Another "What Fuel" Thread

[mast3r]

Hey Chaps!

I have been running my new ST-3 on 95 but i have this gut feeling i should be providing her with a better quality of drink.
"Should" i be running on 97+ (super unleaded?)

Thanks

 

[Gornall]

Hey Chaps!

I have been running my new ST-3 on 95 but i have this gut feeling i should be providing her with a better quality of drink.
"Should" i be running on 97+ (super unleaded?)

Thanks

RON does not equal quality unfortunately.

 

[[TW]Fox]

You may as well use super yes. It's not much more expensive.

 

[Gornall]

You may as well use super yes. It's not much more expensive.

Unless an engine "needs" it for the compression and what not, is there any advantage?

I assume the V-Power, Ultimate and what not are the better quality fuels but might aswell is not a good enough reason to use them IMO. The branded ones are quite a hike in price over the regular fuels.

Whats the advantage?

 

[TheDean]

The branded ones are quite a hike in price over the regular fuels.

Whats the advantage?

I'd be interested in this too...

 

[Janesy B]

What does the handbook say?

 

[Dogbreath]

I strongly suspect an ST would benefit from super unleaded, but the handbook will tell you for sure.

 

[Matt82]

thorney motorsport gained eleventy billion extra percent mpg when using tesco gold plated indulgence fuel

 

[stoofa]

Just check to see if your car has mappings for both 95RON & 98RON.
Vast majority of cars on the road don't and really you won't gain anything from using the higher RON fuel.
If you car has got the mappings (and I would expect an ST-3 to have) then you should see a slight increase in performance and fuel economy with 97RON+ fuels.

That has certainly been my experience with the Octy vRS.
I usually use 99RON and my fuel economy and general performance "feels"better than when I used to fill up with 95RON all the time.

 

[Nomisf]

If the ECU is smart enough you may find Higher Octane fuel allows it to run a more aggressive boost/timing map, may gain a little power.

Edit: Beaten from above =[

 

[Steedie]

My engine probably doesn't need it like some cars, but I still use BP Ultimate because it makes a hell of a difference to the noise at idle. It sounds like a stereotypical diesel on Tesco or other diesel, V-Power and BP Ultimate seem to make it feel and sound a lot more smooth

 

[[TW]Fox]

Unless an engine "needs" it for the compression and what not, is there any advantage?

My handbook tells me that to acheive the manufacturers quoted fuel economy and performance figures, I should use 97 ron fuel or above. I see no reason not to.

My engine probably doesn't need it like some cars,

You drive a diesel and this thread is about higher octane unleaded fuel?

 

[Steedie]

Very observant of you Fox, as always. They also do fancy diesels too. And while that isn't what the OP will be using, I was clearly pointing out that although my car might not need the "good stuff", I still use it for other benefits.

So like his car might not need it (although I'm sure it will), considering the tiny price difference, it's worth using it for the number of other benefits

 

[MikeHiow]

The ST will benefit from SUL. Standard you'll see a small increase in power (Ford actually say they tested NUL at 215 and SUL (BP) at 235 giving the book figure an average of 225.) - greater protection for your engine as well as a small increase in fuel economy.

I wouldn't run my ST on anything but SUL, long term.

 

[MrMoonX]

it is better on super but it takes a tank or so to learn the new fuel and you get more responsive throttle and a small increase in economy, I do it every now and again on my ST but not all the time

 

[mast3r]

thanks to all, i will now run her on the good stuff, SUL it is.

 

[BigglesPiP]

Unless an engine "needs" it for the compression and what not, is there any advantage?

You'd only ever need it for spark advance, but a modern car is either somewhat retarded or has a knock sensor to allow them to run on 95 or even less.

Whats the advantage?

Handbook might say use 97, which you'll need to get the rated specs, 95 won't do any real harm.

The advantages will be more power and efficiency (barely) and a cleaner fuel system, which gives you more power and efficiency (barely).

 

[Gornall]

You'd only ever need it for spark advance, but a modern car is either somewhat retarded or has a knock sensor to allow them to run on 95 or even less.



Handbook might say use 97, which you'll need to get the rated specs, 95 won't do any real harm.

The advantages will be more power and efficiency (barely) and a cleaner fuel system, which gives you more power and efficiency (barely).

All of this is irrelevant if your car is not designed to run on it though correct?

E.g. I have a MK4 Golf GTI. On the fuel cap it says 95RON. There would be no advantage to me running the super stuff as far as I'm aware as my engine simply wouldn't take advantage of it.

Is this assumption correct?

As far as I knew, the RON rating is literally the amount of compression it would take to make it go bang (very basic terms of course) and the real benefit is the additives in the fuel to make a better quality fuel not just a higher RON rating.

As has been said, higher RON doesn't mean better fuel. But is there any real advantage of these fuels like V-Power etc if your car is a 95 RON car.

 

[mast3r]

On my Fuel door it says 95RON BP Fuel preferred.
I fill at Tesco on their 95RON, thoughts please.

 

[Gornall]

On my Fuel door it says 95RON BP Fuel preferred.
I fill at Tesco on their 95RON, thoughts please.

If your running on what it says there won't be a problem.

I'm curious if using the branded fuels is worth it. e.g. Instead of Asda bare basic unleaded. What about the Shell unleaded? Is it better? Is it just gimmick?