Article today
www.pocket-lint.co.uk
"Superfuels "don't equal super savings"
Paying more at the pumps may not improve economy, tests prove
NEWS: 29 September 2007 8:00 GMT by Jonathan Goddard
Drivers who fill their cars with expensive "superfuels" and expect to see big economy gains should think again, according to a report by What Car? magazine.
Real-world tests were carried out for What Car? by the AA?s former senior research engineer, Peter de Nayer. In these tests, high-octane premium fuels including BP Ultimate, Shell V-Power, Esso Supreme and Total Excellium performed little or no better than their cheaper equivalents, in spite of costing around 7% more per litre.
?Our tests show that premium fuels are an unnecessary expense with no major fuel economy benefit?, said What Car? editor Steve Fowler.
?The verdict is still out on whether superfuels prolong engine life, as fuel manufacturers claim. Nonetheless, even using the fuel companies? own figures, you?re unlikely to travel 7% further on a tank of fuel for a 7% increase in your fuel bill.?
The top-performing fuel in What Car??s tests was Sainsbury?s 97-octane fuel, which delivered 0.5mpg more than its 95-octane fuel in real terms that means just 6 miles more per tank.
?Unless the prices of these superfuels come down, there are far easier and cheaper ways of reducing your fuel consumption and your car?s emissions?, added Fowler. ?By changing your driving style, anticipating the road ahead and sticking to the speed limit, you can make fuel savings for free.?
Edited by Pugugly on 26/09/2008 at 18:32
|
|
"Sainsbury?s 97-octane fuel" - there is no such thing technically and it will be something else, region to region.
|
They can do, as I said in another thread yesterday I reckon my TDCi Mondeo is slightly more economical on Shell V-Power, it costs about 7% more which equates to about a 3 mpg benefit to pay for itself and I dont think it quite achives that though I also think it runs a little more crisply and V-Power should lube the pump etc better.
However my old V6 Vectra was much more economical on the old Shell Optimax to the extent that it made it cheaper to run.
|
|
|
|
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7635303.stm
|
"For many cars it is a waste of money paying over the odds for so-called 'super fuels'," said Richard Headland, editor of Which? Car magazine.
Hm - he didn't say "for most"...
Edited by FotheringtonThomas on 25/09/2008 at 14:49
|
|
|
|
Drivers who fill their cars with expensive "superfuels" and expect to see big economy gains should think again according to a report by What Car? magazine.
I'm not sure why they'd expect any such thing. These fuels are just higher-octane, with some extra additives against wear, & cleaners, aren't they?
|
Although production petrol engines are smart enough these days to run on different grades of fuel, certain high-output engines run better, and put out considerably more power, if fed the high-octane brew.
A friend has an old Mk I or II Golf GTI that always pinks when run on ordinaire, but a lot less on super. After a good Italian tune-up it probably wouldn't pink at all on super, but in its normal life these days it never exceeds 2,500 rpm or 55mph, poor little thing.
|
I am sure that a TV Programme (5th Gear?) did some tests which showed that these fuels did give a performance increase in high powered cars, I think they used an EVO or an Imrezza. Not much effect in anything run of the mill.
|
|
The report also says that if you intend keeping a car for a long time it could be worthwhile using super fuels as it will provide smoother running and a little extra power. It also says the detergents will keep the engine cleaner.
|
|
|
|
|
My car's handbook says "Higher octane unleaded fuels may be used but offer no significant advantage." so I stick to the recommended 95 octane.
|
|
Where I live the difference between 98 and 95 used to be about 60p a tank or something ridiculous so I always used 98 and it always felt better for it. Now there is a much larger differential, I stick with 95. It's hard to be objective really, occasionally after I tank up the car seems to shoot off with the slightest touch of the gas and I'll say to my wife "wow that's good petrol" but it's probably only my perception.
|
|
|
|
It depends on the car. Japanese turbo'd cars benefit from higher octane fuel. My old skyline definitely prefers Vpower over any other fuel.
|
Yes; 98RON+ is essential for my Mazda 3 MPS, and it gets nothing but V-Power under normal circumstances. The loss of boost on the one occasion I was forced to use some 95 to get me home was a matter of obvious fact, not perception.
It's difficult to argue with the gist of this report for non-performance car owners though. If I owned a boggo petrol, I'd still try to be choosy about which brand of 95RON I used, but certainly wouldn't entertain higher octane fuels, even for long-term running. I believe premium fuels probably are worthwhile for non-performance modern turbodiesels, however.
|
>>It depends on the car. Japanese turbo'd cars benefit from higher octane fuel. My old skyline definitely prefers Vpower over any other fuel.
Not only do they "benefit," many "must have" a higher spec fuel as their diet and in Japan they are set up to run on 102 octane and they have to be remapped to use 98RON over here and feeding them 95 has an adverse effect on their performance. All the quality specialist importers of JDM (Japanese Domestic Market) cars include a remap for UK fuel to deal with this.
|
|
The Which? report was based on a very small sample of vehicles and isn't worth the paper it's written on.
|
I have always held Which? Motoring Reports in very low regard and shall file this report in the same manner.
My Merc C320 CDI gives better economy using Shell V-Power compared to standard diesel.
|
|
|
|
Not only do they "benefit " many "must have" a higher spec fuel as their diet
And it's not just the performance cars -- remember the Mitsu Carisma GDI engine?
I've noticed that most Japanese engines (in Japanese built cars) seem to prefer the higher octane fuel. Nothing tangible, just a sense of less noise/more power.
|
|
Yes, my Accord always seemed happier on the posh Shell stuff.
|
We used a small amount of petrol to get the Sunday bonfire going at the back of the garage, which tells you I'm going back a few years.
One day I decided to hang the expense and use five star.
It didn't quite explode, but it made a noticeable 'woomph!' noise and warmed my eyebrows.
Three star would just flare and not produce half as much heat.
There's clearly a lot more stored power in higher octane fuel.
Not sure what else the story proves, apart from the stupidity of playing with fire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
