Author Topic: shell v power  (Read 10779 times)

Offline mossy1969

  • GTI forum regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
shell v power
« on: 15 September 2012, 22:03 »
is shell v power really anygood or just a big con

Offline barrym381

  • Forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 5,935
Re: shell v power
« Reply #1 on: 16 September 2012, 13:56 »
does make a difference when you have a mapped car but a fiat panda it wont help much  :grin:

Offline Poached

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: shell v power
« Reply #2 on: 16 September 2012, 15:13 »
is shell v power really anygood or just a big con

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQghB4asSnI

Presenter somewhat annoying...

Offline AlanD

  • Serious forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 9,946
  • MK5 2.0T 16v
Re: shell v power
« Reply #3 on: 17 September 2012, 20:16 »
The MK5 is designed to use the higher octane fuel. I won't go into it but its to do with how the FSI engine works (if your interested have a quick Google of how the FSI engine works). Even a standard MK5 will see benefits from it.

Having said that its bloody expensive, I personally just use the usual stuff purely for cost reasons. Used to use it when fuel was cheaper and I didn't have mortgage to pay and tbh, I really struggled to see that much difference. Still, the facts speak for themselves.

Offline thai-wronghorse

  • Serious forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 7,325
  • mk1 Seat Leon FR TDI
Re: shell v power
« Reply #4 on: 17 September 2012, 21:54 »
The MK5 is designed to use the higher octane fuel. I won't go into it but its to do with how the FSI engine works (if your interested have a quick Google of how the FSI engine works). Even a standard MK5 will see benefits from it.

Having said that its bloody expensive, I personally just use the usual stuff purely for cost reasons. Used to use it when fuel was cheaper and I didn't have mortgage to pay and tbh, I really struggled to see that much difference. Still, the facts speak for themselves.

Blimey that's quite some variation on the Scooby tests.

Offline barrym381

  • Forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 5,935
Re: shell v power
« Reply #5 on: 17 September 2012, 22:08 »
The MK5 is designed to use the higher octane fuel. I won't go into it but its to do with how the FSI engine works (if your interested have a quick Google of how the FSI engine works). Even a standard MK5 will see benefits from it.

Having said that its bloody expensive, I personally just use the usual stuff purely for cost reasons. Used to use it when fuel was cheaper and I didn't have mortgage to pay and tbh, I really struggled to see that much difference. Still, the facts speak for themselves.

Blimey that's quite some variation on the Scooby tests.
thats why any scoob i have gets v-power   :wink: :wink:

Offline MS1COYS

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 820
  • Alfie 'H' 10-09-11
Re: shell v power
« Reply #6 on: 17 September 2012, 22:27 »
A guy I know who i was speaking to the other day, says he always adds 20% methanol to a tank of V-Power and it gives him a further 15% power on top of the extra 5-8% he gets from using Shell's finest over other leading brands of super unleaded  :shocked:
Evolution Map / Longlife USA 80mm TBE w/100 cell Sports Cat / ITG Maxogen G60 / Forge Twintercooler/ Forge TB Hose / R8 Coilpacks / EBC D&G Front & Rear Discs / EBC Yellowstuff Pads / BSH PCV Kit / Poly Pro Front & Rear / W.A.L.K / APR Torque Arm / 034Motorsport Density Line Engine Mounts / Vibratechnics Subframe Mount / Vibratechnics Dogbone Bush

292bhp / 287lbft

Offline Hurdy

  • Serious forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 8,466
Re: shell v power
« Reply #7 on: 19 September 2012, 08:20 »
I always run my cars on v- power or higher octane fuel. I've read the back to back tests and accept them. I don't have time to faff about doing my own laborious tests, so use 98-99 Ron fuel as standard. The tests say you get around 28 extra miles to a tank and the extra cost of v-power over 95 Ron is around £4 a tank, so effectively you should get the cost back and also get the added benefits of more power and extra longevity of the engine for free. The fact that you shouldn't use 95 Ron once mapped is also a factor. :cool:
Seat Leon Cupra Black 290 DSG

Offline MS1COYS

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 820
  • Alfie 'H' 10-09-11
Re: shell v power
« Reply #8 on: 22 September 2012, 14:41 »
I always run my cars on v- power or higher octane fuel. I've read the back to back tests and accept them. I don't have time to faff about doing my own laborious tests, so use 98-99 Ron fuel as standard. The tests say you get around 28 extra miles to a tank and the extra cost of v-power over 95 Ron is around £4 a tank, so effectively you should get the cost back and also get the added benefits of more power and extra longevity of the engine for free. The fact that you shouldn't use 95 Ron once mapped is also a factor. :cool:

I've just equated this myself as can be seen in my thread. It's a no brainer really  :smiley:
Evolution Map / Longlife USA 80mm TBE w/100 cell Sports Cat / ITG Maxogen G60 / Forge Twintercooler/ Forge TB Hose / R8 Coilpacks / EBC D&G Front & Rear Discs / EBC Yellowstuff Pads / BSH PCV Kit / Poly Pro Front & Rear / W.A.L.K / APR Torque Arm / 034Motorsport Density Line Engine Mounts / Vibratechnics Subframe Mount / Vibratechnics Dogbone Bush

292bhp / 287lbft

Offline Gene Hunt.

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,426
Re: shell v power
« Reply #9 on: 28 September 2012, 22:32 »
Only ever used V Power in my ED30. Worth the few extra pennies over the 95 ron. :wink:
Candy White ED35.