I ask for some sort of scientific proof, a testing lab or scientific analysis and you provide me with a poor to moderately bad written prose by an unknown journalists anecdotal perception of his and his wife's minivan experience using Nitro+?!?!?! That's not quite passing the sniff test upholding a burden of proof. Again, until a reputable, unbiased testing is done I won't take Shell's claims to anything as truth... not knocking Shell the same would hold true for Chevron, Mobil, etc. They are making grandiose claims but have yet to have ANYONE verify them. Here in America it is VERY common for companies to make claims - America's #1 selling blah, blah, blah... "Proven to provide better protection than blah, blah, blah... none of which needs to be proven. If I decide to "shell" (get it!??! oh SNAP!) out another .23-.40 it would be based upon scientific and substantiated facts not a companies claims or assumptions of others certainly not by referral from a journalist driving a minivan! Shell has made huge claims that does not, nor does their shear size as you claim, hold any sort of legitimacy that what they say has to be correct - https://www.ftc.gov/public-statement...substantiation

Perhaps it is possible that what they say is true, but my guess is that IF in fact it is the miracle juice they state why have they not gone to unbiased companies to have this tested? If I were on their marketing dept and had any internal proof of it being "better than" you know damn well I'd be all over EVERY lab to verify my claims and have it be out there

 

There is no gasoline test lab bigger than shell and chevron, chevron has 1600 working in their lab. And Chevron would have sued Shell if their claims of being better were false. They have a financial interest to do so.

 

Shell V-Power® NiTRO+ Premium Gasoline isn’t just reinventing premium gasolines, it’s reinventing the premium gasoline category. Shell V-Power NiTRO+ offers drivers unbeatable protection against gunk and corrosion, and superior protection against wear, giving drivers one more reason to fill-up at Shell. And this triple action protection formula is only available at Shell.

That falls exactly in the definition of "Puffery" - These statements, if false, are the subject of a false advertising claim. Interestingly, a claim that a product is “improved” or “better” without referring to any specific quantifiable characteristic is typically considered puffery.Dec 17, 2014

What Shell has stated contains nothing in terms of specifics therefore they cannot be held to any level of accountability. They do not offer anything in terms of facts or anything quantifiable so therefore they can make all the claims they want. Until an outside unbiased firm can state that in any way their fuel is "superior" as they claim, I'll continue to disregard what their marketing department spews out. Again, if their product is THAT good why have they not gone to any of the reputable testing and analysis agencies to provide any credence to their claims? That would make sense would it if in fact their fuel IS as good as their marketing would profess and might justify the added .24-.40 per gallon? Like you said earlier, and I agreed with, Techron has been proven a good cleaner and it's merits validated, Shell's claims are intentionally written in ambiguous terms so as not to be held to any level of accountability for a good reason... if it were that good they would include quantifiable percentages or other stats to bolster their case.

 

There is no gasoline test lab bigger than shell and chevron, chevron has 1600 working in their lab. And Chevron would have sued Shell if their claims of being better were false. They have a financial interest to do so.

AS IBM has proven for decades "it pays to spend more on marketing than on product". Those aforementioned companies have thousands in their labs and constantly try to improve their product, but don't be so naive to believe their marketing solely based upon ambiguous and preposterous claims. Chevron can't sue because there is nothing in Shell's claims that state anything they can be held accountable for - they are not saying X% increase in power, or x% increase in performance, or a measurable cleaner engine as then they could be held... but aren't those the ONLY things we should care about?!?! Likely the reason they are not saying such things as there is no measurable gain. I don't care about "improved" or "better", tell me HOW MUCH better and PROVE it otherwise those are worthless words by a marketing department intent on capturing dollars/marketshare without proving their case. If Shell had something here we'd know about... and not from a 2-bit UK news journalist driving his minivan and using "seat of the pants" SWAG methodology to bolster his and Shell's claims.

 

Leeper-

I agree with your logic and thoughts in general.

Given that there is no on-going problem with our cars while using current fuels, it would be impossible to prove that any new gasoline is 'better'.

Can't fix something that's not broken, but that doesn't stop a refiner from inferring otherwise

There's little difference between the marketing tactics of fuels, soft drinks, beers, soaps, you name it.

 

So the rationale for trusting grocery store gasoline is what? a 20 cent discount per gallon. It cant be because they employ more scientists.

 

Fair question - my rational is that Costco sells so much gasoline that is never has a chance to sit in their tanks long enough to in any way cause (which from what I've read is the major cause of so called "bad gas") issues in engines and that is costs on the average at least .10 cheaper than anyone else especially Mobil, Shell, Exxon or the other bigger name companies. I am not now, nor ever have been a person who is the LEAST bit influenced by movie stars selling products, sports stars selling products, or what any marketing crap a company tries to shove down my throat. Like Ronald Reagan said "Trust but verify"... to bring this around full circle regarding the claim that somehow Shell's Nitro+ gasoline is in any way "superior" to any other gasoline, let alone Costco premium, I'll continue to believe that their marketing is just that, completely invalidated marketing intended to persuade people in the absence of any factual evidence otherwise they'd readily and happily provide that to boost sales and brag factually about their superiority rather than use ambiguous language which is pure puffery. Aside for perhaps a bad tank of gas at a podunk station in BFE while traveling across country I have never had any issues with gas, at least in my car, so my concern with potential issues versus the cost of perceived "increased performance or longevity" definitely falls towards savings until such time as I can verify that spending the extra $$ does actually yield any proven benefit for me rather than the marketing team at a particular refinery

You seem focused and concerned with the term "scientists" why is that? Scientists are used for MANY reasons that do not include "improving a product, things like how to extract it better, making it cheaper, additives which may or may not benefit our end usage, but what I would be most impressed with is if they did happen to have created a gasoline that is somehow "better" that they could PROVE it... which they again did not and have yet to do.

 

Chrysler, since the 80's, has time and again fought the EPA and refiners, and testified before the US Congress concerning production of fuels that can support the engineers performance designs. It's no secret. Every major manufacturer has complained and has been a tug of war for decades. The demise of the 4.0L Nikasil V8 engine was because of high sulfur content in fuels here in the US, and when sulfur combines with ambient molecules to form sulfuric acid, commonly known as battery acid, chemically stripping it from the cylinder. Of course Jaguar cares. (as I'm sure every owner of these vehicles should as well)

US fuel production, and it's distribution, as I said earlier, is both simple, and complex. Consumers want the cheapest fuel possible. And distribution points, and their racks, no matter the refiner, are shared by virtually everyone. It's what gets added into the fuel. It's like the banning here in the US of MTBE in 2006, which was used as an oxygenator. Now, ethanol is used. So in the US stocks, there is no such thing as "pure gas" because ethanol is now used as the replacement for MTBE as the oxygenator. Every oil company states this openly. In the UK, toluene is commonly used. Just understand the difference between US fuel and UK fuel is different.

Just realize some of our posters either have a very short memory, or they don't have enough direct exposure to the industry to truly understand.

 

In the US, the distribution market is much different than in the UK. The fuel is different, the additives are different, the regulations are different, the requirements of the region and it's availability are different. A given retailer is not going to pay a fuel hauler to carry Shell (the closest Shell refinery) fuel from Houston to Tulsa for example. The fuel requirements are different because of blend, the cost is prohibitive, when a Phillips refinery and their rack is 10 miles from the Shell station. In my area, 91 (R+M)/2 is the highest octane refined at local refineries. To get 93 (R+M)/2, the closest refiner is 1 state away, and the transportation costs to deliver to the location here makes the fuel nearly double the cost. It's just the way it works here in the US. What makes the fuel different is if they (the retailer) specify TT at loading at the rack, and you will pay more for this. Always remember, you are at the mercy of the retailer to specify in their order to fuel haulers that TT be delivered. Various oil companies produce TT detergents, like Chevron's Techron, or BP's Invigorate, or Shell's Nitro+, but in the end whatever the name of the detergent stock at the rack, it is mixed in as the rack fill occurs. What you are doing is confusing octane rating with detergent quantity. Apples vs. Oranges. It's both simple, and complex.

 

In the winter I also use Cenex alcohol free 92 octane gas; can't notice any difference, except the extra cost!
My '07 XK gets same gas mileage as my '12 Honda CRV! about 22-23 mpg, same trip.
But the Xk drives like a dream on Hankook tires; whereas the Honda rides like a truck and steers awful on the freeway......................... no rain today so will drive the XK! wonderful!

Cheers, Adrian

 

As one who has direct exposure to fuel delivery companies in the US, I can tell you there is no fuel (vehicle gas) in the US that doesn't contain ethanol as the oxygenator. MTBE and benzenes/toluene can no longer be used. It's just the way it is. Been that way for nearly a decade now.

 

Exactly. I doubt many realize that. Because they are won over by discounts. Here it is in Costco's words.

"To achieve this voluntary "Top Tier" designation, all the fuel sold in the U.S. must meet the higher standard. Costco cannot currently do this as we buy from a variety of refiners and distributors around the country and do not own our own truck terminals where the additives are blended with the fuel."

But I am not trying to convince anyone not to buy cheap unbranded gas. I am saying if you are like me, dont put too many miles on your jag, want the best, go with Shell, Chevron, you have nothing to lose, the difference of $50 a year is well worth the piece of mind and you wont have to spend a penny on fuel additives.

What piece of mind you ask? look what happened to some unlucky sods. Tainted Fuel at NJ Costco Causes Problems | NBC 10 Philadelphia

 

You must have an outdated copy of the internet on your computer.

Costco is clearly listed as being a participating retailer on Top Tier's own site

http://www.toptiergas.com/retailers/

Costco's own site says the following

"As our valued member, you expect Costco to always offer the finest quality products at the best possible price. Gasoline is no exception. Costco has closely studied fuel additives and engine deposits, and conducted extensive engine tests at nationally-recognized laboratories. As a result, we decided to increase the detergent additives in our fuel to provide a better value to our members. As of March 2014 Costco is listed as a TOP TIER™ gasoline retailer. Find out more at Retailers."

Kirkland Signature? Gasoline

 

While they may be listed as a participant, I can tell you first hand, that when Costco station #3213 calls Star Transport at 7am on Tuesday and say's I need 4000 gallons of product, and doesn't tell the dispatcher at Star they want premiumTT, they will receive a primary blend, with ethanol added (up to 15%) to meet octane rating of 91 (R+M)/2 with no additional additives. Star will call Global rack which is 20 miles from the retailer, and inquire price, and if 2 cents more than the Phillips rack 30 miles away, they will hop over to Phillips. Star nets another 2 cents to the already 15 cent transport costs quoted. This gross cost to the retailer is 14 cents less than with TT, and the retailer drops their price by 4 cents over the BP station next door, and nets another 10 cents per gallon because of the traffic. Do not kid yourself into thinking C-Store retailers don't do this. (this example was only used as an illustration)

 

Mickey you have a gift my friend for focusing on the other end of the stick. The point you missed is to David's point, that Costco buys from many distributors and has to accept whatever TT they will be adding.

But yes, points to Costco for finally agreeing to add enough detergent in their gas 24 months ago. As a point of reference and credibility, Chevron has been doing it for nearly 24 years.

 

The other end of the stick that I look at pretty much indicates that much of your info is out of date or just plain incorrect. This same stick gets inserted into the spokes of many of your arguments as a result. The far end of the stick (your end) appears to be covered in smelly brown stuff.

I'm sure Box has related details of an actual although anecdotal event and if I were a believer in 'top tier' I'd be upset, but I see it as nothing more than a marketing scheme- so no skin off my nose. Fortunately, Ford/JLR/Tata seems to agree and make no mention of requiring such products.

Living in Canada, very few retailers are part of the scheme. As a result not many cars have been blessed with said holy water, yet have no more operational problems than anywhere else. Makes you wonder, no?

Carry on. I'm sure there's more conspiracy theories in the wings.

 

Will this thread be up for a "Most Humorous of the Year" award?

 

Canucks are inherently more honest than Americans? Man, that's an oxymoron. Again, only 2% of stations in North America are corporate. The remaining 98% are C-store. Most folks haven't a clue as to the inside workings of the retail gas business.

All stations in a given area do receive their gas, regardless of brand name at the pump, from the refiners closest to your locality. That's the economics of it. That's why some regions have much higher prices due to transportation costs. That's why stations in my region are either supplied by Phillips, or Valero refinery, no matter if it is a Shell, BP, CONOCO, Texaco, Chevron, Petro, Valero, Speedway, 7-11 or Costco or any other retailer. Otherwise, the price per gallon would be double or more at those which were not Phillips or Valero due to transportation costs. The list of refineries in a given area can be found in this list... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil_refineries

 

You have an odd way of learning, but I dont mind.

Canadian gas is much better than US gas, lower sulfur and other stuff. Notably completely different regulations. USA too had more stringent regulations, until the Bush administration in their infinite wisdom REDUCED the standards. The car companies fought back with creating their own standard which they called Top Tier.

And no you are WRONG JLR absolutely recommends quality gasoline. For the 150XK, I dont know about the other cars. So you have to ask yourself, what are they warning about if all gas is the same??

 

Apologies to readers looking for info and not banter.

Here is a good article from Road and Track that does a good job of explaining it all.

Do you still buy the cheapest gas you can find? Ever worry it might mess up your engine? Maybe you should, if you drive a newer, direct-injected car, as the hostile environment these high-precision multi-orifice injectors operate under makes them vulnerable to the performance-robbing deposits cheap gas can leave.


According to consulting engineer Jerry Horn at Chevron, these deposits are formed from a series of compounds, among them olefins and di-olefins with double-bonds that break down, forming gummy deposits that can alter airflow around intake valves or fuel flow out of injectors. Jim Macias, fuels technology manager at Shell, adds that these carbonaceous deposits start out as one of the 300 compounds in gasoline, then polymerize on hot surfaces. There’s no single component to target, which complicates preventing or cleaning them.


Back in the 1990s, as Tier I emissions regs were phased in, the deposits — created by fuel impurities — began causing problems for the emissions gear that manufacturers had to guarantee for 100,000 miles. So the EPA established a minimum fuel-additive performance standard in 1995, but the standard was below what some suppliers were then offering, so many reduced their fuel detergency, making matters worse for the subsequent Tier II standards of 2004. After unsuccessfully lobbying for higher standards, a group of automakers (Audi, BMW, GM, Honda, Mercedes, Toyota, and Volkswagen ) consulted with fuel suppliers to establish a higher voluntary standard, marketed as “Top Tier Detergent Gasoline.”


Top Tier is a performance standard, establishing tests and minimum acceptable results for intake-valve and combustion-chamber deposits, fuel-injector fouling, and intake-valve sticking. It also requires that all fuel grades marketed by the brand meet the standard (not just the premium grade, for example). Additive manufacturers pay for the testing, fuel suppliers pay an annual fee to participate, and compliance testing is conducted by third-party labs. Over and above the three basic tests to certify Top Tier fuels, the major fuel suppliers conduct additional testing. Jerry Horn explains that Chevron is “trying to cover more of the on-road vehicle population with additional engine and vehicle dynamometer tests, and then also we do tests with a cab company in SoCal to test fuels under relatively severe service conditions.” A revision to the current EPA and CARB test regimens is also expected in the future, perhaps to include testing of direct-injection, but certainly to change the standardized test engines* (which now include a Ford 2.3-liter, Chrysler 2.2 liter, and BMW 1.8-liter engines from the 1980s that are getting hard to find parts for).


So how do Top Tier fuels like Chevron and Texaco with Techron, Shell’s Nitrogen-Enriched, and BP’s Invigorate work? Each employs top-secret organic chemistry (Chevron admits theirs involves a polyether amine. Others often employ polybutene amines, if that helps), but by and large the molecules include a “hydrocarbon tail” (that keeps the detergent soluble in fuel) attached to a head that includes a functional group containing nitrogen. When enough of these nitrogens attach to a deposit, it comes off. Then the nitrogens can attach to the clean surface and prevent new deposits from forming. The fresh challenge with DI is designing functional heads that don’t lose their cool at temperatures of 4000 degrees F or higher.
Chevron and Shell both claim that running a few tanks of fuel can remove the deposits left by miles of use of minimum-standard fuels.


National gas prices are still well below historic highs, but as for fuel-system cleaning products, Macias cautions “the aftermarket treatments tend to be high-concentrations of these additives. Some of that material can get into the crankcase and the effects are not entirely known. It is a big dose of materials, and we are not sure if it could cause damage to the catalytic converter. The only way to ensure that a vehicle maintains peak performance is to use top-quality fuel consistently.” Horn states this about these concentrated aftermarket additives “You can wash [deposits] off, but they’ll come back, and any deposits can impact air-fuel mixture and combustion, emissions, drivability, fuel economy, etc.”