Super Unleaded - i cant see the point - who runs it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jez
  • Start date Start date
R420LA6X2/4MNA said:
The point is contamination happens across the range from time to time, its pretty unavoidable in such a mass volume production sector.

I think it was more an oppertunity to bash the supermarkets rather than anything that out of the ordinary.

In typical UK media style, I'd lay money that the numbers involved was massively over exagerated - it all helps in a good story, never mind the truth..... (Again, word of said tanker drivers) - We do a lot of chatting at truck stops & the like! :o:D
Click to expand...

nah ive heard of stories like this elsewhere

one of the blokes on scoobynet claimed he worked for the petrol industry. He didnt go into details, but he went on about how he sampled and alalyzed petrol and had some suprmarket stuff on his desk at work and you could see the sand deposites floaring around in it

he didnt give details, and being an internet forum just put it down to somebody making stuff up to suit their argument

and then years later, that story cropped up. And im sure simon has got some similar oppinions as well, and he works in the oil industry.
 
Last edited:
danza said:
I used to use 99 in my CTR, but wasn't particularly surprised to find it was no different when using 95, and the fuel economy stayed just as shockingly bad and didn't get worse.
Click to expand...

Not a surprise with Tesco 99, I would expect Vpower 99 to show better fuel economy. I definately get better economy on higher octane fuels
 
Sorry, I havent read all this thread, here are some 'scientific' numbers from Which magazine for a the VW twincharger engine;

1.4 TSi
Shell V-Power Unleaded 99 Ron
33.6 mpg
99.6 Ron
198.5 g/km
151.9 bhp
5.3% power increase

Shell Unleaded 95 Ron
32.9 mpg
95.7 Ron
201.6 g/km
144.2 bhp
n/a power increase
 
MrLOL said:
nah ive heard of stories like this elsewhere

one of the blokes on scooby claimed he worked for the petrol industry. He didnt go into details, but he went ou about how he sampled and alalyzed petrol and had some suprmarket stuff on his desk at work and you could see the sand deposites floaring around in it

he didnt give details, and being an internet forum just put it down to somebody making stuff up to suit their argument

and then that story cropped up. And im sure simon has got some similar oppinions as well, and he works in the oil industry.
Click to expand...

We actually did the investigation (people where I work not actually me) into what was the cause of failed lambda sensors.

It was traced to the benzene that was used by the fuel manufacturer to Morrisons. It was 'second hand' as the chemical had already been used for a industrial flushing/washing process. This is where it picked up the high levels silicon contaminant which caused issues with the lambda sensors once it made its way into a fuel.

Guess that is what happens when you buy cheap ingredients to try and sell cheap, loss leading fuel.

There is no reason for it having sand in it though. :p
 
Right, first tank of BP Ultimate after using BP 95 results:

At the time, 95 RON was 107.9 and Ultimate was 110.9.

Normally I get bang on 200 miles per tank on my daily driving, has bee nthe same for 2 years of owning the car. Out of the 39 litres of fuel (from full to red light) I did 245 miles.

That's a 45 mile increase and my driving (VTEC most of the time) hasn't changed at all. That's a change from 23mpg to 28mpg. Quite impressive tbh.

Other notes is the car seems much smoother and quieter which gives you a little confidence boost and makes crawling at traffic lights a bit easier too.

I'm going to do the same test with the SAAB. I put half a tank in last fill up and it will get a full tank this time around and I'll see how that fares with it being a turbo car and all.

I'm quite happy with the difference and the price paid at the time was only £1 odd more than 95 RON. This time around it's costing me £4 odd extra over the same amount of fuel which isn't that much more to pay for 45 extra miles. If I toned down the right foot I could probably go for 260 or more, but that defeats the purpose of the car ;)
 
Modern cars take about 200 miles worth of v power etc... tilll the ecu learns u have better fuel and maps for it. So doing once a month is a bit pointless. I run V powe run V power in my 273bhp TT, just because its a weekend toy and it doesnt cost me much in fuel doing 4k a year in her, I only get 18mpg tho!
 
I agree with BigglesPiP on the gains; I recently put in 100ron fuel at the Nurburgring and there was a noticeable torque increase around 2000rpm-4500rpm.

Would anyone care to work out how much more you would pay per month by using 99ron over standard tesco 95ron. I use on average £200 a month on normal fuel.

Much appreciated
 
seems my car is getting better with Ultimate, onto the second full tank of it and mpg has pipped up to 34mpg, even though I was ragging it late to work this morning.

A lot of people may say its a load of rubbish, but this is coming from 27.9mpg for over a year, now I change fuel I'm getting 33mpg+?
 
At the prices around here, it would cost me £96 for a full tank of Ultimate :p ...still, I am going to put the Jag on it for a while and see if it makes any differance.
 
I was looking back at last years MOT when I was running super, compared to this year running normal. Emmissions have gone up, when I get home I will post the results.
 
That could be other things though and car age / wear related, more oil being burnt than last year, cat not doing as good a job, sensors letting it run slightly rich.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom