SUPER FUELS A 'WASTE OF MONEY'

[andrewparker]

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=18722

[Makaveli]

Can open - worms everywhere 

[andrewparker]

I guess it would be interesting if they had tested it on some more performance orientated cars, instead of ones which are designed to run on 95RON anyway...

[MAT ed30]

i think its true and i have noticed that if i put v power in the car i get 30+ mpg doing normal stuff but when its running tesco 99 i have been getting 27mpg and thats driving the same and doing the same journeys

[luca]

A load of rubbish imo. A focus 1.6 wtf are they talking about, nobody would bother putting super unleaded in a car like that so why use it in the test. The main cars that benefit from super unleaded are high performance/tuned cars. Turbos and sc cars respond better in terms of performance increases with super unleaded.

[bobotheclown]

without any "scientific" data and testing methods it's hard to say whether they have/have not any benefits. The article is a bit sparse on details so will reserve judgement until a more scientific article is produced and will continue to fill her up with V-Power.

[Jkctr]

Complete rubbish. V-power was found to give a subaru imprezza sti (hawkeye) 10bhp increase against 95 ron on a standard car! With performance cars (of which a 1.6 focus is not, and so should not be given 'performance fuels'!) you will see a good increase. I got a few extra bhp and torque when i was mapped on v-power and i dont even have a turbo!

[Hurdy]

"It found that the VW Golf’s hi-tech 1.4TSI engine responded well to Shell V-Power, but there was little to choose between super fuels and ordinary petrol when it came to economy and emissions."

So is that the combined supercarger and turbo test that they did

They say in that statement that the TSI responded well to V-Power, so I'm assuming it was actually more power! Which if I'm not mistaken would be a benefit and ergo NOT a waste of money!

[Horney]

My reply on pistonheads is applicable to you lot to.
"I think you're all missing the point. Your average Which? reader drives a 1.6 Astra/Focus/Golf/Civic etc etc. For their readership (and 90% + of road users) it clearly is a waste of money. No where int hat article does it say you should use 95 in a car rated to take 98+. Infact I'm pretty sure the article even says that for performance cars it can make a difference."

Nick

[T88OMM]

If you look on the fuel cap of the GTI it recommends 98 ron, the engine performs at its best with this fuel. Why buy a performance car and put lower grade fuel in it

1. You are not getting the best out of the car
2. You may be harming the engine in the long run

I notice a difference in performance when I have neen caught short and had to put lower grade fuel in mine. The car feels very sluggish when running on this.