I run a tankful of V-Power through the Fiesta every 3 or 4 fills for the cleaning properties as much as any performance benefit, although we do notice another 3 mpg or so, and slightly perkier performance. Evo magazine did borescope examinations on some of their long termers on what was then Optimax on a before and after basis, and the difference was remarkable.
I use it in the bike because it keeps better than standard Unleaded, even though with "fixed" ignition timing the bike can't take advantage of its extra octane rating. The inside of my carbs looked mint when I saw them last year though. Float bowls and needle jet were like new. I put it down to Optimax.
Cheers
DP
|
Used to buy Shell Optimax most of the time.
V-Power (its replacement) is 9p / litre more expensive.
I now buy Tesco 99 ron - 5p/6p more than the standard unleaded.
MoT day tomorrow - let's hope that my faith in Tesco 99 RON has worked and it passes the emissions tests - with nearly 86,000 mls on the clock £2-£3 / week extra makes sense if you avoid the need for refurbs of engine parts. Cra runs better or at least I feel it does.
|
When I had my Volvo T4 I was advised by a Volvo tech to use SUL, as he claimed the Volvo ECU was very quick at adapting to high octane fuel and could gain up to 10bhp from its use.
The owner's manual also had a wishy-washy statement along the lines of "95 octane minimum, there may be a performance benefit from using higher-octane unleaded fuels"
It always FELT quicker using SUL but extensive testing against the stopwatch showed no repeatable difference in in-gear acceleration times.
|
|
|
|
The inside of my carbs looked mint
An interesting observation. I've owned my Hornet 600 since new in September 1998 and have covered about 2k miles pa since. Some years are much more than this (including this year, with a holiday to the South of France to come) but others are less. Either way, the bike spends all winter sat idle every year, hooked up to Optimate, tyres over pressure, resting under dust cover, and with fuel chemistry ageing.
Initially the carbs needed cleaning and balancing every couple of years to keep them in perfect fettle; without this attention, and using branded, detergent inclusive, 97 RON fuel, the 5000RPM EU drive by noise "hole" in the power curve would eventually become a gaping chasm and the mid range noticeably flatter. Since switching to Optimax when it was released, and now V-Power, the carbs have not needed touching once. They are clean, the mid range pulls hard, and the first run after winter when the tank is full of "old" fuel is just like any other. It may be coincidence, and other fuel across the market may now contain better detergent than when the bike was new, but what I write is fact none the less.
|
|
I use V-power and used Optimax before hand. Partly for the cleaning qualities and partly for the extra Shell points. I thought on a 4-cyl Merc I had it made the car smoother, as well, but on the 6-cyl Volvo, Forester Turbo and now Outback, the difference is negligable in terms of driving.
|
I use V power in both cars - mainly for the cleaning agent and increased mpg that I also get.
It does feel a little perkier as well as someone said above.
|
|
|
|
I use it in my Octavia 2.0TFSi - Skoda say use 98 RON and a VW specialist I know is fairly adamant that the VW 2 litre petrol turbo works best or gives best performance on Shell V-Power (99.1 RON apparently) so that's what I use or Tesco 99 on occasion. I haven't run it on 95 RON fuel but owners of the same car on other web sites who have done, claim a noticeable drop in performance and smoothness. EVO did a test last year involving rolling road tests and draining and refilling tanks using higher octane fuel. Optimax (now V-Power ) produced useful power gains (more than BP Ultimate) across a range of performance cars and negligible or zero in other more "standard" cars.
|
|
Oh - and I won't use BP because the price difference is too large and becuase I have heard things about it that make it clog your engine up.
|
|
|
|
|
I run a tankful of V-Power through the Fiesta every 3 or 4 fills for the cleaning properties as much as any performance benefit, although we do notice another 3 mpg or so, and slightly perkier performance. Evo magazine did borescope examinations on some of their long termers on what was then Optimax on a before and after basis, and the difference was remarkable.
The car they tested was a Japanese performance turbocharged car - these benefit from Optimax because they are initially designed for 100RON fuel in Japan.
Your Fiesta, however, is not. Stop wasting your money.
|
|
|
|
|
