BP Petrol.

Anyone got experience of using their new fangled stuff? Is it any good?
Is it to be avoided at all costs?

 

Without a knock sensor and turbo, I don't think you'll get any
perfomance increase in power. I did notice an altering in the engine
vibes from both the CG125 and the Bandit though.

 

Cab says...

Can't say I've noticed or really give a **** tbh. Petrol is petrol to
me. Bike needs it, so I fill it up wherever I am.

 

I know they weren't as helpful about providing specifications,
specifically the RON octane rating, of their "Ultimate" as Shell were
about their "Optimax".[1]

This had the net effect of me thinking "It's not as good as Optimax"
whether that be the case or not.

If a manufacturer isn't prepared to back up their performance claims
with some good, old-fashioned facts then I'm not going to gamble an
expensive tuned engine by putting their product in it. Simply saying
"it's similar to Optimax" isn't enough.

 

Lozzo wrote

12 eyes he speak the truth.

 

I've felt the same way. They've no explanations as to what it is, what
it does or why it's more expensive.

It got me thinking though, after one of the lurkers on the NG told me
that he gets better mileage out of it and that it's worth the extra few
pence/cents.

 

Well, indeed...

What's the availability of "Optimax" in France? I recollect seeing more
BP stations over there than Shell ones, certainly seem top be more of
them in the UK...

 

I don't know really. There are quite a lot of BP stations around Paris,
but not so many Shell stations. I don't know if this is a nationwide
trend.

Anyway, the only Shell station near to where I live, I don't use. Not
since they refused to serve me as they wanted cash up front.

 

You don't have 'pay at the pump' then? anyway, shell is shite. It makes
the SV hard to start among other problems.

 

There are some, but not many, in town. They're mostly in the sticks,
IME.

 

Ah, well; it is Paris after all.

 

FWIW, I can only comment on what I see at work, as I never use Shell or
BP (if I can help it), based on our observations of faults occuring.

The additive enriched fuels *seem* to offer a very quick improvement in
performance - whether real or perceived I cannot say. My only personal
experience of using Shell was of poor running and stalling.

What we are seeing more of now though is engine management faults. Most
are O2 sensor failures, EGR valve failures and unexplainable misfires
[1].

When these components are removed they are usually found to be coated in
a sticky black soot, very often linked to vehicles that are being run on
Shell fuel. The BP stuff hasn't been around long enough to obtain data
as yet.

In the worst cases we have found valves burning out too - even on the
legendary VTEC Honda engines - that's how bad it can be.

It's now so bad that we are advising customers to avoid using fuels with
additives, and stick to plain fuels - like Jet or Total. A major
additives supplier is also now making an 'anti-additive' additive (yes
really!). We are finding some success in using the newest Forte' Fuel
Treatment, which is not like a normal fuel system cleaner, but is a
contaminant neutraliser [2].

The way I see it is that the additives are probably the equivalent of a
£3 bottle of stuff off the shelf. It costs somewhere between 30 and 100
million pounds to design, develop and build an engine. An engine,
particularly in the case of Honda and Toyota, and many others, that will
have been designed to burn standard fuel as efficiently as possible.

You get to the pump, and that fuel is *not* the same as the stuff they
developed the engine for.

As for fuel economy and savings, has anyone actually worked it out?

I just did. Assume an average of 40mpg on standard fuel, and a gain of
2mpg on Optimax. I priced the fuel at 4p/litre difference, 90.9p and
94.9p around here. Over 12000 miles it will cost you £1230 for standard
fuel, and £1238 for Optimax. That is assuming that you do actually get
better consumption at all.

[1] they can also produce fault codes.
[2] sorry if that sounds like an advert.

 

Dunno, never used it. Still, be careful with the pumps, cos they're all (or
were) the same shade of blue including the diesel ones so could be easy to
fill up with the wrong fuel. Chap on a beemer forum filled his 330d with
petrol instead of diesel [1]. Caused £3k damage to his engine, which BP
footed the bill for.

[1] It might have been the other way round, i forget.

 

Oh, nice reply. Thanks. I think I'll stick with the regular smelly
stuff.

 

I tend to use 95 anyway and don't bother using 98. As I said, one of
the lurkers told me that he had better fuel consumption after using it
the Ultimate.

I was wondering whether it's worth a try or not. Would it produce
beneficial results? Better for the environment or not?

 

Almost certainly not. In an engine that is not able to use the extra
octane, you will end up with some unburnt fuel being passed through the
system. A higher octane fuel needs a longer burn cycle, if the engine
does not offer that, then not all of the fuel will get burnt.

 

Now for the short reply.

"snake oil" ;-)

 

Don't let the facts spoil a good theory.

 

<VVBG>

Magnet-onna-fuel line.

 

One of my customers at Alfa sold those. It was mysteriously removed from
his own car when it came in for warranty repairs.