Shell V-Power - does it make a difference to your BMW?

ScoobyDoo69 · 14 Jan 2008 at 00:52

I would imagine that it wouldn't be noticed by many people on many cars (unless tuned in some way) - but as I mentioned before, you don't notice a performance benefit from good oil, but you should use it because you know that it's better for the engine in more ways than you'd actually notice ?

Freefaller · 14 Jan 2008 at 09:13

I'd use 97+ RON on a turbo/supercharged car, on a big N/A I wouldn't bother, but that's just me.

alexs · 14 Jan 2008 at 09:55

[TW]Fox;10885254 said:
I use 97 becuase.. I dont even know why. It certainly makes no difference I've noticed over 95

Out of interest, does your car's handbook recommend 97/98 RON for your M54 engine?

mrk · 14 Jan 2008 at 10:11

Around 20miles extra per tank for me and that's even a 4cylinder. Though given the extra cost of vpower there seems little point apart from the different smell at the pumps

The handbook mentions 97 on mine.

Is it healthier for the engine then to run vpower ?

ScoobyDoo69 · 14 Jan 2008 at 10:34

mrk said:
Is it healthier for the engine then to run vpower ?

If you believe what they say about it like I do, then I would say so, yes.

therealnerd2 · 14 Jan 2008 at 10:44

alexs said:
Out of interest, does your car's handbook recommend 97/98 RON for your M54 engine?

I'm pretty sure most car manuals over 1.6l 'recommend' 97+

Dead and Gone · 14 Jan 2008 at 10:59

I used to have a 04 530D and when I put the good diesel stuff in I did notice a difference in both performance and MPG used to get a couple of MPG more than normal. Now I have a E46 M3 and normally run it on 97 ron or up I get about 24 - 25 mpg average. I did put 95 Ron in the M3 once and it didn't feel as responsive but could have just been me as I was expecting it lol....

ScoobyDoo69 · 14 Jan 2008 at 11:11

I'd say the M3 always needs Super UL?

prayman · 14 Jan 2008 at 11:24

ScoobyDoo69 said:
I'd say the M3 always needs Super UL?

Wouldn't have thought so. My Z4M seems slightly better (performance & mpg wise) on Super, but will run just fine on normal. So at least an E46 M3 should be the same, and probably the E92...

[TW]Fox · 14 Jan 2008 at 12:17

alexs said:
Out of interest, does your car's handbook recommend 97/98 RON for your M54 engine?

Yes - it specifies 98 RON.

Which is interesting as IIRC in 2002 you couldnt buy 98 RON in the UK?

rickchild · 14 Jan 2008 at 13:24

98 made a massive difference on my TT for the kick and 8-10% better mpg, but nothing noticeable on my 330 over 95.

BlizzardX · 14 Jan 2008 at 13:32

Although not a BMW I think it still kinda counts... I run my Audi A4 2.0T on V-power. Yes, I do get some extra mpg but ultimately it feels more responsive. I don't have to press the pedal as much to accelerate. Perhaps its psychological but I really don't think it is. My engine is 'required' to run on 98 RON but will run on 95 RON.

Jez · 14 Jan 2008 at 13:34

[TW]Fox;10886917 said:
Yes - it specifies 98 RON.

Which is interesting as IIRC in 2002 you couldnt buy 98 RON in the UK?

Shell Optimax was available in 2002, but it could just be them not translating it properly from ther german manual or something, you'd have thought they would have simply written super unleaded.

OllyM · 14 Jan 2008 at 13:39

*shrug*

Scania · 14 Jan 2008 at 13:54

I used to put 95 or 97 into my M52 engined 728i, it went well and fuel consumption was reasonable - ish.

I asked at BMW service and was told that what grade the petrol was was not as important as the source of the petrol in the majority of BMW petrol engines.

In other words don't use supermarket fuels as they often are a lower grade to Shell for example.

How true that is though is open to debate I suppose.

iBot · 14 Jan 2008 at 14:01

Petrol is rubbish in this country anyway, It doesnt matter what grade you use.

OllyM · 14 Jan 2008 at 14:04

iBot said:
Petrol is rubbish in this country anyway, It doesnt matter what grade you use.

More enlightened rubbish from you I see :rolleyes:

Jez · 14 Jan 2008 at 14:08

iBot said:
Petrol is rubbish in this country anyway, It doesnt matter what grade you use.

I have yet to see a post from you which has been anything more than complete trolling.

The petrol here is very high quality and heavily regulated, it is in theory the same wherever you buy it other than small engine aditives as it is all distributed using the same Uk wide network of terminals and tanks and all conforms to the same industry standards.

Scuzi · 14 Jan 2008 at 14:11

iBot said:
Petrol is rubbish in this country anyway, It doesnt matter what grade you use.

Care to elaborate? If you are going to post crap like that with the intent of trolling I'd advise you not to bother. Stop it now.

Final warning.

Scania · 14 Jan 2008 at 14:15

iBot said:
Petrol is rubbish in this country anyway, It doesn't matter what grade you use.

Petrol in the UK is considerably better in quality to that found in Spain for example, I know - my sister runs a Spanish registered car which she's learned the hard way to always fill with Shell,rather than at "El Gringo's" garage down the road from her apartment!

Back on topic....

One fact is beyond dispute – Supermarkets and the main oil companies get their fuel from the same refineries.

Now if the ‘magic’ ingredients that, say, Esso for example, added gave better MPG than Supermarket petrol do you not feel they would get it verified by an independent body(AA/RAC motoring magazines, [TW]Fox

etc) and you would never stop hearing about it in the media?

An objective test would very easy – get some identical cars put in different makes of fuel and drive them in convoy swapping drivers every so often.

Also if the ‘magic’ ingredient had any proved advantages do you not feel that the rival suppliers would have the fuel analyzed and that ingredient added to their fuel?

There is absolutely no proof that brand X gives better MPG than brand Y and the oil companies are very careful not to claim so – lest they contravene advertising regulations. If anybody could prove me wrong, I'm happy to be preached to!