Supermarket Fuel, Facts Please
Discussion
Limpet said:
all road fuels sold in the UK meet BS EN x standards, which is an adequately rigorous test that ensures the quality of the fuel is at a level where your engine won't self destruct on the way home.
True to a point but the standards only govern what is in the fuel in terms of chemicals and also the Octane levels. There are no British standards that define a fuels minimum levels in terms of engine cleanliness and engine perfrormance.Also the standards actually only govern the quality of fuel that can be sold, you can actually use anything in your engines on the road as long as you don't sell it to anyone !
Anyone who says they get better range/mpg on one fuel or another when doing comparison tests on the road is kidding themselves and anyone who chooses to believe them because ultimately you cannot say that your comparisons were in a controlled environment with identical conditions, you just can't. Same weather, same temperature, same traffic conditions, same throttle application - it's just not possible.
I've tried and it's no where near accurate enough to be a comparative test. There are far too many variables.
I've tried and it's no where near accurate enough to be a comparative test. There are far too many variables.
Shell diesel was quieter on my old 270cdi than they others, not sure why? But was pretty obvious whenever she filled up elsewhere.
But no difference to mpg.
500ml of 2 stroke oil did the same.
At 60k miles I had issues with EGR and swirl flaps, hence starting to use Shell and/or the 2 stroke oil, after 60k miles of using I spent a day cleaning EGR and Swirl Flaps again and they were really clean still. That to me says there is something in it.
So, if the filling stations only add the equivalent of 2 stroke oil, that would be reason enough of a reason to use them.
Didn't I read that Shell uses a completely different refining process to everyone else too?
Petrol cars I always use Shell 98 or Tesco 99, if the car has a knock sensor and is therefore mapped for higher ron. That makes a huge difference to power and mpg.
Proved on a rolling road on two cars and with MPG over a good 20k miles on each with the Merc E350.
The 335i on 95ron lost so much power, it was down over 30hp and you could really feel it. Could be proved every time too.
But no difference to mpg.
500ml of 2 stroke oil did the same.
At 60k miles I had issues with EGR and swirl flaps, hence starting to use Shell and/or the 2 stroke oil, after 60k miles of using I spent a day cleaning EGR and Swirl Flaps again and they were really clean still. That to me says there is something in it.
So, if the filling stations only add the equivalent of 2 stroke oil, that would be reason enough of a reason to use them.
Didn't I read that Shell uses a completely different refining process to everyone else too?
Petrol cars I always use Shell 98 or Tesco 99, if the car has a knock sensor and is therefore mapped for higher ron. That makes a huge difference to power and mpg.
Proved on a rolling road on two cars and with MPG over a good 20k miles on each with the Merc E350.
The 335i on 95ron lost so much power, it was down over 30hp and you could really feel it. Could be proved every time too.
manracer said:
Anyone who says they get better range/mpg on one fuel or another when doing comparison tests on the road is kidding themselves and anyone who chooses to believe them because ultimately you cannot say that your comparisons were in a controlled environment with identical conditions, you just can't. Same weather, same temperature, same traffic conditions, same throttle application - it's just not possible.
I've tried and it's no where near accurate enough to be a comparative test. There are far too many variables.
I always use 98/99ron on my petrols. I've tried and it's no where near accurate enough to be a comparative test. There are far too many variables.
When I got the 2012 E350 (M276 NA 6 35 litre engine)the spec said it only needed 95ron.
I used 95 ron for the fist 25k miles (I bought the car with 70k on so run in) and over that period it returned 26mpg.
Then when looking at literature from Germany they specify Super Plus Benzin, so 98/99ron.
I started using that and sure enough after the first tank thought it felt much peppier, but as you say, could have been cooler, warmer, whatever.
I then put 95 back in and straight away you could feel the throttle response drop off.
After two more tanks of 98ron I took it to the rolling road, it came back with 304hp.
I then put in a tank of 95 ron and rolling roaded it again, this time it was 278hp.
I carried on using 98ron over the next 30k miles and measured the mpg, it went up to an average of just over 30.
Also, if I ever used Sainsbury fuel, the EML light would come on the moment it got to just under 1/4 tank left, every single time.
When scanned it said 'unknown fuel additive' and 'nox sensor' something or other. Regular or Super unleaded.
Now if you were talking about diesel, ignore all that, I agree.
As usual with these threads, there are complete confusion of two concepts:
1) Is RON99 fuel the same as RON95?
2) Is RON95 from brand A (e.g. Shell) equivalent to RON95 from brand B (e.g. Tesco) ?
Most of the pro-Shell V Power comments are comparing it with RON95. I don't think anyone is disagreeing that there is a clear chemical difference and difference in the refining process.
The OP, I believe, was asking for the second question. Is there a problem using supermarket regular compare to branded regular. There, it is demonstrated that the actual petrol is identical and come from the same refineries. The only difference is a small fraction of percent additives.
My brother has sold fuel tankers, tanker loading equipment and road tanker safety kit for years, he's been involved in the industry where the fuel is refined, stored then transported to the garage, it's all the same apart from small amounts of additives.
Poor storage at the end point is more likely an issue rather than any other factor.
Poor storage at the end point is more likely an issue rather than any other factor.
I've got a Signum with the 2.2 Direct petrol engine, which differs slightly from a standard engine as it injects fuel into the cylinder as opposed to inlet manifold/before inlet valve. Not all that common although I think this high pressure petrol route is becoming more popular now for the small turbo'd engines that are around.
Anyway, I fill up with only Shell V-Power, the reason behind this is because almost any other fuel causes it to miss-fire badly. I recently went up to Northumberland with a further drive up to Scotland, a good 1200 mile round trip, 5 fill up's. All V-Power apart from the 3rd which was a splash and dash at a services, no "premium" fuel at that station so just put 15 quid in to get me to the next Shell. 10 miles down the road stopped at a roundabout, went to pull away and miss-fire, next roundabout, miss-fire, stopped at some lights, pulled away - miss-fire.. Managed to get to the Shell station, full tank of V-Power - apart from one more miss-fire the car was fine for the next 600+ miles, and still is months later.
I spent a tonne of time working out what the issue was previous to this, sent injectors off to get tested, replaced all the seals. New coil pack (does all 4 cylinders), new plugs. Nothing fixed it, started using redex as a last ditch and that normally cleared the miss-fire, figured I'd religiously use V-Power for a while and the issue went away, filled up at a Texaco for convenience, issue came back. Ended up draining half a tank and using it for the mower and replacing it with V-Power, issue went away.
For my car fuel is definitely different from V-Power to others, my wife has a Fabia with the 1.4 diesel, 295,000 miles of any fuel from literally anywhere and it's absolutely fine, just keeps chugging away.
I have an Uncle who has his own mechanic business and he showed me some gel like substance that had built up on a fuel filter never did get to the bottom of what it was but he believes it was fuel related.
Anyway, I fill up with only Shell V-Power, the reason behind this is because almost any other fuel causes it to miss-fire badly. I recently went up to Northumberland with a further drive up to Scotland, a good 1200 mile round trip, 5 fill up's. All V-Power apart from the 3rd which was a splash and dash at a services, no "premium" fuel at that station so just put 15 quid in to get me to the next Shell. 10 miles down the road stopped at a roundabout, went to pull away and miss-fire, next roundabout, miss-fire, stopped at some lights, pulled away - miss-fire.. Managed to get to the Shell station, full tank of V-Power - apart from one more miss-fire the car was fine for the next 600+ miles, and still is months later.
I spent a tonne of time working out what the issue was previous to this, sent injectors off to get tested, replaced all the seals. New coil pack (does all 4 cylinders), new plugs. Nothing fixed it, started using redex as a last ditch and that normally cleared the miss-fire, figured I'd religiously use V-Power for a while and the issue went away, filled up at a Texaco for convenience, issue came back. Ended up draining half a tank and using it for the mower and replacing it with V-Power, issue went away.
For my car fuel is definitely different from V-Power to others, my wife has a Fabia with the 1.4 diesel, 295,000 miles of any fuel from literally anywhere and it's absolutely fine, just keeps chugging away.
I have an Uncle who has his own mechanic business and he showed me some gel like substance that had built up on a fuel filter never did get to the bottom of what it was but he believes it was fuel related.
yant said:
The OP, I believe, was asking for the second question. Is there a problem using supermarket regular compare to branded regular. There, it is demonstrated that the actual petrol is identical and come from the same refineries. The only difference is a small fraction of percent additives.
The base fuels are the same as they come from the same refineries.The final fuels will perform differently with respect to engine cleanliness and possibly engine performance due to the different addtive packs that are used between different companies.
Will the supermarket fuel cause running problems? - in the short term no but if it does not provide the same levels of cleanliness as say a Shelll V-Power then over time your car will not perform as well as it would have if it has used the higher quality fuel all it's life.
Is this observable on the road? - possibly but there are a lot of factors that also contribute to it.
if retail petrol in the UK is functionally identical across all brands, then at least one of the following statements must also be true:
a) engine performance and longevity are unaffected, whether a brand uses additives or has none
b) although competing brands use unique formulations of additives, the results across these differing formulations are the same
c) the chosen fuel additives have no effect on things like engine performance and longevity -- and are a de facto risk for brands that make marketing claims to the contrary
Rovinghawk said:
Spragnut said:
some gel like substance that had built up on a fuel filter never did get to the bottom of what it was but he believes it was fuel related.
Something on presumably the inside of a fuel filter would be fuel related? Impressive diagnostic skills.I guess what I was trying to say to make it clearer was, he thought it may have been something within the pumped fuel from a station that had been put in the tank as opposed to some external contamination. i.e he was pretty sure the customer didn't dump a load of silica gel into the tank for some reason, or pee'd in it after a night our (see the "caught peeing in the kettle" post Rovinghawk as you seem a bit dense).
It was something seen on 2 cars within a short time frame, perhaps the above comment regarding storage of the fuel was the culprit.
I'm neither a mechanic nor a scientist so can't comment further.
unsprung said:
if retail petrol in the UK is functionally identical across all brands, then at least one of the following statements must also be true:
a) engine performance and longevity are unaffected, whether a brand uses additives or has none
b) although competing brands use unique formulations of additives, the results across these differing formulations are the same
c) the chosen fuel additives have no effect on things like engine performance and longevity -- and are a de facto risk for brands that make marketing claims to the contrary
B would be the most logical to my mind. For all 95-RON fuel, different retailers will have their own unique additives and blends, which will have the same end result, or at least, negligible differences to most users. a) engine performance and longevity are unaffected, whether a brand uses additives or has none
b) although competing brands use unique formulations of additives, the results across these differing formulations are the same
c) the chosen fuel additives have no effect on things like engine performance and longevity -- and are a de facto risk for brands that make marketing claims to the contrary
In a discussion full of analogies, is it a bit like asking "Is Fairy Liquid better than Tesco Lemon Fresh Washing Up Liquid?" - they do the same thing, but Fairy Liquid purports to be more efficient at doing the same thing, but costs more to do it, but to most people, their dishes still come out clean no matter which they use (or, stay just as dirty) because its not entirely the liquid that does the job, but the manner in which it is used?
GAjon said:
I’m not a scientist but did have some white paper disposable overalls once, so that’s just as good.
Now on Friday last week I went on a track day to Rockingham with my race car and took 2 ten litre cans of fuel, one V Power one Tesco 99 Ron.
In the morning I was on V power and was lifting on turn one.
In the afternoon I used the Tesco and didn’t lift at turn one.
Proving absolutely definitely scientifically that Tesco fuel is faster.
Or was it Tesco first? ?
This is the perfect representation of the type of 'analysis' done against fuel. The title says "Facts, Please", and the posts have been 99% conjecture. Now on Friday last week I went on a track day to Rockingham with my race car and took 2 ten litre cans of fuel, one V Power one Tesco 99 Ron.
In the morning I was on V power and was lifting on turn one.
In the afternoon I used the Tesco and didn’t lift at turn one.
Proving absolutely definitely scientifically that Tesco fuel is faster.
Or was it Tesco first? ?
Grayedout said:
The base fuels are the same as they come from the same refineries.
The final fuels will perform differently with respect to engine cleanliness and possibly engine performance due to the different addtive packs that are used between different companies.
Will the supermarket fuel cause running problems? - in the short term no but if it does not provide the same levels of cleanliness as say a Shelll V-Power then over time your car will not perform as well as it would have if it has used the higher quality fuel all it's life.
Is this observable on the road? - possibly but there are a lot of factors that also contribute to it.
Grayedout - your statement appears to state that if you use fuels with lower levels of "cleanliness" your engine will not perform as well long termThe final fuels will perform differently with respect to engine cleanliness and possibly engine performance due to the different addtive packs that are used between different companies.
Will the supermarket fuel cause running problems? - in the short term no but if it does not provide the same levels of cleanliness as say a Shelll V-Power then over time your car will not perform as well as it would have if it has used the higher quality fuel all it's life.
Is this observable on the road? - possibly but there are a lot of factors that also contribute to it.
Do you have any evidence that some fuels offer lower levels of "cleanliness"?
Do you have any evidence that it causes long term effects?
if so what?
[as discussed VPower has a different Ron/Octane]
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff