Which Stabilizer to use ?

[Rand]

Well I filled up today with my Giant Eagle fuel perks

So now I have 17 gallons in cans.

2 gallons are for use in OPE.

I drive .8miles to work now so these might be sitting here awhile.

My choices are

Stabil Marine formula from kmart clearance.

Stabil Reg Formula -free after coupon

G-oil Fuel stabilizer (actually paid for this one)

I used the G-oil stabilizer in the 2 cycle can because it also has G-oil 2cycle oil in it (api tc jaso-fd)


Any opinions?

 

[spasm3]

I use the marine stabil and it works very well. i also use about an ounce of tcw 3 in 5gallons of fuel with the stabil.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: spasm3
I use the marine stabil and it works very well. i also use about an ounce of tcw 3 in 5gallons of fuel with the stabil.


This is generally what I do as well.

$4.07/gal for premium????

Just paid $3.52 for 93 here. Glad you got it for free.

 

[Rand]

yea kinda offtopic but the midwest has been horrid lately.
Huge spike from Minnesota down through ohio.
it was 3.66/3.88 for 87/93 at sams.

giant eagle was 384/408

one about 15miles away was 3.69/3.93 but that kills the savings.

most places nearby were 3.79-389 for reg.

since at least 2-3 gallon were going through my OPE I decided on 93 vs 87. 89 was an option but only 12cents cheaper.

I dislike paying 12C for 2 octane points when 93 (6pt) is 24C

Also my car is actually tuned from the factory to detune to run on 87 so if you run 93 it definitely picks up abit of timing.

 

[badtlc]

GET worked much better than stabil for me. I also like startron as a stabilizer.

 

[danthaman1980]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: spasm3
I use the marine stabil and it works very well. i also use about an ounce of tcw 3 in 5gallons of fuel with the stabil.


This is generally what I do as well.

$4.07/gal for premium????

Just paid $3.52 for 93 here. Glad you got it for free.


Consider yourself lucky... In my area, we're just under $4.00 for Regular, and up into the $4.20 - $4.40 range for Premium.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: badtlc
GET worked much better than stabil for me. I also like startron as a stabilizer.


Agreed. Startron is the only stabilizer I use. Only one that has worked as advertised for me in my yard equipment and boat. I actually tried the marine stabil and was very disappointed with it.

 

[Jim Allen]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: badtlc
GET worked much better than stabil for me. I also like startron as a stabilizer.


Agreed. Startron is the only stabilizer I use. Only one that has worked as advertised for me in my yard equipment and boat. I actually tried the marine stabil and was very disappointed with it.


Disappointed how? I'm curious. Did you get phase separation? Or?

I used Marine StaBil and kept two five gallon cans of E10 for 2 years (inadvertently... I didn't have them properly marked for the normal rotation) and couldn't tell it from fresh gas, either in the way the mower and truck ran or visually. I don't doubt there is other good stabilizers out there but I wonder what it takes for the end user to proclaim one is better than another.

 

[badtlc]

For me stabil just didn't keep gas well enough for my tastes. My small engines would start immediately and run, but they would not run great until I got fresh gas in them. GET's stabilizer and startron give me great running engines before getting fresh gas in there.

 

[Quest]

I've been using various different flavour of Stabil for years, including the common red, marine stabil and rebadged B&S fuel stabiliser, all of them worked beautifully on my OPEs (recently acquired a 16 yr old craftsman (B&S6hp sidedraft carb type) mower to join the team), no issues with starting for all these years using E10 (E10 has been around in our area for over 2+decades now, initially limited to a few gas stations).

Q.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: badtlc
GET worked much better than stabil for me. I also like startron as a stabilizer.


Agreed. Startron is the only stabilizer I use. Only one that has worked as advertised for me in my yard equipment and boat. I actually tried the marine stabil and was very disappointed with it.


Disappointed how? I'm curious. Did you get phase separation? Or?

I used Marine StaBil and kept two five gallon cans of E10 for 2 years (inadvertently... I didn't have them properly marked for the normal rotation) and couldn't tell it from fresh gas, either in the way the mower and truck ran or visually. I don't doubt there is other good stabilizers out there but I wonder what it takes for the end user to proclaim one is better than another.


Pretty much as badtlc talks of. Just not happy with how the equipment runs with it in there. Also, my Brother's generator treated with marine Stabil would not restart after being stored for 8 months. He had to pull things apart and clean everything to get it to fire up. I had him use Startron after that and now it fires up every time and runs fine without issue. Big deal for him as he lives in the backwoods so to speak and when power goes out it is for weeks not hours. He needs the generator to start every time 1st time.

Also, seen a lot of [censored] in the gas( that funky algea like stuff you get with ethanol fuels )when using products other than Startron after extended storage( 6 months + ). Nice clean tank using Startron.

 

[GMorg]

I'm not doubting that StarTron may satisfy customers and may even be a useful product, but the some of the stuff that they have on their website seems to be completely separated from reality. I'm not going to critique the entire site, but nearly everything they have on enzymes is either dumbed down to the point of it being false or they are just making things up. As a specific example, the following statement does not seem to be likely: " Star Tron® uses highly specialized enzymes to modify how gasoline and diesel fuel burns, resulting in more complete and uniform combustion with reduced engine emissions."

I'm not trying to impress anyone, but I am a molecular geneticist. I build genes for synthetic enzymes on a routine basis. "Enzymes to modify how..fuel burns" cannot be literally true.

 

[Quest]

Originally Posted By: GMorg


I'm not trying to impress anyone, but I am a molecular geneticist. I build genes for synthetic enzymes on a routine basis. "Enzymes to modify how..fuel burns" cannot be literally true.


Lemme give you a "like" on this one.

Q.

 

[badtlc]

Originally Posted By: GMorg
I'm not doubting that StarTron may satisfy customers and may even be a useful product, but the some of the stuff that they have on their website seems to be completely separated from reality. I'm not going to critique the entire site, but nearly everything they have on enzymes is either dumbed down to the point of it being false or they are just making things up. As a specific example, the following statement does not seem to be likely: " Star Tron® uses highly specialized enzymes to modify how gasoline and diesel fuel burns, resulting in more complete and uniform combustion with reduced engine emissions."

I'm not trying to impress anyone, but I am a molecular geneticist. I build genes for synthetic enzymes on a routine basis. "Enzymes to modify how..fuel burns" cannot be literally true.


It is obviously changing something in the combustion process if those results from testing institutes are correct. If you can dispell those results on their site, it would make for some great reading.

 

[GMorg]

To badtlc: Specifically, which results on their site?

 

[badtlc]

Originally Posted By: GMorg
To badtlc: Specifically, which results on their site?


The ones right below what you were talking about. You were on their site, right?

http://mystarbrite.com/startron//content/view/12/34/lang,en/

 

[GMorg]

I'm not going to spend hours trying to track down references that aren't referenced. I am more than happy to try to evaluate any specific study or data set. If you KNOW of one, please share. I have not seen any specific Star Tron references. They may exist but I don't see them on the page that I read (and just re-read based on the implication that I had missed them).

"In tests conducted by a marine engineering school, a Detroit Diesel engine powered by Star Tron®-treated fuel demonstrated significant gains in power and fuel economy." -- There are hundreds of marine engineering schools. There are NO specifics here that would allow evaluation.

"In an extensive gasoline engine test at a Pennsylvania school of technology, deadly carbon monoxide was reduced an average of 80%, with some engines showing reductions of carbon monoxide and toxic hydrocarbons of up to 90%." -- which school, when, where published. Again, there is nothing but fluff in this statement, not just regular fluff, deadly fluff. And, does anyone think they assessed "toxic" hydrocarbons separately?

If someone reads the Star Tron site and concludes that any information is offered that can be objectively considered, then we will have an observation that sheds light on why advertising works.

 

[NHHEMI]

Startron works and works very well. I am not going to be swayed by someone claiming to be an exppert who then can't be bothered to back up his claims the company is making false statements.

 

[badtlc]

Yeah, I would think there would be some simple explanations why Startron couldn't achieve those results. Sorry I asked. I thought you would have some interesting insight on the subject.

 

[GMorg]

I have not disputed that Star Tron works. I have never used the product and NHHEMI has already noted his satisfaction. My comment was directed to the marketing hype on their website and the language that they use regarding the use of enzymes. I was asked to address studies referenced on their website. I haven't seen the studies, only hints that they exist. I think that the last two comments are downright silly. If there are members that want to get into the biochemistry of the claims, I am open to the idea.

I am getting a little fed up with this stuff. What claims have I made that were not substantiated. Do you really want to get into protein structure and enzymatic mechanisms? These topics have nothing to do with this site. If the company claimed that the gravity pull of the moon made their product work would I need to PROVE how that statement cannot be true?

I guess that the teacher in me has an urge to not let influential false statements stand. In this case, it is the marketing fluff on the Star Tron site. However, I am beginning to again question whether this site is really worth my time. There is very little motivation to contribute to this site when members act this way.