Soltron Fuel Consumption Test

gandy

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 Aug 2004
Messages
3,404
Location
Aberdeenshire (quite far from the Solent)
Visit site
Hi,

Just for fun I have been trying to see whether Soltron makes a difference to fuel consumption. Our boat's fuel useage is too low and difficult to measure, so the test vehicle is my Freelander - common rail Diesel, five years old and generally in good order.

I used Soltron in six fills, over 2,838 miles, and compared this with the previous seven non-Soltron fills totalling 2,667 miles.

Pre-Soltron - min 37.8, max 43.4, overall 40.4 mpg
Soltron - min 39.5, max 42.9, overall 41.4 mpg

Although there appears to be an overall difference of 2.5%, there is a lot of variation between samples. Without doing any statistics I'd say the difference was not significant. I conclude that my test doesn't prove improved fuel consumption, but the sample is not large enough to disprove it either.

Trials ceased because I need to keep the Soltron for the boat, and its unobtainable locally. Otherwise I might have continued for say six months to see if I get a more significant result.
 
Interesting and to be honest agrees with Industry for all additives.

The only time really you would get an improvement in consumption is with an engine that is gummed / clogged up etc. that needs additive to assist in cleaning it out. Other would be to improve the burn capability / energy output of the fuel - in this case Specific Energy and Cetane ... which virtually no biocide / bug additive does.

So we are back to improved cleanliness of engine only ... which I would say in the case of your Freelander is probably reasonably clear of crud etc.

People mock the small bottles of cleaner you can buy over the Halfords / Gas Station counter - but used at intervals can in fact keep injectors etc. reasonably clean ... but will not clean clogged / dirty - that needs serious stuff not available to joe public.

The claims made by various additives are questionable outside of the main purpose of the additive ... difficult to prove, difficult to disprove ...

Mmmmmmmm /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
 
Not the Ol\' Slick 50 ?????

Now they reckoned they had driven a car round a Nascar track with it .... had a bench run engine for so many hours etc. etc.

Funny how it sort of disappeared ...........

All it was really was a derivation of Teflon and a few odds and ends thrown in ..... as I heard !!
 
[ QUOTE ]
The only time really you would get an improvement in consumption is with an engine that is gummed / clogged up etc. that needs additive to assist in cleaning it out. Other would be to improve the burn capability / energy output of the fuel - in this case Specific Energy and Cetane ... which virtually no biocide / bug additive does.

[/ QUOTE ]Indeed, how would it materially increase the specific energy of the fuel? Any benefit (if any) must be due to improved running/economy of the engine.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The only time really you would get an improvement in consumption is with an engine that is gummed / clogged up etc. that needs additive to assist in cleaning it out. Other would be to improve the burn capability / energy output of the fuel - in this case Specific Energy and Cetane ... which virtually no biocide / bug additive does.



[/ QUOTE ]

It would be more interesting to try a comparison with bio diesel. It runs cleaner, cleans out the fuel system. Seems to last longer in my fishing vessel but hard to test the "milage". /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif
 
Biodiesel .....

Greenergy are one of the biggest suppliers of BioD in UK ....

Often it is ( and I don't mean to say Greenergy do this ...) blended into or with Hydrocarbon stock.

BioD uses various harvest products ... rape-seed oil is one ... and has to have various "solvent" additives added to break down the chains ... and also create a level of energy output. The Germans since during WW2 have been very active with BioD / fuels ....

As to whether it is better than HC based ? I don't think is really relevant as its not in sufficient quantity or at price levels to oust HC based Diesel ...
 
My old Daihatsu Diesel used to run noticeably smoother and quieter if I used an additive (Redex, if I remember right). I assumed that this additive changed the characteristics of the fuel in some way, surface tension or something, because the change was immediate. It reverted fairly soon after I stopped using the treatment, which also suggests that it hadn't carried out any actual cleaning of the fuel system or engine. Something similar used to happen each year at MOT when the garage would bung a bottle of (expensive) "fuel conditioner" to make the car pass the smoke test.

I haven't tried Biodiesel yet .. that's next on my list as there's a local small-scale producer. I don't know if I'd dare use it on the boat (although I'd love to). There are stories of the Biodiesel dissolving crud which had been sitting happily in the system, not soluble in normal Diesel - resulting in a series of blocked filters.

Similar used to happen when switching old engines onto unleaded, or travelling to a country where there was more ethanol in petrol.
 
Don't know about biodiesel cleaning engines out! Over here in Europe, major manufacturers quote the percentage of biodiesel tha tthey will allow to be used and still honour the warranty. All manufacturers are obliged to allow up to 5% biodiesel to be used but after that, they vary a fair bit. Most wil lallow up to 20% or 30% but for the most recent "Euro-IV" diesel engines, major manufacturers are starting to REDUCE the percentage of Biodiesel that people are allowed to use. That makes me think it might not be that good for very modern systems.

Also, on the Slik 50, theme, when it was popular over here, we tried the same test WITHOUT adding the Slick 50. Still managed to drive a scrap car for 20 miles or so before it siezed!
 
Top