Omega Owners Forum

Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Tony H on 28 September 2007, 19:05:47

Title: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Tony H on 28 September 2007, 19:05:47
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Bo Bo on 28 September 2007, 19:20:31
Well I know a few on here say they get better performance or MPG, the only difference I can find is my wallet is lighter when I use it.........
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Grumpy on 28 September 2007, 19:33:42
I keep an extensive spreadsheet for my cars, that even includes where I bought
the fuel.

I often do a 150 mile trip from Cheshire to Cumbria.
When ever I've used Tesco fuel I get circa 33 mpg.
When ever I've used the higher grade Shell I get circa 36 mpg.

So, I'm paying approx 10% more for an approx 10% improvement in mpg.
So it evens out.
But......... I know I'm putting a quality fuel in with the Shell, and not some cheap
Russian stuff with God knows what additives stuffed in it to bring the spec up.
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: PaulW on 28 September 2007, 19:39:09
The old heap of a corsa will only run Vpower or anything 99RON.  Anything else will cause it to run like a bag of spanners...

Admittedly it was setup to only run on the higher octane stuff, but still  ;D
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Jimbob on 28 September 2007, 19:51:45
Pre Omega
1.8 Astra and a 2.0 Mazda 626
Both These went better (faster, mpg, and smoother) on Optimax
1.8 Cav - Little difference.


2.2 Omega
Small increase on Vpower, but does feel smoother
3.0 Omega, not really noticiable, maybe a little better

So imho looks like smaller cars benefit more, bigguns like ours will burn anything!

I have noticed all our cars seem to not do so well and run rougher on Tesco's petrol
Will NOT put it in any now, even with 5p a litre off.
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Martin_1962 on 28 September 2007, 19:54:12
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: theolodian on 28 September 2007, 20:01:53
Depends on if the car is set up for it or not.  Makes the most difference on turbo cars in warm climates, so not likely to help a miggy in the UK.  :'(  

Also, if you just whack it in it takes at least a tank or two for many ECU's to adapt to take advantage of it.  
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: TheBoy on 28 September 2007, 21:25:07
Quote
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
They were undoubtedly right then :P
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: miggy on 28 September 2007, 21:44:37
Quote
Quote
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
They were undoubtedly right then :P

Here Here
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: theolodian on 28 September 2007, 22:10:47
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
They were undoubtedly right then :P

Here Here
Is there some joke that I am missing?  Everyone seems to use the wrong words for classic sayings.  Here here instead of hear hear?  I see this all the time on here, or is this another cross-pond thing?
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Baron Von Spongebob on 28 September 2007, 22:14:05
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
They were undoubtedly right then :P

Here Here
Is there some joke that I am missing?  Everyone seems to use the wrong words for classic sayings.  Here here instead of hear hear?  I see this all the time on here, or is this another cross-pond thing?

Its like Reading a book in Reading.. :D
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: miggy on 28 September 2007, 22:15:19
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
They were undoubtedly right then :P

Here Here
Is there some joke that I am missing?  Everyone seems to use the wrong words for classic sayings.  Here here instead of hear hear?  I see this all the time on here, or is this another cross-pond thing?

Alright, hear hear, ate some dictionary have we/

Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: theolodian on 28 September 2007, 22:16:32
Quote
Quote
Is there some joke that I am missing?  Everyone seems to use the wrong words for classic sayings.  Here here instead of hear hear?  I see this all the time on here, or is this another cross-pond thing?

Its like Reading a book in Reading.. :D
It'd suck to be illiterate in that village!  :P ;D
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: theolodian on 28 September 2007, 22:19:30
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
They were undoubtedly right then :P

Here Here
Is there some joke that I am missing?  Everyone seems to use the wrong words for classic sayings.  Here here instead of hear hear?  I see this all the time on here, or is this another cross-pond thing?

Alright, hear hear, ate some dictionary have we/

Sorry, I'm a bit anal sometimes.  Case in point, a dictionary would not have corrected that.  :P
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: miggy on 28 September 2007, 22:22:49
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
They were undoubtedly right then :P

Here Here
Is there some joke that I am missing?  Everyone seems to use the wrong words for classic sayings.  Here here instead of hear hear?  I see this all the time on here, or is this another cross-pond thing?

Alright, hear hear, ate some dictionary have we/

Sorry, I'm a bit anal sometimes.  Case in point, a dictionary would not have corrected that.  :P

Hear Hear,    ;D ;D ;D ;D Joke, dont take it seriously
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: theolodian on 28 September 2007, 22:26:47
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
They were undoubtedly right then :P

Here Here
Is there some joke that I am missing?  Everyone seems to use the wrong words for classic sayings.  Here here instead of hear hear?  I see this all the time on here, or is this another cross-pond thing?

Alright, hear hear, ate some dictionary have we/

Sorry, I'm a bit anal sometimes.  Case in point, a dictionary would not have corrected that.  :P

Hear Hear,    ;D ;D ;D ;D Joke, dont take it seriously
Everyone's worried about me being upset.  Do you not see the cr@p I give whoever I can on here?  :-? ;D
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: miggy on 28 September 2007, 22:30:02
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
They were undoubtedly right then :P

Here Here
Is there some joke that I am missing?  Everyone seems to use the wrong words for classic sayings.  Here here instead of hear hear?  I see this all the time on here, or is this another cross-pond thing?

Alright, hear hear, ate some dictionary have we/

Sorry, I'm a bit anal sometimes.  Case in point, a dictionary would not have corrected that.  :P

Hear Hear,    ;D ;D ;D ;D Joke, dont take it seriously
Everyone's worried about me being upset.  Do you not see the cr@p I give whoever I can on here?  :-? ;D

I aint  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: theolodian on 28 September 2007, 22:32:37
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
They were undoubtedly right then :P

Here Here
Is there some joke that I am missing?  Everyone seems to use the wrong words for classic sayings.  Here here instead of hear hear?  I see this all the time on here, or is this another cross-pond thing?

Alright, hear hear, ate some dictionary have we/

Sorry, I'm a bit anal sometimes.  Case in point, a dictionary would not have corrected that.  :P

Hear Hear,    ;D ;D ;D ;D Joke, dont take it seriously
Everyone's worried about me being upset.  Do you not see the cr@p I give whoever I can on here?  :-? ;D

I aint  ;D ;D ;D
PUNCTUATION!

 ;D ;D
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Tony H on 28 September 2007, 22:34:07
Woh! the previous post contains the most multi quotes i've ever seen on this forum :o
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: miggy on 28 September 2007, 22:39:38
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Heard a report today done by Which magazine that states there is no significant advantage using high Ron petrol over the ordinary stuff, the petrol companys countered with the argument that the Which tests where not extensive enough :-/
Over to you lot,.............................................................................................Debate :)

WHich magazine thought a Sony 950 had a poor picture - when it was winning awards for best picture

Which magazine is crap!
They were undoubtedly right then :P

Here Here
Is there some joke that I am missing?  Everyone seems to use the wrong words for classic sayings.  Here here instead of hear hear?  I see this all the time on here, or is this another cross-pond thing?

Alright, hear hear, ate some dictionary have we/

Sorry, I'm a bit anal sometimes.  Case in point, a dictionary would not have corrected that.  :P

Hear Hear,    ;D ;D ;D ;D Joke, dont take it seriously
Everyone's worried about me being upset.  Do you not see the cr@p I give whoever I can on here?  :-? ;D

I aint  ;D ;D ;D
PUNCTUATION!

 ;D ;D

Could not be bothered or bovvered
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Kevin Wood on 29 September 2007, 01:27:01
Wthether high octane petrol does anything for you entirely depends on the engine. I would imagine Which did not understand this and thus did not test it correctly.

Then again, if you believe the oil companies' marketing you'd think every car would benefit from it when in fact only a small percentage will.

Kevin
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Markjay on 30 September 2007, 09:00:21
For you performance chasers out there - forget BHP and MPG, if you are not using regularly Redex or Forte with every tankful then switch to 97RON - BT Ultimate, Shell V-Max and Texaco High-Octane all have detergents additives that keep the injectors clean. Me? I use 97RON and Redex....
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: theolodian on 30 September 2007, 09:07:55
Quote
For you performance chasers out there - forget BHP and MPG, if you are not using regularly Redex or Forte with every tankful then switch to 97RON - BT Ultimate, Shell V-Max and Texaco High-Octane all have detergents additives that keep the injectors clean. Me? I use 97RON and Redex....
Injector cleaners like Forte massively reduce the octane of your fuel.  You should run 97/98 with it or it will pink, on top of losing BHP and MPG.
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Essex_Andy on 30 September 2007, 09:20:38
Funnliy enough I was boring the wife with the comparison I make on fuel and mpg and costs. Yeah I neeed to get out more ;D

So far I have found that Tesco 99ron gives me 11% improvement on MPG than regular unleaded so as long as the price difference between the two fuels is less than 11% I'm saving money...especially with the 5p per litre discount Tescos have at the moment
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Markjay on 30 September 2007, 09:27:06
Quote
Quote
For you performance chasers out there - forget BHP and MPG, if you are not using regularly Redex or Forte with every tankful then switch to 97RON - BT Ultimate, Shell V-Max and Texaco High-Octane all have detergents additives that keep the injectors clean. Me? I use 97RON and Redex....
Injector cleaners like Forte massively reduce the octane of your fuel.  You should run 97/98 with it or it will pink, on top of losing BHP and MPG.

Sorry, I disagree... it is basically turpentine-based and has no ill-effect on the engine whatsoever, in spite of a whole list of urban myths including that it destroys the cats, the lambda sensors, the spark plugs, etc. Been using Redex with every tankful over the past 8 years, and never experienced any problems. In my book it comes highly recommended (though I know some people here prefer Forte).
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Auto Addict on 30 September 2007, 09:34:11
Quote
(though I know some people here prefer Forte).

Their Little Chefs used to be great, when they first opened ::)
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Markjay on 30 September 2007, 09:41:58
Quote
Quote
(though I know some people here prefer Forte).

Their Little Chefs used to be great, when they first opened ::)

Hmm... Roast checked with potatoes and peas was my favourite dish...  :y
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: theolodian on 30 September 2007, 09:42:43
Quote
Quote
Quote
For you performance chasers out there - forget BHP and MPG, if you are not using regularly Redex or Forte with every tankful then switch to 97RON - BT Ultimate, Shell V-Max and Texaco High-Octane all have detergents additives that keep the injectors clean. Me? I use 97RON and Redex....
Injector cleaners like Forte massively reduce the octane of your fuel.  You should run 97/98 with it or it will pink, on top of losing BHP and MPG.

Sorry, I disagree... it is basically turpentine-based and has no ill-effect on the engine whatsoever, in spite of a whole list of urban myths including that it destroys the cats, the lambda sensors, the spark plugs, etc. Been using Redex with every tankful over the past 8 years, and never experienced any problems. In my book it comes highly recommended (though I know some people here prefer Forte).
Yeah, and I don't believe in snake oil.  Higher octane and additives have a certain benefit when used appropriately, but like huge 4x4's are used way out of proportion.  If you're a performance chaser start with a performance car, then these things might matter.
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Martin_1962 on 30 September 2007, 09:52:11
I found a difference with BP over Tesco - over 1 seconds difference actually. I'll do some tests next thursday or friday (less gas in tank - less weight) and see what a direct comparison does.
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: theolodian on 30 September 2007, 10:25:26
Quote
I found a difference with BP over Tesco - over 1 seconds difference actually. I'll do some tests next thursday or friday (less gas in tank - less weight) and see what a direct comparison does.
Yeah, that is different.  Cheap fuel can be a false economy.  Also, I usually only put 30 quid in, the car is noticeably faster if you don't brim the tank.  Probably helps the fuel economy too, but hard to tell.

I will add that as fuel prices go up the difference in price for 98 RON drops percentage wise and any gains become more improtant.  Of course if you have to drive 2 towns over to get it . . .
Title: Re: Higher RON petrol no significant improvement
Post by: Martin_1962 on 30 September 2007, 10:31:04
Tescos is near - BP not too far away, Calor similar distance, FLogas over side of town.

Flogas is cheast at the moment