We have been assured that the problem is now resolved. Thank you for your patience.

This is a question we get asked regularly and we feel the need to clarify. It’s also a topic we discussed at length with the managing Director of www.powerenhancer.co.uk, a company with a no-nonense attitude that has gained our respect. As such, we have quoted what they had to say on the matter.

From all our experience and testing we have yet to find a commercial fuel-based engine cleaning product that has resulted in any form of short, medium or long term damage to a fuel system or engine. Sure, there are many products that are useless and don’t deliver as promised but the main commercial ones we have tested are at least totally benign to an engine, including those with superchargers or turbo chargers.

Please note that this is not a licence for you to put any old rubbish in your fuel tank! With BG being the largest and most respected producer of vehicle based chemicals in the United States for many years, and after selling hundreds of thousands of cleaners throughout the trade whilst working directly with manufactures such as VW and Audi, we have yet to hear of any damage of any kind.

This core ingredient of BG cleaners, PEA (Polyether-amine) is proven and documented by the Worldwide Fuel Charter to be the only chemistry proven to safely remove carbon from within a combustion engine. Providing the recommend dosages are not seriously abused our cleaners are no more dangerous than putting gasoline (or diesel for diesel engines) in the fuel tank.

So why does my main dealer and car manual insist on no fuel additives?

This is down to a combination of draconian thinking and commercial protection. Firstly and unlike in the US, manufactures (fronted through their main dealers) have a vested interest in maintaining a “replace with new policy”. For example, if a main dealer plugs in their diagnostics computer and it registers a faulty diesel fuel pump or faulty injectors then they must advise the customer that they require a new pump or injectors.

We have seen bill for almost £3000 to supply and fit 4 new diesel injectors from one of our customers! The fact that injectors and pumps can be reconditioned or that a good quality cleaner will 95% of the time resolve the problem is irrelevant. Main dealers have little choice and they risk falling out of favour with the manufacture or worse, losing their franchise if they deviate from the “replace with new” policy. If you accidently put a stain on the carpet would just replace the carpet without trying to clean it first?

Secondly, UK based manufacturers and dealers are protecting themselves from customers that may foolishly put a harmful substance in the fuel tank, i.e. bleach (and we’re not joking) or putting fuel additives in with the oil or visa-versa. Hence, a straight forward “no additives” policy.

It also doesn’t help that the taboo surrounding oil additives has had a significant but negative impact on the use of fuel based additives in the UK.

So why is it different in the United States?

Unlike in the UK, the US main dealers have a strong influence over the manufactures. In many cases it is the main dealer that will call the shots. Unfortunately in the UK it is quite the opposite although we are starting to witness some change with manufacturers (such as VW/Audi) using BG direct to provide additive based solutions for their vehicles. It’s just that the cans are labelled VW even though they are BG products.

Many main dealers in the US use BG 44K, BG 244 and other BG products as part of routine servicing and have been doing so for some time with great success as have our UK-based customers who have tried and continue to use BG products.

Please don’t hesitate to contact us if you require any further advice.

The FuelTechExperts Team

Numerous studies have been published, either by oil companies or by car makers or even by scientific bodies, claiming and countering benefits, and exposing the so-called risks of additive usage in engine oils. There is so much of ‘expose’ pervading the market, particularly in the Internet forums, that an automobile owner, as the ultimate end user, may become totally confused about whether or not it is necessary to use additives with oil for their vehicle. This article is an attempt to regain some accurate context and clarity on this taboo subject.

Oil is a multi-billion dollar global industry. Two of the most important attributes of this industry are stiff competition and hectic infighting for protection of vested interests. Engine oils that these companies market conform to various international specifications like SAE and API. The main motive with which these companies operate is obviously profit. However, it’s not a profit at any cost situation. The quality of the product is also something very important for these oil companies. It’s this quality that can give them an edge in capturing and retaining a sizeable market share. So, most oil companies invariably try to market good quality engine oil that optimizes performance and ensures higher engine life.

But, the most important question is – how sincere are these oil companies in making really good oil? Do they make the best quality oil? The answer is certainly a big NO. Let’s see why this is so. First, the expression “best quality” is completely relative. One oil may be good for a particular type of engine and not so good for another. Moreover, there is no such end-goal specification, only set regulatory standards.

Research is unfolding new possibilities almost every day. In this highly dynamic situation, it is quite possible for an oil brand that is an excellent quality today, get replaced by a more efficient substitute tomorrow. Therefore, there is nothing sacrosanct about best quality oil. Second and most important, oil companies would never make the “ultimate” oil, even if it was theoretically possible, because that runs counter to their business interests. Optimum quality oil can mean more shelf-life and less replacement and this will obviously make their markets take a beating. It is, therefore, a natural conclusion that oil companies do not make, rather do not endeavour to make, the best quality oil. Rather, it’s in their business interest to promote marketing and strategic associations to earn more money, than devoting resources for quality optimization.

There are interesting examples on this. A very well known worldwide oil manufacturer (renowned for their quality fully synthetic oils) spend more on marketing than they do on R&D and production put together! Another well know petroleum supplier in the UK owns the rights to Slick 50 and despite the many complaints and legal cases that have surfaced and the brand having been notorious in tarnishing the oil additive market in general, this supplier purchased the rights to Slick 50 and continue to sell this product today. Why? Because it still makes money! For clarification, we do not endorse Slick 50 or recommend any PTFE or similar based oil additives.

So, it’s not at all hard to accept that these oil companies make oil that surpasses the basic quality specifications set by various accredited agencies but it is not in their interests financially, to far exceed these specifications. This means, what you buy is likely to be a good oil that you can rely on for good performance and protection, and obviously not best oil for peak performance. The old age adage “you get what you pay for” applies here.

This naturally keeps one issue strongly in the focus – oil quality can be improved for optimizing performance and delivering peak output.

Basically, engine oil has two main components-basestock and an additive package. The bulk of the oil constituting nearly 70-95% is made up of base fluid with the rest being the additives. The additive chemicals add value to the positive qualities and minimize impacts of the negative qualities of the basestock. Basestocks are of two main types, petroleum and synthetic. Crude oil in its purified form is the petroleum basestock. They have been in use since the earliest development and application of lubricants to moving parts of an engine. Synthetic basestocks, on the other hand, are made in the laboratory with specific chemicals corresponding to different functions that the lubricant is required to perform. Synthetic basestocks are thus very much use-specific. Although they came to be known in the 1900’s, they started getting prominence in automobile industry in the 1970’s. Further information on the composite of oil can be found in our article – What’s in Engine Oils.

So, if additives are essentially in oil from the outset, then why is there so much of controversy in fortifying existing oil further with additional additives? For one reason, a part of it is created by the oil companies to further their business interests. An excuse they commonly use is that further additives would upset the carefully selected blend of existing additives.

The reality is that selecting the appropriate constituents for the additives and their blending is a very expensive affair. If the oil companies are to invest substantially to create these facilities, the end product would be costlier. Again, we return to the fact that oils only need to comply with the regulatory performance criteria for it given country. There is no need to go over engineer an additive pack. Instead, this is saved for their more exclusive customers like high profile motor racing teams.
Another blockage is created by the car manufacturers. They refuse to honour the warranty obligations if oils with additives are used in the engines manufactured by them. It’s business that’s uppermost in everybody’s mind. Car manufacturers make engines with some engine life in mind. If they run longer than expected, thanks to excellent engine oils charged with appropriate additives, their business is certainly compromised. So, naturally, they would discard the idea of using such products that give engines a longer than necessary life.

Furthermore, there are unscrupulous individuals in the market place that insist on selling additives that claim ultimate protection or unrealistic MPG gains. This is unfortunate as it has somehow resulted in the unreasonable deduction by some misinformed public, usually self claimed “experts” that frequent the internet forums, that if additives were any good then manufactures would include them in their oil. Well, the answer is they do, but usually in small (lower cost) quantities meaning that many oils can be improved further.

From all this heat, one thing emerges firmly. Additives do have a positive role in enhancing engine oil quality, and only intensive research from credible companies with limited vested interests can show ways and means to improve engine oil quality, and reveal more cost effective solutions to improve engine performance and longer engine life.

Our advice is to do your research before considering putting an additive in with your engine oil. Check the ethical standing of that company; search the internet for feedback. Alternatively you can contact us if you have a query concerning any particular oil additive.

The FuelTechExperts Team

There has been a lot of talk on the web and amongst garages & tuners about the BG range of products and services; in particular, BG 44K for petrol and the new BG 244 for diesel. There is no doubt that BG Products Inc is not only a well established organisation but their reputation is reportedly huge in the US.

Remarkably, their products are so well respected that many manufactures and dealers now use them as part of routine servicing. For example, you could take your Lexus to your local dealer and find that a can of BG44K makes its way in to the tank to clean the entire fuel system and remove all carbon build-up, in addition to the normal scheduled service.

So, what exactly are BG44K and BG244? Well, the following is taken from the website www.powerenhancer.co.uk and explains more about the product:

“This patent-protected, modern treatment, which is simply added to a full tank of petrol, safely cleans away accumulated deposits in parts of the engine fuel system (including injectors) and from the intake components, intake valves and combustion chambers.

Gone are £100+ garage bills to remove and clean petrol or diesel fuel injectors, or worse, authorised dealers telling you your vehicle requires new injectors with some repair bills running well into four figures. Gone is the need to tear down engines to remove built-up carbon deposits. In fact, in the US BG 44K® as well as other BG products now feature as part of routine car servicing by established car manufacturers and their dealers networks. The same is now happening in the UK.

With a recommended use of every 10,000 to 12,000 miles, one treatment is all that’s required for you to notice the difference in starting and engine running. Most notice a difference within 1/3 of a tank through the treatment.

Please don’t confuse BG 44K® with off-the-shelf injector cleaners. There is no comparison and no better product available on the market today. Other cleaners don’t provide the necessary cleaning power to completely remove deposits, gum and varnish from fuel injectors. Furthermore, they barely touch the carbon deposits that accumulate over time. At best, they maintain a cleaner fuel system; the problem being that’s it not convenient nor cost effective for you to have to add a cleaner every time you fill your vehicle with fuel.”

This is a bold statement but unfortunately a true one. Most off the shelf cleaners are actually “fuel conditioners” and even though they play a role whilst in the fuel tank, they seldom have any long lasting effect, and that is because they don’t touch the carbon or hard gum deposits. What they tend to do is help “improve” the quality of the combustion and reduce emissions, usually to help pass exhaust gas emissions tests, but that’s all.

“Similarly, don’t confuse BG 44K® with “magic” additives that claim increased horsepower or wildly improved fuel economy. What BG 44K® actually does is restore the performance of your engine back to when it was new. Lost performance and degraded fuel economy will be restored and your vehicle will perform as it did when it left the factory.”

This is refreshing to see. A company that is actually realistic on the expected results of their products. In our business, we see too many over exaggerated claims of performance, reduced MPG etc.

“What makes BG 44K® so effective? A main contributory factor is a key active ingredient called Polyether-amine. As acknowledged by the Engine Manufacturers Association (www.enginemanufacturers.org), PEA as it is commonly known, is the only recognised and approved chemical compound for dissolving and removing hard baked carbon deposits.”

We are very well familiar with PEA chemistry and can confirm that it is the only proven compound for safely and effectively remove carbon build-up in a combustion engine.

“So how does this make BG 44K® significantly more effective than other cleaners or fuel alone? Well, the amine family of chemicals contain Nitrogen so by simply carrying out a titration test to measure the levels of Nitrogen one can determine the effectiveness of the product.

FACT: Internal combustion engines are inefficient and whilst this remains the case they will accumulate deposits. Whilst steps have been taken to include detergents in fuel, unfortunately, they DO NOT contain enough Polyether-amine based chemistry to keep an engine free from deposits.

BG 44K® does contain a strong Polyether-amine based proprietary formula and the results speak for themselves. We would urge you to search on Google, where you will find many links to websites owned by car manufacturers and dealers supporting the use of BG products, not least, BG 44K® and other Total Deposit Control® products. You will also find a wealth of positive feedback and testimonials from those who have tried and continue to use BG 44K®. BG are experts in deposit control and removal for the combustion engine and have lead the way in this field for years.

How You Can Verify It Works Too – Our Challenge to You…

If the own a petrol vehicle then before adding the contents to your tank of fuel, remove one of the spark plugs from the engine and shine a torch down the spark plug hole. You will notice that the top of the piston is black and coated with a carbon build-up. Similarly, the valves and other parts of the internal intake system are likely to be in a similar condition (see images below). Now add BG 44K® to a full tank of fuel and drive the car normally. The carbon will start to dissolve and will be removed through the normal engine combustion process.

The Challenge….

After you are 1/3 of the way through that tank of fuel, remove the spark plug again and shine a torch down the spark plug hole and re-check the condition of the top of the piston. You will notice that much of the carbon is removed and that you will clearly see signs of a cleaner piston and without deposits. After 1/2 to 3/4 of tank of fuel, all you will see is a clean piston with no carbon deposits. We were even able to read the part/serial number on the top of the pistons in our test vehicles! Not only does it thoroughly clean the entire fuel system but it also removes all carbon deposits. “

Ok, so we took up this challenge and ordered a can of BG44K for our Toyota MR2 Turbo (petrol) and BG244 for our Audi A6 2.5TDI (diesel) test vehicle. The results were interesting to say the least.

For the MR2, we pulled all the spark plugs and shoved an endoscope down into the combustion chamber and as expected after 82,400 miles of use, the pistons, valves and combustion chamber were coked-up with carbon.

We need to mention at this point that these products come in cans and not easy to pour bottles, which we would have preferred. However, disposable funnels were provided and we found that they did the job without creating a huge mess. As per the instructions, we emptied the contents into the fuel tanks respectively and filled up with fuel on top.

For our tests, we just drove the cars normally – general commuting and so on. What became apparent very quickly with the MR2, after approximately 50 miles, was that it felt much smoother. Furthermore, the tick over when at standstill was smoother. We weren’t expecting a result as quickly but we put this down to the high concentration of PEA, which although is still very safe for the engine, it is not cheap to produce.

Because of the quick results, we decided to pull the plugs out again after only 100 miles and check for carbon build-up. Sure enough, it was almost gone with some traces left but the components were mostly back to bare metal. We were impressed. A check after 200 miles revealed completely clean piston tops. The engine note was also notably quieter; again, this is down to the carbon removal.
Overall the car felt great, was picking up speed quicker and was much smoother. Now, let’s not fool ourselves – it hasn’t gained an increase in performance over factory figures, but more accurately, has restored the engine back to the power it had when it left the factory.

The BG244 on our Audi gained similar results. It just picked up smoother and was more responsive. There also notably less clatter. But what really impressed us was the reduction in smoke both when the turbo kicks and at higher RPM.

We accept that these aren’t the most scientific of tests but for these type of products we are firm believers in gathering empirical data rather than squatting over an engine dyno. After all, these particular cleaners were not exactly aimed at increasing performance. Instead it just so happens to be a bi-product of a cleaner and thus more efficient engine. As such, we are confident that both BG44K and BG244 do what they say on the tin, more so than any other injector cleaner or carbon remover we have used.

For further info in the UK visit http://www.powerenhancer.co.uk.
If in the US visit http://www.bgfindashop.com.

The FuelTechExperts Team

Octane boosters are popular in the performance scene because they often regain power lost through detonation. Sold for around $10 – $50 (£5 – £25) in a handy bottle, they’re a convenient fuel additive and horsepower helper. But with so many brands on the market, you may be fooled into thinking they’re all as effective as one another.

Well, they’re not! Differing chemical compounds, additives and even volumes, mixed in with a good percentage of advertising, ‘independent” testing and testimonials all conspire to confuse the consumer away from the single most important point: does it improve the octane rating? Let’s find out the truth.

Firstly, Do I Need an Octane Booster? If you haven’t already done so then read our article “Do you really need an octane booster” first.

If you have determined the need for an octane booster then continue…

For this test we tracked down nine common makes and variations of octane booster; two fuel “additives,” a straight race fuel and a drum of Toluene. Where there were several different “levels” of octane boosters in the one brand, we chose the strongest version.

The biggest claims the manufacturers have is the amount of “points” they claim to increase. This can be ambiguous as a “point” can relate to either 1.0 RON (Research Octane Number) octane points, or 0.1RON octane points.

The list of entrants in our octane Olympics included:

• STP Octane Booster
• Wynns Octane 10+ Power Booster
• Amsoil Series 2000 Octane Boost
• Super 104+ Octane Booster
• VP C5 Fuel Additive
• ELF HTX 330 Racing Fuel Stabilizer
• Nulon Pro Strength Octane Booster
• PowerFuel Super Street Nitro Based
• PowerFuel Max Race Nitro Based
• NF Octane Booster Racing Formula
• NOS Octane Booster Racing Formula
• Toluene
• VP Motorsport 103 Unleaded Racing Fuel

The Test

To conduct these tests we contracted independent laboratory Intertek Testing Services, who would test our products on a “knock engine.” We also had to find a base fuel to add our boosters to so we went to the closest public petrol station, which happened to be Shell.

Being a performance-based test, we chose premium unleaded fuel as this represents the most common high performance fuel (i.e.: if you start with regular unleaded, you’re wasting money!) We should add that “some” boosters would have improved the octane rating of regular unleaded proportionately more than our tests with PULP.

With a RON rating at a minimum of 95, we first established the exact octane of the PULP. The biggest surprise was our randomly select Shell resulted in a quite high 96.8 RON. We precisely measured and mixed each additive to the PULP, according to the manufacturer’s recommendations and poured each into the knock engine’s tank. The compression ratio was then slowly increased until it started to knock, gaining a threshold of detonation and subsequently a maximum RON rating.

Of less importance but still worth mentioning is the design of the bottles: since most people will be pouring it straight into a tank, the design of a bottle is important to prevent any spillage on paintwork causing damage. So let’s look at the results!

Octane Points

As mentioned earlier, it’s very easy to confuse octane ratings as there are a number of separate international standards. MON (Motor Octane Number) is the number derived from a fuel when it’s applied to a test engine run at 3000rpm rather than 600rpm and with higher inlet temps and ignition advance. An known importer of 104+ fuel suggested MON is seen as a more real-world test. Although none of the fuel companies promote the MON figure which is normally between 7 and 10 numbers less than RON (Research Octane Number). Intertek’s Graeme Marks believes RON provides the general public with an idea of which additive works more effectively. And being the most commonly-used reference, we’ve decided to use RON for all our tests.

The Results

BASELINE OCTANE 96.8

11th PowerFuel Super Street Nitro Based – 946ml treats 35 litres RRP: $35
Octane Improvement: 97.0 (+0.2 RON)

Right from the start, we were told PowerFuel’s additives weren’t necessarily octane boosters, but horsepower helpers. We kept this in mind when testing both the products, but of the two, only the Super Street claimed it was specifically designed to increase the octane rating of PULP. With a 20-percent nitro mix, Super Street Nitro-Based still improved octane ever so slightly (0.2RON) but the real test for these two would really come on dyno power runs.

10th PowerFuel MaxRace Nitro Based – 946ml treats 35 litres RRP: $45
Octane Improvement: 97.0 (+0.2 RON)

Containing another 15 percent more nitromethane than the SuperStreet formula, MaxRace doesn’t claim to increase octane, but the verbal recommendation was the same, i.e.: its main characteristic is to boost horsepower, not octane. For a fair comparison of these two additives, you need to look at the power they produce. As for octane, it proved very similar toe the SuperStreet formula bumping up octane ever so slightly.

9th STP Octane Booster – 350ml treats 57 litres RRP: $10.95
Octane Improvement: 97.4 (+0.6 RON)

One of the cheapest of the group, the STP was also one of the hardest to find. Auto stores either didn’t stock it, or had simply run out! Claiming to increase the octane 2-5 points, in a well-designed-for-pouring bottle, the STP – used in the ratio determined by the label – improved the octane marginally by just over half a point. A little disappointing unless you interpret STP’s claim actually meant 0.2-0.5 points. Then it’s a good result!

8th Wynns Octane 10+ Power Booster – 325ml treats 60 litres RRP: $10
Octane Improvement: 97.6 (+0.8 RON)

Wynns was the cheapest of the lot and claimed an increase between two and five points, again not actually listing what a “point” related to. Strangely though the 10+ could indicate 1RON and if this is the case going by our tests it almost lived up to its name. But, not quite, increasing the octane rating by 0.8RON.

7th Super 104+ Octane Boost – 473ml treats 83 litres RRP: $25.95
Octane Improvement: 97.5 (+0.9 RON)

The acknowledged winner of all previous testing, Super 104+’s bottle stated we should expect an increase between four and seven point. With a new formula introduced about 12 months ago, identified by an “Eagle” logo on the back of the bottle, the Super 104+ seems to have lost its edge with a marginal gain of just less than 1.0RON.

6th VP Racing C5 – 355ml treats 75 litres RRP: $19.95
Octane Improvement: 98.1 (+1.3 RON)

VP has a strong reputation with fuels and its high octane formulas are very popular with drag racers. VP Racing’s C5 Fuel additive lacked information concerning its contents or claims, but the C5 additive still provided a reasonable increase of 1.3RON.

5th NOS Octane Booster Racing Formula – 355ml treats 60 litres RRP: $28
Octane Improvement: 98.6 (+1.8 RON)

NOS, a relatively new octane booster, comes in “1/10th” scale bottles designed to emulate the actual nitrous bottles of its successful NOS systems. The Racing Formula is the strongest of three concentrates and containing Hydrotreated Aliphatics and Methylcyclopentadienyl Manganese Tricarbonyl (try saying that 10 times in a row), it contains a lead replacement which NOS claims increases the octane rating by as much as seven points. Obviously not recommended for street use, it also included with a handy pouring spout. In testing, it proved a good result improving the octane rating by almost 2 RON.

4th ELF 330 Fuel Stabilizer – 1000ml treats 50 litres RRP: $45
Octane Improvement: 98.6 (+1.8 RON)

“If you spill it on your paintwork, don’t rub it off – rinse it with water” were the words of warning. We were also told to “pre-mix” the ELF before adding it in a fuel tank (which we were doing anyway) as the ELF has a tendency to settle to the bottom of fuel if it’s either not mixed properly or left to sit. This was made somewhat more difficult by the design of the bottle, which tends to drip when pouring. With some nasty stuff known as Aniline, the ELF 330 doesn’t claim any numbers, but provided a decent 1.8 RON point improvement.

3rd Amsoil Series 2000 Octane Boost – 354ml treats 57 litres RRP: $23
Octane Improvement: 98.8 (+2.0 RON)

Recommended for off-road and racing use, the Amsoil Series 2000 claimed to increase the octane rating by up to seven points. It came up a little short, but still proved surprisingly good with a full 2.0 RON improvement. This was good enough for the bronze medal in our Octane Booster Olympics.

2nd Toluene (Toluol) – 20 litres treats 100 litres RRP: $48
Octane Improvement: 99.3 (+2.5 RON)

Since toluene (pronounced toll-you-een – also known as methyl benzine) isn’t a commercially advertised octane booster, we were unsure of exactly what ratio to mix the clear Toluene to the fuel. From personal experience, and although we had seen high percentages increase octane even further, 30 percent was considered the maximum. Available only from various fuel distributors (it is a special order through services stations), under advice we ran a 20 percent mix (quite a lot more than the others) and saw an impressive improvement of 2.5 RON. This achieved the silver medal.

1st NF Octane Booster Racing Formula – 250 ml treats 80 litres RRP: $29.95
Octane Improvement: 99.6 (+2.8 RON)

An Australian-made product from Perth, the NF Octane Booster Racing Formula was the smallest bottle in the field, but looking at the mixing ratio, also the strongest relying on an incredibly small dose – a mere 3 percent! Claiming to increase octane as much as 6.0 RON , NF took the gold medal in a surprising tie. If it were a split decision based on concentration though, it would be the clear winner.

1st Nulon Pro Strength Octane Booster – 500 ml treats 60 litres RRP: $20.95
Octane Improvement: 99.6 (+2.8 RON)

The Australian-made Nulon Pro Strength Octane Booster is the top of the range Nulon fuel product, claiming to boost octane “up to seven number”. The Pro Strength gained a joint gold-medal equalling NF’s 2.8RON increase.

Race Fuel

VP Motorsport 103 fuel – Used straight fuel (20-litre minimum) RRP: $70
Octane Improvement: 107 (+10.2RON)

Purely for interest, we also decided to test a straight racing fuel. While there are many available (such as ELF) for no particular reason we chose VP. The highest octane VP fuel which was still totally street-legal was the Motorsport 103. Working out at $3.50 per litre and “designed for maximum power and throttle response”, the VP was very impressive with an octane rating of 107RON – more than 10RON points more than PULP. Obviously more expensive than the boosters but if octane is problem, racing fuel like VP may be the answer.

Further Information

As the name suggests, a knock engine is designed to test the detonation or anti-knock rating of fuels and fuel additives. It’s a slow revving engine capable of running most fossil fuels through an adjustable compression ratio. As the comp ratio increases, it accurately measures the intensity of the knock and determines the fuel’s octane rating.

The world standard is a one-cylinder two-valve four-stroke engine with exposed valve gear. Archaic in appearance, a “carby” is fed from any one of three fuel bowls to allow three different fuels to be run back to back. The mixture is actually controlled via gravity feed and by raising or lowering the float level of each bowl!

Run under load via a belt-drive linking the flywheel and load system, it ensures a real world situation and ensuring minimal variation between tests, oil temperature, intake air density and air temperature are all monitored and controlled.

The engine is somewhat agricultural; however its unique ability to vary the compression ratio while running between 5.0:1 and 15.0:1 is quite amazing. The operator simply winds a handle and the entire head and cylinder assembly moves up and down relative to the crankshaft.

A knock sensor measures both the frequency and intensity of the ping (as displayed on a knock metre). Figures are then cross-referenced on a chart using the information provided by the knock meter, plus the height of the head and barrel. Finally, knock intensity is figured in and the fuel’s octane rating determined.

Taking two hours to warm, this $200,000 engine is super robust and rarely needs rebuilding. Individual tests can then proceed at approximately $120 per test sample.

Being subjected to so much detonation, you can only imagine how much maintenance an engine of this nature must need. Interestingly, this isn’t the case as the piston and rod assembly are rejects from a monstrous ship engine (just kidding)! They’re huge with an incredibly thick piston crown contributing to a combined gudgeon pin and piston weight of 1794 grams! Likewise, the rod weighs an astonishing 1929 grams. The bottom line is these engines which have replacement value of over $200,000 and almost never require rebuilding.

Dyno Boosters

Ultimately, the role of an octane booster is to regain horsepower lost through detonation or retarded ignition timing due to detonation. But two of our products, the nitro additives, weren’t specifically designed to increase octane. Instead, they contained a mix of nitromethane (the petrol Top Fuellers run) in a “percentage” concentrate. Power Fuel’s Super Street and Max Race additives had 20-percent and 35-percent nitro respectively, and the Australian importer specifically claimed they would increase power, not necessarily octane.

So, we took those two products and the two best-performing octane boosters to MRT Performance for some Dyno Dynamics dyno testing. Interestingly, we were going to use MRT’s rally Civic, which normally runs on avgas. On PULP – even with the booster – it was pinging too much, so a Jap-spec EF Honda Civic was used with a 1.6-litre VTEC and about 10.0:1 comp ratio.

The graphs tell the story though, and to be fair to the products, with variables such as heat soak, the results weren’t as conclusive as could be gained from an engine dyno. But that is not to say the products don’t work. As our test proves, they do, but it’s not as easily measured on a chassis dyno. Plus the Civic had no detonation problems on PULP, further hampering the apparent effectiveness of the boosters.

Summary

Both the Nulon Pro Strength and the NF Racing Formula rated the best octane boosters in our test. And considering that less NF was needed than Nulon, it evens out a little with a slightly higher cost. Still, both proved extremely effective at increasing octane, even outranking Toluene, which needs much higher levels of concentration.

The VP Motorsport 103 fuel was an interesting exercise, and if a little more effort (i.e.: buying it from the selected outlets) is worth the octane, it’s a good representation of what to expect from straight racing fuel.

We hope you found this useful. NF Octane Booster can be ordered from here.

The FuelTechExperts Team

Firstly, we need to understand why octane boosters exist in the first place – it is to prevent the onset of detonation. Detonation is described as: “Excessively rapid burning of the fuel mixture, often caused by auto-ignition due to excessive temperatures in the combustion chamber, incorrect ignition timing, lean mixtures, too high a compression ratio or unsuitable fuel.” Basically, a too-low an octane rating of the given fuel. Heard as a faint, metallic rattle, detonation is accompanied by a loss of power and can cause serious damage to piston crowns. It is also known as pinking.

The significance of detonation is such that many companies produce fuel additives designed to increase the inherent octane rating of a given fuel. The proliferation of octane boosters has in part come about in recent times thanks to low quality fuels, particularly with the demise of leaded fuel, which had a much higher octane rating.

This presents a problem for high-performance cars designed to run on higher octane or 100 RON Japanese fuel. Japanese import performance cars, Subaru’s STI WRX for example, run an ECU program for 98 to 100 octane fuel and may detonate on lower octane fuels if the ECU is unable to compensate for the lower octane. Some have even had ECU upgrades that require 102 Ron fuel but this is readily available in Japan but not in Europe or the US, or certainly not from a conventional gas station.

Normally, octane boosters would be of little use if an engine is not detonating. However, with the advent of more sophisticated ECU/EFI programming many engines can optimise the engine management system by advancing the ignition timing and thus benefit from higher octane fuel. This means more power. They are also advantageous as an “octane buffer” for highly tuned vehicles. For example, if your vehicle’s fuelling and ignition is mapped for 98 octane and you are using 98 octane fuels, then it may be of benefit to use an octane booster to increase the octane to 99 or 100 as a safety margin, in the event of having “degraded” fuel etc.

Honda’s S2000 2.0-litre engine for example, running a high 11.0:1 compression ratio, relies on advanced engine management as much as quality fuel. But it can sustain its power on a lower octane pump fuel because the ECU compensates. However this is achieved by reducing the ignition timing and thus results in degradation in performance. This is where a modern vehicle with advanced engine management can take advantage of a higher octane fuel or a base pump fuel plus an octane booster.

Also, any turbo owner who has experimented with boost will know if you run too much, it will detonate, so improving the octane is vital for maximum performance. However, non-performance vehicles designed and mapped to run comfortably on base pump fuel, say 95 RON, will not gain a performance advantage. Sure, many octane boosters offer other advantages such as valve protection etc, but it will not gain in power. Unless…..the vehicle in question has been remapped or chipped, or tuned in such a way that it can take advantage of a higher octane fuel.

For example: if you take a bog standard Ford Fiesta that is designed to run of pump fuel then there will be no performance increase from using an octane booster. But if you have the ECU (fuel and ignition) remapped for a higher octane then it will be necessary to use either a higher octane fuel or a base fuel plus and octane booster in order to achieve the power safely. Octane boosters are popular in the performance scene because they often regain power lost through detonation as a result of tuning upgrades.

Unfortunately, some popular TV car shows have been quick to rubbish the use of octane boosters. One for example demonstrated the use of several products on low performance cars such with basic engine management such as a Peugeot 106, basic Clio etc. We could have told you the results before they even started. They were all vehicles designed to run on basic low octane pump fuel and their ECUs are not sophisticated enough to take advantage of a higher octane fuel let alone an octane booster. Of course, it doesn’t help when many manufactures put ridiculous claims on their labels implying that octane boosters will increase performance on all vehicles when clearly they won’t.

To summarise:

You can/should use an octane booster if:

You have a modern medium to high performance vehicle and wish to make the most of the available power, and you are unable to easily obtain a good quality high octane fuel in your given area.

Your vehicle manual specifies a particular high octane fuel (i.e. 98 Ron super unleaded) but you are only able to find 97 Ron or below. To clarify, many modern cars will adapt accordingly if using a lower octane fuel than that specified but a reduction in performance will result.

You suspect that you may have a tank of old or bad fuel where the octane value has deteriorated.
Your engine has been mapped specifically for a higher octane fuel and/or the engine has been mapped very closely to the edge (detonation threshold) and you require an increase in octane to provide a buffer.

You have modified you vehicle in other ways such as an increase in the turbo boost pressure making detonation much more likely.

You are about to go on a track day where the engine will spend most of its time under considerable stress and you wish to prevent the onset of detonation under prolonged high-stress conditions.

You are not looking for a performance increase but wish to lubricate and protect the valves but using an octane booster in small regular dosages.

We hope this helps clarify any confusion. If you want to establish the best performing octane boosters then click here see the Octane Booster test results.

The FuelTechExperts Team

1 General Vehicle Maintenance

If you’re completely disillusioned with magic fuel pills, fuel magnets and those fuel saving devices that didn’t work (as expected) or the MPG on your vehicle has dramatically reduced, then don’t lose hope. Vehicle maintenance plays a key role in fuel economy. Again, this is basic but still valuable information.

Firstly, check your tire pressures. They should be at the correct pressure for your vehicle assuming you are using the recommended size wheels and tyres.

If you are serious about saving every ounce of fuel then consider changing the brand of tyre to a good quality low resistance tyre and the lower the resistance the less the engine has to work and hence the reduction in fuel.

Ensure you vehicle is regularly serviced. You would be surprised the difference a clean air filter and quality oil will make. It is also possible to change the oil for a lower viscosity, which would help reduce “drag” on the moving components, but this should not be done at the detriment of engine protection, which is the primary function of the oil.

2 Engine Cleaning

Accumulating deposits on parts such as fuel injectors, exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) systems, plenum runners, throttle bodies, pistons and intake valves significantly impair engine efficiency. The result is invariably power loss, rough idle and reduced fuel economy. However, cutting through the tenacious fuel deposits is no ordinary task, and only the best cleaners make any notable difference.

Our experience has shown that the only effective cleaners on the market are those rich in a compound know as polyether-amine (PAE). The most effective and most respected in commercial circles being BG44K and BG244.

Even with almost a quarter of a million mile run, engine components in combustion chambers, intake manifolds, ports and valves will remain astonishingly new by using BG 44K. It’s virtually as good as an engine right from the assembly line. This maintains the design excellence of the engine right throughout its operating life, and obviously optimizes engine performance and drastically economizes fuel consumption.

Its remarkable that most vehicle owners wait until their vehicle has running problems or very poor MPG before investing in a high quality fuel system and engine cleaner. We have seen MPG increases of over 25% from simply cleaning the fuel injectors and removing carbon build-up. If in doubt try this first.

For further info in the UK visit http://www.powerenhancer.co.uk.
If in the US visit http://www.bgfindashop.com.

Click here to see the results of our BG 44K and BG 244 test.

3 Oil additives

Although we consider this to be a bit of a mine field it would be remiss of us if we didn’t inform you that we have discovered that there are small but tangible gains to be had from oil additives. These are safe gains we might add but please tread with caution as it is true that there is a lot of rubbish out there. We are currently testing a series of reputable additives and hope to post the results soon. In the meantime, if you require any advice on a particular additive then feel free to contact us.

4 Engine Chipping / Re-mapping / ECU Reflash / Tuning Modules

The 5th way of improving MPG is by remapping or chipping your vehicle. This is achieved by altering the fuel and/or ignition timing and other parameters within the engine management unit (ECU) or through the use of a piggyback tuning module.

Although results can vary wildly this can be a very effective and safe way of improving MPG if you know where to go and who to trust. Depending on the vehicle and quality of mapping, this is where improvements of up to 20% can be achieved. We are currently testing various ECU remaps and tuning modules. Check back soon for the results.

5 Driving Style

For our tips on how your driving style can improve fuel economy click here.

The FuelTechExperts Team

Ok, another Fuel Economy report. A feeling like this on your part is not unexpected but, hold on, we promise you something a little different – views and experience from industry professionals and equally important – some common sense! Fuel economy, fuel saving, improved MPG and the use of fuel savers and similar devices is a subject we are regularly asked for advice, hence the need for us to provide an overview of our experience on what we have tried and tested.

At this point, perhaps it would be worthwhile to provide a few words about us. We have been working in the motor industry (with myself also as an investigative journalist,) for most our working lives but over the past 7 years we have paid particular attention to oil & fuel additives and general engine tuning, with a special focus on researching the effectiveness of additives and devices that claim to improve fuel economy (mpg). The results are interesting but not all that surprising really. So, we’ll give you the facts concerning the use of fuel additives and fuel saving devices and how they relate to MPG improvements.

Firstly we will concentrate on fuel saving products that have failed to increase MPG. We have either tried them ourselves or will provide access to other independent test results. Our main test vehicles are an Audi A6 2.5 TDI (Diesel) and A Toyota MR2 Turbo (petrol). We also occasionally use a Mitsubishi Evolution VI and BMW Z4 2.5 for more “performance” related tests.

Although it can be argued that the most accurate tests are performed in laboratory controlled conditions, we are not scientists and neither are our readers. Instead, we prefer to test the various products using real life driving and not dynameters or similar measuring devices. Besides, an attempt to prove a product works on paper as tested by an “independent” lab means nothing if the results cannot be replicated on the road, and this is where it really matters. We do use regular commuting routes to provide an honest assessment when comparing MPG figures.

1 The Mystic World of Fuel Pills

A company called Fuel Freedom International, flooded the Internet with a “magical” gas pill promising ultra-high fuel economy. We tested this pill on both our Audi A6 and Toyota MR2 for a total of 5 full tanks of fuel on consistent regular commutes. It resulted in a random fuel deviation of approximately +/- 1.5 mpg over the original MPG (A6 – 38MPG and MR2 – 27 MPG), which is consistent with what we would normally expect, hence no gain.

The claims were also tested by some ABC affiliates but positive results were not forthcoming. “The pill will kick in after burning several tanks of fuel” was the explanation of the company. But, how many…? Nobody had an answer. We considered 5 tanks over a period of 2 months more than sufficient for our testing.

Another Texas Company launched a hyper campaign promoting a fuel pill that could bring about almost 40% fuel saving and reduce emissions significantly when added to a tank of fuel. We tried this too and it didn’t work. The product was also tested by researchers at the University of Texas at Austin and in a Florida University. I know we weren’t going to concentrate on lab tests but it is merely to make the point that the results were negative in both types of test. Unfortunately, this pill turned out to be nothing more than a chemical equivalent of naphthalene, a toxic substance used in mothballs. It had nothing to do with improving MPG; rather, it had a negative effect on engine performance. As a result the company later had its assets frozen in a lawsuit.

We have refrained from providing detailed results on all the pills we have tried or by providing details on journey’s, times, MPG etc. This is simply because there is really nothing to report other than there was no discernable difference on either our diesel or petrol test vehicles or from tests conducted by other independent bodies. Bascially, we have not yet seen any scientific or emperical data that proves any of them work although we wish we had because it would be much more interesting to write about!

2 Fuel Magnets

Unlike fuel pills, fuel magnets have been around for years. Manufacturers claim a “change to the molecular structure of gasoline by aligning the hydrocarbons” that in turn improves fuel efficiency.
Again we will not delve into too much detail but needless to say we tried and tested the top 6 fuel magnets over almost a year and a minimum of 4 tanks for each device on both diesel and petrol test vehicles.

We can’t help but agree that the negatively surrounding these type of devices is founded. As an example, a particular fuel magnet hit the headlines in 2005 claiming to improve mileage by 27% when added to the fuel line. This multimillion dollar affair was investigated and it too discovered to be totally bogus. Later, the FTC sued the company, which then agreed to pull its ads.

EPA evaluated these products and rubbished their claims. Vested interests aside, if it had been possible to lower fuel consumption by placing a magnet in the fuel line, then everybody in this cunningly competitive world would have done so, whether subjected to vested interests or not.
Other explanations on how magnets work in fuel lines are many. Other than the alignment theory as mentioned above, many say that magnets help fuels to burn quickly and completely. But, studies show that faster burning does not, even in theory, improve fuel economy significantly on modern engines. Moreover, if the fuel really does burn faster, the ignition must be retarded to suit and this would reduce performance.

Claims such as these are a global phenomenon. An Australian company marketed a pill that promised slashing fuel costs by up to 42%. The company was successfully prosecuted by the Consumer Protection Department for false advertising.

It is true that The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) endorses neither fuel pills nor fuel magnets. The blatant dismissal of all these claims of fuel efficiency made by these so-called fuel pills is simply due to one fact – none of the claims are verified by unbiased research and/or controlled testing! All are based on individual testimonials, many being nothing more than words manufactured by the suppliers.

But what about the many legitimate testimonials from customers? We have what we believe to be a reasonable explanation to this and one which we have experienced firsthand. The most common explanation and one that is completely valid is that driving style, climate conditions, variations in fuel quality and other such factors contribute towards inconsistent MPG and fuel emissions.

Although these are vital factors we believe there is a more important underlying reason. Let us explain. One of the first tests we did many years ago with a fuel magnet netted an increase of 9% on a weekly 600 mile round trip commute for the first tank. The second tank netted approximately 5% and the third about 2%. Why?

After racking our brains we finally figured out what had happend. When you spend your hard earned money on a product of this nature you REALLY want it to work. This is a basic Psychological phenomenon. Furthermore, it is human nature that people do not want to be wrong or proven wrong. Again, this is a psychological defence mechanism.

What had actually occurred is that for the first tank we were unwittingly trying to obtain the best MPG improvement we could and as a result ended up driving much smoother than we would normally? We would seldom reach excessive speed and would brake much smoother. The MPG obviously improved as a result. I know this appears obvious if not simple, but you would be surprised how many people do this without fully realising it.

As we got back into our normal driving “routines” the MPG deteriorated. I guess this does, after all, support a need for lab-based testing but since that original test we made a careful note of ensuring that we maintained our normal driving style during any future testing.

It is unfortunate but it is the way of the world that “miracle” fuel savers are out to lure you with unbelievable claims. We strongly advise that you be realistic. We certainly are not naive to think that there isn’t a great deal of vested interest in this market, because there is. However, we are similarly not gullible enough to think that fuel magnets, fuel pills, copper tubing devices, air intake enturbulation gadgets and other wacky gimmicks all deliver as promised. If they did, our test vehicles would be giant magnets on wheels.

So, with all this negativity what, if anything, does improve MPG?

Read our blog entry “Fuel Economy – What Does Work – Our View” to find out…click here

The FuelTechExperts Team

1. Don’t drive too fast or accelerate too hard. Wind resistance increases drastically with increasing speed. Studies show that for every ten miles per hour you floor it, you lose as much as 15% in fuel economy. So, slow down, and be a fuel efficient, safer and relaxed driver.

2. Try moving in high gears and slow speed as much as possible. When the engine turns slowly, there are fewer explosions in the cylinder meaning lesser use of fuel. That means more economy for you.

3. Try not to accelerate when moving up a slope like a hill. If you are increasing your speed when moving up, you can see your mileage plummet from 30 or 25 MPG to as low as 6 MPG, and even 2 or 3 MPG. So, either maintain the same speed or go a little slow. You can save fabulously on fuel.

4. Anticipate stops and brake less. Every time you brake, you are wasting the car’s energy by cutting down the forward moving force and transforming it into retarding force acting through the brake pads. So, accelerate slowly and stop naturally at the anticipated points by taking advantage of the running friction, instead of braking at the last moment, and then pumping fuel once again to accelerate.

5. Don’t waste fuel by keeping your vehicle idling for long. Cars seldom require prolonged warming – in fact it can do more harm than good by preventing a natural acid build-up from dispersing from the piston rings resulting in increased engine wear. Driving gently is the best warm up there is. When it’s 25 degrees out, warm up for 30 seconds is quite fine. If it’s 10 degrees out, a minute’s warm up is ok.

6. Drive light. It’s also equally important to do away with roof racks as much as possible. You almost waste 5% MPG efficiency for carrying roof racks.

7. Don’t misuse or overuse the AC. When it’s pleasant outside, feel the nature, instead of shutting yourself in and burning extra fuel by keeping the air-conditioning equipment on.

Apologies if the above appears a little patronising but these are basics that are too often forgotten.

The FuelTechExperts Team