Who are M45 Owners?

[myother45isalesbaer]

I am new to the site, but I was wondering who are you M45 owners? Interested in age and overall car knowledge. Don't much care about your financial position.......but if you care to share please do so. If you can afford one you must be doing well with the money.

The reason I am asking..............oh well..........pound me for this one. I see a ton of speculation as to car issues. One of them that bugs me is the oil additive. Everyone knows oil additives generally don't work and may even void a warranty. What's the one that keeps coming up????

Sk11 or 35NE something like that? What is that stuff? And why would anyone need to add it to their oil? Technical answers would be most appreciated.

[Andrew224]

I'm 28. I know enough to understand the major components of my car and have a basic understanding of how everything works. I can do general maintenance and brakes but leave anything in depth to the professionals.

As for the second part of your post... Are you talking about BG-44K gas treatment? There are numerous references to this in previous posts. It helps reduce the amount of carbon deposits within the engine. Z or Q45tech could probably explain the ins and outs of it. I haven't tried it yet. Apparently, the engines in our cars tend to get a lot of carbon deposits if you baby them. It was designed as a high output engine and needs to be run through the numbers to keep everything in line and running right.

Andrew

[myother45isalesbaer]

Andrew,

Thanks for getting back to me. I was wondering what age group and car knowledge skill-sets were out on this site.

I am a 54 year old fart that fell off a "pumkin" truck in the big city. Back on the farm we had to know how to fix the old tractor, hay bailer and anything else mechanical. A mechanic was 200 miles away and most likely full of moonshine so we couldn't wait for Andy and Barney to get him sobered up so we could get some parts. We either found the parts or made them. If we didn't get the parts the tractor and bailer didn't run. The hay didn't get in and the cows had a fit if they weren't feed and milked.

So I am old school and self-taught. I could not change a spark plug on a M today if I wanted to. Where are they? I wish I could hook-up with a techno guy who knows motors and knows how to tweat those chips. I just don't have the skill sets to deal with the electronics on these cars. Even if I did I could not afford the software to do the analysis.

So the "old Fart" says poop to the gas and oil additives. Over the years all of them have been proven to be pretty much useless. A very few have standed the test of time. Where is STP or Marvel Mystery oil today?

But one thing has held up since "benz" got the internal combustion engine to work. An ocassional full power several minute winding that tach to its limit will reduce or at least blow out some of the carbon. I like to start my fully warmed up engine in first, bang the pedal to the floor and then try to hit second. If I get to full juice in second or by chance third by then I am usually running out of road.

You cannot putt-putt these engines around all day. They were made to run and run hard. Forget the additives.

Just my "old Fart" opinion.

Karl.

[Andrew224]

For what it's worth...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2yNvI2h6Vo

Andrew

[myother45isalesbaer]

Interesting. But I have seen that trick before. For $xxx you pour in some stuff........don't factor the stuff into mileage.......and oh my GOD your MPG went up!!!

Not saying all snake oil salesman are 100% dishonest, just most of them. Put a manifold vacuum gauge on your car and make sure it never goes below half the idle reading and you will get great MPG!!! I've done that one too. Put and egg between your foot and the gas pedal. If the egg breaks you are hitting the juice too much. Try it........it works. In other words lay off the full pull in all the gears.

If your engine is in tune, everything mechanical is up to specs, tires are inflated properly, windows and sunroof are closed over 40MPH there is little to nothing you can do to improve MPG.

OPPS>>>>>I Forgot a big one. When I was in college and poor I would pay some kids 50% of the going rate per gallon to get me some gas. I didn't ask where it came from or how they got it. DAMN.....I got some awesome MPG for a few years until they were caught boosting bigger things. I could go miles and in the morning my tank was full again. I think one time I got 200 MPG out of my Mopar 383 V8.

Sometimes I wonder where those kids went. I think I saw one on the Sopranos. Or it looked just like him. Those were the days.

The old fart speaks his old fart mind again. Put that stuff in your tank or not. Reminds me of the old Esso/EXXON ad about putting a tiger in your tank. Remember that one????

[szh]

I am a 54 year old fart that fell off a "pumkin" truck in the big city.

I am only a few years behind you - 52 years here!

Back on the farm we had to know how to fix the old tractor, hay bailer and anything else mechanical. A mechanic was 200 miles away and most likely full of moonshine so we couldn't wait for Andy and Barney to get him sobered up so we could get some parts. We either found the parts or made them. If we didn't get the parts the tractor and bailer didn't run. The hay didn't get in and the cows had a fit if they weren't feed and milked.

Ah, yes, the gold old days. No ECUs, no computers inside cars, no OBD-II connectors, all direct wiring, no CANBUS, etc., etc., etc. Fuel was carburetted into the engine, and the spark plugs were fired from the distributer, and there was space inside the engine compartment to reach in from above and do things - like change spark plugs and oil filters and the like.

(Although you also had the occasional design problems that prevented car owners from doing the usual simple things. Like the Chevy Monza ... if you bought the optional V-8 engine, changing the spark plugs required you to lift the engine a bit to get to two of the plugs! )

So I am old school and self-taught. I could not change a spark plug on a M today if I wanted to. Where are they? I wish I could hook-up with a techno guy who knows motors and knows how to tweat those chips. I just don't have the skill sets to deal with the electronics on these cars. Even if I did I could not afford the software to do the analysis.

The electronics and controls on today's cars are mostly impossible to tweak. Yes, you have to have sophisticated software and testing skills. Some of the folks who like to work on the modern cars, hang out in our NICO "Engineering Talk" forum and the various engine forums (including the one on the VH and VK engines). There are not a lot of people or posts there, but lots of fun reading if you go back over the previous posts.

So the "old Fart" says poop to the gas and oil additives. Over the years all of them have been proven to be pretty much useless. A very few have standed the test of time. Where is STP or Marvel Mystery oil today?

Pretty much all the oil additives don't do anything to help, although some are mostly benign - so, if anyone wants to waste their money, they can. However, in some cases (like the infamous Lucas oil additive), they can actually be detrimental. Check out the oil frothing problem created by Lucas additive (do a search for it here, or google for the site ... called "bobistheoilguy.com or some such name) for one reason why careful research is better than believing the snake oil guys!

But one thing has held up since "benz" got the internal combustion engine to work. An ocassional full power several minute winding that tach to its limit will reduce or at least blow out some of the carbon. I like to start my fully warmed up engine in first, bang the pedal to the floor and then try to hit second. If I get to full juice in second or by chance third by then I am usually running out of road.

This is still one of the recommended procedures on the current M engine. It is listed in the TSB's as one of the cures for apparent carbon buildup. The problem is that doing it after the car is demonstrating severe symptoms, is pretty much too late. Then, you end up needing the BG-44K or a proper pressured rail flush.

It is one of the reasons I do NOT recommend babying the car - even during the break-in period. To crack a proverb: "A couple of WOTS a day will keep the carbon away" .

You cannot putt-putt these engines around all day. They were made to run and run hard. Forget the additives.

Absolutely!!

Z

[myother45isalesbaer]

Z,

I enjoyed everyone's response to my question. But your's had me laughing and remembering things I thought I had forgot. I remember the Monza issue and how all us old school guys were horrified/disgusted that any car would be built like that.

For some stupid reason I still think I can work on my cars. I need to get my head straight that those days are over. You helped me on that issue. I must admit that as good as the old days were when you could do many things yourself, the cars today will out perform and are generally more reliable. Talking about spark plugs, points, condensor, distributors brings back fond memories of being a backyard mechanic.

I think we are of like mind on the M's. I agree with almost everything you have said. The only thing I have my doubts about is any treatment to remove carbon. In my old fart experience no additive really can get rid of it. I used to try STP gas treatment straight down the carb. Didn't really work. Usually if you get a lot of carbon build up you have also burnt a few valves in the process. I had a 71' Nova V8 that was badly carboned up. Only way I could fix it was pull the heads and do a valve job. After I did that I got another 100K out of that motor before I sold the car. Oh well.....that was yesterday. I need to upgrade my brain for today.

I think I am going to go hang out with the NICO tech guys for awhile and see what going on over there. Appreciate that advice. I'll be back.

Andrew........appreciate your advice too. Seems like you, me and Z are on the same page.

Thanks.............the old fart.

[lfj2025]

I'm 54 also but I don't miss the "good old days". I remember working on carbs and setting points ( no one under 30 knows what points are) and always kept a tool box in my trunk. I was dirt poor and had to fix anything I drove. Today the only tool I need is a cell phone. I'm not rich just don't know what I could fix if it stopped running. The only thing I do now are oil changes.I remember no traction control or ABS in our snowy winters. Now that was fun!!

[myother45isalesbaer]

Hey my good friend,

The only thing I miss about the good "old days" is we could fix it ourselves. I am laughing about the comment you made that no one under 30 even knows what points are. You are so correct. How about those distributors with dual points. Let's see what the feedback on that is.

I am not Bill Gates either. I remember posi-traction. ABS and traction control did not exist. ABS has never done me wrong, but traction control has. I turn it off in the winter. I want control of the car.

Did you see the latest? The newer ones will "gently" brake you into the proper lane if you get out of your lane. I hope they have an off switch for that.

Let me ask this. What do you think of those high tech starter buttons. Did we not have those in the fifties and sixties? What's the big deal? Fuel injection and turbos go way back. The only thing new on cars of today are the electronics that enhance everything. There has not been any new technology except for chips that I can see in the last 40 years.

Still doing oil changes? I even gave that one up a few years ago. Not cost effective.

Like your comments. Keep going. Maybe we can teach these under 30 year olds a thing or two when men where men and they worked on their own cars because we could not afford to do other wise. If my M would not start tomorrow and it wasn't a simple dead battery issue I would have to take it into a techno shop. I hate that.

Karl.

[lfj2025]

So many people think the new hardtop convertible is new, Ford did it in 1959. My very first car was a Dodge with push button transmission! It was a beater and was totaled within a month by a truck driver that was so drunk after lunch he didn't even know what happen. Police told him once he woke up from his nap!!

All these new electronics take some of the fun out of driving but I see people everyday that need all the help they can get. Haha.

Talking about Ms, I've had a lot of cars but the M has truly been my favorite. It will be very hard to replace it when the time comes.

Larry

[myother45isalesbaer]

Larry,

Isn't that a hoot about the "new hardtop convertibles"? I remember the push button transmission too. I sometimes wonder if a bunch of older car guys sit around and see what they can re-invent and tune it up with todays technology and present it as a brand new idea. Whats next.....automatic diming headlights. Cadillac did that years ago.

A few things I don't miss are manual or even automatic chokes on carb'd engines. I don't miss having to readjust the carb for altitude changes. I think the continously variable valve timing and electronically controlled fuel injection has made driving a lot more fun. Not to mention the benefits in performance far exceeds yesterdays technology.

I am with you on paying attention to driving. Don't even get me going on cell phones. I have one in each car......but only for emergencies. If my wife and I are together the one not driving does the talking.

In my opinion you should be paying attention to driving. Not multi-tasking. Driving is enough of a multi-tasking process. Watching out for drunks and other fools is enough multi-tasking for me when I am directing 2 tons of steel around.

I agree........I don't want help controlling my car. Its getting to be too much when the cars start telling the drivers what to do and doing it for them if they don't. These machines are not refrigerators.

Oh well, time for the old fart to get off his soap box. I do love my M. Nissian almost got it 100% right.......too bad not many appreciated it.

Karl.

[szh]

My very first car was a Dodge with push button transmission!

Yup! My aunt had a Dodge Dart ... 1962, I think ... that had this transmission selector. I remember being totally fascinated by it!

Z

[myother45isalesbaer]

Push buttons for the transmission. What is next? Square steering wheels? Remember those. My grandfather had a Chrysler that had a tiny little lever coming out of his dashboard where he could decide what gear he wanted on his automatic.

Lets go to paddle shifters. Love the concept. Its been used in racing for a long time. My only question is between working the paddle shifter, cruise control, reaching over to see my MPG, watching the NAV, playing with the high end stereo, adjusting the steering wheel, adjusting the 12 position seating, turning the seat heaters on or off, dealing with the climate control and voice activated command system, dealing with the cell phone, too mention a few. What am I doing? Playing with a video game or driving a car?

VERY, VERY SCARY STUFF!!! My next car has to have paddle shift on the steering wheel but all the other things need to be relocated. Funny how that paddle shift only lets you go from one gear to another and not skip any. I think all my motorcycles did the same thing.

But...when I took my M out today.......it was pure pleasure as I blew an Audi A6 off the line after tailgating my butt for about 10 miles. I had a big smile on my face and I hope he had a big............. on his.

[jagvet]

The sad reality is that the main reason carbon deposits are frequently encountered on low-mileage cars is our "green" gasoline--with required additives that are inimical to full combustion. In other words, any modern car is fighting against a carbon handicap from the first day driven. This is has been discussed extensively by Pat Goss of the PBS Motorweek show. An additional handicap is present if your area is required to use the EPA-mandated corporate-welfare 10% ethanol mix, which is a killer of both MPG and rubber parts, as well as a year-round producer of water in your gas tank.

Given this proclivity for deposits, occasional full throttle driving as recommended by others here can't hurt. However, it won't solve the problem. There have been very respected studies supporting BG-44K, but no additive is going to be as effective in removing carbon deposits as a periodic chemical flush of the engine. BG is one of the major providers of these proprietary flushes through dealers and service stations, but I am sure there must be others.

Finally, the one "additive" that is a proven mileage booster (and is superior in preventing engine wear) is all-synthetic motor oil--not a blend. No matter what make, as long as the car has less than 90k miles or so (when false seals become an issue), switching to all-synthetic of the correct viscosity will produce at least a 2-3 MPG and up to 5 MPG--improvement. But you won't see that info in any Mobil 1 ad (or any other brand's), because it would crimp gasoline sales, even though it has been documented in numerous studies for years. The all-synthetic pays for itself on a cash basis in mileage improvement, even if it weren't superior for engine longevity and cold-start lubrication.

[myother45isalesbaer]

Jagvet,

Some very interesting info in your post. I was wondering about when does the carbon issue surface? I have about 14k on my 2004 which is split 50/50 highway and city driving.

I have a friend with an older Q with about 200K on his motor and never had an issue. That got me to thinking is this localized to one part of the country? As you probably know better than me in different parts of the country not all fuels are blended the same. In CT for example we have winter and summer blends. Not sure what the difference is exactly, but always thought the winter blends we made a little more combustible to aid cold weather starts. But then we loose a few MPG due to having to run the motors richer for longer until they get to operating temp.

Do you think adding some fuel injector cleaner would slow down the carbon deposit problem........or is it really a case where that is not much you can do about it? How about some octane boost to get the internal temps higher to burn some of that carbon off?

Thanks.........Karl.

[szh]

Do you think adding some fuel injector cleaner would slow down the carbon deposit problem........or is it really a case where that is not much you can do about it? How about some octane boost to get the internal temps higher to burn some of that carbon off?

Using gasoline that contains injector cleaner additives is a Good Thing™ to do.

Hence, I go out of my way to get gas at Chevron stations when I can - it is their Techron additive that makes my M45 behave much better than other gasolines! The recent Shell premium stuff - I forget the name - is also good, I believe.

BG-44K is essentially the same ingredient as Techron, but in a much more highly concentrated form. The typical auto place "Techron fuel cleaner", even the "concentrated" bottles, is not as good as BG-44K, by the way. The Nissan and Infiniti dealers have a Nissan-bottled product, that I was told was "as good as BG-44K", but I am not sure how much to believe that yet. It is true that most Nissan and Infiniti dealers use this as the typical "engine flush" treatment, so if you want a powered rail flush, ask for that specifically!

BTW, BG-44K should, in general, be limited to one use (i.e., one can in a full tank of gas) every 3000 to 4000 miles (only do it a second time right away, if the first can does not eliminate the symptoms) - about 600 miles (or two tankfuls) before an oil change is a good time to do it!

Some people here use it regularly every 3000 miles or so. On my two older Q45's, I did not need to do it that often - the VH engines are not prone to carbon buildup and injector problems - but, on my current M45, with the VK engine, it seems to be a necessary thing. About as regularly as the OCI.

Z

[szh]

I have a friend with an older Q with about 200K on his motor and never had an issue.

That is correct. The older VH engine simply did not have this carbon build-up issue. Much tighter ring tolerances, no oil blowby, and no oil to burn to create the carbon problem.

On the VK engine, the ring tolerances were opened up a bit, to increase the horse-power quite a bit, and this has resulted in oil use and carbon buildup "proneness".

Z

[szh]

There have been very respected studies supporting BG-44K, but no additive is going to be as effective in removing carbon deposits as a periodic chemical flush of the engine. BG is one of the major providers of these proprietary flushes through dealers and service stations, but I am sure there must be others.

Correct! The BG pressurized engine flush system is a proven solution for bad cases of buildup.

Z

[myother45isalesbaer]

To all:

WOW! Tons of good info on the carbon issue and additives. I was always under the impression that additives really didn't do much. Live and learn.

Also under the impression that the Q and M engines were the same. I need to look into that more. One statement someone made is they loosed up the ring tolerances for more power. I would think it would have been the opposite. Tighter would increase compression with less blow-by. So I am confused on that one. Generally as an engine wears the ring tolerances get larger, compression goes down and oil consumption goes up. What's the magic in the M motor that works in reverse?

Karl.

[szh]

Also under the impression that the Q and M engines were the same.

Depends on the model year for the Q45. 1990 - 1996 Q45 was VH45. 1997 - 2000 Q45 was VH41, and 2001+ Q45's use VK45 ... same as our M45's!

One statement someone made is they loosed up the ring tolerances for more power. I would think it would have been the opposite. Tighter would increase compression with less blow-by. So I am confused on that one. Generally as an engine wears the ring tolerances get larger, compression goes down and oil consumption goes up. What's the magic in the M motor that works in reverse?

Well, if the ring fit is too loose, then compression goes down, yes. And, equally importantly, if the ring fit is too tight, you waste some of the power in more friction, etc.

So, there is a fine balance point, where the rings are not too tight (you lose HP) and not too loose (you lose compression and, thus, HP). At this balance point, you are optimizing the power of the engine at the expense of oil and ring tolerance.

In the new VK45 engines, the way that Infiniti got more power out of the VK45 engine (340HP) instead of the lower power (280HP) from the VH45 engine, was by this method probably (among other things, of course!).

The VH engine is probably also a bit understated ... by many people's estimates, the 1990-1993 Q45 perhaps had closer to 300-310HP. Dropped to the rated 278HP by 1996, due to various engine modifications in the 1993-1996 engine years.

Z

[myother45isalesbaer]

Z,

What you have stated about ring tolerences is what I always thought to be true. The only time if have seen it work in reverse is when the different metals used expand and contract at different rates. Those in my days were generally full race motors that were built loose, but as temps came up they got tighter and started putting out the HP they were designed to.

Are you self-taught or factory trained? You seem to have a ton of mechanical knowledge. Not to be rude, but I really question those HP numbers. HP is a number that can be played around with a lot using formulas. It has always seemed to me torque and at what revs it hits its max is more reliable to determine that kick in pants feel that nails you to the seat. My 300 HP Beemer motor had less HP than the M, but the torgue came on sooner in the RPM range. The M gets there at a higher RPM making it seem somewhat slower from a stop.

My analysis is the beemer had bigger horses that run slower while the M has smaller horses, just more of them that need to run faster to get the torque output.

Interesting stuff........at least to an old gear head like me.

Karl.

[szh]

What you have stated about ring tolerences is what I always thought to be true. The only time if have seen it work in reverse is when the different metals used expand and contract at different rates. Those in my days were generally full race motors that were built loose, but as temps came up they got tighter and started putting out the HP they were designed to.

Yes, I remember reading that a long time back, but had forgotten!

Are you self-taught or factory trained? You seem to have a ton of mechanical knowledge.

Totally self-taught (I read a little bit), so I often get things wrong too! And, I really do not know much about cars ... just the few things I have read about. Unlike some people here, my limited "knowledge" comes from reading and not real hands-on experience. Wish I had the time for that.

By the way, check out posts from Dennis (Q45tech) if you want to learn about stuff that you never knew before! Dennis is an engineer by profession, who has made it a life passion to learn about automotive engineering and talks to us here at NICO about those learnings.

His posts are not always the easiest to understand by us mere mortals, but if you wade through them and understand them in detail, the information is simply awe-inspiring.

Not to be rude, but I really question those HP numbers. HP is a number that can be played around with a lot using formulas.

Yup, they sure can be manipulated ... no offence taken at all! Check out this link http://www.nissanperformancema...sarah/ for what I consider the definitive word on how HP is calculated from dyno measurements of torque. Sarah explains why the magic number is "5252" (BTW, if I wasn't already married, I know who I would lust after! ).

As long as torque stays relatively flat over most of the rpm range, and is reasonably high above 5252 rpm, then the HP keeps climbing too as the rpm's increase. For me, this one of the reasons I prefer the V-8 in the M45 to the V-6 in the M35 and G35, even though it is the same engine design ... the torque comes up sooner and the smoothness of the power delivery makes it superior, although the HP numbers are pretty close.

It has always seemed to me torque and at what revs it hits its max is more reliable to determine that kick in pants feel that nails you to the seat. My 300 HP Beemer motor had less HP than the M, but the torgue came on sooner in the RPM range. The M gets there at a higher RPM making it seem somewhat slower from a stop.

Can be quite true. You have to look at lots of things to get a feel for what happens with any given car when you floor it! The torque rise, its shape with rpms, the weight of the car, the weight of the wheel/tire combination (it is not always best to get bigger tires and wheels) particularly the rotating inertia if the wheel has weight farther out from the center, etc., etc., etc., can have quite an effect on the car launches.

It is one of the reasons that the all-electric Tesla has such interesting acceleration and performance - electric motors generate a lot of "instantaneous" torque at almost no rpm's at all! Check out http://www.teslamotors.com/ for more info. Here is the torque curve for it: http://www.teslamotors.com/per...e.php.

Of course, seat of the pants measurements are not too reliable as a measurement yardstick! You really should dyno and quarter-mile the cars to get the best comparison.

Z

[myother45isalesbaer]

Z,

Thanks again for a boat load of good info. I'm self-taught too. Unfortunately I spent the last 3 decades in finance playing with money and lost track of all the new things going on in the auto world. The basics are the same but the details sure have changed. Now that I am retired and done playing with finances I am playing catch-up on the automotive world.

You are right on about the HP numbers and seat of the pants measurements. I knew most of what you said but forgot. I am going to check out that site you recommended.

One of the first things I noticed about my M is the power does come on smooth. Its so smooth I maybe underestimating its kick in the pants measurement to my BMW. But as you say, and I agree, that is in no way an accurate measurement. It just feels good. My ex-Beemer had that feel good push you into the seat upon launch. Problem was you then had to take it to the Beemer shop and spend several K to keep it running right. Although I liked the BMW I am not at all disappointed in the M as a replacement for a 540i. The difference in specs as measured by the pros is really not noticeable. An the M is bigger to boot.

And kudos to you on the electric motor and torque. The average Joe would not know that is 100% true. But then I guess none of us fit the average Joe profile or we would not be on this site talking about cars.

Karl.

[myother45isalesbaer]

Hey Z,

I went on Sarah's site. Is she real or a bunch of techno guys answering questions? If she is real, you SHOULD marry her!!!

I didn't pay alot of attention to all the .002 kind of stuff on specs because they were specific to a single question. But all the technological facts presented were 100% right. I loved the explanation of stock, 1/2 race, 3/4Q race and full race cams.

She is one serious Motorhead. The explanation about altitude, temps, etc. and their effects on engine performance were Awesome.

I made that site one of my favorites. Thanks.

[szh]

Sarah is, indeed, one serious Motorhead.

She has already been asked The Question before ... one of the ones she answered in her column a short while back:

Quote »Will you marry me?Asleepz

Where's my ring(s)? And matching piston set? Size SR20 please [/quote]

Z

[myother45isalesbaer]

Well............if all she wants is a few motor car rings. I can do that. I have a few Jag XKE valves around if that would help. If I look in my basement I think I have an original factory Ford 60 T'Bird fuel pump. What do you think? How about I throw in some 1920"s tractor parts? What ever she wants.

She has to be one BIG time piece of work. Someday I would love to meet her and talk motors........I have been married since 1976. So cars are about all I can or care to talk about anymore.

Karl.

[jagvet]

I can't point to any personal experience, because I have low (mostly highway) mileage. I can only point to what Goss recommends--a preventive chemical engine flush every 2-3 years. (I just passed the 3 year mark.) A lot of the info I've gleaned from him comes not just from the nationally syndicated Motorweek TV show, but also from his DC-area radio call-in show. His website is goss-garage.com. From his description of the green-gas syndrome, I don't think fuel injector cleaner will do the job (although it's a good idea on other grounds).

As to variability by locale, there are at least three factors at work in sludge accumulation. First, how the car is driven (hard/highway vs. easy/stop-and-go) etc. But I suspect the second is more important--the EPA-balkanized US gasoline market. Last time I checked there are something like 19 different geographic gasoline content standards (usually x 3 grades of gas). Generally speaking, the extra aggravation of ethanol pollution is confined to so-called non-attainment areas (major metro areas). On top of that, there is considerable variation in gasoline quality. I don't remember all the details, but Honda and number of other manufacturers created a new fuel standard for current day engines several years ago. Has some slogan name like "Top Tier" or some such. Last I heard from Goss, only Chevron and another brand that escapes me had met this standard. That too could affect the rate of sludge accumulation. Thus unless two cars are driven in the same area by drivers with the same fuel source and comparable driving habits, there is really very little basis for comparison.

One more recommendation on fuel I received not from Goss but from a Nissan tech. Since my manual reommended 91 octane (which virtually no one sells around here any more), I asked him whether I should fill with a 50-50 mix of 89 and 93. He said, specifically because of the sludge problem, if it were his car, he would put in all 93. That's what I've done, using Chevron 93 almost exclusively.

Lastly, Goss has also pointed out the only defense there is against year-round water accumulation in your tank if you're forced (as I am) to fuel with the ethanol mix junk. The only thing that will keep the water component of ethanol from separating in your tank (regardless of weather) is an isopropyl-based gas treatment (one bottle per month). I can tell you from store shelf research that the usual STP etc gas treatments on most shelves are not isopropyl and are therefore useless against ethanol. It must say isopropyl on the label to do any good. One brand I found locally at an auto store is Iso-Heet, but I am sure there are others. I not only treat my car fuel this way, but also the gas supply for lawn equipment (for which, of course, any form of alcohol is strongly un-recommended in the manuals).

[myother45isalesbaer]

Jagvet,

I assume that means you have a Jag and a Vet. DC.........I spent four of my best years down there at GWU at college. Got so hooted up one night I side swapped a lamp post right in front of Arlington Cemetary. Had an awesome time down there not to mention one of the greatest educational experiences possible.

So what do you have as Jags or Vets?

I have no clue who Goss is or what he is talking about. But, I don't think there is an enviromental fuel. The only way to stop pollution of the environment is to stop consuming. Too many people on the planet. The only alternative I see to the auto issue is Hydrogen. Seems to be a ton of issues around that.

But get this one. Hydrogen Peroxide was used in German submarines in WW2. They blew up a lot of subs, but they were willing to try it.

I agree there as gas additives and other additives that will absorb water and let you burn it out of your tank. I forget which one is which. In over 40 years of driving nearly everything from a farm tractor to jet, most fuel's float on water, you just need to drain it off before you take off. Too bad cars don't have that ability built in. That would end all the additive gas tank stuff.

Anyway, I am very disappointed I can not drive down PA avenue today in front of the White House. When Pres Nixon was there I talked to him at the Lincoln Memorial one night. Did not see......but was there when Wilbur Mills "Jumped" into the Potomac with his girl friend.

I read the Constitution and Bill of Rights, took a tour of the Capital, Library of Congress and just came away with a ton of respect for our founding fathers. Forrest Gumb I am not. I missed that Vietnam situation due to pure luck on the lotto and Mr. Nixon ending the draft the year I was due to go.

Want to hear a good one? When the no gas stuff was going on, I found a gas station right behind the White House that was pumping 24/7.

But...back to the cars. I tried that 50/50 mix. It does not work. We can get 91 up here in CT. I am thinking about putting some octane booster in sometimes. But these cars adjust for octane. I put in some 87 and it ran with a few pings, but no where near the power.

Have to go and protect the homeland.

Karl.

[szh]

Very good observations, jagvet!

Has some slogan name like "Top Tier" or some such. Last I heard from Goss, only Chevron and another brand that escapes me had met this standard.

Yes! Chevron advertizes their ability to meet "Top Tier" rating with their gas - contains Techron.

The only thing that will keep the water component of ethanol from separating in your tank (regardless of weather) is an isopropyl-based gas treatment (one bottle per month). I can tell you from store shelf research that the usual STP etc gas treatments on most shelves are not isopropyl and are therefore useless against ethanol. It must say isopropyl on the label to do any good. One brand I found locally at an auto store is Iso-Heet, but I am sure there are others.

Definitely agreed! I also use ISOHEET occasionally ... by the way, in my previous posts on the topic, I also say to make sure you all get ISOHEET and not the regular HEET, since ISOHEET is isopropyl alcohol and HEET is not.

Z

[szh]

I have no clue who Goss is or what he is talking about.

Goss is a Motorhead who shows up on the tv show "Motorweek". Very knowledgeable about cars.

Anyway, I am very disappointed I can not drive down PA avenue today in front of the White House.

Yeah! The last time I was in DC a couple of years ago, we walked past it instead. Oh, well.

BTW, my absolutely favorite time in DC, totally sobering, was visiting the Vietnam War Memorial in 1985. My sister and I just sat there on the grass, quietly, not speaking at all for hours, and watched the families who came by and paid their respects.

Although neither of us had anything to do with Vietnam, or lost a loved one there or anything like that, it was one of the most emotional moments in my life for sure.

I remember the griping when the design of the Memorial was first announced, including the rage against the sculptor, Maya Lin, who had been randomly selected for the work. Yet, when the work was completed, the critics were pretty much silenced. There is a power in the simplicity of the wall - to me, the more traditional soldier statues to the side (that Maya was forced to add in the design phase) is okay, but simply not needed!

Z