Superfuels

[G.O'Rilla]

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

[Ste]

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...

[simac]

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 !

[David_SRi_2.2DTi]

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...

[wardy]

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.

[Duncan]

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.

[Ste]

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.

[vcdti]

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

[Duncan]

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).

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.

[MysteryElite]

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.