I know from reading some of Mike's old posts that he says to stay away from Exxon/Mobil and the no-name brands (Wal-Mart, Costco, Sams Club, etc...) Aside from that, has anyone noticed a performance difference (power, MPG, etc.) between brands.

I've seen some Shell commercials saying that they have reformulated their gas and you will have better MPG with their gas. Has anyone seen this improvement?

Sorry for all the questions...just trying to see if anyone has evidence to determine what gasoline works best for them

 

gschein,

When I used 87 Octane I had best results with Amoco, Shell and Citgo.

For 93 Octane my best are Texaco, Sunoco,and Shell.

 

I thought this was a great question, did a search and didn't find much, so I eagerly awaited all the responses....
nothing? Hmmmmm, come on everybody......
Locally, we have very little to chose from here...looks like Texaco, Shell or Chevron for me....leaning to Chevron for the Techron additive.

 

Gentlemen,

This varies greatly depending on geographic area - in other words, we can't always say the same brands of fuels that work well in the east also automatically and always work well in the west too, for example. And by "west," I mean primarily those areas where premium gasoline is only 91 octane - which is west of about Texas geographically, roughly speaking - instead of the 93 & 94 octane premiums that we get here in the East.

So anytime someone wants to report results, they need to also include where they are, if that is not automatically listed & displayed right under their screen name when they make a post here, as their location matters - both to the poster and the reader.

Anytime someone wants to know general fuel quality info, the way to get it is to just look it up via the search feature as all the info anyone could want is already here for the reading, for the cost of a few mouse clicks.

I rather doubt you're going to see anyone say "I got more power with xx brand," for example, as formal controlled testing would be required. Virtually nobody among the general public of F-150 owners actually does professional, properly controlled dyno testing of this type to even attempt to actually quantify that with any real accuracy or relevance. And that would be required in order to be able to make such a claim regarding power levels specifically. Now *we* have done some testing of that type from time to time, but even with us it's only if and when we get some "extra" time - or make the time. I don't know of any F-150 owners in general doing that kind of formal testing - that's really something that is more in a "tuner's realm," so to speak. Or a professional racer's realm, for example - generally speaking, you usually won't find that info among the public at large, as they usually don't have a real reason to do such formal controlled testing.

We generally advise people to talk more about fuel mileage, because that is something far more "universal" - fuel mileage under the same basic driving conditions is a decent *relative* indicator of energy content when the same basic driving conditions are present to compare 2-3 tanks of each different brand/source of fuel. Track the exact mpg results, and then do the comparisons - making sure not to compare winter to summer fuels (meaning not comparing "reformulated," also known as "winterized" or "winter gas," to non-reformulated fuels, which are also known as "summer" fuels).

Generally speaking, all else being equal the fuel delivering the best mpg under the same basic driving conditions is generally the fuel with the higher energy content, and that's an easy way to identify the best fuels (in terms of energy content) in any given locale. We do recommend clearing the PCM by disconnecting the battery for a few minutes before starting this, and again each time you change to a different brand or source, so that the adaptive strategy adjustments begin again from scratch, and yo have a level playing field, so to speak - we do the same thing when dyno or tack testing, for example, to eliminate another significant potential variable.

It's far easier for the average vehicle owner to make mpg comparisons, and from that informal data draw informal conclusions as to *relative* energy content (BTU's per gallon) of their local fuels. That's about all the "ordinary layman" can realistically do, and it's something very universal that we can all relate to, and has direct relevance - so this is why we suggest looking at this from an mpg standpoint.

Last............................

In general, beware the term "reformulated," as that usually means it's been oxygenated, thus reducing the energy content - the actual number of BTU's per gallon of fuel. Not 100% ALWAYS, but close enough (like 99.8%) so that if you have a choice of not using a reformulated fuel, we recommend you use non-reformulated fuels. Reformulated fuels deliver less power & performance in true high-performance engines, and lower fuel mileage in all engines as compared to a non-reformulated fuel, generally speaking.

I hoe that basic info helps a bit,

 

that's simple enough, it just may work!
Seriously, good answer and thank you!
It makes perfect sense that the mpg would directly relate to performance. It also covers the variables, such as altitudes, temp,humidity...all of them and not to mention the other variables as to particular vehicle (engine, mods, state of tune, etc.)
And yes, right again on reformulated. Beware of anything new or named something else, especially *oxygenated* during the winter in cold climates of smog check locations. You may not be getting what your so sure of....not noticable in some cases and severe detonation in others!
Thanks again Mike for the opportunity to go Duuh!

 

Hi Jeff,

>>>Thanks again Mike for the opportunity to go Duuh!<<<

Yeah, I'm a master of the obvious!

Have fun,