33 replies to this topic

[goGoGene]

..and no, it had nothing to do with the race.

I usually fill up at Shell. Tanja and I have a Shell card, so we get the gas 5% cheaper. Well, the other day I was running low and filled up at "76" instead. I can't believe that added power that my car ('98 Subaru Impreza RS) now has. I talked to me brother in law (in the oil biz) about this and he said that it is widely accepted that Shell fuel is the dirtiest, poorest grade fuel around, and their additives are crap. He added that Chevron fuel with the techrolene additive is really one of the best fuels out there, and the additive really does help maintain engine clenliness/power. I wouldn't have believed him, but I continue to have far more power than I was ever getting out of Shell fuel. Has anyone else experienced similar?

ggg

[Chewbacca]

Whenever I get fuel (I'm from Canada) from Crappy Tire or from Petro Canada - I notice that it's really bad.

I've offen wondered about this...I guess it's not just a myth after all.

[BRG]

Do you get this Shell Optimax stuff in N. America? It is supposed to a premium special fuel that "releases a burst of power when you need it" to quote from the ad. The UK campaign drew heavily on the Ferrari/Schumacher connection. It all sounds like b*****ks to me, as I reckon that all petrol on the UK market is pretty much the same. As for a suddden "burst" of power, how does the fuel know "when you need it"? Are we dealing with an intelligent hydrocarbon here? Or is it just BS?

[Ozymandias]

The wonders of a competitive maket. I'm from Venezuela were, althought we have diferent petrol stations, all the fuels are from the same oil company, owned by the state. So there is no diference in between petrols but there is one tiny upside to all this, a litre of 95 oct petrol cost 80 cents.

[Ben]

That would appear to explain the USA's recent conduct with respect to your country.

Ben

[Chickenman]

The myth about Shell fuel being cr*p is no myth at all. At least in North America. Known as one of the worst fuels for a performance car on the market.

I live in Vancouver Canada. Been racing since the mid 70's. Most guys running hot cars on the street ( particularily Supercharged or Turbocharged ) now use Mohawk, because of the 10% Ethanol added. Very, very clean fuel and makes a lot of power. Even Chevron has fallen out of favor with most of the performance crowd here. Chevron changed their formulation back in the early 90's. With the new additives it is very slow burning and plugs come out black no matter how lean you run the car. Note: Talking carburated cars here in regards to plug colour. And yes...we've run them so lean that the EGT went through the roof. Plugs still came out black with Chevron. It's something in their additives.

My 1986 Camaro Autocross car ( 355 ci SBC , 10.3 to 1 compression, Dynoed 420hp ) runs much smoother and cleaner on Mohawk 94 Octane than Chevron 94 Octane. The Mohawk is worth 2 to 3 degrees extra static ignition advance or the Chevron ( which is 2nd best ). With the Mohawk I can run 14 to 16 deg initial timing with absolutely no detonation or run on, whereas with the Chevron I have to back the ignition lead off to about 12 degrees or I get run on.

Fuel quality also differs from region to region. We pay more in Canada for our Fuel than our US neighbours, but our Fuel quality generally seems to be much better. Perhaps more stringent controls,...I don't know. What I do know is that every one who races on pump gas up here comments that their cars run worse on US gas. If i set my car up to Run Chevron 94 octane using Canadian gas it runs like a pig on Chevron 94 from US gas stations. I generally run Sunoco or Union 76 in the States. Just my .02c worth.

[Jezztor]

Hmm, odd. Here in South Africa, Shell is most definitely one of the best performance fuels around, you really can feel it. Whether this is because the others are inferior or not, I do not know, in comparison to USA, UK etc. We have a company that is doing VERY well for themselves at the moment called Sasol, who have a fuel called "Dual Fuel", which can be used in both leaded and unleaded engines, without causing any harm or deficit in performance.

Additionally, they have just introduced a new diesel called TurboDiesel, which is quite attractive as far as fuels go because it has been dyed a gorgeous shade of purple, doll It is an INCREDIBLE performance fuel for turbo diesels (like our heavy-duty Land Cruiser). It contains only 0.05% Sulphur, and they plan to take that down to 0.03% Sulphur content!

Jezz

[DOHC]

Originally posted by Ozymandias
The wonders of a competitive maket. I'm from Venezuela were, althought we have diferent petrol stations, all the fuels are from the same oil company, owned by the state. So there is no diference in between petrols but there is one tiny upside to all this, a litre of 95 oct petrol cost 80 cents.

Ozymandias -- just wanted to check. Last time I was in VE the price was much lower. Should it be 8 US cents per liter?

[Chickenman]

Very true...what may be cr*p in one Country may have a totally different formulation in another and be great.

[Wolf]

GGG- is it maybe just petrol from one gas-station? For example, there is one gas-station near me (well, I've been there couple times because it's open 24/7) that is notorious for it's additive (tap-water to be more precise).

[Ozymandias]

your right DOHC, its 8 cents not 80. By the way Ben this is one of the only areas were Venezuelan markets are not liberal and thank god, 8 cents, incredible.

[goGoGene]

Originally posted by Wolf
GGG- is it maybe just petrol from one gas-station? For example, there is one gas-station near me (well, I've been there couple times because it's open 24/7) that is notorious for it's additive (tap-water to be more precise).

Nope, I make use of at least four Shell stations regularly, all are at least a half hour away from the rest.

ggg

[MrAerodynamicist]

Originally posted by Jezztor
We have a company that is doing VERY well for themselves at the moment called Sasol,

Didn't they sponsor Jordan?

Personally, I've never noticed the difference but then I've not really looked out for any.

[benrapp]

Originally posted by BRG
Do you get this Shell Optimax stuff in N. America? It is supposed to a premium special fuel that "releases a burst of power when you need it" to quote from the ad. The UK campaign drew heavily on the Ferrari/Schumacher connection. It all sounds like b*****ks to me, as I reckon that all petrol on the UK market is pretty much the same. As for a suddden "burst" of power, how does the fuel know "when you need it"? Are we dealing with an intelligent hydrocarbon here? Or is it just BS?

Astonishingly, Optimax is apparently actually worthwhile. It has (allegedly scientifically proven) the highest octane content of UK fuels, and is the only fuel presently sold in the UK that works with FSI (fuel stratified injection) engines. A number of mfrs (Audi first) have FSI engines on the Continent that they want to bring here, and a motor industry contact told me today that the Chancellor is going to incentivise the petrol companies to roll out FSI compatible fuel quickly.

I'll have some comparisons of my own next week, because we'll be dyno testing my replacement race engine, and I'll run some fuel comparisons.

[Conrad Turner]

Interesting read, I assumed that all petrols had to meet a certain standard, never realised that tere were some that performed better, having said that, at the end of the day I'll get mine from the nearest station anyway.

[Jezztor]

[Jezztor]

Originally posted by MrAerodynamicist
Didn't they sponsor Jordan?

I believe they did, yes. Not sure if they're South African or not, though - can't find much helpful information.

Jezz

[30ft penguin]

Hm, all I can say is that here (Germany) I notice a definite improvement in the way the engine of my car runs (smoother) when using Shell Optimax as compared to other fuel types/brands. It's hard to describe, but you really notice it when accelerating. It's not that much more expensive than the standard non sulfur-free fuel and tests by various magazines have shown that it helps keep the engine clean and that it actually can *clean* the engine. I do not know whether this really is true (I am no expert), but I do feel a difference when driving and I think it's worth the price difference. Dunno, maybe they do not think it's worth selling this type of fuel in the US or something like that, thinking there is no necessity for a 99 Oktan fuel there. If somebody wants to read what Shell says about Shell Optimax, here's something for you to babelfish (it's in German) : http://www2.shell.co...x_10090720.html

[Chui]

I'm glad someone else noticed this. When I was at GM Powertrain Division we'd use AMOCO Ultimate for Dynamometer Durability. Why? Because of the additives in Shell SU2000 fuels. When I had my Geo Prism [Toyota Corolla GT-S sedan] I noticed what seemed like more power from SUNOCO 94 octane. I also noticed that fuel economy dropped considerably. I just filled up my ITR with Sunoco 94 octane and I noticed that it's 10% ethanol. I haven't been able to percieve any more power, though. I prefer AMOCO and I'll drive around a bit to locate one.

[Amadeus]

If you are UK/Irish there is a good article in this months EVO magazine about this (EVO is a mag dedicated to high performance street cars - not modded Vauxhalls but TVR, Porsche, Lotus, etc - this month is a Ferrari special, drool, drool). I just scanned the article so I can't remember the details, but...

They trialled three cars on regular fuel for 1500 miles then Optimax for 1500 miles. Cars were (I think) Jag XJ, Honda something with a VTEC engine (Civic type R?) and a BMW M coupe. The cars were speed trialled for in gear acceleration on regular and Optimax and they checked out deposits on the valves before and after.

The results were pretty impressive - the BM had clean valves anyway but there was a visable reduction in deposits on the other two. Likewise all of the cars posted better acceleration figs using the Optimax (by up to 1.5 secs in some cases). All of the cars though were modern with knock detection, allowing the engine to adapt to higher octane fuel. Subjective reports from teh 3 jurnos was that they noticed a difference (even the Jag with an auto box) with the Optimax fuel. They were so impressed that all three now use it either regularly or exclusively.

[FordFan]

Comparing fuels between countries is a bit difficult anyway. Isn't the octane measure different in the US than in other places (R+M/2, whatever that means).

[BRG]

Originally posted by benrapp
Astonishingly, Optimax is apparently actually worthwhile.

It is probably having Jeremy Clarkson advertising Optimax that has made me doubtful about its value! I find Jeremy's blind Ferrari obsession makes me dubious about anything that he says. And the "burst of power just when you want it" claim is advertising gobble-de-gook nonsense. I use Tesco's finest and, if I push the throttle down, it gives me a burst of power. I'd be worried if it didn't.

[zixxer]

Sorry ya'll but oil companies trade fuel all the time. Not the least uncommon for a Unocal refinery to supply a nearby Shell station and vice versa. There have even been rulings in US courts that major refineries are required to supply fuel to independent retailers. Not to do so is a violation of antitrust laws.

[4mula1]

Originally posted by goGoGene


Nope, I make use of at least four Shell stations regularly, all are at least a half hour away from the rest.

I don't know that that would matter. Where I live there are a handful of distributors, each spanning a huge area. I know I can go east for 30 miles and still get the same fuel from a like branded station. If you live in a more densely populated area there should be more competition, which would be better for you, unless they all source from the same refinery.

[Melbourne Park]

In Australia we use our own oil and refine it and also we use imported refined petrol (ium / or "gas"). We have sulphure in our local fuel. Our octane rating for standard fuel is quite low. The oil companies sell the low octane unleaded fuels as "standard" fuel; the higher octane fuels have cleaning additives and higher octane levels. Of all the fuels, Shell Optimax has had the highest octane rating although there is a competitor for it coming or maybe out soon. However Optimax's octane rating is still not high enough to run the latest WRX STI engine. To run one you have to add an additive to the tank.

The lubricants of other high octane fuels - Mobil is an example - caused some serious problems to a number of brands about two years ago I think. BMWs and Nissans suffered a sludge problem that caused many engines to loose their lubrication capabilities due to the sludging of the lubricants. BMW had a publicity statement where they said that the problems were not the engine's fault, but the fuels fault. Nonetheless BMW stripped and repaired their engines, and claimed that the oil companies re-embersed them. Optimax however gave no problems, so as well as being higher in octane, its lubrication additives are regarded as the best (at least the last time I read about such issues which was a year or two ago).

Another problem with Euroean engines has been our sulphur content. BMW especially did not like the amount of sulphur in our Australian fuel, and it wasn't until only a few years ago that their engines were adapted to happily run such fuels without longevity issues. So in Aus. Its best to have a recent BMW and some other Euro brands, or find a fuel with a low sulphur content.

In Australia we also have had problems with Asian diesel fuels. A way to lower the cost of the fuel has been to add other fuels, such as kerosene. Many trucks and turbo 4WDs suffered enormous expense without recompense due to the pre - detonation of such poor fuels in their highly stressed engines. Evidently it was not possable to proove that the situation of kerosene being substituted because of the mix of many outlets types of distillate. The major companies, such as shell, have therefor benefited as their diesels are local and pure and have been claimed not to have been effected by the illegal substition of distillate with inferior and incorrect fuels.

In some engines, using a higher octane fuel improves fuel consumption and hence the higher price is justified, with the detergents becoming a free benefit (as long as they work in a higher performance engine).

[Cory Padfield]

FordFan,

(R+M)/2 means that the listed octane number is the mean of Research Octane Number and the Motor Octane Number. These are two different ways to measure fuel content.

[FordFan]

Thanks.

Now, if I only know what the difference is between research and motor octane numbers . . .?

[John Galt]

Originally posted by goGoGene
Well, the other day I was running low and filled up at "76" instead.

ggg

"Not just any 76! The spirit of 76! 19th Avenue 76!"

[Christiaan]

theres a dude here doing research on inlet valve depostion due to various fuel additives. It is actually a problem here and in Cape Town especially where the major oil companies all share refineiries and the only difference is the additives. In Zimbabwe back in the days our fuel was 30% ethonal with no additives. It was red in colour. Now our fuel is from Libya and has no ethanol and is vey dirty BUT, it makes your engine fly.

[Cory Padfield]

A tidy explanation of octane numbers resides at:

http://www.osbornauto.com/octane.htm

[EddieJF1]

When I lived in Ohio, I always used '76' or Sunoco (get on that 94 ) because of the extra power I noticed when using either gas. Now I generally go to Mobil or Amoco because of the convenience. Shell is usually more expensive and not on my usual route, but I'll stop there if it's the best to pick from (unlike the water Speedway or RaceTrac serve up).

Another brand that was popular for being crap (at least in OH) was BP. Everyone stayed away from BP unless the price was really cheap. I did notice while stopped in Orlando that the BP stations pump logos now said 'Fueled by Amoco'.

[Flying Mantuan]

I can tell you I have family members that drive fuel trucks for the major fuel companies, that fill up where ever they need to, in order to complete their deliveries. So, I guess you never really know what you're burning. And, I have found that the performance level of my car can vary when filling up from the same station.

[355 boy]

Optimax on an optimally mapped engine can return 15%+ extra bhp on a dyno, and 5-10% on a regular engine. I know because I've seen the readouts on my freinds race car before and after mapping to suit optimax.

[StephenJK]

Not to beat the subject to death, but heard on the news this morning (Toronto) that Shell have setup a toll-free number you can call if you are having problems with your fuel gauge.

Apparently, Chrysler mini-vans and/or Dodge trucks have been experiencing failure of the fuel level sender in the tank. The problem is a buildup of "black gunk" that stops the sender from working.

I'm sure this is a local problem, as the petrochemical distillers in Southern Ontario are infamous for dirty fuels. I'm still not taking any chances. I never had good luck with Shell, especially in winter.