My biggest concern with fuel is moisture in the station's tanks. A brand name fuel station with low turn over will have more moisture in a tank then compared to a no-brand station with high turnover. I can't count the number of times I was stuck getting gas from a station which I supected to be low turn over only to be confirmed the next day with starting issues.

Your test is not complete. You are listing Phillips 66 and Shell as your 2 named brand test, please add in a high volume no-brand name station to your mix and then tell me the mpg figures.

As for your concerns with additives, I think you are buying the marketing pill because I've had cars go to 200K miles without any problems going to the same no-brand station for the entire time I owned the car.

 

I hate to sound suspicious, (well, actually, I don't mind too much) but the poster pushing Shell here sounds just a little bit like someone from their marketing department. Call me crazy, but if it were really some sort of mix of additives or whatever that was causing the FE jump, wouldn't it make more sense to try and figure out what it is and what other brands use the same thing or something similar and then promote the actual ingredients which, for whatever reason, achieve the optimal effect? Because brand name isn't everything, and the things inside any particular gallon of Shell gas from winter to summer or maybe from station to station could be inconsistent.

 

Hi leahbeatle,

No skin off of my back and I'm excited with what I've found. Just out of curiosity please tell me if you found something exciting like what I've found, how would you share it?

So don't try Shell. I saw an increase in mpg from the first tank but it doesn't matter to anyone but me. Stick with what you have. I'm only sharing this because I own a 2006 Prius and through today I've seen my mpg increase by more than 20% in the last two weeks and it's still going up. 20% for me is more than 50 cents per gallon.

I don't have anything to do with Shell. I work at an electrical generation facility and I'm just about to retire.

As far as I know, no one has ever conducted any testing on what cars run best on what gasolines. This is another reason I'm posting. If those who are getting higher mpgs provide their input on consistent gasolines, the rest of us can learn from each other. I will assure you that if I can find a different name brand fuel that provides better results than Shell, I'll move to them.

Incidentally, I purchased Shell gas twice from a different region at different stations in the last two weeks. I live in Arkansas and all of our fuel comes from terminals in Little Rock. Kansas City gets their gas from somewhere else. The consistency in the fuel is good as my mpg is still going up and this tells me that it's the additives.

Ray

 

The claimed "20%" seems a little much but actually the EPA says there are differences:

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/rfgecon.htm

They go on to list other factors but the key is there are differences. The problem is it is dang hard to separate each effect.

The right way to do it is to run the car on 'half-tanks' for a week using each brand. This would allow a methodical look at each brand to determine how each one ranks. Then upon finding the 'best' and the 'worst', go back and do another set, preferably in a double-blind study, to see if it is confirmed.

The other approach, which I favor, is to find a friend with a calorimeter who will let you test samples. This is much faster and more accurate.

Bob Wilson

 

Harry, You wrote: "Fuel economy is also strongly correlated to speed: you won't get very good mpg's at 75-80 mph!"
livvie, you wrote: "Your test is not complete. You are listing Phillips 66 and Shell as your 2 named brand test, please add in a high volume no-brand name station to your mix and then tell me the mpg figures."

Harry, I completely agree with you. Read my posts beginning from #1 and you'll see that I mentioned this because I wasn't driving my car during this time and it still was getting better mpg than I ever got using Philliips 66 or anything else.

I am posting my fuel observations and asking others to provide their feedback. My Prius likes Shell gasoline over all the others to the tune of around 23% better mpg so far. livvie doesn't see much value in this but I do because it correlates to around 57 cents per gallon savings for me, so far.

livvie, Over the last year I have essentially used 19,000 miles of primarily Phillips gasoline and two weeks ago I found found a gasoline that is giving me more than 20% greater mpg. Why should I change? I've used Loves, Conoco, Exxon and several other brands (while on the interstate) but mostly Phillips. I'm sharing what I'm seeing now. If other drivers want to share what their mpgs are and the fuels they are using that's great, but I'm sticking with something that works for me.

And I plan to share what I find, good or bad.

Ray

 

I'm pretty amazed. I started this thread because I saw a significant increase in mpg in my Prius and I wanted to share my finding with others. I figured that other people would be interested.

But no one wants to try to duplicate what I'm seeing. I've been accused of being a Shell marketing person, and told that I need to test my car at other stations to confirm something I already know, and my information is pooh-poohed as not being very credible.

(Sigh)

I was pretty excited but my bubble has been popped.

OK - you guys (and gals) just chill. Since you all have determined that what I'm witnessing and seeing my Prius do with a new gas can't be possible, I'll stop posting what I'm learning. I don't care what you buy.

I thought I was helping.

 

After using Chevron exclusively for almost 30 full tanks in my HCH, I went to Shell one day. On that tank, my mileage rose from a recent 50mpg average to 55mpg.
At first, I didn't know why my mileage had improved, and went back to Chevron. Mileage was back down. Then I put two-and-two together. Shell.
Went back to Shell, next tank 60mpg. The weather was about the same, even used AC a little. Did some drafting -- Man this helps...but very thrilling to say the least. -- No other changes.
Next tank, 56. Some windy days. No drafting. No AC.
I believe Shell makes a difference, maybe due to the ethanol content, but what do I know!
My past vehicles did not run very well on Shell. Engines would ping. That's why I never used it for my HCH.
Believe what you will. I am going to stay with Shell, maybe for 30 more tanks.

 

Hi folks,

It will take me another week to get the fuel low enough to start testing. I'll need to carry a 'pony can' in case I run out.

What I'll do is run the tank down to 'warning blink' and then put in a finite amount of fuel, 4 gallons, each time. This should let me gather useful data by brand.

Locally, we have:I'll record the results in the mileage database and see what happens. A little empiricism goes a long way and there are enough reports to suggest the experiment has merit. I'll also record the price so we can figure the $/mile.

BTW, I also have access to a nice hill, 525 ft./160 m. south of town that I've used for hill-climb performance testing. It makes sense to include a set of hill climb tests at a high power setting and see what the Graham scanner reports.

Bob Wilson

 

Why? Because you are stating a case that BRAND name matters. I'm saying that is non-sense. Maybe some chemical in Phillips 66 does something, maybe it's the station, whatever the case is, I'm not seeing any difference going from Mobil to Haffner's (non-brand name).

 

Ray, others have commented that they have gotten better fuel economy with Shell.

I'd love to run Shell, but there are no stations near my home.

Harry