Redex petrol system cleaner

[Conscript]

I'm sorry if you don't feel that a large speed differential between cars is any more risky than no speed differential between cars.

The same argument is often used as a reason for not increasing the motorway speed limit..

There's no need to apologise, as I didn't say that.

What I did say was, that implying that driving a car at 56mph was unjustifiably dangerous because it suddenly rendered large swathes of the driving population utterly bewildered at seeing a vehicle that isn't a lorry going a bit slower, was silly.

Of course, large speed differentials are more risky. But there are varying degrees of risk, and there are varying reasons why someone might choose not to drive as fast as they are permitted. I also think you're overstating the "large" speed differential too. I spend a lot of time on the motorway cruising at a true 70MPH, and I hardly feel like I'm tearing past lorries presumably doing 56MPH when I overtake them. Your perception may differ of course.

You're still acting on your assumption that there is no rational reason to drive that slowly, and therefore there is no justification whatsoever for any increased risk that might arise from doing so. But you've been given a reason (twice) why people do it...fuel economy.

Forgive me, but it just feels like you do understand exactly why people drive slowly on the motorway, but that it irritates you (which I can sympathise with), so you're pretending you can't rationalise why people do it, and exaggerating the "danger" of doing so to make your point.

 

[Joe T]

^^^ This.

 

[[TW]Fox]

I do know why people do it - I dispute that is rational.

 

[Conscript]

I think it's entirely rational. There's lots of variables, but I don't think anyone can dispute that in most cases, cruising more slowly will increase fuel economy (to a point) and thus save you money. You and I might be lucky enough to be in a position where that saving is miniscule, or of no consequence...but evidently it is to many. I wouldn't be so arrogant to claim that just because I don't care about the savings, that anyone who does, is being irrational.

I would also add that you might need to get used to it. EVs are an inevitability, and it seems that unlike ICE cars, their energy consumption is linearly linked to speed, so we could see a lot more people opting to cruise slowly on the motorway...at least until range anxiety becomes a thing of the past.

 

[Vanquish-Storm]

Does anyone else find that these are the people who then normally carry on at 40 through a 30 limit?



...and this is why I should read the whole thread before posting

Great minds think alike friend!

 

[[TW]Fox]

You and I might be lucky enough to be in a position where that saving is miniscule, or of no consequence.

He's driven 1000 miles in 8 months!

 

[Conscript]

I mean, I had expanded to making a point about people in general who do it, which would be evident if you quoted the very next part of the same sentence..

You and I might be lucky enough to be in a position where that saving is miniscule, or of no consequence...but evidently it is to many. I wouldn't be so arrogant to claim that just because I don't care about the savings, that anyone who does, is being irrational.

...but fine, whatever. You win. Shall we leave it now? Think we've derailed the thread enough.

 

[cu3ed]

I don't think it is, people driving at 56mph are at best a nuisance and at worst dangerous. It's a fast moving road, we have to make allowances for trucks and everyone knows exactly how fast a truck will be going but other traffic doing stupid speeds catches people out, partly the reason why the 60mph limit for vans on dual carriageways does not apply on motorways.

I accept that a 56mph driver should present no issue for a competent driver but many drivers are not such a thing.

There is just no rational reason for doing it.

Absolute complete and total nonsense.
Lorries are limited to 58-62 on motorways, by your reasoning it's safer to have them all travelling at 70.
Its why we have over taking lanes. Frankly if you can see reasons for people tavelling about 10mph slower than you then you are the danger on the road as it just proves you aren't driver aware on the road. Also its shown the time difference is only a few minutes on a normal trip.

Seriously, this is one of the most inconsiderate stupid things I've rwd here.

 

[cu3ed]

Better off just putting premium fuel in your car

Edit: I don't think either would increase MPG though

Isn't premium fuel rubbish as well unless you car comes with a knock Valve sensor? Which most don't, in fact it's better to run standard unleaded.

 

[Armageus]

Id had a diagnostic carried out on it to confirm this and that it wasn't something else in the system and the guy at the garage recommended using Wynns turbo cleaner.

I thought the usual snake oil shenanigans but then considering it was like 8 quid bought a bottle and added it to a full tank.

I've had good results with Wynn's gold fuel system cleaner on the wife's Fiesta. It removed whatever was causing a hesitation/judder when lifting off throttle and has resulted in a slight but noticeable improvement to mpg

 

[MrRockliffe]

Isn't premium fuel rubbish as well unless you car comes with a knock Valve sensor? Which most don't, in fact it's better to run standard unleaded.

I wouldn’t be qualified enough to say

 

[cu3ed]

I wouldn’t be qualified enough to say

Pretty sure that is the case as Premium also has a slightly higher octane, and without a knock sensor to be able to tell the different combustion rate in the cylinders it could actually be worse for the engine.

 

[Gaygle]

Absolute complete and total nonsense.
Lorries are limited to 58-62 on motorways, by your reasoning it's safer to have them all travelling at 70.
Its why we have over taking lanes. Frankly if you can see reasons for people tavelling about 10mph slower than you then you are the danger on the road as it just proves you aren't driver aware on the road. Also its shown the time difference is only a few minutes on a normal trip.

Seriously, this is one of the most inconsiderate stupid things I've rwd here.

The speed limiters of an HGV are set to 56mph, if you, in a car, are also travelling 56mph you're in very real danger of being in a situation where an HGV tries to overtake you or you try and overtake an HGV at a 1mph over speed, causing traffic doing 70mph+ to have to slow right down for the 30 seconds the overtake takes. This blocks up dual carriageways in general, risks causing accidents and means that everyone else who is travelling at the speed limit uses more fuel having to slow down and accelerate up.

It's a selfish thing to do and so ridiculously anal. The difference in fuel consumption between a car doing 56mph and 65mph is negligible in the scheme of a tankful of mixed driving - you'll find more economy out of pumping up your tyres a few PSI or removing unnecessary weight or getting eco tyres - none of which unnecessarily hold other people up or risk accidents with 44 tonne lorries.

It's the same as the idiots that join the dual carriageway/motorway at 40mph (along with the 5 cars behind them they're also forcing to do them same) because they don't want to accelerate up to speed and, heaven forbid, cause their fuel consumption to drop by 1mpg. It's just a poor driving standard.

 

[Gaygle]

Isn't premium fuel rubbish as well unless you car comes with a knock Valve sensor? Which most don't, in fact it's better to run standard unleaded.

Pretty much every engine produced in the last 15-20 years comes with a knock sensor. Super unleaded has a higher RON rating which won't make a difference to power the in vast majority of cars, but the detergents which are added to super unleaded will work in every single car.

 

[adam cool dude]

Pretty much every engine produced in the last 15-20 years comes with a knock sensor. Super unleaded has a higher RON rating which won't make a difference to power the in vast majority of cars, but the detergents which are added to super unleaded will work in every single car.

You also have the added cooling benefit of the higher Ron petrol which can only be a good thing in turbo charged engines.

I normally run Wynn's injector cleaner once every six months in my cars but that's about it as far as additives go. It is about the only part of an ice that can get glogged up that an Italian tune up will not fix.

 

[sideways14a]

I like to chuck a bottle of redex through my 5 every few months, i always run super anyway - it wont hurt it so i dont see any reason not to.

What is very noticeable is when folk just pootle around at low revs all the time using the cheapest gas available, the difference between a before and after thrash at the redline for a few miles is sometimes enormous.

 

[cu3ed]

The speed limiters of an HGV are set to 56mph, if you, in a car, are also travelling 56mph you're in very real danger of being in a situation where an HGV tries to overtake you or you try and overtake an HGV at a 1mph over speed, causing traffic doing 70mph+ to have to slow right down for the 30 seconds the overtake takes. This blocks up dual carriageways in general, risks causing accidents and means that everyone else who is travelling at the speed limit uses more fuel having to slow down and accelerate up.

It's a selfish thing to do and so ridiculously anal. The difference in fuel consumption between a car doing 56mph and 65mph is negligible in the scheme of a tankful of mixed driving - you'll find more economy out of pumping up your tyres a few PSI or removing unnecessary weight or getting eco tyres - none of which unnecessarily hold other people up or risk accidents with 44 tonne lorries.

It's the same as the idiots that join the dual carriageway/motorway at 40mph (along with the 5 cars behind them they're also forcing to do them same) because they don't want to accelerate up to speed and, heaven forbid, cause their fuel consumption to drop by 1mpg. It's just a poor driving standard.

That is not what I'm talking about that's pretty obvious, over take that truck and acellorate to a safe distance then sit at about the same speed at them to maintain the distance. It's not what I was talking about at all.

 

[cu3ed]

Pretty much every engine produced in the last 15-20 years comes with a knock sensor. Super unleaded has a higher RON rating which won't make a difference to power the in vast majority of cars, but the detergents which are added to super unleaded will work in every single car.

That was tested, the so called cleaning fuels made no real world difference, think 5 th gear tested them all.

 

[Nasher]

Getting burned on carbon off takes something pretty strong. The stuff in petrol probably won't be enough.

 

[Gaygle]

That was tested, the so called cleaning fuels made no real world difference, think 5 th gear tested them all.

I said that the vast majority of run of the mill cars will have no difference. But even 15 years ago when they did that test, a 250bhp Impreza STI made 15bhp more just by running Shellf Optimax rather than supermarket fuels. And a 180bhp Golf GTI made 5bhp more.

In a world where now everything is turbo charged and you've got mass produced perfomance cars putting out more power than most Ferraris/Lamborghini's of 15 years ago, I'd argue that performance fuels are going to benefit far more people than ever before. That's before we even talk about the cleaning aspect of them.