Shell Fuelsave
Discussion
CWH its shell's new regular fuel designed to save you a litre per tankfull.
My thought is, seen as the price of oil has come down since its high and they've not brought the fuel down by a similar margin they've stuck a smaller amount of v-power-esque additive in, to give them a marketing boost and sales increase.
My thought is, seen as the price of oil has come down since its high and they've not brought the fuel down by a similar margin they've stuck a smaller amount of v-power-esque additive in, to give them a marketing boost and sales increase.
v power doesn't give you any more miles per tank either though, unless you're getting knock with 95 ron fuel. it will allow to run the engine at a higher state of tune. that's it.
on here
http://www.shell.co.uk/home/content/gbr/products_s...
they recon it has lube in the fuel, which helps your engine move easier, or in the case of the diesel, it burns more effectively. 'savings may vary'. I'm sure they've found one car it works on, but gimmik imo
on here
http://www.shell.co.uk/home/content/gbr/products_s...
they recon it has lube in the fuel, which helps your engine move easier, or in the case of the diesel, it burns more effectively. 'savings may vary'. I'm sure they've found one car it works on, but gimmik imo
Snake Oil.......they will have found cheaper additives so they can make more profits......I remember Formula Shell and how many engines got messed up...that was a new Super Fuel .... http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2010/07/23/shell-fue...
Edited by lescombes on Friday 23 July 07:44
Formula Shell
In the post war years Shell was one of the leaders in fuels technology – in particular the development of additive packages designed to enhance the performance of petrol (gasoline) in automobiles. Amongst the new products of the 1950s and 1960s was “Super Shell with ICA” a fuel/additive mix which controlled ignition (ICA stood for Ignition Control Additive). However after the oil price hikes caused by OPEC raising the price of crude oil in the 1970s Shell and other oil companies suspended advertising and marketing programs and “fuels differentiation” (as this strategy was known) ceased. Shell scientists and technicians continued to carry out research into the subject and by the mid 1980s Shell felt able to introduce a new initiative. A fuel/additive package which was claimed to “significantly improve your car’s performance” was launched in the United Kingdom, Europe and elsewhere from 1985 onwards. It was known as “Formula Shell”.
The initial customer response to Formula Shell was very positive and drivers claimed to notice a genuine improvement in their car’s performance. Shell’s sales responded significantly in all markets where the new brand was introduced. However within a few months in some countries reports began to appear of problems with a small number of cars running on Formula Shell. There were reports of damaged engines and even of cars having to be taken off the road because of mechanical defects. One particular example was of a police force in Scotland which suffered damage to many of the cars in their fleet. This was highly publicised in the British media.
Shell’s initial response to these problems was denial. They claimed that the Formula Shell product had been extensively tested and denied that there could be any problem. However as reports began to come in from around the world Shell started to take the matter more seriously and conduct their own laboratory experiments into the problem. Eventually Shell was forced to acknowledge that in a small number of instances with particular cars running on leaded petrol one of the components of the product (known as the “Spark Aider”) could cause problems. Formula Shell was withdrawn in the United Kingdom and some other markets – although the brand continued to be sold (without the Spark Aider) elsewhere. Compensation was paid to those car owners whose cars had been damaged by the product. An internal report criticised Shell’s management for its slow response to the problem, its initial denials that there had been a problem at all and for other aspects of the management of the affair which was seen to have damaged Shells’ reputation for technical excellence.
The problems of Formula Shell were confined to a small number of markets and to a small number of cars in these countries - but the damage to the brand was such that it was completely withdrawn in most of these countries (e.g. the United Kingdom). However Formula Shell continued successfully in many other markets and the brand name still exists today as an automotive lubricants brand
In the post war years Shell was one of the leaders in fuels technology – in particular the development of additive packages designed to enhance the performance of petrol (gasoline) in automobiles. Amongst the new products of the 1950s and 1960s was “Super Shell with ICA” a fuel/additive mix which controlled ignition (ICA stood for Ignition Control Additive). However after the oil price hikes caused by OPEC raising the price of crude oil in the 1970s Shell and other oil companies suspended advertising and marketing programs and “fuels differentiation” (as this strategy was known) ceased. Shell scientists and technicians continued to carry out research into the subject and by the mid 1980s Shell felt able to introduce a new initiative. A fuel/additive package which was claimed to “significantly improve your car’s performance” was launched in the United Kingdom, Europe and elsewhere from 1985 onwards. It was known as “Formula Shell”.
The initial customer response to Formula Shell was very positive and drivers claimed to notice a genuine improvement in their car’s performance. Shell’s sales responded significantly in all markets where the new brand was introduced. However within a few months in some countries reports began to appear of problems with a small number of cars running on Formula Shell. There were reports of damaged engines and even of cars having to be taken off the road because of mechanical defects. One particular example was of a police force in Scotland which suffered damage to many of the cars in their fleet. This was highly publicised in the British media.
Shell’s initial response to these problems was denial. They claimed that the Formula Shell product had been extensively tested and denied that there could be any problem. However as reports began to come in from around the world Shell started to take the matter more seriously and conduct their own laboratory experiments into the problem. Eventually Shell was forced to acknowledge that in a small number of instances with particular cars running on leaded petrol one of the components of the product (known as the “Spark Aider”) could cause problems. Formula Shell was withdrawn in the United Kingdom and some other markets – although the brand continued to be sold (without the Spark Aider) elsewhere. Compensation was paid to those car owners whose cars had been damaged by the product. An internal report criticised Shell’s management for its slow response to the problem, its initial denials that there had been a problem at all and for other aspects of the management of the affair which was seen to have damaged Shells’ reputation for technical excellence.
The problems of Formula Shell were confined to a small number of markets and to a small number of cars in these countries - but the damage to the brand was such that it was completely withdrawn in most of these countries (e.g. the United Kingdom). However Formula Shell continued successfully in many other markets and the brand name still exists today as an automotive lubricants brand
There's another post on it here: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff