5 ms·

It impresses me that even with all this mixing from various sources at various stages, the quality of the final output is consistently maintained. How is a 'tr

It impresses me that even with all this mixing from various sources at various stages, the quality of the final output is consistently maintained. How is a 'tragedy of the commons' situation prevented, where a supplier might be inventivised to skimp 'just a little' on quality, figuring it will average out downstream? Kind of how clipping and sweating would gradually debase physical coins. Is there actually a fair bit of variance that is adjusted for in your vehicle?

andromeduck 4y ago
Modern cars have variable valve timin, yeah, but it's more that there's a small number of big players, and strict standards based on an easily measurable metrics and a product that already relirs on a lot of processing/gradii/mixing to produce.
teruakohatu 4y ago
At some, or multiple points, each source is being monitored before it mixes with other sources. It would be a huge scandal if someone was mixing in adulterated gas. A couple of weeks ago a number of motorists in New Zealand filling up at a particular gas station has water pumped in with the gasoline, causing engine problems. I did wonder at the time what could possibly have caused that! https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2023/01/auckland-motorists-cars-break-down-after-filling-up-fuel-with-water-at-caltex-station.html https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2023/01/auckland-...
- mschuster91 4y ago
  > A couple of weeks ago a number of motorists in New Zealand filling up at a particular gas station has water pumped in with the gasoline, causing engine problems. I did wonder at the time what could possibly have caused that! If I were to guess, someone didn't take care in getting the water pumped out after cleaning a tank.
fuzzfactor 4y ago
>skimp 'just a little' on quality This already happened across-the-board for all companies. That's how we migrated from 95 and 100 octane ratings, and ratcheted down to 87 and 93. People gradually adjusted to the lower quality until the cars could go no further, and here we are. Actually, just the opposite happened one day about 20 years ago. There was an oil company that did something nobody had thought of in years, they actually made the gasoline better for a while. With promotional advertising they were legitimately claiming you would feel the difference after a tankful or two. The secret was they were simply supplying more than the minimum 87 & 93 octane ratings. They really pulled a fast one there. For a while. Turns out that actually making the product better can even be accomplished in a deceptive way after all. They're gone now, assimilated by a larger company that would never think of such a thing.
- mschuster91 4y ago
  > That's how we migrated from 95 and 100 octane ratings, and ratcheted down to 87 and 93. People gradually adjusted to the lower quality until the cars could go no further, and here we are. Crazy. Here in Europe, gas stations have generic 95 and 98 (plus some still carry E5 95 for older cars that don't handle 10% ethanol without issues), premium shit for people with supercars (e.g. Shell V Power, 100 octane) and diesel. Can't remember the last time I saw anything less than 95.
  - dagw 4y ago
    Worth noting that the US[1] and Europe don't measure "octane" the same way, so they're not directly comparable. The US way of measuring typically results in a number 4-6 'octanes' lower than an equivalent European fuel. So 87 Octane fuel in the US would probably be rated 91-92 in Europe and 93 Octane fuel could be as high as 98-99 Octane under the European system. [1] and Canada and Mexico
    - fuzzfactor 4y ago
      Here's an overview of the standard laboratory antiknock test engine: https://cfrengines.com/about/ https://cfrengines.com/about/ What they don't say is that different oil companies started operating the engines in different ways to begin with, and it took many years before standardization was possible at ASTM. And ASTM was much more North-America focused than ASTM International is today. By that time there were two main methods of conducting the test in the USA, known as the "Research" method and the "Motor" method. These are different ways of operating the same test engine. These antiknock numbers could be quite a bit different from each other, and different oil companies and automotive companies had developed their preferences. In Europe they had basically started out using the Research method alone and stuck with it for commerce. This value is normally consistently higher than the Motor method. Full standardization in the USA was a bureaucratic compromise so it ended up (R+M)/2, so if anyone was to do any whining it would be equal whining for all. Vendors didn't complain, you need two of the reference engines anyway so you can run both methods at the same time: https://event.corelab.com/uploads/F1F2%20Product%20Brochure%20GEA%2030653.pdf https://event.corelab.com/uploads/F1F2%20Product%20Brochure%...

andromeduck 4y ago

Modern cars have variable valve timin, yeah, but it's more that there's a small number of big players, and strict standards based on an easily measurable metrics and a product that already relirs on a lot of processing/gradii/mixing to produce.

teruakohatu 4y ago

At some, or multiple points, each source is being monitored before it mixes with other sources. It would be a huge scandal if someone was mixing in adulterated gas. A couple of weeks ago a number of motorists in New Zealand filling up at a particular gas station has water pumped in with the gasoline, causing engine problems. I did wonder at the time what could possibly have caused that! https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2023/01/auckland-motorists-cars-break-down-after-filling-up-fuel-with-water-at-caltex-station.html https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2023/01/auckland-...

mschuster91 4y ago
> A couple of weeks ago a number of motorists in New Zealand filling up at a particular gas station has water pumped in with the gasoline, causing engine problems. I did wonder at the time what could possibly have caused that! If I were to guess, someone didn't take care in getting the water pumped out after cleaning a tank.

fuzzfactor 4y ago

>skimp 'just a little' on quality This already happened across-the-board for all companies. That's how we migrated from 95 and 100 octane ratings, and ratcheted down to 87 and 93. People gradually adjusted to the lower quality until the cars could go no further, and here we are. Actually, just the opposite happened one day about 20 years ago. There was an oil company that did something nobody had thought of in years, they actually made the gasoline better for a while. With promotional advertising they were legitimately claiming you would feel the difference after a tankful or two. The secret was they were simply supplying more than the minimum 87 & 93 octane ratings. They really pulled a fast one there. For a while. Turns out that actually making the product better can even be accomplished in a deceptive way after all. They're gone now, assimilated by a larger company that would never think of such a thing.

mschuster91 4y ago
> That's how we migrated from 95 and 100 octane ratings, and ratcheted down to 87 and 93. People gradually adjusted to the lower quality until the cars could go no further, and here we are. Crazy. Here in Europe, gas stations have generic 95 and 98 (plus some still carry E5 95 for older cars that don't handle 10% ethanol without issues), premium shit for people with supercars (e.g. Shell V Power, 100 octane) and diesel. Can't remember the last time I saw anything less than 95.
- dagw 4y ago
  Worth noting that the US[1] and Europe don't measure "octane" the same way, so they're not directly comparable. The US way of measuring typically results in a number 4-6 'octanes' lower than an equivalent European fuel. So 87 Octane fuel in the US would probably be rated 91-92 in Europe and 93 Octane fuel could be as high as 98-99 Octane under the European system. [1] and Canada and Mexico
  - fuzzfactor 4y ago
    Here's an overview of the standard laboratory antiknock test engine: https://cfrengines.com/about/ https://cfrengines.com/about/ What they don't say is that different oil companies started operating the engines in different ways to begin with, and it took many years before standardization was possible at ASTM. And ASTM was much more North-America focused than ASTM International is today. By that time there were two main methods of conducting the test in the USA, known as the "Research" method and the "Motor" method. These are different ways of operating the same test engine. These antiknock numbers could be quite a bit different from each other, and different oil companies and automotive companies had developed their preferences. In Europe they had basically started out using the Research method alone and stuck with it for commerce. This value is normally consistently higher than the Motor method. Full standardization in the USA was a bureaucratic compromise so it ended up (R+M)/2, so if anyone was to do any whining it would be equal whining for all. Vendors didn't complain, you need two of the reference engines anyway so you can run both methods at the same time: https://event.corelab.com/uploads/F1F2%20Product%20Brochure%20GEA%2030653.pdf https://event.corelab.com/uploads/F1F2%20Product%20Brochure%...