Feedback on Shell FuelSave

Hammyman

-chris- wrote: »

Just wondered if anyone had filled up with it yet and had any results? I'm going to fill up later today but I only do about 250 miles per month so takes me ages to get through a tank

Cheers! Chris.

Yes. Its the same as the old stuff. No different. They're quoting a saving of a litre over a 50+ litre tank so its barely 2% which most people could beat just by emptying the boot.

It does have the advantage in my area as being at the same price as Asda so I shall continue to fill up there should I find myself in the near of.

Inactive

diddlydum wrote: »

The real gullible fools are the ones who regularly fill up at Tesco. They're normally 2p more expensive and their fuel is like p*** compared to Shell and Esso.

Can't argue with that, I use whichever is the cheapest, excluding the supermarkets, if Shell is the cheapest, I will use it, but not because of any sales hype.

The " gullible " I refer to, are those that may well seek out a Shell Station, even if the price is the same at a garage they have just driven past.

Anybody that thinks that the oil companies are trying in some way to help us motorists must live on a cloud.

-chris-_3-2

I was actually on the press day of the launch of their new fuels last week (hence me starting this thread to see what people think).

They had some good demonstrations about why it gives improved efficiency. Including showing the movement of a piston and how it moves a lot more easily with the new fuel, and also how dirt builds up on engine parts (and how with the new detergents this is avoided). I know most people are sceptical however on this occasion I believe that these new fuels are an improvement from Shell, ok it's small, but nonetheless it's still an improvement, and at no extra cost to us.

The claims "up to a litre" make me think they must have managed to get a saving of 0.501 litres in testing on the car which gives the most benefit (in order to please advertising standards).

I asked them the question on the press day what the 'average' person would receive. They said that because of the sheer amount of different cars/engines (including age of cars etc), and also the big variation in the way people drive, the journeys they take etc, it is very hard to work out a true average for the whole population. However they did point out that although they can't give an actual figure they are very confident in the product and the tests they have done at MIRA proves it is more effective then their previous fuels (and those tests are what resulted in this 'upto 1 litre per tank' claim).

Also; another thing I think worth baring in mind is that if it does help keep engine parts cleaner this can only be a good thing long-term, especially for older cars (on the press day we got given 2 inlet valves, one was from a car run on normal petrol, another from fuelsave petrol - the one from the fuelsave car was very clean, the other was very dirty!) Once again may make a very small difference, but still a positive.

Quentin

-chris- wrote: »

I was actually on the press day of the launch of their new fuels last week (hence me starting this thread to see what people think).

It seems you have an interest in this then! You do seem to be spinning us their yarn over this! Care to come clean?

xycom1

Hammyman wrote: »

Yes. Its the same as the old stuff. No different. They're quoting a saving of a litre over a 50+ litre tank so its barely 2% which most people could beat just by emptying the boot.

It does have the advantage in my area as being at the same price as Asda so I shall continue to fill up there should I find myself in the near of.

Thought this too, TBH 2% is in the region of the difference between a warm day and a cold one when driving my car, natural variation in fuel economy so can't see it making much practical difference.

sassy_one

Are they even doing this for unleaded petrol?

Each time I have been to a Shell garage, three different ones this week it's just Diesel ??

I might try it but to be honest, I don't hold much faith in it!

Hammyman

-chris- wrote: »

I was actually on the press day of the launch of their new fuels last week (hence me starting this thread to see what people think).

They had some good demonstrations about why it gives improved efficiency. Including showing the movement of a piston and how it moves a lot more easily with the new fuel, and also how dirt builds up on engine parts (and how with the new detergents this is avoided).

As a mechanic, I have only two words to say:

Utter poppycock.

A piston isn't going to move any more easily than it does with any other fuel. Dirt builds up on engine parts and detergents are only going to HELP reduce buildup on parts in the combustion chain. The bits you do need to worry about such as crankshaft bearings, camshafts etc don't get anywhere near the fuel. It also won't remove anything already caked on valve stem seats.

You could achieve what that fuel does by chucking in additive once a year. But TBH, you're not going to notice it.

sassy_one

Hammyman wrote: »

As a mechanic, I have only two words to say:

Utter poppycock.

A piston isn't going to move any more easily than it does with any other fuel. Dirt builds up on engine parts and detergents are only going to HELP reduce buildup on parts in the combustion chain. The bits you do need to worry about such as crankshaft bearings, camshafts etc don't get anywhere near the fuel. It also won't remove anything already caked on valve stem seats.

You could achieve what that fuel does by chucking in additive once a year. But TBH, you're not going to notice it.

Are you saying a engine flush is pointless then?

Gordon_Hose

Personally, I think engine flushes can often do more damage than they do good.

oldagetraveller

sassy-one wrote: »

Are you saying a engine flush is pointless then?

Now that certainly is something devised for the "gullible".:D