globalgb

Thats pretty cool if its true (and I'm certainly not saying its not) - are they advertising the stuff as 98 ron do you know?

Daz34

No. Why would they? BP is only 97 RON

Roojai

Very interested to read about the higher calorific value of Esso.

If you had a choice would you map the engine for 98ron and lower calorific value or for 97ron and higher calorific rating?

s70rjw

iTrader: (2)

STi PPP fuel filler says to fill car with a minimum of 98 RON

Rewolf

Filler says 98 on normal PPP, but dealer says 95 RON is OK because the car will automatically adjust iteslf to the quality of the fuel.

I tried Optimax - I really did, and it did exactly the same to my WRX as it did with the ST200; sometimes is is great running really smoothly, and then it runs really rough and the car feels like stalling all the time. I now use the Esso 97, and it is consistant all the time. Maybe the garage doesn't turn over enough Optimax, and you get a good tank followed by a bad tank, but I have had enough of it, and will stick to Esso.

stewfo

iTrader: (2)

Maybe a stupid question but !!

Can i safely run any of the super unleaded fuels on MY00 standard uk car.
Currently using standard unleaded.
cheers

MJW

Try reading this thread on the GTR Register

redwrx

Shell Optimax, is 98.5 ron when it leaves the refinery.

For anyone who wants to drive down Oilsites road, from Ellesmere Port to Elton, you will also notice that at the Shell filling points, there are other named fuel tankers. Shell, supply other big names aswell, just as BP in Aberdeen do the same.... to do with geographics and cost.


How do i know,?? cos through my office window are sat Shell Stanlows intake 2004 engineering apprentices, and its a regular discussion point.

aaronhowe

From what i understand RON rating dictates how quickly the fuel will burn. The higher the RON rating the slower it burns therefore reducing the risk of detonation.
If a car mapped for 95 RON fuel runs on 98 RON fuel it would most likely feel more sluggish due to the slower burning fuel.
However the advantage of slower burning fuel is that if a car is mapped using 98 RON the ignition timing can be advanced further than it could be if it was being run on 95 hence it would make more power.

So running on the Esso fuel may feel more lively but if yours is an import or is mapped for higher octane fuel its probably not doing it any good

The moral being that you should run your car on whatever octane rating it was mapped for.

jasonius

iTrader: (1)

Tankers have more than one compartment and therefore can carry several different grades of fuel. This could explain some of the 'cross contamination'.ie do they used a separate tanker/compartment for diesel etc..? If not do you think they flush first... I don't think so..!

The fuel always a contentious (sp?) issue. Without measured accurate testing it is all subjective with to many variables. It's easy to think the car feels faster/more responsive when infact it isn't..!

Jason

jasonius

iTrader: (1)

I think you'll find Optimax and Shell SUL are the same..?

samcowrx

My old supercharged vr6 golf , and my my94 wrx both run best on esso sul, noticed that ultimate and optimax poor, and vpower did nothing different to esso.

daniel p smith

sainsburys super is not ultimate and the cross contamination from one compartment to another on a tanker is very minimal and to be honest you wouldn't know what went in what compartment

Probein

Just out of interest, what's Total Excellium like? Have a Total garage next to my house and it'd be handy to fill up there when I've got the scooby.

MrRA

WOW! Resurrected thread!

tsl202

i've an sti v3 v-limited wagon and usually use v-power, the car run smooth and strong with no octane booster.
last week end i had to fill about 20 ltrs of esso 98ron and aaaaaarhhhhhg!
about a mile away from the fuel station i deeped the throttle and the car begon run like a very old car!!
i lifted the throttel immediatly! i'll never fill again my tank with esso!! true poison for an sti!!
beuuuurki!!

swampster

iTrader: (1)

On what are you basing that assumption? Not being funny, I'd like to know..

With BP Ultimate basically being BP's brand of SUL (not talking Ultimate 102 here) and BP has been providing all of Sainsburys petrol since 2004. I'd say there's a good chance that BP Ultimate and Sainsbury's SUL is the same stuff.

MrRA

Not if they are selling at different prices though, which (and I'm taking a big guess here) I would say that the supermaket stuff may be priced a little bit cheaper.

swampster

iTrader: (1)

Pricing at the pump doesn't mean a great deal.. but there probably isnt that much in it. But when it boils down to it, if Sainsbury's are selling cheaper it might just be that they're selling at a lesser margin than BP's own branded franchises, the bog standard 95 RON is probably cheaper at Sainsbury's than most BP forecourts too.

As somebody mentioned in the thread earlier, asking the BP tanker driver if it was the same stuff, he said it was..

I guess unless someone from the industry can tell us we'll never know, as with Sainsbury's selling BP petrol "unbranded" so to speak, there will probably be all kinds of non disclosure agreements in place to prevent Sainsbury's damaging BP franchise forecourt sales by undercutting them.

MrRA

I would have to disagree there. With the amount of tax and other things that are included in the forecourt price, very little is left for the vendor who is selling it, and as such if they are selling it at a slightly lower price I would tend to think that maybe a few less additives etc are in the petrol.

I wouldn't also take a tanker drivers' word either. Remember all the threads speculating whether or not V Power would be 100RON prior to it's release. There were a few people who posted up that they had talked to tanker drivers who had said 'Yes, it's 100RON', when in fact V Power (in the UK anyway) turned out to be 99RON.

Personally I'm not really bothered where supermaket petrol comes from as I have always, and will always, use V Power