User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: Superfuels

  1. #1
    Regular Member G.O'Rilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    On the road
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default Superfuels

    aka BP V-Power, Shell Excellium, Total Ultimate.......or something like that, anyway.

    Not very scientific, given the claimed reproducibility, but pretty much what a lot of people have found.

    An interesting read, anyway.

    http://www.whatcar.co.uk/news-specia...aspx?NA=228253

  2. #2
    Regular Member Ste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    ..... Driving the Jaguar XF
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Jaguar XF 3.0D V6

    Trim : Black

    Engine : 3.0D V6

    Year : 0000

    Default

    I would say it is very scientific what has been done and how it has been measured.

    So basically says what I've always said about these fuels, and I've been asking for independant testing to prove the fuel company's claims for ages.....

    Now we have it, and it shows that these fuels do not cut it in real life.

    As most of the cost of the fuel at the forecourt is tax, if the petrol company can get 9p more out of you without paying any more in tax, and to get that extra 9p costs them maybe 1p, then they have made 8p more per litre. Not daft are they??

    The reproducibility of 1% is about 10 times what the difference in extra mileage claimed by the fuel copmany's - - so is perfectly adequate for the tests.

    1% of tank mileage is about 3-4 miles? So if company claiming 28 more miles per tank, then the +- 0.5% reproducibility is more than good enough to show the difference what the fuel makes. Incidentally, the difference the fuels makes on these tests fall within the 'noise' of the tests. Showing that the fuel makes no determinable difference.


    I'll stick with Asda standard fuel I think. . . .


    Edit, thinking about this. A reproducibility of 1% is very, very good indeed.

    In our engine emissions test cells we consider +/- 3% to be good, where they have +/- 0.5% = = impressive...
    Last edited by Ste; 2nd October 2007 at 15:50.

  3. #3
    Regular Member simac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Wirral
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    This stuff makes no difference to my car anyway LOL the last time I used V power it wouldn't do more than 27 MPG on a long run when I normally get 38/40 on the same trip with normal U/L fuel !

  4. #4
    Regular Member David_SRi_2.2DTi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Leeds
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    I've tried Shell Diesel Extra, V-Power Diesel and BP Ultimate Diesel.

    When using V-Power Diesel I'm sure the engine sounded like it didn't really like it, I've not noticed any considerable difference with BP Ultimate Diesel (except the price, the fuel was 1.03 per litre!) so I think I'll stick with Shell Diesel Extra...

  5. #5
    Regular Member wardy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Chichester
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    I've tried V-power.............no difference from cheapy asda/tesco fuel IMHO. Certainly no extra mileage, and I couldn't tell if there was any difference in running.

  6. #6
    [Ex]Admin Duncan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    East Sussex
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Not very scientific at all. How did they ensure there was no contamination from other fuels? How did they ensure that only one type of fuel was being delivered to the engine, as opposed to the test fuel with bits of the other fuels (both normal and super) being in the system?

    Anyway, this paragraph for me was the clincher anyway.....

    So, if you do 12,000 miles a year, you'll spend £1226 on regular fuel at the current national average of 96p a litre.

    If you use a premium fuel, which costs an average 103p a litre, your annual fuel bill will be £1309 - a difference of £83.


    I do about 20,000 so call it an extra £140 a year for me on using SUL over normal UL. If the engine is being cleaned better/coked up less with the SUL fuel then that's worth it IMO. But more importantly, with the state of tune my car is in BSR say that I need to use 97/98 RO to get the benefits of it, and not cause any problems - so for the extra £140 a year it's a no-brainer.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Ste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    ..... Driving the Jaguar XF
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Jaguar XF 3.0D V6

    Trim : Black

    Engine : 3.0D V6

    Year : 0000

    Default

    D, you are right. It is a no brainer, and I'd rather buy 100 pints of beer from my 'saving' from 25,000 ++ miles a year and use Asda brand.

    Clearly the tests would have been done using only the fuel as stated with no contamination etc, I think that goes almost without saying.

  8. #8
    Regular Member vcdti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Herts
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David_SRi_2.2DTi View Post
    When using V-Power Diesel I'm sure the engine sounded like it didn't really like it
    Funny you should say that, im sure mine sounded more like a diesel (rattle)with V Power, back to BP and it sounds better

  9. #9
    [Ex]Admin Duncan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    East Sussex
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ste View Post
    D, you are right. It is a no brainer, and I'd rather buy 100 pints of beer from my 'saving' from 25,000 ++ miles a year and use Asda brand.
    lol - I knew you'd say something like that. When I was running the car in standard form i.e. standard 2.0T it was Asda's best 95 RON. With the Stage 1 it was mostly 97 with some 95 as it wasn't so crucial - but with Stage 3 and the state of tune the engine is in, it's not just recommended but is advised by BSR to use 97/98 to both get the performance and avoid issues like detonation/knocking.

    They quoted that they did 'performance' tests on a standard Golf GTi - they were hardly performance tests. Standard engine, which is not in a particularly high state of tune, and some through the gear tests

    I agree that in an average car in standard tune you're unlikely to see any real benefit from using a super fuel in terms of performance. As for the mileage/mpg side of it, I think that can vary with the car. I've seen quite significant differences in mileage to a tank from using different fuels - as it happens Shell Optimax was one of the worst!, along with a supermarket 95 RON (this was when running Stage 1).
    Quote Originally Posted by Ste View Post
    Clearly the tests would have been done using only the fuel as stated with no contamination etc, I think that goes almost without saying.
    I'd hope so - would have been handy though if they'd stated it and how they ensured it.

  10. #10
    Regular Member MysteryElite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North Somerset
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    I expect petrol turbo engines will be where you would see the most benefit. Some turbo cars specify "super unleaded" (or at least did, an example was a c. 1997 Volvo S40 T4 that my brother had for a while).

    I expect thats partly why D and other 2.0T drivers would see most benefit - and the tests noticably lacked a petrol turbo.

    Personally I'll stick with standard in my 3.2, as it gives me a good combination of performance and economy for my driving.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Visitors found this page by searching for:

Nobody landed on this page from a search engine, yet!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •