8 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHFuel Additive
Leading reported evidence
Recommend brand - like many general service centres might
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Its their recommended brand - like many general service centres might use forte products i.e.
Leading evidence: 'Recommend brand - like many general service centres might' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Recommend brand - like many general service centres might' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Looks like you are right Jon - seems only recommended for China, so probably not available over here.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Its their recommended brand - like many general service centres might use forte products i.e.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
8 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
911uk: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T205155Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Hi all. Just got my first 911 02 plate seen some product called keropur fuel additive on net,Does anyone use this? Should I use it? Where do you buy. It and how much does it cost plese!
Hope its not to much info to ask in one go but any feedback would be appreciated.
don't hold much with fuel additives, with 99 octane fuel now at shell stations, that's all you need really; it already has similar detergent additives.
If you want the kapour additive its should be available through all porsche service centres. Its their recommended brand - like many general service centres might use forte products i.e. flush/fuel system cleaner at a major service
http://www.porsche.com/china/en/accessoriesandservice/porscheservice/fueladditive/
now bear in mind that is from porsche china website; may not be the same story in the UK: we are blessed with very high quality fuels here and so may not be deemed necessary in the UK.
give your local porsche service centre a call, they will probably sell you a bottle of the stuff:
mercedes use it too, merc product number is: A 000 989 25 45 12:
I wonder if its the same price???? (again thats from US not UK, so could be different story)
I remember reading a long (and at times quite boring) article in one of the respected mags where they tested lots of fuel additives against plain UK pump fuel and saw no significant gain in performance, economy or protection from any of them. They did not test this particular brand though..
Geniune imitation !!
You don't sell moody DVD's down at Upton Park on a Saturday afternoon do you?
"Three for a tenner"
"He's selling three for a tenner"
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
