Jump to content

Fuel supplier for Randalls/Albertsons/Tom Thumb grocery stores in Texas??

camjr
 Share

Recommended Posts

camjr Enthusiast

camjr

Posted
Posted

I've not been able to find anything online despite multiple searches and phrasing. Does the group know who supplies diesel to this grocery chain in Texas (specifically, the DFW area)? I know that the chain has an agreement with Chevron/Texaco for rewards points to be used for discounts at their stations, but don't know if the agreement is reciprocated in terms of supplying the grocery store fuel stations. I'm interested because I can typically save $1 per gallon on diesel by fueling there due to the amount I spend in groceries.

I found an old post from nearly 10 years ago that it may have been Citgo back then, and others that it may be "local suppliers", but nothing in the last 5-10 years. Does anyone have any insight??

camjr Enthusiast

camjr

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Your not going to like the answer: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/diesel-fuel/where-our-diesel-comes-from.php

 

Where our diesel comes from - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

 

I figured it was a bid process for generic suppliers.  Traffic is high enough at this station with lots of diesel pickups in this part of North Texas, so I'll keep using it along with fill-ups at QT and other high-volume pumps.  The truck seems like both well enough, and diesel for $1.90/gal after my grocery shopping discount at the Tom Thumb station is not bad at all...

Edited by camjr
  • Like 1
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted

Back in the day Chevron filled tanks at Chevron stations. Gulf at Gulf etc. It got complicated and expensive. Common carriers, bulk transfers supply what they call the "Rack" now and final additive packages are filled on request. Thing is diesel and gasoline are federally and chemically defined. The difference between one and two is the add package. Everybody these days eats from the same trough. 

 

Yes there are exceptions. Pipelines and bulk storage tank fields still don't have 100% coverage and there are some small markets that are still supplied by a local refiner. Some so small no one hears of them Caribou Refining in Utah comes to mind. Hudson Oil in Kansas back in the day was a one trick pony. Sinclair in Wyoming. Most have heard of that one.

 

By the mid 70's you could see a Sinclair tanker filling tanks at Hudson, then down the street to Phillips 66 and finishing the wagon at an AMOCO. 

 

I worked at the Chevron in El Paso for some years and the only way I was sure I was getting Chevron gas was to fill at the refinery pump (employees only) 😉  

  • Like 1
RCF71 Enthusiast

RCF71

Posted
Posted

Grumpy summed it up pretty well.

 

I’ll add that branded gasoline additives make more difference than diesel additives in my opinion.  Diesel is more important to buy from high volume stations.  

  • Like 2
Transient Senior Enthusiast

Transient

Posted
Posted

Who supplies the Navy Exchange gas stations?  Even with my Albertson's/Von's fuel savings at a Chevron out going with the cheaper fuel at Arco/AmPm the Navy Exchange is still cheaper.  With a 6.2, $4.11/gallon is an easier pill to swallow versus $4.65-$0.20.

RCF71 Enthusiast

RCF71

Posted
Posted

I don’t know for a fact, but, unless they advertise “Top Tier” gasoline like Costco does, it’s most likely the lowest bidder for their supply contract.  That would likely also mean it has a minimum spec additives package.  Chevron used to have the best additives package (Techron), and may still I just haven’t researched it lately.  Not that a min spec additives package isn‘t ok, but top tier packages will keep things cleaner longer.  The gasoline portion less additives is all the same.
 

My background - former gasoline blender, optimization analyst, and trader.  So I have a substantial amount of experience with gasoline/diesel/jet fuel (production, distribution, markets, etc).

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, RCF71 said:

My background - former gasoline blender, optimization analyst, and trader.  So I have a substantial amount of experience with gasoline/diesel/jet fuel (production, distribution, markets, etc).

 

I worked upstream from you making the components you blended for decades and close the end working in R & D taking the field to the lab. Soooo....you're the bean counter that :crackup:(Kidding) There's another guy on here that is further up the pipe yet. Working the platforms in the Gulf. 

 

PEA...the active ingredient in Techron is still quite effective if used in large enough doses. (Former Chevron) I worked a tank field long enough to know to buy high volume stations then dose your own anyway. (gasoline not diesel) Never worked that side of the yard. 😉 Just refined the raw components. 

 

 

RCF71 Enthusiast

RCF71

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

I worked upstream from you making the components you blended for decades and close the end working in R & D taking the field to the lab. Soooo....you're the bean counter that :crackup:(Kidding) 

 

No, I’m the guy figuring out how to squeeze every penny out a barrel of oil, not a bean counter.

  • Like 1
Transient Senior Enthusiast

Transient

Posted
Posted

I have a question I've been pondering for awhile, but thought I'd ask it here.  With the new engine being DI, where the fuel always into the cylinder after the valve, as opposed to previous designs where the fuel sprayed before the valve, does Top Tier fuel really need to be used?  The whole selling point on TV to the vegetal public was that the additives kept the valves clean.  It's that even relevant now with direct injection engines?

RCF71 Enthusiast

RCF71

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Transient said:

I have a question I've been pondering for awhile, but thought I'd ask it here.  With the new engine being DI, where the fuel always into the cylinder after the valve, as opposed to previous designs where the fuel sprayed before the valve, does Top Tier fuel really need to be used?  The whole selling point on TV to the vegetal public was that the additives kept the valves clean.  It's that even relevant now with direct injection engines?


Yes, still makes a difference on fuel injectors, and indirectly on valves.  Poor spray pattern  affects combustion, and poor combustion causes more carbon buildup, etc.

 

Years ago (actually while I was in my Nomex coming from work as gasoline blender) I stopped in the GMC/Pontiac dealer to pickup my wife’s Grand Prix.  I had dropped it off to get the fuel injectors cleaned.  Service manager saw my company name on my Nomex and asked me if I would explain Gasoline (similar questions as here, whose gasoline is better, ...).  Told him yes, if he would show me how they clean fuel injectors.  Long story short, they had a small container they would pour about a quart of TECHRON in, then pressurize it with air, connect to fuel rail, pull fuel pump fuse, then start the car and let it run til empty on straight TECHRON.  Thought that was a pretty good testament to TECHRON’s effectiveness on keeping fuel injectors clean.  Since then, have mainly used top tier gasolines and have not had any more fuel injectors fouling issues.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Transient Senior Enthusiast

Transient

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, RCF71 said:


Yes, still makes a difference on fuel injectors, and indirectly on valves.  Poor spray pattern  affects combustion, and poor combustion causes more carbon buildup, etc.

 

Years ago (actually while I was in my Nomex coming from work as gasoline blender) I stopped in the GMC/Pontiac dealer to pickup my wife’s Grand Prix.  I had dropped it off to get the fuel injectors cleaned.  Service manager saw my company name on my Nomex and asked me if I would explain Gasoline (similar questions as here, whose gasoline is better, ...).  Told him yes, if he would show me how they clean fuel injectors.  Long story short, they had a small container they would pour about a quart of TECHRON in, then pressurize it with air, connect to fuel rail, pull fuel pump fuse, then start the car and let it run til empty on straight TECHRON.  Thought that was a pretty good testament to TECHRON’s effectiveness on keeping fuel injectors clean.  Since then, have mainly used top tier gasolines and have not had any more fuel injectors fouling issues.

Ok.  Thanks. 

  • 2 weeks later...
walkyle New Member

walkyle

Posted
Posted (edited)

I can just review seeing conveyance trucks with conventional names in favor of them topping off the tanks for these stores. That doesn't mean it isn't Chevron fuel however. Presumably your smartest choice is to get the Albertson Employee or other while he's filling the tanks and ask him.

Edited by walkyle
KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

I usually use Kroger’s fuel locally. We have a Kroger card. My wife’s car usually gets filled up after church at sams she has a card. Most of my vehicles are over 10 years old but one our trip car. Lately our local HEB has been cheaper my 20 year old Chevy truck gets fueled up there. I've never add any other additives, never had. Never had a problem. On trips I use truck stops, usually name brands. My wife’s car has only left town 3 times for trips. It’s an 11 Genesis. So far I’ve turned down 3 injection cleaning request. I don’t fall for gimmicks. I guess I’m lucky.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...