"P J" <pj@pjama.invalid> wrote in message
news:gphamr$c5l$1@news.motzarella.org...
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>> I can't speak for the nitrogenized gasoline, but I started using Shell
>> several years ago, based on their cleaning claims. I discovered that
>> whatever it was, Shell gas was cheaper to run than other fuels.
>>
>> I started with a few tanks of their Ultra, with extra cleaners, to get
>> things clean (this was a 94 Lexus with 130K miles on it). Then I
>> switched to their 87 octane, and ran nothing but that. I was getting
>> better mileage than I did on other fuels, and even accounting for the
>> fact that the Shell was a bit more expensive to buy, it was cheaper to
>> run.
>
> Hm, interesting. And I thought Chevron was the way to go.
>
>> go figure. I think their claims are legit--but they were so even before
>> claiming this "nitrogenized" fuel.
>
> I hope it's not a kind of gimmick like those claims about magnets around
> fuel lines. ;-)
> I noticed though that Shell also uses up to 10% ethanol in its gas which
> is said to reduce fuel efficiency, so it's even more puzzling how they can
> achieve better overall milage than other main brands.
> pj

Pretty much all gas in the Houston area seems to be 10% ethanol.