Costco or Sam's club Gas really bad?

[TimmyC]

This thread is interesting considering that I only put V-power in my car. Costco is like 80 cents cheaper a gallom

[fumanchu1]

@mav1178 thing is that I cannot find his definition of nominal in any dictionary I have looked into, that includes dictionaries for standard language as well as one for mathematical specific term

[Tcoat]

I love the fact that people think they are getting the exact same gas even if they go to the very same station every fill up.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by fumanchu1

I agree with the shall portion (but it only says shall contain ethanol) and does not define a quantity what you did was add the nominally sentence after the shall contain sentence which is not how it is represented in the text (it's in a different paragraph altogether).

It does define a quantity (or rather, a rate). It says "10.0% ± 1% by volume ethanol" right there in the standard. I didn't add anything. It's right there on the page on the Top Tier website.

Originally Posted by fumanchu1

Here if you search ASTM D4806(which it states top tier fuel must comply with)

No, it does NOT state that. It says the ethanol added to the fuel must comply with D4806. D4806 applies to the ethanol additive, not to the gasoline.

The base fuel shall conform to ASTM D 4814 and shall contain commercial fuel grade ethanol conforming to ASTM D 4806.

Which makes the rest of this pretty much irrelevant, but to clarify:

Originally Posted by fumanchu1

Here if you search ASTM D4806(which it states top tier fuel must comply with) this is their definition:
This specification covers nominally anhydrous denatured fuel ethanol intended to be blended with unleaded or leaded gasolines at 1 to 10 volume % for use as automotive spark-ignition engine fuel covered by Specification D4814. The significance of this specification is shown in Appendix X1.

see how that now says 1-10% volume meaning that their reference to nominal was only as an identifier and does not require 10% at a 1% error margin. Nominal in this case was used as a wanted/hope for number rather than a requirement (although they do need minimum 1% and max 10%)

D4806 is the standard for testing ethanol that is intended to be used in E10 or less gasoline (E5, E7 and E10, as opposed to ethanol that is intended to be used in E15 or E85). In the US, E10 (not necessarily Top Tier) is allowed to have ethanol up to 10% (with a margin for error). That's why it says on the pumps "May contain up to 10% ethanol by volume."

D4806 only applies to the ethanol. It doesn't have anything to do with how much ethanol is required to be included in Top Tier gasoline. The Top Tier standard says the gas must have 9% to 11% ethanol, and that ethanol must comply with D4806.

If you buy E10 at a Top Tier station, the gasoline still has to have 9% to 11% ethanol to be compliant with the Top Tier standards. If you buy E10 at a non-Top Tier station, it can have less ethanol, because it doesn't have to comply with the standard. You could have E5 gasoline that contains ethanol that complies with D4806, but that still wouldn't make it Top Tier gas because it doesn't contain enough ethanol.

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by fumanchu1

how can we determine what constitutes poor gasoline if the definition of what makes good gas is not clear to all parties in the discussion. We first need to attain a level footing of knowledge of the terms and definitions before we can truly discuss and make an educated decision, come to a logical conclusion.

Let me spell it out differently:

every gas sold in the US has to meet minimum requirements.
As long as the octane rating is good enough for your car, the rest of the whole ethanol, detergents, snake oil, and secondary info is mostly dictated by what supplies are available to add to gasoline, and what type of marketing spin they want to put on a product to differentiate.

You are not guaranteed the same kind of gas, even if you use the same gas station all the time. The distributor can (and often will) change supplier based on what makes sense to them money and supply-wise.

-alex

[fumanchu1]

You cant just change words in a policy without anything tonback it up therefore your statement are irrelevant. Also you make no sense based on the own quote you had put forth it claims astm as the requirement for the definition they bring forth regarding ethanol content so you saying astm has nothing to do with the top tier fuel rating is completely false as they themselves qualify that astm as defining what constitutes the 10% statement in the form of as per astm... or defined in astm... so saying it doesnt have anything to do with it is ignoring part of the statement to fit your rationale. Btw im still waiting for you to come with anythijg of substance other than your conviction. I have brought forth several sources to refute your arguments/opinions yet you hope to refute sourced facts with opinions

Sent from my SGH-M919V using Tapatalk

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by mav1178

Let me spell it out differently:

every gas sold in the US has to meet minimum requirements.
As long as the octane rating is good enough for your car, the rest of the whole ethanol, detergents, snake oil, and secondary info is mostly dictated by what supplies are available to add to gasoline, and what type of marketing spin they want to put on a product to differentiate.

You are not guaranteed the same kind of gas, even if you use the same gas station all the time. The distributor can (and often will) change supplier based on what makes sense to them money and supply-wise.

-alex

[fumanchu1]

I agree it is secondary for all the additives vs octane levels but what i dont agree with is you state things with nothing to back up you statement and you try to then discredit a astm on which your quote states it has based their requirements on to qualify what is top tier fuel. Thats where my issues with your statements lie

Sent from my SGH-M919V using Tapatalk

[Tcoat]

and in a departure from my norm...

[extrashaky]

I think he's screaming at his phone now. He probably punched himself in the head a few times also.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

I think he's screaming at his phone now. He probably punched himself in the head a few times also.

Well the last one did sort of drop into a level near incoherence.

[fumanchu1]

Yeah sorry last one was on the phone while waiting for lunch so it probably is incoherent and no shaky not angry at all. Calm, cool and collected i dont get angry in debates just invested and tend to go on until i lose motivation which this burger did very well.

Guess we will nust agree to disagree on a point that is lets be honest not very important at most. I did enjoy that debate though and we managed to keep it civil and most importantly it passed the time lol

Sent from my SGH-M919V using Tapatalk

[chaoskaze]

Guys I get soft watching guys debating about words. 😂 gonna balance things out a bit with my kind of jet fuel.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by chaoskaze

Guys I get soft watching guys debating about words. 😂 gonna balance things out a bit with my kind of jet fuel. Attachment 122286

Different "bating" there Chaos!