Supermarket fuel inferior quality says Telegraph. Really?
Discussion
Devil2575 said:
Indeed, which is why people frequently believe things that aren't true. Personal experiences are not a good form of evidence for anything.
Devil2575 - I'm coldDevil2575's mum - Well put a coat on then
Devil2575 - Although my personal experience is that I'm warmer with a coat on, there have been no government funded university approved independent research into the feasibility of a coat making me warmer, and therefore I refuse to accept the evidence that wearing a coat makes me warmer just because wearing a coat makes me warmer, and thus shall not put one on.
Ari said:
Devil2575 said:
Indeed, which is why people frequently believe things that aren't true. Personal experiences are not a good form of evidence for anything.
Devil2575 - I'm coldDevil2575's mum - Well put a coat on then
Devil2575 - Although my personal experience is that I'm warmer with a coat on, there have been no government funded university approved independent research into the feasibility of a coat making me warmer, and therefore I refuse to accept the evidence that wearing a coat makes me warmer just because wearing a coat makes me warmer, and thus shall not put one on.
The hierarchy of evidence is:
The Telegraph advice is from "Honest John". I don't know if this is an individual, as is presented, or a website now owned by some media company but in any case they seem to push Shell V-Power at every single possible opportunity. I'm sure they have done lots of independent and carefully controlled tests to confirm this, and aren't just spouting off half informed advice as if it's stone cold fact.
hufggfg said:
"Good form of evidence"... It is A form of evidence, but not a particularly good one. Of course there are some "interventions" (to use the medical lingo) where the effect is so clear that even anecdotal evidence consistently gives the correct answer.
The hierarchy of evidence is:
Fairy nuff. The hierarchy of evidence is:
Devil2575 - Although my personal experience is that I'm warmer with a coat on, there have been no government funded university approved independent research into the feasibility of a coat making me warmer, and therefore I refuse to accept that wearing a coat makes me warmer is a good form of evidence just because wearing a coat makes me warmer, and thus shall not put one on.
Why do we have to take "Honest John"'s advice as gospel, that is your starting point.
Did the person actually writing this analyse all supermarket fuels and compare them to non supermarket fuels, and if so, can we see the results?
If not, "HJ"'s claim that supermarket fuel is not as good as non supermarket fuel is just bias and hence totally worthless (even if, for argument's sake, he is found to be correct).
Did the person actually writing this analyse all supermarket fuels and compare them to non supermarket fuels, and if so, can we see the results?
If not, "HJ"'s claim that supermarket fuel is not as good as non supermarket fuel is just bias and hence totally worthless (even if, for argument's sake, he is found to be correct).
On my last road trip in the States we used fuel varying in octane rating from 85 to 91, and from many different fuel companies, none of which made any discernible difference to how the car ran. Further, there will be a hell of a lot of cars over there that reach intergalactic mileages while only ever being run on the cheapest 85 stuff, so I doubt very much that you need to worry about any of the petrol that's on sale in the UK - it's luxury in comparison.
Roger Irrelevant said:
On my last road trip in the States we used fuel varying in octane rating from 85 to 91, and from many different fuel companies, none of which made any discernible difference to how the car ran. Further, there will be a hell of a lot of cars over there that reach intergalactic mileages while only ever being run on the cheapest 85 stuff, so I doubt very much that you need to worry about any of the petrol that's on sale in the UK - it's luxury in comparison.
I think you are making assumptions based on just numbers that do not relate to each other - USA fuel is rated differently to UK fuel Ari said:
hufggfg said:
"Good form of evidence"... It is A form of evidence, but not a particularly good one. Of course there are some "interventions" (to use the medical lingo) where the effect is so clear that even anecdotal evidence consistently gives the correct answer.
The hierarchy of evidence is:
Fairy nuff. The hierarchy of evidence is:
Devil2575 - Although my personal experience is that I'm warmer with a coat on, there have been no government funded university approved independent research into the feasibility of a coat making me warmer, and therefore I refuse to accept that wearing a coat makes me warmer is a good form of evidence just because wearing a coat makes me warmer, and thus shall not put one on.
Physics does not come into determining the presence or otherwise, and percentages thereof, of the different constituents of fuel.
Since there are hundreds of variables with respect to the smooth running or otherwise of an internal combustion engine, anectdotal evidence regarding same is also worthless.
Saturday I removed a bracket from the lift that services our property.
Within an hour the lift broke down.
Which means?
Nothing, no connection at all.
Ari said:
Fairy nuff.
Devil2575 - Although my personal experience is that I'm warmer with a coat on, there have been no government funded university approved independent research into the feasibility of a coat making me warmer, and therefore I refuse to accept that wearing a coat makes me warmer is a good form of evidence just because wearing a coat makes me warmer, and thus shall not put one on.
Maybe not that specifically (although you never know, there are some very daft studies) but I bet there's been a hell of a lot of research (government funded or otherwise) on heat transfer and insulating materials.Devil2575 - Although my personal experience is that I'm warmer with a coat on, there have been no government funded university approved independent research into the feasibility of a coat making me warmer, and therefore I refuse to accept that wearing a coat makes me warmer is a good form of evidence just because wearing a coat makes me warmer, and thus shall not put one on.
B'stard Child said:
Roger Irrelevant said:
On my last road trip in the States we used fuel varying in octane rating from 85 to 91, and from many different fuel companies, none of which made any discernible difference to how the car ran. Further, there will be a hell of a lot of cars over there that reach intergalactic mileages while only ever being run on the cheapest 85 stuff, so I doubt very much that you need to worry about any of the petrol that's on sale in the UK - it's luxury in comparison.
I think you are making assumptions based on just numbers that do not relate to each other - USA fuel is rated differently to UK fuel 996TT02 said:
Why do we have to take "Honest John"'s advice as gospel, that is your starting point.
Did the person actually writing this analyse all supermarket fuels and compare them to non supermarket fuels, and if so, can we see the results?
If not, "HJ"'s claim that supermarket fuel is not as good as non supermarket fuel is just bias and hence totally worthless (even if, for argument's sake, he is found to be correct).
We don't - hence the question... Did the person actually writing this analyse all supermarket fuels and compare them to non supermarket fuels, and if so, can we see the results?
If not, "HJ"'s claim that supermarket fuel is not as good as non supermarket fuel is just bias and hence totally worthless (even if, for argument's sake, he is found to be correct).
Swanny87 said:
So would 85RON US be similar to ours? I've always heard that US fuel is 'weaker' than ours but was never sure whehter it was just hearsay or not.
US 85 RON would be the same. The difference is in the US they don't use RON. They use Anti Knock Index (AKI). Both of them are Octane ratings, but give a slightly different number to the same fuel. The two ways of measuring Octane are RON (Research Octane Number) and MON (Motor Octane Number), and AKI is (RON + MON)/2. The way the MON test is carried out gives a slightly lower number, and is technically more accurate in the real world, but this only matters for scientists and engineers, as all people use it for in the real world is "what is a higher number". The actual number is meaningless as long as the test is consitant.Lots more information here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating#Researc...
Heaveho said:
No mate, I live in the real world, things get done on as repeatable a basis as possible so I know whether to bother or not, but I'm not a scientist, and I doubt many others posting on this thread are either! You can only go by your own experiences, that's what the majority of people are posting, I'm no different.
Some of us are!hufggfg said:
madbadger said:
We put some supermarket and branded fuel through our mass spectrometer to have a look.
100.0% the same.
Apologies for my lack of understanding, but what exactly does a mass spectrometer measure? Is it effectively just saying that the fuels are exactly the same Octane rating? Or is it saying that the additives are the same as well?100.0% the same.
Lots of people here are talking about the difference in additives, rather than the Octane rating. Of course the placebo effect is very important (and not negated by data showing an improvement, that's the who point of placebo, it can lead to a real change, not just a perceived one) but I'm also interested in what impact additives have (if any).
Lots of videos on the net but imagine you are stood holding a hair dryer and someone throws a cannon ball past you. You will not be able to alter its trajectory much. If they use a ping pong ball, though then you will.
If you can measure the trajectory of both then it is possible to predict the mass of the projectile and say if it was a cannon ball or a ping pong ball.
The same thing happens at a sub atomic level and all elements can be measured by looking for a known response.
Therefore it is possible to analyse a sample with the right instument and have a good idea what was in the sample.
hufggfg said:
Apologies for my lack of understanding, but what exactly does a mass spectrometer measure? Is it effectively just saying that the fuels are exactly the same Octane rating? Or is it saying that the additives are the same as well?
Lots of people here are talking about the difference in additives, rather than the Octane rating. Of course the placebo effect is very important (and not negated by data showing an improvement, that's the who point of placebo, it can lead to a real change, not just a perceived one) but I'm also interested in what impact additives have (if any).
I was thinking the same.Lots of people here are talking about the difference in additives, rather than the Octane rating. Of course the placebo effect is very important (and not negated by data showing an improvement, that's the who point of placebo, it can lead to a real change, not just a perceived one) but I'm also interested in what impact additives have (if any).
I was also under the Impression that supermarket fuels have more bio ethanol in them or something similar?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff