MPG increases with FP and UCL

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 16, 2004
Messages
6,182
Location
Santa Barbara, CA
I am comparing FP60 and Lucas UCL for MPG increases. It’s not a perfect experiment, but it is some real world data with as little variables as I could achieve under normal circumstances. Vehicle is a 1993 Mazda MX6 2.0L DOHC 5spd, in good tune. EPA rated 26/34. Fuel tank capacity is 15.5 gallons. Treatment rate is 1oz/5gal except for one tank of UCL which is noted at 3oz/10gal rate. If the previous tank did not contain any of the same additive, 3oz was added to get the correct rate. If a previous tank DID contain that additive, it was added at ~2.5oz, as fill-ups were generally around 12gal. Tires were kept at 40psi. 6 tanks were used for the average MPG for FP and UCL, one sole highway mile tank of FP60 was not used (34.75mpg). 9 tanks were used for the average MPG with no additives. You can see that Shell gas was used almost exclusively (5% rebate) and also note that the ounces of additive was also accounted for when calculating MPG.

 -


Now the cost analysis. The average $/gal of gas during this experiment was $2.596. Using $28/gal for UCL with tax comes out to $30.17. Using the cost of FP60, plus shipping, but with no tax and at the old price it comes out to $36.21/gal. When using these products at 1oz/5gal, the cost equates to an increase of 1.82% per 1 gallon of gas for UCL and 2.18% per gal for FP60, or $0.71 and $0.85 per tank, respectively. Using an avg MPG of 31.12, UCL must increase MPG by 0.57 to break even and FP60 by 0.68. UCL increased MPG by 1.10 or 3.53% and FP by 0.61 or 1.95%. FP60 basically pays for itself. Lucas UCL seems to be actually saving me money. I look forward to trying the new FP3000.

 -


Disclaimer: this test was not controlled and the results are applicable to my car and my driving conditions only. Your mileage may vary.
cheers.gif


In case the picture links go down in the future: the MPG averages for no adds, UCL and FP are 31.12, 32.22, and 31.73.
 
Since UCL was used at end of test, maybe UCL results benefited from a cleaner fuel system?
 
I think this experiment does show that both products are comparable, at least with mpg gain. Looks like if you can pick up a gallon of Lucas UCL at truck stops for cheap, it might be the way to go.

I've used Lucas UCL on a long highway trip and noted that oil consumption was reduced. Usually during high speed driving my car will begin to sip some oil, but didn't seem to use any with UCL in the tank.
 
I ran some techron through the car before the data shown here. I think the fuel system was pretty clean, as whenever I've run techron or another FI cleaner, my MPG never increased - indicating that it wasn't dirty enough to make a difference.

I will try some FP3000 when it comes out and see how it compares, too. I'm just happy to see an actual difference and that its big enough to save money (albiet a tiny bit) beyond the product paying for itself. I think an every tank product like FP or UCL is a great idea to help condition and lubricate the gas which could vary from station to station as far as quality goes. Add in the fact that the product pays for itself and you're getting a bunch of benefits for free.
cheers.gif
 
5% Shell rebate + 2-3.5% mpg increase can add up.
The higher the price of gas, the more appealing these products become.
 
Just called Lucas. They said UCL & Lucas Fuel Treatment is the same thing & Lucas Fuel Treatment available at most auto parts stores. A local Advance Auto Parts store just gave me a price of $25.48/gal.
 
I personally saw a bigger mpg increase while using Lucas UCL compared to FP60, which I use religiously now. Too bad I didn't take better data, but I remember it was about 5% increase in mpg vs about 2% with FP60... I would love to get better mpg... maybe when my 2 gallons of FP60 run out, I'll switch back to Lucas (2002 Subaru Impreza TS, non-turbo)
 
The MMO didn't seem to give a consistent increase in MPG, just stayed within regular fluctuation. I used it a couple of times earlier with no results either, but that was before I replaced my tires, and so isn't included in this data as my tire replacement caused a drop in MPG. All of this data is from my current set of tires.

I stopped using MMO (in my car, still use it for my boat) b/c when I used it I couldn't tell the difference MPG wise - with FP or UCL I can tell with the miles per tank before I even fill up and calculate.

MMO did seem to make my car run/idle smoother than FP or UCL, albiet the difference is pretty minor, just as FP might be a little smoother than the UCL.
 
Wonder what kind of results you would get by also adding LC as FP and LC work synergistically together?
 
If I buy some FP3000 when it comes out, I might just throw in some LC to try it out. Won't have any results for a few months, and I'm sure I'd want to extend my OCI with LC to justify it and that would mean UOAs.
cheers.gif
 
Wife's Forester got 2 mpg better on a hwy trip, as well as 2 mpg better the last city tankful. Only change I did was 1 ounce FP per 5 gallons. However, it is warmer now, so air resistance is less on Hwy, and cold start until warmup is shorter when it's warm, so, I don't really know if FP is helping MPG or not. I do think its easier to test on her vehicle, that way, my "opinion" doesn't affect the way I drive my car...I could easily affect economy by driving just a bit more conservatively at critical times.
 
Oh, btw, thanks for going to the trouble to post all that data. Very nice! Just remember that you did these tests through the winter months. Surely air resistance and cold-starts affect mpg. Maybe fuel quality does, too. Just something to consider.

Keep up the good work! Nice mpg for your car!
 
Just got a 32 oz bottle of lucas UCL. Going to run it through the next few tanks and see if there is any differences in mileage or feel. I have used FP60 in the past and "think" it ran better and got better mileage.

Car is a 95 BMW 525i with 123,000 miles just finishing up second ARX clean/rinse procedure.
 
I've used FP in my '01 blazer w/marked improvement in mileage.I pretty much use this truck to go to & from upstate NY once a week 250-300 mi depending on what I have to do.went from 17-18 to 20-22. the truck is pretty much stock w/ moded airbox and KN filter.
Lucas UCL I had started using in my '91 Blazer before I had the engine rebuilt and hot rodded. made a small difference in mileage but was more seat of the pants improvement and quieted my fuel pump a bit too.
seeing as the 2 trucks have completly different fuel delivery systems I can't compare one to the other.
dunno.gif

my $.02
 
have been using UCL for the last 99thou miles and have had a 2mpg increase. The car had 37thou on it when I started using it and had averaged overall 41mpg. Since the overall average is at 43.03mpg, the car today has 136+thou no it. The car is a 98 Suzuki Swift and had a EPA rating of 39-43. It has a 10.3gal tank and I put 2oz in every 6 to 8 gal fillup. My prior car was a 96 Geo Metro(same car-both 4cyl's) with the same EPA rating and it average 41 the whole 216thou I drove it. Wish now I would have used UCL than. The best mpg before was 46-now I get 48+ on long runs. Buy it by the gallon at NAPA, it was $22 per gallon but now is $25.
 
Guys, I'm not believing this. First, I get better mpg in both my cars using FP. THEN, I go from 40 to 45 mpg on my motorcycle using FP. I never expected this to happen. It's been several tanks on all vehicles. Maybe this stuff does more than just clean a little. All of these vehicles are less than a year old, and all have used mostly Shell, but, some Exxon and rarely BP, all from busy stations. So, I don't think any of them should be unusually dirty. Anyway, for whatever reason(s), I'm sure enjoying the results!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top