Btu
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
From: Cayman
Btu
I have ofter hear mike talk about fuel energy content. If memory serves me right he said that this is measured in BTU's. When I go to the pump how can I know what number to look for to know that the energy content is good. I want to use the best fuel for my ride. By the way I am constantly getting 15 mile per gallon, we have very few high ways here. the longest being about ten miles. So I am mostly in traffic. So the best energy content fuel would do great.
Thanx
fowl.
Former Sponsor
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 13,385
Likes: 4
From: Virginia
Hi Fowl,
Ahh, that's the kicker, that BTU level is never listed on any pump, nor will oil companies generally tell you should you call and ask them. The only thing on the pump is the octane number, the price & number of gallons, basically.
Of course, actual energy content is a bit of a moving target, it's not going to be the exact same from one refinery run to the next, there is going to be some variance there. The best fuels will have a consistently high energy content, but even then, there is going to be some variance in the actual number.
I agree with FamilyRide, if you're getting a consistent 15 mpg in your conditions there, you're doing very well.
Ahh, that's the kicker, that BTU level is never listed on any pump, nor will oil companies generally tell you should you call and ask them. The only thing on the pump is the octane number, the price & number of gallons, basically.
Of course, actual energy content is a bit of a moving target, it's not going to be the exact same from one refinery run to the next, there is going to be some variance there. The best fuels will have a consistently high energy content, but even then, there is going to be some variance in the actual number.
I agree with FamilyRide, if you're getting a consistent 15 mpg in your conditions there, you're doing very well.
Former Sponsor
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 13,385
Likes: 4
From: Virginia
Hi df4.6,
I think you must have misunderstood, I never said anything about us having a "study". It's well known in the aftermarket tuning industry that Exxon gas has been among the lower energy content fuels for the past couple of years, since they went to a reformulated fuel year-round in all areas of the US, whether a reformulated fuel is mandated for use in that geographic area or not. It's a good clean-burning fuel as far as that goes, which is what they were trying to achieve. The problem is just that its energy content is just low compared to that found in fuels like Texaco & Amoco in most areas of the country, and so you generally won't get as much performance or as good fuel mileage with it compared to higher energy fuels. This wasn't always the case, Esso & later, Exxon, has traditionally been a good fuel, this is just recently, in the past couple of years since they went to a "reformulated" status year-round in all areas of the US. We have heard from some of our Canadian customers that for them, it's just the opposite, they are getting good performance & as good mileage from the Esso or Exxon they get locally. We don't know if that is true in other foreign countries, though we used mostly Esso for the better part of 13 years in Europe, and had no particular problems, it seemed fine years ago over there.
About the only way we as laymen can roughly determine relative energy content is to do your own informal mileage "testing". Run 3-5 tanks of each brand of fuel, doing the same basic type of driving, and generally, the fuels with the higher energy content are going to deliver more fuel mileage, all else being equal. We've done that a few times over the past few years, & Exxon always ranks down there with the lower-energy off-brands. We will occasionally see that a no-name was a decent fuel, that can certainly happen on occasion, as there is a good deal of sharing of base gas stocks, but day in and day out, there are higher energy fuels available here in the US than Exxon, such as Texaco, Amoco, in many areas Citgo, etc. There are all kinds of variations, out West Chevron seems to work very well whereas here in the East we don't care for it. Same with Shell, in reverse, which seems to work well here in the East, but not out West, and so it goes. We simply try to accumulate data informally, from our own results and those that many of our customers report back to us, to try and let peole know whicih fules seem to be doing the better job in most areas. It's not a scientific study, by any means.
I hope that helps,
I think you must have misunderstood, I never said anything about us having a "study". It's well known in the aftermarket tuning industry that Exxon gas has been among the lower energy content fuels for the past couple of years, since they went to a reformulated fuel year-round in all areas of the US, whether a reformulated fuel is mandated for use in that geographic area or not. It's a good clean-burning fuel as far as that goes, which is what they were trying to achieve. The problem is just that its energy content is just low compared to that found in fuels like Texaco & Amoco in most areas of the country, and so you generally won't get as much performance or as good fuel mileage with it compared to higher energy fuels. This wasn't always the case, Esso & later, Exxon, has traditionally been a good fuel, this is just recently, in the past couple of years since they went to a "reformulated" status year-round in all areas of the US. We have heard from some of our Canadian customers that for them, it's just the opposite, they are getting good performance & as good mileage from the Esso or Exxon they get locally. We don't know if that is true in other foreign countries, though we used mostly Esso for the better part of 13 years in Europe, and had no particular problems, it seemed fine years ago over there.
About the only way we as laymen can roughly determine relative energy content is to do your own informal mileage "testing". Run 3-5 tanks of each brand of fuel, doing the same basic type of driving, and generally, the fuels with the higher energy content are going to deliver more fuel mileage, all else being equal. We've done that a few times over the past few years, & Exxon always ranks down there with the lower-energy off-brands. We will occasionally see that a no-name was a decent fuel, that can certainly happen on occasion, as there is a good deal of sharing of base gas stocks, but day in and day out, there are higher energy fuels available here in the US than Exxon, such as Texaco, Amoco, in many areas Citgo, etc. There are all kinds of variations, out West Chevron seems to work very well whereas here in the East we don't care for it. Same with Shell, in reverse, which seems to work well here in the East, but not out West, and so it goes. We simply try to accumulate data informally, from our own results and those that many of our customers report back to us, to try and let peole know whicih fules seem to be doing the better job in most areas. It's not a scientific study, by any means.
I hope that helps,