Asda vs Shell V-Power Nitro+

IIRC your Polo was exactly the same as mine. We share last place on the Motors power to weight leaderboard... :D

Do you recall any difference? Most I have done before is 20 litres of BP Ultimate (98) which I think went in on top of about 5 litres of regular unleaded.
 
Last edited:
I run mine on Shell VPower and it runs so much smoother than on Sainsbury's/Morrisons petrol.

I filled it with Sainsbury's a while back and it just took so long to pick up, it bogged down when pulling away and it just generally felt ill. Filled it with VPower and the difference is incredible. No increase in power or mpg, it just felt smoother and quieter.
 
Filled the Slowlo up with V Power and the guy in front of me who was filling up an RX7 with V Power was looking around as he did so, and commented on the fact I was using V Power and asked what engine it had in it. I had to tell him it was a 55PS 1.2 and that I was doing it to test the difference in fuel economy. He just said "Ahh okay".

YOU SAID THIS WOULDN'T HAPPEN! I TRUSTED YOU! :(
 
I wanted more than anything, in that moment, to say something like "it has a 2.8 V6 out of a 4MOTION" or "It has a 3.2 V6 out of a Golf R32, or even "it has a 2.3 V5" or maybe even at a stretch "a 1.8T" (all of these blocks will fit without physical modification to the massively oversized engine bay)

BUT NO, IT HAS A 1.2, AND A PERSON ASKED!!!
 
Last edited:
Haha that is very true, but you can hardly compare a 1.3 Wankel/Renesis to a 1.2 3cyl. :p

Incidentally, insurance companies seem to double the displacement of these engines. They consider a 1.3 Renesis powered RX8 to be a 2.6 :p
 
Acme said:
I wanted more than anything, in that moment, to say something like "it has a 2.8 V6 out of a 4MOTION" or "It has a 3.2 V6 out of a Golf R32, or even "it has a 2.3 V5" or maybe even at a stretch "a 1.8T" (all of these blocks will fit without physical modification to the massively oversized engine bay)

BUT NO, IT HAS A 1.2, AND A PERSON ASKED!!!
Click to expand...

Almost as good as when i was filling up my N/A supra and some guys said and asked "I love these, this the twin turbo?"

"no it's the n/a"

"ahh okay"

*cries deeply*
 
Acme said:
Haha that is very true, but you can hardly compare a 1.3 Wankel/Renesis to a 1.2 3cyl. :p

Incidentally, insurance companies seem to double the displacement of these engines. They consider a 1.3 Renesis powered RX8 to be a 2.6 :p
Click to expand...

this is because a rotary has 3 chambers when 2 out of 3 are filled capcity is 2.6.

Someone with more rotary knowledge can give a better explanation.
 
yeah I've noticed that when I had a browse about some rx-8s on AT :p

and you totally could have said you have the audi 4.2 v8 lump in there ;) (if you've seen the vw lupo conversion some people have done :eek: madness!! :D )
 
Sasso said:
yeah I've noticed that when I had a browse about some rx-8s on AT :p

and you totally could have said you have the audi 4.2 v8 lump in there ;) (if you've seen the vw lupo conversion some people have done :eek: madness!! :D )
Click to expand...

Haha :p

I could have, but it would have been a little unbelievable as my car no longer looks like in my sig, and it is jacked up on 165's wrapped around steels. Plus I would have had to drive away.
:p
 
All i can say in response to this frankly ludicrous thread is that its fairly clear that a lot of you do not have scientific backgrounds :p
 
Acme said:
I want to see how VPOWER affects the economy of my car, but I would look like a right plank filling up an old Polo with 99 RON premium sporty juice. :p
Click to expand...

lemonade said:
Seriously though why would you care what someone else thinks and why would someone else care what your filling up with, i dont look at what others are doing when i fill my car up!
Click to expand...

I drive a 1.6 i30 - hardly classed at the most powerful of cars, and put v+ in it. I get on average 4mpg more per gallon doing exactly the same journeys at the same time of year.
I switched from supermarket fuel because the engine was lumpy at low revs and easily cut out when moving at slow speeds (first/reverse 2-3 mph) - the switch to Shell made the car more driveable
Whenever I switch back to supermarket fuel (normally Tesco when they do a silly offer) my mpg drops
 
might put some v-power diesel on my next fill up of the kia rio... for the giggles... and the looks of disbelief from bystanders :p

I don't expect to see any noticable difference in mpg as most of the time I am doing around town driving that mpg is more dependent on traffic than anything :p might be a bit quieter/ smoother at idle/low speeds as has been suggested.

....I'll be sure to wear my Shell V-Power diesel baseball cap when I do fill up though.... gotta look the part ;)
 
The zed should be run on 97 min, it'll run on 95, but you can get det issues, and you shouldn't rev it hard. So I always go for Shell v power - then again I always have for any performance cars. :)
 
WhiteCobra said:
Never see a MPG difference but now the STs mapped for 97 ron it'll run like crap on normal 95.
Click to expand...

It probably won't 'run like crap' on 95. My 530i is factory mapped for 98 RON but doesnt 'run like crap' on 95 - it just doesnt deliver the stated performance and economy figures.
 
[TW]Fox;26625480 said:
It probably won't 'run like crap' on 95. My 530i is factory mapped for 98 RON but doesnt 'run like crap' on 95 - it just doesnt deliver the stated performance and economy figures.
Click to expand...

You're probably right as I haven't tried it. However bluefin offer 2 maps for the modifications I've got, one for 95 fuel and one for 97+, so there must be something to warrant two seperate maps as apposed to just having one map that adjusts the timing to the fuel you use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom