Arjan B.

In my home town we pay for a US gallon [3.6 liters] 5.48 US Dollar.........
Regualr fuel [95 European octane, 93 US octane] we pay 4.88 Us Dollar per Gallon.

I will try V- Power the next month and will let you know the result.

V-power should give more torque, and cleaner valves etc. Shell Pura [before V-power] was already a good fuel with good performances.

We'll see...............

Irishdriver

The German Super plus must be 98 - in order to ensure they always are 98 Octane most producers exceed the requirement. Shell decided that they could make a marketing point here by saying the Optimax was cleaner and more powerful. Whatever it is, it seriously more expensive than other brands of super plus.

If the car really had so much of a power increase as they imply - many cars in Germany would no longer be legal if they used the petrol !!!

My opinion is it's just hype and marketing - I did try it and found no noticable difference.

Can't say if you would notice after 100,000km but you'll have more than spent the cost of a top end rebuild.

Rob W.

I use Optimax over here in the UK without fail. I get at least 10% better economy with it, which cancels out the extra cost and the car feels crisper. I do c25k miles a year, so I reckon it's worth it.

Rob W

Computamedic

Just to add my 2 cents worth I've used Optimax in a variety of "higher" performance saloons (3 litre V6 Peugeot & Renault) as well as my wife's 325 BMW. I exclusively use it in the C4 and I'm convinced that the cars seem to feel more responsive. The cleanliness issue can only be proved by stripping the engine but I'm happy to pay the premium - if only 'coz it "feels" better. I also think the fuel economy is better with Optimax compared to standard unleaded.

Dave

Christer

I used Optimax on my C2 when it was standard, and found that I could detect a slight increase in power in the higher gears (obviously it was there in the lower gears too, but couldn't detect it). I didn't take note of any fuel consumption changes so decided it wasn't really worth it. Now I have to use 97/98 RON fuel, so at least it takes the decision away from me...!

springer3

I don't believe you are correct that the two numbers are intended to simulate different engine loading. Both methods (RON and MON) compare the fuel to iso-octane, which is the referece for anti-knock performance, and has an assigned anti-knock value of 100. The motor method uses a test motor which has variable compression ratio (there is device simialar to a jack for a connecting rod). The research method is based on chemical comparision of the fuel. You are correct that the (RON) is typically higher than the MON.

I suspect, but don't know for sure, that the inflated RON numbers were developed to hype the octane rating, a pure marketing ploy. Anyone remember the Sunoco pumps that had a dial where you could dial any octane number up to "260"? You can bet that was the RON!

Arjan B.

On 100.000 kilometers that would be a more price of 100.000/10= 10.000 liters, 10.000 liters X 0,04 cents [difference between 95 octane and V-power overhere] = a total of 400 Euro's [ 480 US Dollar.] I think a top end rebuilt will cost slightly more then that............

Irishdriver

Well here the V-power 100 costs 1,299 Euros per litre.
You can get other petrols for up to 10 cents less - This gives about 1000 Euro for the head rebuild.

About your fuel consumption, if you admit that 13 - 15 L/100 Km is nearer reality (with the odd visit to 20 litres/100km) then you could have up to 1,500 Euro towards renewing the valves.

OK so It's not enough for a complete rebuild - and you've told me a million times not to exaggerate.....

Arjan B.

Irish driver, I know what you mean. It doesn't matter. I just going to test it, and if the profit is more then the costs, I will fill it every time, otherwise I will go back to mty Total Euro 95 Fuel.......

Great day!

springer3

Enough semantics. I agree with you on the effect of the two ratings. I merely pointed out that there was no intent to reflect different conditions.

The motor method better represents anti-knock performance under heavy loads. It is, after all, run on a real spark-ignition test motor under load. Onset of detonation is monitored while the compression ratio is gradually increased. The research method is a shortcut, and it does not require expensive and time consuming motor runs.

Who worries about knocking during "mild driving without consistent heavy loads on the engine"? If you get knocking under those conditions, won't you have major problems when you climb the first hill on a hot day? Silly questions.

Jay H

In my area of the Midwest, we'll see premium fuels rated anywhere from 91 to 93, depending on the gas station. My observation is the premium is usually rated at 92 or 93. If it's 91, I tend to move to the next station where the rating is higher (for usually the same price). Race gas (@100) is available in very select and limited locations.

Jay
90 964