Super Unleaded

[pilchardthecat]

So i'm back at the green pumps instead of the black ones for the first time since about 2003.

So far i've been using shell v-power, but there are various other options available of roughly equal convenience;

Tesco, Waitrose, Jet, Total, BP, Shell

Is there any difference between the super-unleaded offerings from these - ie: is there anything i need to consider other than price?

[Pulse]

I always used Sainsbury 97 in my Z4. It was quite happy with that.

[V88Dicky]

Generally, you'll only see a benefit if your car has been specifically re-mapped to run on super-unleaded. If it hasn't, then ordinary good quality regular will do just fine. Cheaper too

[David87]

As far as I know only Shell V-Power and Tesco Momentum 99 are 99RON, everything else is either 97 or 98.

[ChipsAndCheese]

I was using Sainsbury's 97 in mine as it is the cheapest in my area at 116.9 p/l, but last couple of fill ups I switched to v-power. IMO there is a difference and the car feels better on the 99 Ron shell. Also got a few more miles than usual, but as not every journey is the same I can't guarantee that that is down to the change in fuel.

[mattmoxon]

Generally you will only see a difference over the 95ron fuel if your car has forced induction or as V88Dicky rightly says if the car has been specifically mapped to use the higher ron fuel. I notice no difference in the 'Stang whatsoever.

ETA: there are exceptions to this granted but many cars will happily consume whatever you put in the tank, 95, 97 - 99 etc.

Edited by mattmoxon on Tuesday 31st August 22:20

[pilchardthecat]

The higher-octane stuff is recommended according to the book

[otolith]

Not necessarily as clear cut as 95 or super, either - someone on Seloc said that Lotus had told him that 97RON was worth using in his car but anything higher would give no further benefit.

[ludicrous speed]

i notice no difference in economy, price, or performance.. yes it costs more but i don't actually notice the difference. if it's recommended the car uses the higher ron stuff then use it.

[robsco]

V-Power exclusively here, both Alfas I've owned have ran noticeably smoother using it. Who knows though, it may well be a psychological thing.

[pilchardthecat]

ludicrous speed said:

i notice no difference in economy, price, or performance.. yes it costs more but i don't actually notice the difference. if it's recommended the car uses the higher ron stuff then use it.

Yes but my question is; which one? or are they all the same?

Think i'll probably stick with V-Power. I'm getting 25mpg which is more than i'd expected

[Jebi]

Placebo

[Mars]

Jebi said:

Placebo

Couldn't agree more. All modern cars are required to be able to run on 95RON. Only those specifically mapped for 97, or those which have a "learning" ECU (few) can fully utilise 97/98RON.


My 244bhp Caterham was mapped on 98 but had so much headroom in the ignition map that it ran perfectly on 95, giving exactly the same power output. Another chap who came with me to the mapping session had a lower headroom owing to a highly skimmed head (giving a higher compression) so had to run permanently on 97 or more.


In general 95 for a road car. It actually has more calories per volume (octane additivies dilute petrol). If you are going to get it very hot during a trackday, run more boost (turbo or sc) or have a blueprint/hand built engine with low ignition headroom then you are justified in 97+. Anyone else using it is fooling themselves. I tried it in my 3-litre Scooby - thought it ran better but did some long distance commutes and proved it gave exactly the same mpg. It's a placebo. At best some companies **might** add some detergents to their more expensive brews but I call "placebo" as Jebi said above.

[sebhaque]

I've run two tanks of 95 RON in the Impreza and the rest 98+ (as recommended). It did not like the 95 petrol, spluttering everywhere and ultimately conking out on more than one occasion. However, the car is designed to run on 98+ so this is to be expected. The Impreza does run on 97 RON, although it -feels- down on power and only gets 22mpg as opposed to 26 on 99 RON (what it usually gets).

I have run my Corsa on several tanks of 97 RON and it has made no significant difference. I have achieved an increase in mileage of 0.9mpg which really isn't worth the price. This was over the same series of journeys conducted at roughly the same time. Indeed, my mileage only varies by about 20 miles over the whole 400 mile range of the tank.

[Garlick]

V Power definitely makes my TVR pop and bang more than other high octane fuels. All of my cars are run on full fat petrol, but I do try and find Shell for the Chim whereas the others get whatever high octane fuel I happen to be near at the time.

I have always wondered if I get what I pay for however.

[HAB]

Garlick said:

V Power definitely makes my TVR pop and bang more than other high octane fuels.

Ditto my 964!

[winshent]

have a read of this...

[anonymous-user]

Tesco super is 5% bioethanol and my car hates it, avoid.

It runs much better on the cheaper Sainsburys super unleaded.

[vit4]

I do tend to get marginally better mileage out of the super stuff. However, by marginally I mean a difference of about twenty or so miles a tank tops, not enough to really prove that it's the fuel and not just chance. Still, I throw in a bit of super unleaded every now and then. As a treat like

[Ynox]

Always run my Octavia vRS (remapped) on super. Find it likes VPower the best, followed by either tesco/sainsbury's super.