petrol in todays daily star
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (11)
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,613
Likes: 9
From: Browsing through a copy of Razzle
petrol in todays daily star
anyone read todays star about petrol, apparently after many-a-test they have found that the so called high 'Ron' fuel (v power being one of them) are no different to standard 95 'Ron' unleaded
As above I reckon, complete crap. I heard they tested it on run of the mill family cars and I would probably agree with what was said. But when you use it in a car like a Subaru it bound to be different. I put 95 ron in the car once and it ran like a bag of sh1te, then put V-Power in it and the difference was huge. Power and smoothness. Not sure about MPG though.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
5th gear tested v power and BP ultimate against supermarket fuel
V power / bp ultimate didnt make much difference to the cars they tested, unless the car was a performance car, and the scooby got an extra 10 bhp from v power, a little less from BP Ultimate
V power / bp ultimate didnt make much difference to the cars they tested, unless the car was a performance car, and the scooby got an extra 10 bhp from v power, a little less from BP Ultimate
Trending Topics
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
have a read of this
Page 1 features - Fifth Gear
and watch this
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=smLkmCRl6n0
Page 1 features - Fifth Gear
and watch this
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=smLkmCRl6n0
hope this is true as i've got about 3 yrs of v power fuel receipts, i'll be off to court with shell and start using 95 ron fuel too
we're in the money, we're in the money............................................. .................................................. ...................
Aaron
we're in the money, we're in the money............................................. .................................................. ...................
Aaron
I believe it was the findings of a Which magazine test. They took what appeared to be bog ordinary cars such as Focus 1.6 and VW Golf TSi 1.4 and found little point in using "superfuels" What a completely pointless exercise? Anyone owning those cars is about as likely to use Vpower or any other SUL as I am of using NUL! Drivers of those cars are interested in economy and are not about to pay an extra 7p a litre just for the sake of it - I certainly wouldn't!
JohnD
JohnD
Scooby Regular
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,483
Likes: 0
From: On the Cat and Fiddle
Scooby Regular
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Unless your car requires the extra octane rating of super-unleaded to prevent knock, det, pre-ignition or whatever else you want to call it then spending your hard-earned on super is a complete waste of money.
More miles to the gallon? Take some lead out of your right shoe and that might happen.
Smoother to drive? Get a Bentley if that floats your boat.
Crisper throttle response? You'll convince yourself of anything if you want it bad enough.
Kevin
More miles to the gallon? Take some lead out of your right shoe and that might happen.
Smoother to drive? Get a Bentley if that floats your boat.
Crisper throttle response? You'll convince yourself of anything if you want it bad enough.
Kevin
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
From: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
What's a shame is that they don't take the opportunity to explain what the octane rating of a fuel actually means, and why it doesn't make any difference in an ordinary engine. My guess is that they simply don't know this themselves - so what chance do the poor readers have?
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
From: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Sorry, I got distracted by the **** on the weblink....what were we talking about again? 
Typical case of a headline not representing the real conclusion. The sentiment that many cars won't benefit significantly from using Vpower etc, which is what the article is actually saying, is true. Most people in the UK drive Focuses etc... It's very different from saying "they are a waste of money" per se which is what the headline says, as clearly, for performance cars with active ignition control, that is simply not the case.
Typical case of a headline not representing the real conclusion. The sentiment that many cars won't benefit significantly from using Vpower etc, which is what the article is actually saying, is true. Most people in the UK drive Focuses etc... It's very different from saying "they are a waste of money" per se which is what the headline says, as clearly, for performance cars with active ignition control, that is simply not the case.
You need to bear in mind that these tests were conducted by the same type of people that voted the Fiat Multipla as car of the year 
and were written for people with as much passion for cars as for their microwaves and washing machines
and were written for people with as much passion for cars as for their microwaves and washing machines
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (20)
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,150
Likes: 0
From: 8.95 @ 168mph. Zero to 1KM 194.1mph
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
I'm too tight to use v power- its as simple as that. cost of fuel is terrible- let alone paying even more for it.
and I find realistically - where the chuffing heck am I ever going to use all that power in my normal wrx anyway in day to day driving ??
maybe if my car was a track toy- you could justify it- but can't see where else.
and I find realistically - where the chuffing heck am I ever going to use all that power in my normal wrx anyway in day to day driving ??
maybe if my car was a track toy- you could justify it- but can't see where else.
AFAIK
The main function of a higher RON petrol is that it has a greater knock resistance?
Hence the reason why we use V-Power etc in our cars.
The bhp/performance/economy reasons are marketing ploys given by the petrol companies in order to sell more. Therefore I would not be surprised if there was no bhp difference between fuels on lower power cars.
IIRC - Shell V-Power all comes from one refinery (Sanford) and is transported all over the UK. All other petrols and SULs (including Tesco 99 etc) are from the nearest refinery (ie you could be buying BP Ultimate, but it came from the Esso refinery) as the petrol companies have agreements to supply each other with petrol. The only difference being additives that are put in each tanker.
Read into that as you wish, but I read it that V-Power is the only SUL with any consistency.
The main function of a higher RON petrol is that it has a greater knock resistance?
Hence the reason why we use V-Power etc in our cars.
The bhp/performance/economy reasons are marketing ploys given by the petrol companies in order to sell more. Therefore I would not be surprised if there was no bhp difference between fuels on lower power cars.
IIRC - Shell V-Power all comes from one refinery (Sanford) and is transported all over the UK. All other petrols and SULs (including Tesco 99 etc) are from the nearest refinery (ie you could be buying BP Ultimate, but it came from the Esso refinery) as the petrol companies have agreements to supply each other with petrol. The only difference being additives that are put in each tanker.
Read into that as you wish, but I read it that V-Power is the only SUL with any consistency.
Last edited by rossi_p; Sep 26, 2008 at 02:40 PM.
Two things - if fuel costs are an issue then a subaru probably isn't for you. There are much cheaper, better specced cars out there if you don't want to use the power.
As to getting more power from a standard engine this is why Shell do their V-Power days to encourage people to "feel the difference". The majority of owners it will make no difference to but there will be the odd one who convince themselves that it has changed the car and given them more go and as a result will by V-Power at 7p a litre more. If they didn't, Shell wouldn't do it.
5t.
As to getting more power from a standard engine this is why Shell do their V-Power days to encourage people to "feel the difference". The majority of owners it will make no difference to but there will be the odd one who convince themselves that it has changed the car and given them more go and as a result will by V-Power at 7p a litre more. If they didn't, Shell wouldn't do it.
5t.
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
From: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
I'm not sure how it is like in UK - but actually "standard" Vpower is 95RON. The better one - 99+ RON is usually called VPower Racing or VPower 99+.
Maybe that's the point... and maybe they simply compared normal VPower with standard unleaded - and then it would make sense - I wouldn't expect any real difference. It's mostly like some cleaning additives etc.
It's the VPower Racing (or 99+) which we really need... and with this one I would expect much difference, if the car know what to do with higher octane rated petrol
Maybe that's the point... and maybe they simply compared normal VPower with standard unleaded - and then it would make sense - I wouldn't expect any real difference. It's mostly like some cleaning additives etc.
It's the VPower Racing (or 99+) which we really need... and with this one I would expect much difference, if the car know what to do with higher octane rated petrol
Sticker on the inside of my 1995 WRX petrol flap - Use 100 RON fuel only - 99 seems close enough. I've heard that 95 RON in a JDM is bad news, massive power drop as the knock sensor retards the timing (never done it myself - maybe its just hearsay??) Not willing to risk it though.