Regane HM vs Redline Sl-1

[97tbird]

Why would you want fuel treatments in a 2014 car ???
Just use good fuel.

My wife also has a 2014 Mazda 6 SkyActiv and I have no plans to use anything in it until it has at least 50-60k miles, perhaps even 75k as it sees a lot of hwy miles, and is a DD.

On the 2003 Elantra, our beater, with 211k miles I do use Techron every 5-6 months, independent of mileage.

On the Bimmer, with 42k, I just started using Techron, but about twice a year only...I might start using it more often when it hits 60k or so..

But a 2014 really shouldn't need anything, IMO.

I believe Redline is good stuff, but is it that much better than Techron to pay more than the BOGO price at Techron ??? After all, Techron probably still has more endorsements from car companies (I know it may not mean anything, but still...)

 

[badtlc]

Originally Posted By: 97tbird
Why would you want fuel treatments in a 2014 car ???
Just use good fuel.

My wife also has a 2014 Mazda 6 SkyActiv and I have no plans to use anything in it until it has at least 50-60k miles, perhaps even 75k as it sees a lot of hwy miles, and is a DD.

On the 2003 Elantra, our beater, with 211k miles I do use Techron every 5-6 months, independent of mileage.

On the Bimmer, with 42k, I just started using Techron, but about twice a year only...I might start using it more often when it hits 60k or so..

But a 2014 really shouldn't need anything, IMO.

I believe Redline is good stuff, but is it that much better than Techron to pay more than the BOGO price at Techron ??? After all, Techron probably still has more endorsements from car companies (I know it may not mean anything, but still...)


HP DI injectors have been a maintenance item. Keeping them clean should be priority #1 for any DI engine. HP DI injectors foul easier than port injectors. When they foul, it increases fuel dilution issues due to incomplete combustion. This fuel dilution leads to increased volatility of the oil. And of course, increased oil volatility likely increases intake valve deposit formation if you have a PCV system (you do).

 

[surfstar]

If I had a new DI vehicle and wanted to use something quite often, I would go with LubeControl's FP plus and use every tank or every other. Maybe do a PEA treatment once per year, just for kicks.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: NMBurb02
But so what? They both treat 20 gallons, as you pointed out, so if they are equally effective at their prescribed dosing, it comes down to cost per treatment (not per ounce).

That they're both ascribed to treat 20 gallons per bottle doesn't mean they're equally effective. Chevron Pro-Gard is in a 20 oz bottle meant to treat up to 16 gallons. Techron Concentrate Plus in the 10 oz bottle is meant to treat up to 16 gallons. It's almost universally assumed that the latter will dose more detergent overall.

The issue is that we have no way of knowing which has more because it's generally considered a "trade secret". Even where it hasn't been protected as a trade secret, they rarely give more than a range that leaves people guessing.

 

[NMBurb02]

Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: NMBurb02
But so what? They both treat 20 gallons, as you pointed out, so if they are equally effective at their prescribed dosing, it comes down to cost per treatment (not per ounce).

That they're both ascribed to treat 20 gallons per bottle doesn't mean they're equally effective. Chevron Pro-Gard is in a 20 oz bottle meant to treat up to 16 gallons. Techron Concentrate Plus in the 10 oz bottle is meant to treat up to 16 gallons. It's almost universally assumed that the latter will dose more detergent overall.

The issue is that we have no way of knowing which has more because it's generally considered a "trade secret". Even where it hasn't been protected as a trade secret, they rarely give more than a range that leaves people guessing.

Hence, "so if they are equally effective at their prescribed dosing". We have to make some assumptions, and that is one I have made based on what I have read on these boards on this topic. There are some products that are know to be less effective (Gumout non-Regane and non-AIO, Chevron Pro-Guard, non-PEA products), but I have not read anything claiming definitively that any one of the premium cleaners (Gumout AIO, Techron Concentrate, Redline SI-1) works better than the others, only personal preferences. I have no strong preference among the premium cleaners and instead go by price per gallon treated.

 

[NMBurb02]

Originally Posted By: NMBurb02
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: NMBurb02
But so what? They both treat 20 gallons, as you pointed out, so if they are equally effective at their prescribed dosing, it comes down to cost per treatment (not per ounce).

That they're both ascribed to treat 20 gallons per bottle doesn't mean they're equally effective. Chevron Pro-Gard is in a 20 oz bottle meant to treat up to 16 gallons. Techron Concentrate Plus in the 10 oz bottle is meant to treat up to 16 gallons. It's almost universally assumed that the latter will dose more detergent overall.

The issue is that we have no way of knowing which has more because it's generally considered a "trade secret". Even where it hasn't been protected as a trade secret, they rarely give more than a range that leaves people guessing.

Hence, "so if they are equally effective at their prescribed dosing". We have to make some assumptions, and that is one I have made based on what I have read on these boards on this topic. There are some products that are know to be less effective (Gumout non-Regane and non-AIO, Chevron Pro-Guard, non-PEA products), but I have not read anything claiming definitively that any one of the premium cleaners (Gumout AIO, Techron Concentrate, Redline SI-1) works better than the others, only personal preferences. I have no strong preference among the premium cleaners and instead go by price per gallon treated.

And the concentration of PEA isn't everything. As has been pointed out before in other threads, there are different types of PEA and they have varying degrees of effectiveness, so it is all a guessing game as to which top tier cleaner is best. All we have to go on are testimonials, which is fine by me, but still leaves a lot of guesswork.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: surfstar
If I had a new DI vehicle and wanted to use something quite often, I would go with LubeControl's FP plus and use every tank or every other. Maybe do a PEA treatment once per year, just for kicks.


That might help, I'd plumb in an inverse oiler and feed it a UCL and FI cleaner cocktail.

 

[mkosem]

Originally Posted By: surfstar
If I had a new DI vehicle and wanted to use something quite often, I would go with LubeControl's FP plus and use every tank or every other. Maybe do a PEA treatment once per year, just for kicks.


I use FP Plus at every fillup in our DI vehicles. At that rate, is it really worth it to bother with a PEA product too? I used to switch off between FP Plus and SI-1 maintenance doses, but it's easier to only lug one of them around.

--Matt

 

[NMBurb02]

Originally Posted By: mkosem
Originally Posted By: surfstar
If I had a new DI vehicle and wanted to use something quite often, I would go with LubeControl's FP plus and use every tank or every other. Maybe do a PEA treatment once per year, just for kicks.


I use FP Plus at every fillup in our DI vehicles. At that rate, is it really worth it to bother with a PEA product too? I used to switch off between FP Plus and SI-1 maintenance doses, but it's easier to only lug one of them around.

--Matt

One of the benefits of PEA-based cleaners is that they do not leave behind their own residues/deposits. If FP Plus is not PEA-based, then it still might be beneficial to run a treatment dose of a PEA-based cleaner once every 5-10k miles.

 

[mkosem]

Originally Posted By: NMBurb02
Originally Posted By: mkosem
Originally Posted By: surfstar
If I had a new DI vehicle and wanted to use something quite often, I would go with LubeControl's FP plus and use every tank or every other. Maybe do a PEA treatment once per year, just for kicks.


I use FP Plus at every fillup in our DI vehicles. At that rate, is it really worth it to bother with a PEA product too? I used to switch off between FP Plus and SI-1 maintenance doses, but it's easier to only lug one of them around.

--Matt

One of the benefits of PEA-based cleaners is that they do not leave behind their own residues/deposits. If FP Plus is not PEA-based, then it still might be beneficial to run a treatment dose of a PEA-based cleaner once every 5-10k miles.


FP Plus is definitely not PEA based, nor is it a conventional fuel system cleaner by any stretch. I'm not sure if the new formulation is any different than FP60 with respect to deposits, but the dyson analysis report on the former does indicate that deposits (albeit an immeasurable amount) were left behind by 30ml of FP60 (the amount of product that would be appropriate for 5gal of gas).

Quote:
3.4 Deposit and Residue Tests

Lab bench tests were done on LC and FP for burning and deposit residues at > 750 F, and It was observed that very thin transparent films were left behind by either product. The deposits for 30 ml of either fluid weren't measureable on an electronic scale accurate to 0.001 grams. I.E., virtually no deposits. Consider that putting in one ounce of FP for every 640 ounces of gas, and you will find that the fuel will contribute more deposits in one tank full than will FP or LC for the lifetime of the vehicle.


While PEA itself reportedly doesn't leave any deposits, isn't there a good possibility that the carrier product does? In the case of FP, the whole product was tested (not just one ingredient). I wonder if any such research has been performed against PEA-based cleaner products. I suppose it couldn't hurt to go back to my original regimen of rotating from FPPlus to SI-1. It's significantly more expensive per treated gallon of gas than FPPlus, but with the amount of mileage our vehicles accumulate it's doesn't really amount to much from an annual cost perspective.

--Matt