“The RAC and the AA both agree that petrol and diesel fuel quality is governed by the same European standard, wherever it’s sold. So Lord knows where these people get their ideas from. Maybe these are the folk who firmly believe the Royal Family are shape-shifting lizards or that Jay-Z is a time-travelling vampire.”
I must try this
I watched an episode of 5th Gear a while ago. They had an old VW Scirocco twin turbo that when new had 180 BHP. On the power test bed, age had reduced power considerably (can't remember exact figures). What I do remember is that fuel additives restored more BHP than any other maintenance activity. I would like to have seen this applied to a larger sample of cars but it did seem plausible.
General supermarket fuel is not partially good, Costco fuel however is the best of the bunch, I worked in R and D up until recently for fuels and lubricants for the global industry not affiliated to any of of the majors so no bias any way, the company I worked for held the patents for shell V power as we did all the research Costco fuel is as good as this. It’s the only fuel I use unless travelling away, van has 70 thou on the clock no EGR issues fingers crossed and used coasting function since we have had it, never had the need to give it thrash to clean it however it uses no oil between changes and it gets new oil every 10 to 12 thou it will also achieve 40 mpg plus on a run but 25 to 28 local.
My van has driven over 204000km now. I mostly refuel at supermarkets or lowest price stations. Occasionally I refuel at Total or Esso. I really don't see any difference in mileage. Apart from the first 45000km, I have had no issues the last 160000km with the EGR. The first I changed because of a factory fault in the Dordogne on a campsite.As CaliMac mentioned above, and as someone who also works closely with a number of fuel brands, I can confirm that Shell V Power products have a number of additives that reduce carbon deposit build up and increase mpg etc. They talk a lot about the 'cost of ownership across the life of the vehicle, not just per tank'. See below for the cleaning claims:
V-Power unleaded Fuel | Shell UK
Introducing our latest-generation Shell V-Power Unleaded fuel, contains 3x more cleaning molecules than Shell our regular Unleaded. Find out more here.www.shell.co.uk
I'm now a Tesla driver, but when I had a diesel E Class, I did use V-Power every 4th tank to help remove and prevent the build up from cheaper, minimum-standard supermarket fuel.
Indeed, that's some going, but you'll appreciate rather a small sample size to draw any conclusions.
As I understand it the purpose of EGR is to capture the oily fumes from the crankcase (that once-upon-a-time was simply vented to the atmosphere) and direct those oily fumes into the air intake and thus burn them in the engine's combustion cycle. The problem is that the oily fumes also tend to turn into carbon deposits in the EGR valve and piping, air intake passageways and on the intake valve. Google will show you lots of horrible images of the built-up deposits. I haven't pulled the Toyota's intake system apart to check (it had 200,000 km on it when I bought it, and another 70,000 since I fitted the catch can). But I'm regularly draining that amount of condensed oil from the catch can with every 5,000 km oil change (old-school diesel servicing). I feel that keeping that oil from entering the intake manifold can only be good for the performance and longevity of the engine. I do know the car is running well with good economy (for a 3,900 kg light truck) and perfect reliability at this point, and I'd like to keep it that way for a long time to come.
I’m afraid your understanding of the function of an EGR valve is incorrect.As I understand it the purpose of EGR is to capture the oily fumes from the crankcase (that once-upon-a-time was simply vented to the atmosphere) and direct those oily fumes into the air intake and thus burn them in the engine's combustion cycle. The problem is that the oily fumes also tend to turn into carbon deposits in the EGR valve and piping, air intake passageways and on the intake valve. Google will show you lots of horrible images of the built-up deposits. I haven't pulled the Toyota's intake system apart to check (it had 200,000 km on it when I bought it, and another 70,000 since I fitted the catch can). But I'm regularly draining that amount of condensed oil from the catch can with every 5,000 km oil change (old-school diesel servicing). I feel that keeping that oil from entering the intake manifold can only be good for the performance and longevity of the engine. I do know the car is running well with good economy (for a 3,900 kg light truck) and perfect reliability at this point, and I'd like to keep it that way for a long time to come.
So yes, assuming the T6.1 Cali doesn't already have one fitted, I'll fit a catch-can as soon as I can to prevent problems later. In my web browsing I'm seeing some hints that the Cali might already have one fitted, but I can't be sure until mine is delivered and I have a chance to crawl all over (and under) it.
This is not correct. The EGR (exhaust gas recuperation) returns exhaust gas into the inlet manifold when you drive at low power. This reduces NOx, but because the EG is returned before the DPF, it contains a lot of soot.As I understand it the purpose of EGR is to capture the oily fumes from the crankcase (that once-upon-a-time was simply vented to the atmosphere) and direct those oily fumes into the air intake and thus burn them in the engine's combustion cycle. The problem is that the oily fumes also tend to turn into carbon deposits in the EGR valve and piping, air intake passageways and on the intake valve. Google will show you lots of horrible images of the built-up deposits. I haven't pulled the Toyota's intake system apart to check (it had 200,000 km on it when I bought it, and another 70,000 since I fitted the catch can). But I'm regularly draining that amount of condensed oil from the catch can with every 5,000 km oil change (old-school diesel servicing). I feel that keeping that oil from entering the intake manifold can only be good for the performance and longevity of the engine. I do know the car is running well with good economy (for a 3,900 kg light truck) and perfect reliability at this point, and I'd like to keep it that way for a long time to come.
So yes, assuming the T6.1 Cali doesn't already have one fitted, I'll fit a catch-can as soon as I can to prevent problems later. In my web browsing I'm seeing some hints that the Cali might already have one fitted, but I can't be sure until mine is delivered and I have a chance to crawl all over (and under) it.
The VW California Club is the worlds largest resource for all owners and enthusiasts of VW California campervans.
