Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

[NSW] Dodgy Fuel

Discussion in 'General Motorcycling Discussion' started by jd, Jul 3, 2007.

  1. http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22008814-421,00.html
    If anyone in that area filled up recently might be an idea to drain the tank, I know I'd be worried about just what is meant by "sub-standard fuel" :shock:.

  2. Apparently they'd been selling standard ULP as PULP.
  3. I'd be going back and demanding a tank of the real stuff - free. (Or my money back).
  4. That'd be enough to potentially damage vehicles designed for a minimum 95 octane - wonder if anyone affected would have grounds for legal action against the seller.
  5. hardly! Detonation problems take a fair amount of effort to destroy something in a non bleeding edge racing environment. A tank or two wouldn't get you anywhere near damage, even more so if you are at all mechanically sympathetic. Besides, aside from a few bikes, all cars requiring the stuff now will have knock sensors. If you want to strip your bike and then try to prove that this particular fuel and nothing else in the life of the vehicle caused a small pit in a piston, go right ahead.
  6. What about a modified turbo engine though for example - they're very sensitive to octane and many don't even come close to running on 91 RON since even stock many Japanese imports aren't even that happy running on 98 (having been designed to run on 100 RON). There's also older high-compression carburetted engines designed to run on 98-100 RON leaded that don't have a knock sensor to protect them from 91 RON. And not all drivers would recognise the sound of pre-detonation and know to stop driving.
  7. and unless you are running high boost all the time, a tank or two isn't going to magically blow holes in your pistons. Those who modify engines should have an understanding of what that bad rattling sound is anyway. I'm not covering the sale of misrepresented goods here - merely saying that unless those vehicles were doing serious track time you would not be able to attribute damage to an engine from that little fuel unless the engine was brand spankers and you could prove you had only ever filled up with the misrepresented fuel.

    As for knock sensors, they are damage mitigators for long term. Besides, octane ratings drop if you park the car for a week. You are being sensationalist.
  8. Did anyone look at the test results? All tanks were between 95.5 and 96 octane levels. ULP is 91 octane. One of the four was at 98 octane at the correct level. 96 Octane fuel in Melbourne could only be Premium Silver, still a premium fuel but the second grade behind Premium Gold which is the Refinery's top Premium fuel.
  9. I've noticed I've got dodgy fuel a few times but I couldn't find anywhere to report it. Does anyone know who's responsible for monitoring and prosecuting these servo's?
  10. I was recently $400 out of pocket due to dodgy fuel... Apparently there was water in my fuel tank which had fouled the spark plugs and made my ECU go spazzo. Despite my bike still being under warranty, it cost me $400 to have it towed (refused to start), diagnosed and have the spark plugs changed, because spark plugs are "consumables" and water in the tank is my problem... :mad:

    I get fuel from the same place all the time. Mobil on Liverpool Rd at Ashfield. I get 98 RON.
  11. Oddly enough the Department of the Environment and Water Resources are responsible for monitoring fuel quality. Complaints can be made here:
  12. With the outrageous pricing regime that the petrol companies operate by it is disheartening to find yourself being ripped off even further. There have been a few cases of fuel substitution in this area and probably quite a few more that were never proven but have ample anecdotal evidence.
  13. I work for Mobil in SA, and here it fuel is monitored by weights and measures (I guess its "deptartment of W & M"). They can come on site at any time and perform an audit, checking the quality of fuel, or calibration of pumps (must be within 1% accuracy).

    In all my years in this industry, I have only seen a similar problem to this once and it was at the time leaded was phased out, and replaced with LRP. Mobil performs it's own quality control testing, and a 'freeze' was put on LRP due to it not being up to spec. That's not to say it hasn't happened at other times or in other states, just I don't know about it.

    Don't be fooled by media hype about dodgy operators who mix water with their fuel either (as seen on T.T. or ACA type stories). What you will find in those situations is that water has most likely got in the tank due to rain. Fuel floats on water, and most tanks have their pickup point at around 1000 litres, meaning you could effectively have 900lts of water in the tank and no-one would ever know. What these stories should be saying is that the operator (usually independant sites and not company sites) fail to test their water levels. from the my perspective, we check the tanks on a weekly basis with a paste which changes colour in the presence of water. When the level gets to about 2cm on the dipstick, usually around 3-400 ltrs, a contractor is called to removed the water.

    As for pricing of fuel, it fluctuates due to competition. i'd prefer if it didn't, but then I know if that happened it would be at the higher of the prices throughout the cycle, not the lower. Fill up on Tuesdays,and the law of averages will see you pay the lower prices nearly always. The current ACCC investigation is really just something instigated to appease the voting public.
  14. I think that a bigger problem is operators who mix other flammable liquids, which aren't subject to excess, into their petrol supplies to increase their margin. There have been plenty of places charged for that over the years and I have no doubt that there are plenty of others who've never been caught.
  15. Yeah certainly, tho I've never really understood that for what is used. I guess ethanol, but I'm not aware of the cost of that as to whether it becomes cost effective (ie provide greater margins). Definitely couldn't see methanol being used as it costs more per litre than fuel in the first place to my knowledge, but then again half metho half water will burn.
  16. Do you have any links/literature about this? I normally take a while to get through a tank of petrol (anything from 3 to 6 weeks in my car) and quite often am refilling to full at about half way.

  17. hah i work for bp but in WA, nsw are retards for doing that