Premium fuel vs Regular fuel

[Elmura]

If your engine is standard, refer to the minimum octane required for the specific car. Higher octane won't produce more power unless the computer is tuned for it - it is a slower burning fuel that resists detonation. For an engine in good health, putting higher octane than specified should not benefit much relative to increased cost.
However, you should not put lower octane than specified else poor performance, economy & worse will be the result.

Sent from my LG-D802 using Tapatalk

[wai]

A higher octane rating will mean it can resist detonation more. This would allow the ignition timing to advance more than standard, and this can give you a higher BMEP which will result in more torque.

The problem is that the ECU must be tuned to do that, if not, you will not see any appreciable increase in power.

Now, the only reason I would go for PULP95 is if the only standard ULP you can get is E10. The reason is that E10 will see your consumption go up by around 10% because ethanol has around 30% lower calorific value. As a result, you burn as much fuel as you were with just ULP, plus you are burning 10% ethanol.

The engine needs to be retuned for E10. When ethanol burns, the oxygen atoms are released, and this leans the mixture out. The combustion temperature is higher because of this, and you can have issues.

When I had my Hiace, I tried E10. The engine was rough and pickup was bad. I ran the tank low and filled it with PULP95. The difference was amazing. The engine was smooth and throttle pickup was excellent, just driving out of the service station.

So, you will not get any more power, but if it gets you away from E10, then go for PULP95. No point in wasting your money on PULP98.

[brad]

Why would anyone run 91ron (either e10 or otherwise) in a modern VW vehicle? WTF?

[wai]

Why would anyone run 91ron (either e10 or otherwise) in a modern VW vehicle? WTF?

If that is what the manufacturer recommends, then there is no issue with it. E10 however is a politically concocted attempt to appease certain lobby groups, and is not something I would ever recommend.

[brad]

If that is what the manufacturer recommends, then there is no issue with it. E10 however is a politically concocted attempt to appease certain lobby groups, and is not something I would ever recommend.

That's not the question I asked.

I don't think there has been an VW vehicle in the past 15 years that has had a factory fuel recommendation of less than 95 ron.

[Elmura]

I don't think there has been an VW vehicle in the past 15 years that has had a factory fuel recommendation of less than 95 ron.

United E10 has 95 Octane. There's nothing really wrong with Ethanol - it's simply an alternative fuel source that can be grown rather than mined. It raises octane a few points but has less energy density. Modern engines (last 10 years) are completely capable of handling the fuel's differences as long as it meets the minimum octane requirement.

I don't use it because I'm performance focused. I find even 95 Octane Petrol in my Honda Euro (it's specified requirement) not as good a performer as 98 so whilst fuel consumption improves slightly with 98, throttle response is better and that matters to me. This means either the ECU is really tuned to work with higher octane but given a minimum rating it can work acceptably with; or my pistons & head are coated with years of carbon build up (considering I have new plugs and fuel cleaners run twice a year)

[sports racer]

I wouldn't use Ethanol/petrol mix if you paid me. It's corrosive, that's why it's limited to only 10% of the fuel. Modern cars are built with this in mind but eventually something is going to give.

Some months ago SBS ran a show on the benefits of each grade of petrol and advised 91 octane was suitable for nearly all the cars on Aust roads. The only exception was anyone running a high performance car that could only run on 98. They had access to Govt testing and independent labs and even the commentators were surprised with the results.

However, the recommendations were cost based and none of the testing was done by enthusiasts who don't mind paying more for better performance.

[Guest001]

I wouldn't use Ethanol/petrol mix if you paid me. It's corrosive, that's why it's limited to only 10% of the fuel. Modern cars are built with this in mind but eventually something is going to give.

Some months ago SBS ran a show on the benefits of each grade of petrol and advised 91 octane was suitable for nearly all the cars on Aust roads. The only exception was anyone running a high performance car that could only run on 98. They had access to Govt testing and independent labs and even the commentators were surprised with the results.

However, the recommendations were cost based and none of the testing was done by enthusiasts who don't mind paying more for better performance.

The emphasis is on "Nearly all"

If the handbook says "Use 95" Use it. If your motor blows and VW do a fuel test and its 91 it will be "thanks but no thanks. See you"

Believing a TV show is nearly as bad as believing whats on the Internet.