Arco gas?

Steve wrote:
:: claymore wrote:
::
::: Steve wrote:
::::: wrote:
:::::
:::::: I noticed that Arco is the cheapest priced gas around.
:::::: Is there anything wrong with it or it bad for Honda engines?
::::::
:::::
::::: A Honda engine is no different than any other. As for ARCO, they
::::: pulled out of my area so long ago that I didn't even realize they
::::: were still in business.
:::
::: Why buy Arco and give Hugo Chavez more profit?
::
:: Maybe because you're confusing Citgo with Arco?
::
::

Oops! My bad

 

Can you quote me somewhere that says that?[/QUOTE]

The signs on the pumps in Shell stations frequently said that up until
their most recent ad campaign. I think some marketeer decided to
insinuate a difference between premium and regular/mid-grade with the
latest campaign.

Nor can you find anything that QUANTIFIES any difference between Shell
regular and premium detergent percentages. In case you didn't notice
"more than twice" and "more than five times" are hardly quantitative,
and since "more than five times" is actually a subset of "more than
twice," it doesn't even prove that there's a difference other than
marketing!!!

 

<coughBULLSHITcough>

 

The signs on the pumps in Shell stations frequently said that up until
their most recent ad campaign. I think some marketeer decided to
insinuate a difference between premium and regular/mid-grade with the
latest campaign.[/QUOTE]

I've used Shell gas for some time now, and every collateral on top of
every pump has extolled the difference in detergents with their
'v-power'.

I've never seen anything from Shell indicating "all grades, same
cleaners!".

Sure. More than 2x what the law specifies for their non-v-power stuff,
and more than 5x what the law specifies for v-power.

It starts with what the law says. The law quantifies it for you.

Well, if you read it in context, it's plain what they're saying.

 

it's not bullshit. do you want to learn something or do just want to
throw stones at something you don't understand and remain ignorant?

 

er, why don't /you/ do some homework for a change? all you're doing
here is pissing and moaning, but i don't see you contributing a damned
thing. go figure out what the detergents are and the legal minimum.
then report back with your findings.

 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

The law quantifies only the minimum. "More than <anything>" is NOT
quantitative.

And I'm not sure I even believe that the law PLACES a minimum on
detergent content, come to think of it!

Its plain what you are BELIEVING, not what they are saying.

If both grades contain 6x the "minium required", then BOTH statements
("regular contains more than twice," "premium contains more than 5x")
are QUITE true. And also QUITE irrelevant.

 

Its bullshit. CVCC engines haven't been on the market for nearly 30
years, and today's Honda engines are NO different than anyone else's
when it comes to fuel requirement. They're just engines. Sorry to break
any Hondophile's illusions, but that's reality.

 

The law quantifies only the minimum. "More than <anything>" is NOT
quantitative.[/QUOTE]

2x more than something that's quantified is quantified.

 

The law quantifies only the minimum. "More than <anything>" is NOT
quantitative.

And I'm not sure I even believe that the law PLACES a minimum on
detergent content, come to think of it![/QUOTE]

Then you're an ignornamus. WTF are you thinking?

 

Why are they irrelevant?

 

2x more than something that's quantified is quantified.
[/QUOTE]

<sigh>

"More than 2x something" is not and cannot be quantified. Its adspeak.

 

<sigh>

"More than 2x something" is not and cannot be quantified. Its adspeak.[/QUOTE]

If the law states X amount of a certain detergent (by weight,
percentage, or whatever), and they say Shell has "more than 2x" that,
then you simply take the physical amount specified by law and multiply
that by 2 to get AT LEAST the amount the Shell gas has in it.

Of course, you're of the opinion that "gas is gas," so who cares. What
one wonders is why you seem to care so much about this. The facts are
the facts.

 

if i meant cvcc, i'd have said cvcc.

er, the post cvcc engines ran higher compression and got much higher
power yields from regular gas that anything detroit had at the time.
detroit has to some degree caught up since then, but it's taken them
decades. your homework is to compare specific power outputs for 80's
hondas and 80's detroit.

and as long as you don't do your homework, you'll still not know what
you're talking about.

 

If the law states X amount of a certain detergent (by weight,
percentage, or whatever), and they say Shell has "more than 2x" that,
then you simply take the physical amount specified by law and multiply
that by 2 to get AT LEAST the amount the Shell gas has in it.

Of course, you're of the opinion that "gas is gas," so who cares. What
one wonders is why you seem to care so much about this. The facts are
the facts.
[/QUOTE]

we're wasting our time - he's not interested in facts, just expressing
underinformed opinion.

 

Gas from different stations IS different.

Shell and Chrysler had a problem where the Shell additives were dissolving
the Chrysler fuel pumps!

 

doing a little more homework myself, it seems there's /considerable/
composition differences in gasoline. compare and contrast:

http://www.brownoil.com/msdsgasoline.htm
http://www.albina.com/Fuel/ChevronRUGasMSDS.htm
http://www.hess.com/ehs/msds/gasoline-all-grades-9950.pdf
http://www.mapl.com/msds/gas.html
http://www.docs.citgo.com/msds_pi/330961.pdf
http://www.irvingoil.com/company/msds.asp?cat=Gasoline

another thing that interests me is that benzene, in other environments
is considered highly hazardous. yet when it's in gasoline, it's
suddenly not. how very strange!

 

If the law states X amount of a certain detergent (by weight,
percentage, or whatever), and they say Shell has "more than 2x" that,
then you simply take the physical amount specified by law and multiply
that by 2 to get AT LEAST the amount the Shell gas has in it.[/QUOTE]

What part of the phrase "at least" do you not understand? Those two
words completely invalidate any sort of quantification. If gasoline 1
has "at least 2x the minimum" and gasoline 2 has "at least 5x the
minimum," then it could very well be true that they BOTH ACTUALLY have
10x the minimum! The comparison is completely ambiguous.

No, that's not my belief AT ALL. I do agree that there are BIG
differences in gasolines, both brand-to-brand, and summer-to-winter and
region-to-region. And I don't deny that Shell is pretty good gas (all
the grades, whether or not premium has more additives than regular or
not). Chevron/Texaco is my first pick, but I burn quite a lot of Shell,
Exxon/Mobil, and Valero (pretty much in that order), too because of
where stations are located in my usual driving routes. I avoid Citgo and
Conoco/Phillips like the plague, based on my own experiences with them.

I care BECAUSE ambiguous adspeak only covers up the facts! I wonder why
you are so

 

What part of the phrase "at least" do you not understand? Those two
words completely invalidate any sort of quantification.[/QUOTE]

If I can quantify a lower value below which I will not go, then
quantification occurs.

Regardless of what YOU think.

 

Then your engineering professors taught you a different definition of
"quantitative" and "qualitative" measurements than mine taught me. A
qualitative measurement can tell you "better" or "worse," but only a
quantitative measurement definitively says "how much better" or "how
much worse."