Fuel

[Mikefc]

Hello all,
I was wondering whether anyone has noticed any big difference with fuel from different companies. I normally use Shell; engine hums alone nicely but I could never get fuel consumption below 6.1L. Was driving down Hume Highway and ended up refueling with Caltex - the fuel consumption got down to 5.4L but I noticed that the engine seems to rev harder particularly when accelerating. Wondering what people thought about different brands of fuel?

[wai]

There can be differences, particularly the fuel in major metropolitan areas and fuel in regional areas. It can also differ from region to region.

As an example, in winter, areas likely to see temperatures getting close to zero will have a special winterised fuel. If you use a non-winterised fuel (particularly diesel), you can end up with fuel that does not stray properly and result in increased fuel consumption.

The single most significant thing driving fuel consumption is the driver and how the accelerator pedal is used. Cruise control is great at overcoming even the best driver on the accelerator

[gavs]

Fuel

I've lost to the tune of about 12kw from filling with shell last time. I know because I have a gauge that tells me power and torque outputs.

I knew I should have stayed with Bp....

[MrDeathLad]

I've lost to the tune of about 12kw from filling with she'll last time. I know because I have a gauge that tells me power and torque outputs.

I knew I should have stayed with Bp....

Where would one procure such a gauge?

[Lemonskin]

I always use BP. tried Caltex and Shell, BP just feels better

[Polo_GTI]

BP ultimate FTW

[ill0gitech]

I only use Shell Vpower, and have had no issues.
Part of the reason for this is the 8c off per L
The other part is that there seems to be more Shells everywhere I go


Edit: corrected

[ATYPIC]

BP ultimate FTW

May as well just say Caltex FTW then...coz that's ultimately where it comes from in Melbourne, the Caltex refinery

[Hail22]

I only use Shell Vortex, and have had no issues.
Part of the reason for this is the 8c off per L
The other part is that there seems to be more Shells everywhere I go

Shell 98 is V-Power

Caltex 98 is Vortex

[PoloDave]

you are lucky, V-power over here is 95 , in UK its 99 and Germany still has Shell racing 100RON.. still, having 20% discound makes up for a lot

[dubstyle]

Dont use United Premium. Yes it is 100RON, but its also got 20% ethonol. A great way to bugger your engine.

[Diesel_vert]

United Petroleum's Premium 100 contains no more than 10% ethanol and as such, will not damage your vehicle because most VW models are compatible with E10 blends.

In regards to the theme of this thread, it may be better to avoid ethanol blends if fuel consumption is a high priority.

[nomadx38]

Any more than 0% ethanol is enough to keep me well WELL away XD

[gavs]

Fuel

All I will say is less embodied energy but a cleaner burn....

The 1.4tsi is not an ethanol approved engine. Have checked before.

[Diesel_vert]

The 1.4tsi is not an ethanol approved engine. Have checked before.

Depends who you ask.

Volkswagen AG states that their vehicles are compatible with E10, with the few exceptions listed on a PDF file. The website also has a VIN checking service to see if your vehicle is compatible; copy and pasting a few Australian VINs indicated they are compatible.

The Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI), of which Volkswagen Group Australia Pty Ltd is a member company, indicates that fuel-injected models post 1986 are suitable for use with E10.

Volkswagen Group Australia on the other hand, states on their website that ethanol blended fuels are not recommended, but does not clarify further whether the vehicles are suitable or compatible with E10 on their FAQ page.



Who stated that the 1.4 TSI engine (which is widely used in the VW group) is not an ethanol approved engine? This is an important distinction that needs clarifying and if it is contrary to what is indicated on the FCAI website, someone needs to be alerted.