[Shadow]

Originally Posted by 335diesel

I'd also argue that a purchaser of a large boat or tank is much harder to fling marketing guff at. But is equally keen to make sure his or her machine runs as well and reliably as our "refined tractors."

Oh, come on. Tanks run on anything for obvious reasons; and what's the maintenance schedule on military diesel engines?

Originally Posted by 335diesel

High performance diesels are designed to run on diesel - our UK diesel is good stuff with a decent ignition rate. It's in the US and other countries that they have poor quality diesel and need additives (such as urea - tsk tsk) to make them work.

Looked at a modern commercial diesel vehicle recently? Look for the blue filler cap next to e.g. the windscreen wash (I'm going by Edinburgh's LRT buses here). Guess what goes in there? Urea is less to do with fuel quality, more about meeting Euro V regulations for diesels.

Originally Posted by 335diesel

Until I see clear evidence that I "need" to use silly fuel, I shall stick the same diesel in my 3.0L twin turbo six as I do in my rather agricultural 2.4L single turbo (almost) Transit based four.

I don't think anyone is saying a vehicle "needs" it - just that it might work out cheaper than, say, six new injectors, or a replacement DPF.

[toxicnerve]

Originally Posted by Shadow

Looked at a modern commercial diesel vehicle recently? Look for the blue filler cap next to e.g. the windscreen wash (I'm going by Edinburgh's LRT buses here). Guess what goes in there? Urea is less to do with fuel quality, more about meeting Euro V regulations for diesels.

Is that the AdBlue/Blue Motion stuff?

[Shadow]

Originally Posted by toxicnerve

Is that the AdBlue/Blue Motion stuff?

Yep.

[Em135eye]

Shadow - has any DPF or injector failure been attributed to not using super diesel? Serious question. I haven't heard anything about it and again if it was a fact, the fuel companies would lap it up!

I have looked at several modern marine diesel engines recently - high performance (2 x Volvos 330bhp each) and low performance but super rugged (Perkins 180bhp on a 30 tonne motorsailor) but no, not many bus engines. They don't tend to be very high performance...

Anyway a few opinions and good to discuss the points without descending into the all too regular slanging matches.

If anyone does find any hard and fast facts (not from 5th gear...) then do post them up - always keen to read that kind of stuff.

[briers]

I only ever use Shell fuel because i believe it is of a higher quality to supermarket diesel for example.

I care about the cetane rating of the fuel i put in, i want a fuel that ignites easily to burn as much fuel as possible especially with NOX re-circulation where NOX gasses typically burns cooler than oxygen leaving excess soot as the fuel doesn't burn as completely.

As for v-power diesel i don't notice any difference, i'm not looking for a difference which is why i'm probably not finding it. Shell fuel save which typically has a higher cetane rating gets my money, the performance is just as good. I put v-power in about once a month because of it's additional benefits. I believe the stock additives which are classed as "detergents" should theoretically help break down, loosen or even clean the soot deposits that may be building up on the nozzles etc. The increased lubricity of the v-power fuel should also help lubricate the pump. I'm sure they cannot claim these benefits without proof, so i trust them in that, but just once a month.

[Em135eye]

Briers - I stick to Shell too mainly because its my nearest filling station!

[HighlandPete]

I'm not sure what sort of proof anyone can provide, it we don't want to do our own controlled and verified testing. We seem to want to ignore the vast amount of testing the fuel companies put into their R&D. It seems when they post results we scoff and say 'snake oil'. Just watch the online video of BP's development of the BP Ultimate fuels and see how much testing is involved.

Here's a simple test on a Jag' diesel, but a bit more in gear acceleration and a quieter engine isn't proof is it? Just someone having a go, like FifthGear.

http://www.caranddriving.com/feature...20ultimate.pdf

We had all this same scepticism about the petrol fuels, until there were a few dyno tests on different performance engines, and guys at Thorney Motor Sport sort of took in on themselves to prove the fuels did work, when the doubters said it was all anecdotal.

Even guys like Dr Wolfgang Schneider are "only marketing the stuff", many will say.

Dr Wolfgang Schneider a key development Director at Ford of Europe feels the introduction of the fuel is a big step forward for diesel motoring. “We’ve welcomed BP Ultimate Diesel. As the first performance fuel specifically developed to meet the needs of diesel engined vehicles, we can see clearly how it contributes to lower emissions of regulated pollutants, improved cold starting, lower noise, improved economy and performance and improved protection of the engine. This, we’ve found, allows for cleaner, more efficient vehicle operation and helps protect diesel engines for longer life."

If only he had said "all diesel is the same", we'd believe him.

HighlandPete

[Shadow]

Originally Posted by 335diesel

Shadow - has any DPF or injector failure been attributed to not using super diesel? Serious question. I haven't heard anything about it and again if it was a fact, the fuel companies would lap it up!

That would make very interesting reading - but I expect information on failure rates and modes of such components is hard to come by, especially on relatively new engines. You'd probably need to factor mileage, number of short trips / cold engine starts etc. into the data to get sensible results. I have seen posts on other forums talking about DPF failures in e.g. fleet vehicles where half the fleet ran BP, the other half supermarket diesel. I think every car forum in the world has a version of this thread going

On the subject of marine engines, I know very little about them - for example do they make use of EGR or similar for emissions control? I would have also thought that EGR valves might also benefit from cleaner burning fuel. All the info I could find was from MAN talking about SERIOUS (10 MW output) engines.

[kaishang]

Here's one of the examples of where that MTU marine diesel from my earlier pic is used:

http://www.militaryfactory.com/image...n%20at%20speed

As an FYI, if the engine in a naval ship goes really fubar, they are normally removed by cutting a hole in the side of the ship to get it out.

[TMP]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

I'm not sure what sort of proof anyone can provide, it we don't want to do our own controlled and verified testing. We seem to want to ignore the vast amount of testing the fuel companies put into their R&D. It seems when they post results we scoff and say 'snake oil'. Just watch the online video of BP's development of the BP Ultimate fuels and see how much testing is involved.

Here's a simple test on a Jag' diesel, but a bit more in gear acceleration and a quieter engine isn't proof is it? Just someone having a go, like FifthGear.

http://www.caranddriving.com/feature...20ultimate.pdf

We had all this same scepticism about the petrol fuels, until there were a few dyno tests on different performance engines, and guys at Thorney Motor Sport sort of took in on themselves to prove the fuels did work, when the doubters said it was all anecdotal.

Even guys like Dr Wolfgang Schneider are "only marketing the stuff", many will say.




If only he had said "all diesel is the same", we'd believe him.

HighlandPete

Wow, amazing findings....."Accelerating from 30-70mph when
running on conventional diesel fuel detained us for 9.3 seconds but when running on
Ultimate the increment was dispatched in 8.9 seconds
I may have to start putting in BP Ultimate in again....then will try the fuelsave test. Oh hang on, BP Ult is 137 near me...

One question that always bugs me with Diesels - how long do they take to adapt to the "Super" Diesel fuel? (With my Impreza it was a whole tank, so I never ever put normal unleaded in, as it would take another tank of optimax before i got the benefit back...)

[toxicnerve]

Talking of placebo effect:

http://idle.slashdot.org/story/11/01...bo-Effect-NSFW

[milesr3]

Originally Posted by TMP

One question that always bugs me with Diesels - how long do they take to adapt to the "Super" Diesel fuel?

This bugged me too and I asked Simon (of e-maps) last time I saw him. He reckoned there was no adaption in the mapping of my 535d*, so the benefits come simply from the different way that a higher cetane fuel burns. In which case the effect will be immediate. That's been my observation when experimenting with different fuels.

If BP Ultimate is too costly buy some Supermarket fuel and add Millers to it. Or just use Fuelsave as it's also 55-58 cetane typically.

*If anyone knows better then I'd like to know.

[toxicnerve]

Originally Posted by milesr3

This bugged me too and I asked Simon (of e-maps) last time I saw him. He reckoned there was no adaption in the mapping of my 535d*, so the benefits come simply from the different way that a higher cetane fuel burns. In which case the effect will be immediate. That's been my observation when experimenting with different fuels.

If BP Ultimate is too costly buy some Supermarket fuel and add Millers to it. Or just use Fuelsave as it's also 55-58 cetane typically.

*If anyone knows better then I'd like to know.

But does it lack the other additives/cleaners?

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by TMP

Wow, amazing findings......

All sorts in my filing system and on the computers. But finding internet links is often more difficult.

Originally Posted by TMP

One question that always bugs me with Diesels - how long do they take to adapt to the "Super" Diesel fuel? (With my Impreza it was a whole tank, so I never ever put normal unleaded in, as it would take another tank of optimax before i got the benefit back...)

Assuming the engine is working correctly and in good condition, injectors clean and with a good spray pattern, the fuel should immediately burn better. I'd say within a few hundred metres I can tell my car is back on the good stuff, if I've had a fill of standard fuel. The only fuel I couldn't tell was using Shell Extra, (as it was), that was a higher cetane fuel than the normal diesels. But I have used Ultimate from new, so should be as clean and efficient inside as is possible, for my conditions of use.

A higher Cetane rating improves the ignition quality of the fuel. Combustion is smoother/quieter and more complete, in a given engine, WITHOUT any changes (mechanical or electronic) to the engine working parameters.

A fuel which reduces fuel combustion ‘lag’ and gives a more balanced burn and lower cylinder pressures has to be better. Remember we are dealing with a different type of combustion than petrol. The AFR can vary typically between 20 - 100:1. That has its part to play on the improvements and running parameters.

Personally I don't think too much about the cost issue, has been about 4-pence a litre more expensive than standard BP, up here.

I see it this way, most of us have depreciation on these cars of £100 a wek or more. £1 - £2 a week extra for fuel on my mileage is nothing, as some is gained in improved mpg anyway.

HighlandPete

[milesr3]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

For me, the bhp gain is only part of the story. Diesel engines typically are best at lower revs and at part load, improved torque comes from the best combustion in that middle range. Where most of us drive, mile after mile.

HighlandPete

Me too. This is where the most noticeable improvement comes from higher cetane diesel.

If you look at these measurements of Millers, you'll see that peak torque and power were produced about 500rpm lower than with std fuel. What isn't clear is whether the power and torque drops off earlier, but it's of no consequence to normal everyday driving IMO.

[milesr3]

Originally Posted by toxicnerve

But does it lack the other additives/cleaners?

Which; Fuelsave or Millers? Millers has a very good detergent pack, which is allegedly very similar to what BP use in Ultimate. I don't know what shell put in Fuelsave but I'd hazard a guess that it's better than Supermarket fuel but not as good as their own V-Power as this seems to be it's USP.

[toxicnerve]

Originally Posted by milesr3

Which; Fuelsave or Millers? Millers has a very good detergent pack, which is allegedly very similar to what BP use in Ultimate. I don't know what shell put in Fuelsave but I'd hazard a guess that it's better than Supermarket fuel but not as good as their own V-Power as this seems to be it's USP.

I was referring to the Fuelsave...but you've answered my question.

I am going to give BP Ulitmate a go and see how it goes.

[Em135eye]

Willing to give Millers a go. Anyone know which is the right one for a 335d?

Looks this has replaced "Power Sport 4" - http://www.millersoils.net/M3_cgi/mi...otive&cart_id=

Might give it a go and see if I notice any difference. TBH if it keeps the engine genuinely cleaner, it's no bad thing.

[toxicnerve]

How much is a bottle of millers?

If the price difference between regular and super is 5p, then if you bang in 60litres you're talking a difference of £3 at the pumps....probably cheaper than a bottle of the additives??

[TMP]

Originally Posted by milesr3

This bugged me too and I asked Simon (of e-maps) last time I saw him. He reckoned there was no adaption in the mapping of my 535d*, so the benefits come simply from the different way that a higher cetane fuel burns. In which case the effect will be immediate. That's been my observation when experimenting with different fuels.

If BP Ultimate is too costly buy some Supermarket fuel and add Millers to it. Or just use Fuelsave as it's also 55-58 cetane typically.

*If anyone knows better then I'd like to know.

Thanks mate - I guess I am still stuck with petrol timing understanding....

Use FuelSave when I cant or don't want to use BP Ult (which has mostly since FuelSave came out! Also due to locality of cheap shell vs trip out to get BP Ult.

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

All sorts in my filing system and on the computers. But finding internet links is often more difficult.



Assuming the engine is working correctly and in good condition, injectors clean and with a good spray pattern, the fuel should immediately burn better. I'd say within a few hundred metres I can tell my car is back on the good stuff, if I've had a fill of standard fuel. The only fuel I couldn't tell was using Shell Extra, (as it was), that was a higher cetane fuel than the normal diesels. But I have used Ultimate from new, so should be as clean and efficient inside as is possible, for my conditions of use.

A higher Cetane rating improves the ignition quality of the fuel. Combustion is smoother/quieter and more complete, in a given engine, WITHOUT any changes (mechanical or electronic) to the engine working parameters.



Personally I don't think too much about the cost issue, has been about 4-pence a litre more expensive than standard BP, up here.

I see it this way, most of us have depreciation on these cars of £100 a wek or more. £1 - £2 a week extra for fuel on my mileage is nothing, as some is gained in improved mpg anyway.

HighlandPete

yep - you seem to have the more info, than Google Ok, so that is reassuring that you get the benefit straight away.

Good points on costs...thanks for reminding me how much I am loosing on depr

The cost differentiation is around 7-10p though between FuelSave and BP Ult around me

[TMP]

Originally Posted by 335diesel

Willing to give Millers a go. Anyone know which is the right one for a 335d?

Looks this has replaced "Power Sport 4" - http://www.millersoils.net/M3_cgi/mi...otive&cart_id=

Might give it a go and see if I notice any difference. TBH if it keeps the engine genuinely cleaner, it's no bad thing.

If BP Ult and Millers do the same thing I know which one I prefer....

...esp if anything happens and BMW can tell you have used an additive.

Be good to hear your findings though mate

[Em135eye]

Originally Posted by toxicnerve

How much is a bottle of millers?

If the price difference between regular and super is 5p, then if you bang in 60litres you're talking a difference of £3 at the pumps....probably cheaper than a bottle of the additives??

Seems to be around £8 for 800ml and that lasts for 10 fill ups.

Shell posh fuel is around 7p more a litre here, a tank is 60 litres so £4.20p per fill up or £42 for ten fill ups. I'm actually more convinced by Millers than I am by BP and Shell's claims. For no real reason. Pretty scientific huh?!

TMP - no warranty left on mine (and 100% owned) so I can do what the hell I want with it!