Consumer Gullibility
-
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 13310
- Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:47
Re: Consumer Gullibility
A little off topic: While my car runs on the regular 87 gas as specified in the manual, I use Shell premium in all of my small engines -- garden tractor, chainsaw, brush cutter, snowblower etc. A few years ago I took a small engine repair course at a technical community college. The instructor told us that if we use stabilized Shell 91 -- the only gas in our area without ethanol* -- we should never have trouble with a clogged carburetor.He also recommended adding Seafoam which combines stabilizer with a cleaner. Ever since I've started using Shell 91 + Seafoam I've had no problems and all machines started right up after sitting idle for months. The extra cost of the 91 is very minor compared to the cost of service and repair. I took that course after having to pay $150 for pickup and repair when my snowblower wouldn't start at the beginning of winter. The carb jets were clogged. Canadian Tire puts Seafoam on sale about every 3 months.
* Small engine carbs hate ethanol which gums up the jets.
* Small engine carbs hate ethanol which gums up the jets.
Re: Consumer Gullibility
More OT - an interesting paper from 1935, about engines and fuels, not motoring, linked in today's email from The Engineer (UK):
https://s3-eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/c ... r-1935.pdfSir Harry Ricardo was an important figure in the development of internal combustion engines, and he shared his memories of the early years of motoring in The Engineer
Peter
Patrick Hutber: Improvement means deterioration
Patrick Hutber: Improvement means deterioration
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 225
- Joined: 26 Nov 2014 14:55
Re: Consumer Gullibility
Had a dealership try to add roadside assistance in some sort of package for sale. I pointed out roadside assistance is part of the warranty. Same dealership tried to mark a cost for anti theft serial# etching. Responded I didn't want it and wont pay for it. When we completed the sale I noticed the laser etching was on the car parts as I suspected from the manufacturer.
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 225
- Joined: 26 Nov 2014 14:55
Re: Consumer Gullibility
brucecohen wrote:A little off topic: While my car runs on the regular 87 gas as specified in the manual, I use Shell premium in all of my small engines -- garden tractor, chainsaw, brush cutter, snowblower etc. A few years ago I took a small engine repair course at a technical community college. The instructor told us that if we use stabilized Shell 91 -- the only gas in our area without ethanol* -- we should never have trouble with a clogged carburetor.He also recommended adding Seafoam which combines stabilizer with a cleaner. Ever since I've started using Shell 91 + Seafoam I've had no problems and all machines started right up after sitting idle for months. The extra cost of the 91 is very minor compared to the cost of service and repair. I took that course after having to pay $150 for pickup and repair when my snowblower wouldn't start at the beginning of winter. The carb jets were clogged. Canadian Tire puts Seafoam on sale about every 3 months.
* Small engine carbs hate ethanol which gums up the jets.
Would any premium gas work or only Shell?
-
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 13310
- Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:47
Re: Consumer Gullibility
In my region Shell 91 is the only gas with no ethanol. Gas in your area might be different; look on the gas station pump for a sticker that shows the ethanol level for each octane available.8Toretirement wrote: Would any premium gas work or only Shell?
When a small engine sits idle for a while ethanol can gum up the carburetor jets and prevent it from starting. As I learned the hard way with my snowblower, that can occur even if you've run the engine dry for storage. The mechanic told me the carb jets are very narrow and all it takes is a drop or two of gas for ethanol to clog them.
I just googled for an article about the best gas for small engines. All the articles I saw -- including one by Briggs & Stratton -- said that octane doesn't matter* but ethanol does. My course instructor, who repairs small engines for a living, prefers 91 octane, especially for 2-cycle engines. That works well for me because some of my tools require 91 while specs for others say 87 is good enough. Running everything on 91 means I don't need separate fuel cans and my experience over the past 4 years supports the instructor's advice to use 91 + Seafoam. BTW, I just looked up when I took that course and what it cost. The $348 fee has been an excellent investment. Payback occurred in year-1 as I did the routine servicing for my tractor and snowblower myself. Since then, in addition to routine servicing, I've been able to fix quite a few problems. I suggest that anyone with a lot of small engines see if there's a local technical college or vocational high school that offers a night course in small engine repair. Even if you don't like to get your hands dirty, you'll learn enough about preventive maintenance to more than cover the cost.
* For clarity, octane above 91 does matter. Several articles and chat groups indicated you can run into problems if you run 93 or more in a small engine rated for 87 or 91. I've never noticed anything more than 91 being sold in my region, at least at regular stations.
BTW, according to my instructor and several internet chat groups, you can help an aging car pass Ontario's emissions test by using Seafoam for a week or so before the test.
Re: Consumer Gullibility
Growing corn to make ethanol to put in gasoline to f up small engines had to be one of the dumber things we do at the insistence of government.
My last fill of the boat tank was ethanol contaminated because the 91 also could contain ethanol at that particular station. I guess I'll get some clean 91 and run the engine on the stand 15 minutes before putting it away for the season.
My last fill of the boat tank was ethanol contaminated because the 91 also could contain ethanol at that particular station. I guess I'll get some clean 91 and run the engine on the stand 15 minutes before putting it away for the season.
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 19
- Joined: 27 Oct 2016 12:59
Re: Consumer Gullibility
I'm glad I could contribute on a topic I actually know something about on my first post! Been lurking for a while and enjoying the forum on the financial threads too.
You could not be more correct on this small engine issue. Big impact on my ATVs, lawn tractor and other gear. Startron is also an excellent extremely well regarded additive that solves (addresses) the problem. Very effective in my personal experience and many swear by it.
You could not be more correct on this small engine issue. Big impact on my ATVs, lawn tractor and other gear. Startron is also an excellent extremely well regarded additive that solves (addresses) the problem. Very effective in my personal experience and many swear by it.
-
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 13310
- Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:47
Re: Consumer Gullibility
Not sure that this is the right thread, but here goes.
Be very careful about dealing with Consumer Reports. In September I went to their website and purchased ONE MONTH of access for US$6.95. There was no indication on the site that this would become an automatic monthly renewal. The email confirmation I received correctly stated that my "start date" was Sep 13 and my "end date" was Oct 13. A cryptic line at the bottom -- which I did not notice -- said:
Subscription type:
ConsumerReports.org monthly
(Confirmation of authorized renewal at then current rate)
Today I noticed that my credit card has been billed twice. When I phoned I was told that my confirmation email said there would be auto-renewal and that they send a notification email before each monthly charge. I've just searched my email server and no such email was received. The CR rep said all she could do was cancel my order immediately. She said the second charge would not be reversed.
Bottom line:
1) CR is just as sleazy as any other publication or gym club
2) If you want to check their ratings, go to your local library for the hard copy magazine. If you must use their online access, call a few days before your "end date" to cancel the service. The customer service line is 1-800-333-0663.
Be very careful about dealing with Consumer Reports. In September I went to their website and purchased ONE MONTH of access for US$6.95. There was no indication on the site that this would become an automatic monthly renewal. The email confirmation I received correctly stated that my "start date" was Sep 13 and my "end date" was Oct 13. A cryptic line at the bottom -- which I did not notice -- said:
Subscription type:
ConsumerReports.org monthly
(Confirmation of authorized renewal at then current rate)
Today I noticed that my credit card has been billed twice. When I phoned I was told that my confirmation email said there would be auto-renewal and that they send a notification email before each monthly charge. I've just searched my email server and no such email was received. The CR rep said all she could do was cancel my order immediately. She said the second charge would not be reversed.
Bottom line:
1) CR is just as sleazy as any other publication or gym club
2) If you want to check their ratings, go to your local library for the hard copy magazine. If you must use their online access, call a few days before your "end date" to cancel the service. The customer service line is 1-800-333-0663.
Re: Consumer Gullibility
The Toronto library also offers online access to CR's website for free. I don't know how many other libraries offer this, but it is great.
-
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 1224
- Joined: 23 Feb 2005 10:04
Re: Consumer Gullibility
Regarding winter storage of engines- I put fuel stabilizer in all the tanks, 2 and 4 cycle -every fall, have never had an issuestarting up in the spring. A tank full of fuel gets no condensation.
suzy
Re: Consumer Gullibility
Others, like Hamilton, offer the online version of the hard copy CR magazine through their "Zinio" online magazine reading app. Including back issues.Spudd wrote:The Toronto library also offers online access to CR's website for free. I don't know how many other libraries offer this, but it is great.
- Shakespeare
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 23396
- Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:25
- Location: Calgary, AB
Re: Consumer Gullibility
I recently decided to replace my 10 yo receiver to update the video switching and processing capabilities, taking advantage of the Black Friday sales.
A long long time ago, in the time of stereo, amplifier power ratings were severely inflated. So the FTC mandated power ratings as RMS, not peak, with both channels driven, and with the THD levels stated.
I was disappointed to learn that the so-called "power ratings" of video receivers are nonsense. Typically, the company takes the maximum power with one channel driven at high distortion and multiplies it by the number of channels. The result is both pointless and useless, and is of little or no aid in determining amplifier quality.
[Of course, high power is really only needed for low frequency effects, and is often provided by a powered subwoofer in a dedicated system.]
In the end, I simply could not compare power ratings that were determined in so many different ways. So I chose a new Denon over a similar Sony the old fashioned way: by hefting it. The Denon was more solidly built, so I bought it. It also has an FTC power rating.
[Interestingly enough, it also determined that one of my rear speakers was phased incorrectly. This means that this $450 receiver was quite capable of not only performing a fast Fourier transform of a time signal detected by a microphone to get the room frequency response but of correctly determining phase relationships and distances to the speakers. This was advanced acoustics in the 1970's and the time of Floyd Toole of NRC and his speaker tests - which, incidently, gave rise to several Canadian speaker manufacturers.]
And, yes, I'm quite pleased with it. (The replaced receiver, now in the basement, was also a Denon.)
A long long time ago, in the time of stereo, amplifier power ratings were severely inflated. So the FTC mandated power ratings as RMS, not peak, with both channels driven, and with the THD levels stated.
I was disappointed to learn that the so-called "power ratings" of video receivers are nonsense. Typically, the company takes the maximum power with one channel driven at high distortion and multiplies it by the number of channels. The result is both pointless and useless, and is of little or no aid in determining amplifier quality.
[Of course, high power is really only needed for low frequency effects, and is often provided by a powered subwoofer in a dedicated system.]
In the end, I simply could not compare power ratings that were determined in so many different ways. So I chose a new Denon over a similar Sony the old fashioned way: by hefting it. The Denon was more solidly built, so I bought it. It also has an FTC power rating.
[Interestingly enough, it also determined that one of my rear speakers was phased incorrectly. This means that this $450 receiver was quite capable of not only performing a fast Fourier transform of a time signal detected by a microphone to get the room frequency response but of correctly determining phase relationships and distances to the speakers. This was advanced acoustics in the 1970's and the time of Floyd Toole of NRC and his speaker tests - which, incidently, gave rise to several Canadian speaker manufacturers.]
And, yes, I'm quite pleased with it. (The replaced receiver, now in the basement, was also a Denon.)
Sic transit gloria mundi. Tuesday is usually worse. - Robert A. Heinlein, Starman Jones
Re: Consumer Gullibility
My new Yamaha receiver came with a little microphone too. Same thing: put the mike in the middle of the room and it tunes the speakers for you automatically.
I think you mentioned that you have a Harmony remote. I am really annoyed. I went to the myharmonyremote website to change the programming on the remote and found that they have "upgraded" the software. The website no longer works; you have to download software. It took me a while to get the software working. The site remembered me and what equipment I had, but forgot my activities. What a PITA! This "improved" software still does not allow you to reorder activities so you can put the most common ones at the top of the display. I won't buy another Harmony remote.
I think you mentioned that you have a Harmony remote. I am really annoyed. I went to the myharmonyremote website to change the programming on the remote and found that they have "upgraded" the software. The website no longer works; you have to download software. It took me a while to get the software working. The site remembered me and what equipment I had, but forgot my activities. What a PITA! This "improved" software still does not allow you to reorder activities so you can put the most common ones at the top of the display. I won't buy another Harmony remote.
- Shakespeare
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 23396
- Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:25
- Location: Calgary, AB
Re: Consumer Gullibility
My main Harmony is very old (Harmony 880) and has always needed downloaded software. I added the new receiver, changed all the activities to use it, and deleted the old one. But the switching is now greatly simplified, since (almost) all connections are digital (mainly HDMI). (My old Philips DVD player is used in analog mode to pass closed captions.)
Sic transit gloria mundi. Tuesday is usually worse. - Robert A. Heinlein, Starman Jones