questions of verbally seems a bit
>> harder.
>>
>>
>
> As someone who has conducted research to academic standards, I think his
> problem is more to do with reading and regurgitating without what I would
> call critical thinking. This is what bothers me: fewer people seem to view
> the world through a sceptical lens.

That means I must be ok then, Jean hates the way I double/triple check
just about everything I am told these days.

My sister was ill the other day, she is telling everyone she had a temp
of 46, I immediately told her she should be dead, then went and checked
that what I thought was true, told her, but she won't have it.

Based on her condition/symptoms I'm guessing it was 40.6, still pretty bad
>

> The internet is doing much the same as we used to get from the person sat
> on a bar stool in the local pub but at a much faster rate. I think this is
> a better analogy than reading, due to the toxic influence of reels and
> tiktok for mass dissemination of utter bollocks that the populists exploit.

Unfortunately you still get the person sitting on the bar stool frothing
(pun intended) about "facts" they ave read on the internet. In fact it
makes it worse.
>
> Research is very much about reading as any academic work would involve a
> literature review but using a critical or sceptical lens. One would do this
> prior to any practical work such as interviews, observations or experiments
> to hone one's research questions before designing the methodology.

Nice analysis, mind if I check that? :-)


--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:1045a62$20fp$1@dont-email.me:

> On 02/07/2025 21:25, wessie wrote:

>> Research is very much about reading as any academic work would
>> involve a literature review but using a critical or sceptical lens.
>> One would do this prior to any practical work such as interviews,
>> observations or experiments to hone one's research questions before
>> designing the methodology.
>
> Nice analysis, mind if I check that? :-)
>
>

I'd send you copies of the dissertations I wrote in 2005 and 2011 if I had
a fucking scooby where they were archived. Probably the external Seagate
HDD or one of the USB memory sticks lurking around somewhere.

On 03/07/2025 09:37, wessie wrote:
> YTC#1 <ytc1@ytc1.co.uk> wrote in news:1045a62$20fp$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 02/07/2025 21:25, wessie wrote:
>
>>> Research is very much about reading as any academic work would
>>> involve a literature review but using a critical or sceptical lens.
>>> One would do this prior to any practical work such as interviews,
>>> observations or experiments to hone one's research questions before
>>> designing the methodology.
>>
>> Nice analysis, mind if I check that? :-)
>>
>>
>
> I'd send you copies of the dissertations I wrote in 2005 and 2011 if I had
> a fucking scooby where they were archived. Probably the external Seagate
> HDD or one of the USB memory sticks lurking around somewhere.

I have a never delete policy, I just keep buying bigger disks


--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/