FP60 vs. Lucas UCL

[Chimay]

Can anyone tell me what the difference between FP60 & Lucas UCL is? I just purchased 1 Gallon of the Lucas UCL for 23.99 from a local store so there was no shipping charge either. The descriptions seem to be very similar. I have been thinking of switching to the fuel power but have not been convinced the FP60 is better.

 

[LCD]

Chimay,

I can shed some light on this. FP60 and Lucas are very different from what is actually in the products themselves.

Others can give unbiased opinions and you can run a search also.

Cheap is not always better.

 

[SSDude]

I have used both. The main difference that I have noticed is that I have gotten increased mileage with Fuel Power.

 

[Points]

I use both. I mix about 60% of FP60 and 40% Lucas only because I still have couple gallons of Lucas left. My cars like it and still getting the better mpg.

Points

[ October 06, 2005, 11:45 PM: Message edited by: 59 Vetteman ]

 

[kang]

You might want to throw MMO into the fray. It is also a cleaner and upper cylinder lubricant.

 

[V1]

FP60 has improved my fuel mileage, but I can't compare it to Lucas - never used it.

 

[JHZR2]

With lucas, my BMW felt a little bit peppier... but butt dynos are relatively worthless.

With FP60, my fuel pump is quieter.

With MMO, my idle is smoother/quieter.

None yield the ability to reduce octane from what is demanded for the car (91), or give me higher MPG (carefully recorded, as I do for all my cars).

FP has the benefit of not effecting wear as seen in UOAs. Most other cleaners will effect... Not sure about MMO or Lucas, but it depends on their formulation, I guess.

Lubricity is the primary reason whay I use an additive. In NJ our fuels are good enough to keep things clean... we dont haveany alcohol blended in, whcih I think helps. FP wins in the lubricity department, so its what I use in 9 cars.

JMH

 

[Chimay]

quote:

---

Originally posted by lcd:
Chimay,

I can shed some light on this. FP60 and Lucas are very different from what is actually in the products themselves.

Others can give unbiased opinions and you can run a search also.

Cheap is not always better.

---

Well I understand that they may be very different but you don't say in what way. I would prefer to here it from you. Cheap is not always better. Well neither is more expensive.

 

[peterr]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chimay:

quote:

---

Originally posted by lcd:
Chimay,

I can shed some light on this. FP60 and Lucas are very different from what is actually in the products themselves.

Others can give unbiased opinions and you can run a search also.

Cheap is not always better.

---

Well I understand that they may be very different but you don't say in what way. I would prefer to here it from you. Cheap is not always better. Well neither is more expensive.

---

Chimay

I think you will find that with many of these products the manufacturer will be discreet about the composition. I mean if they told you what it was then everyone and his neighbour could start making their product and competing. Within the bounds of what is left to talk about you might be reduced to such generalities as to come across as slagging the competition, as in "Brand X is just a bunch of cheapo solvents"

Also while Lucas may be easier to get because it is available at retail, it is really in the same general price category as FP60. I would find it really hard to describe FP60 (or Lucas for that matter) as "expensive". And I pay to have FP60 shipped to Canada.

 

[Chimay]

quote:

---

Originally posted by peterr:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chimay:

quote:

---

Originally posted by lcd:
Chimay,

I can shed some light on this. FP60 and Lucas are very different from what is actually in the products themselves.

Others can give unbiased opinions and you can run a search also.

Cheap is not always better.

---

Well I understand that they may be very different but you don't say in what way. I would prefer to here it from you. Cheap is not always better. Well neither is more expensive.

---

Chimay

I think you will find that with many of these products the manufacturer will be discreet about the composition. I mean if they told you what it was then everyone and his neighbour could start making their product and competing. Within the bounds of what is left to talk about you might be reduced to such generalities as to come across as slagging the competition, as in "Brand X is just a bunch of cheapo solvents"

Also while Lucas may be easier to get because it is available at retail, it is really in the same general price category as FP60. I would find it really hard to describe FP60 (or Lucas for that matter) as "expensive". And I pay to have FP60 shipped to Canada.

---

While I don't really care to know what is in it only to know the diffrence as stated in my original question. I guess I should of asked the difference in preformance. I agree that it is not expensive but it cost about 10.00 dollars more a gallon. Lcd said cheap is not always better and I agree with that totally. The descripition's of each are very similar.

 

[unDummy]

Use whatever works for you. I haven't seen any UCL 'proven' to be better/worse then any other.

I can feel the difference with almost all variables with my vehicle. I don't know why everyone says that butt dynos are inacurrate. I guess that some people need every excuse possible to disqualify an opinion.

 

[Chimay]

Well I placed an order today for both FP60 & LC20 just because.

 

[Chimay]

Is it easy to add the FP60? The small bottle I use to add the Lucas UCL works nicely. The FP60 looks a little awkard. I hope it is simple because it will also be used in my wife's car.

 

[stogiedude]

Just reuse the Lucas bottle.

 

[Terry]

I know what FP is and how its tests. FP is a "near" ester made from petroleum based chemistries. Solvency is stable , high flash levels and amazingly contributes to reduced oxidation.

From UOA I suspect Lucas UCL is generally a bright stock based chemistry with low flash solvents added.

I consistantly see FP60 used in oil analysis results that show improved levels of nitration,oxidation, less insolubles, lower fuel soot.

No doubt Lucas products are good quality and well intentioned. I just don't see the benefits of using them through testing of used oil.

Signatures that prove to me that FP works while doing no harm.

I am very serious about this constant mantra I make here and when asked; Lubecontrol/FP60 and Auto-RX are the only 2 products I publicly recommend in customers and BITOG'ers cars/trucks.

Opinion without testing and experience is just that.

 

[moribundman]

quote:

---

With lucas, my BMW felt a little bit peppier... but butt dynos are relatively worthless.

With FP60, my fuel pump is quieter.

With MMO, my idle is smoother/quieter.

---

Just use all that stuff and skip the gasoline altogether.

-----

Something I keep noticing: cheap and inexpensive are not synonyms. Cheap implies low quality. Whenever people try to sell me something by advertising it as cheap, I decline.

-----

As for a company not disclosing what's in their product in an effort to protect themselves from copycats, well that's understandable. However, it leads me to believe that the ingredients are so simple that anybody with half a brain could copy the product with the proper resources. Surely a large companny could copy the product anyway, even if it requires expensive analysis? Then again, if you read the ingredient list on loaf of bread, you may still not be able to make an exact copy of the original product by using that ingredient list.

How can you copyright a product if you don't say what's in it?

 

[MolaKule]

quote:

---

...The descripition's of each are very similar.

---

But their Chemistries are very different, and thta's what delineates one product from another.

 

[Chimay]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MolaKule:

quote:

---

...The descripition's of each are very similar.

---

But their Chemistries are very different, and thta's what delineates one product from another.

---

No doubt Lucas products are good quality and well intentioned. I just don't see the benefits of using them through testing of used oil.

But my question remains is how are they performing differently? What is one doing that the other is not,or what is one doing better than the other?

 

[Robbie Alexander]

quote:

---

Originally posted by V1:
FP60 has improved my fuel mileage, but I can't compare it to Lucas - never used it.

---

It has always increased milage in all my autos, but the question is will it always pay for itself...

It's a very old and dated but still workable product. There are however other products that will provide better results.

 

[stogiedude]

You won't be sorry, both are great products that really work and give results. Money well spent especially if you are planning on keeping your car for a long time. Both products will help prolong the life of your vehicle and improve performance. What you need to do is get a little bottle that you can refill and keep in your trunk for the fuel power to add at every fill up. this is the only reason I can see an inverse oiler would be of benefit. The convenience of being able to add a quart or two of FP at a time instead of every time you fill up would be great.