View Poll Results: What fuel do you use?
Shell V-power 91
67
89.33%
Sunoco Ultra 94
8
10.67%
Voters: 75. You may not vote on this poll
What do you use? 91octane V-Power or Sunoco Ultra 94
07-17-2010, 11:33 AM
#31
Pocket Sand
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ask Rusty Shackleford.
Posts: 7,649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ultra 94 is the only thing that will keep my 7 psi S/C 928 from detonating at high RPM's. I even hooked up the octane loop on the computer to retard the timing 3 deg and it still pinged on 91. Ultra 94, no problem stock timing. It is a little sooty out the pipe though.
N/A guys in stock water-pumpers can do fine with 91 V-Power tho. My 996 C2 runs better on 91, gets slightly better mileage (both computer and hand calculated...because i'm a nerd) and the fuel lasts longer sitting around between uses. The only shameful part of it is using fuel designed for Ferrari in a Porsche
My 2 cents (.3 cents US).
07-17-2010, 11:39 AM
#32
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: on the waterfront, Kobe, Japan
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
in the p-car & last car use chevron 94, pump clearly notes it contains no ethanol, and its the only gas that comes out of its own individual pump.
never encountered any pre-ignition/knocking issues with it in any mode.
07-17-2010, 01:30 PM
#33
Rennlist Member
Matt, I agree with your comments but how would you explain the survey results? Pack mentality?
>>> More than likely, yes. In fairness, Shell does a lot of (good) advertising, and there is no question that ethanol is a dirty, political, short-sighted screw job foisted on the public. It's harmful to old injection systems (CIS and others), provides lower fuel economy since it inherently has less power, and mixes nicely with the condensation in your tank over time. Lot's of negatives for ethanol for sure. The question is what's worse? Low probability of injection issues on modern cars, or detonation? I worry more about the latter, especially under heavy load. If I was just tooling around for a leisurely drive, I wouldn't worry a bit.
As stated above, I have switched to V-Power due to the "concern" over ethanol but I must admit that I am uncomfortable with its low octane rating.
You seem to know what you are talking about. Would you care to elaborate on your comments? It really is a bit obscure at the moment. Should ethanol really be a concern or is octane the only parameter worth tracking?
>>> I'm definitely not an expert, but have done a lot of reading over the years, paying particular attention to mechanics that maintain and rebuild air-cooled engines. The same would apply to engines with forced induction - they all run hot.
In cars that run hot (air cooled, severe loads, track, high ambient temps), I believe the benefits of higher octane outweigh the downside. That said, I don't run the tank low to keep condensation down, and I switch to Shell 91 as soon as the weather cools and track season is over. Definity for long-term winter storage.
I have sent an e-mail to Sunoco to ask about this and will report if they do.
>>> More than likely, yes. In fairness, Shell does a lot of (good) advertising, and there is no question that ethanol is a dirty, political, short-sighted screw job foisted on the public. It's harmful to old injection systems (CIS and others), provides lower fuel economy since it inherently has less power, and mixes nicely with the condensation in your tank over time. Lot's of negatives for ethanol for sure. The question is what's worse? Low probability of injection issues on modern cars, or detonation? I worry more about the latter, especially under heavy load. If I was just tooling around for a leisurely drive, I wouldn't worry a bit.
As stated above, I have switched to V-Power due to the "concern" over ethanol but I must admit that I am uncomfortable with its low octane rating.
You seem to know what you are talking about. Would you care to elaborate on your comments? It really is a bit obscure at the moment. Should ethanol really be a concern or is octane the only parameter worth tracking?
>>> I'm definitely not an expert, but have done a lot of reading over the years, paying particular attention to mechanics that maintain and rebuild air-cooled engines. The same would apply to engines with forced induction - they all run hot.
In cars that run hot (air cooled, severe loads, track, high ambient temps), I believe the benefits of higher octane outweigh the downside. That said, I don't run the tank low to keep condensation down, and I switch to Shell 91 as soon as the weather cools and track season is over. Definity for long-term winter storage.
I have sent an e-mail to Sunoco to ask about this and will report if they do.
Matt
07-17-2010, 07:44 PM
#36
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: on the waterfront, Kobe, Japan
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
07-17-2010, 08:07 PM
#37
Rennlist Member
Yup, my favorite city in Canada, I feel sad every time I leave it and I'm there 6+ times a year. Sat on the pub-side deck of Bridges on Wednesday evening with a couple of friends taking in the scenery...glorious!
07-17-2010, 08:30 PM
#38
fwiw, I've never noticed any difference in performance between Shell 91, Sunoco 94, Esso 91 or even regular cheap stuff, the few times that's all that's been available. I figure even the cheapest stuff available today is better than the best stuff they had in 1972, so it's not surprising I don't notice any difference. I use the Shell 91 in the hope that it'll be better for the engine over the long run.
07-17-2010, 10:42 PM
#39
Rennlist Member
Shell V-Power because that station is nearby and the previous owner mentioned something about using it.
As far as the octane value, I think we're getting ripped. I buy Shell V-Power 100 in Europe which is about a 95 in our rating system.
07-18-2010, 12:10 AM
#41
Race Car
I've wondered the same thing, but I've never known anyone with a vintage 911 (or any other vintage car, for that matter) that uses leaded fuel, not that you could find it anywhere around here. We all just use regular gas.
07-19-2010, 10:34 AM
#42
Race Car
fwiw, I've never noticed any difference in performance between Shell 91, Sunoco 94, Esso 91 or even regular cheap stuff, the few times that's all that's been available. I figure even the cheapest stuff available today is better than the best stuff they had in 1972, so it's not surprising I don't notice any difference. I use the Shell 91 in the hope that it'll be better for the engine over the long run.
I'm thinkin' Ronan's additive idea might be worth the expense. Anyone done any experimenting?
07-19-2010, 11:25 AM
#43
Drifting
I'll let you in on a little secret thanks to the next door guy who works as an engineer for a major fuel company who run the last cracking plant in in Eastern Canada (Sarnia) after Montreal is shut down:
There is only ONE base fuel for sale in Ontario. The tanker truck drivers mix the 'packages' into the tankers when they fill up. Each company has their 'secret' blend that is dumped in for them. He laughed at me when I was like, 'But, but, but...' "The marketing works huh", was his reply?
Most of the cost factor in fuel (other then crude) is not reseach costs - but marketing overhead. We should all be pizzed off that we have the worst fuel in the G20 before we go on about RON ratings. Europe wouldn't run construction vehicles on that crap we call diesel. We still have trace sulfer in our fuel that is a throw back to the old cracking process which is one of the reasons the Monteal facility is closing after near on 100 years of operation in the same location. We are held hostage to the US market as most of our fuel heads south and is made for low US spec's. Until they change expect the same crap as usual. Diesel *may* be changed by 2014 to match euro standards but don't hold your breath.
There is only ONE base fuel for sale in Ontario. The tanker truck drivers mix the 'packages' into the tankers when they fill up. Each company has their 'secret' blend that is dumped in for them. He laughed at me when I was like, 'But, but, but...' "The marketing works huh", was his reply?
Most of the cost factor in fuel (other then crude) is not reseach costs - but marketing overhead. We should all be pizzed off that we have the worst fuel in the G20 before we go on about RON ratings. Europe wouldn't run construction vehicles on that crap we call diesel. We still have trace sulfer in our fuel that is a throw back to the old cracking process which is one of the reasons the Monteal facility is closing after near on 100 years of operation in the same location. We are held hostage to the US market as most of our fuel heads south and is made for low US spec's. Until they change expect the same crap as usual. Diesel *may* be changed by 2014 to match euro standards but don't hold your breath.
07-19-2010, 11:48 AM
#45
Drifting
I use the 91 at Cdn Tire almost exclusively in our vehicles that require Premium for the past 5 yrs. Mostly due to the 'Gas Advantage Card' which allows us to save 8c (was 10c) per liter.
We probably put close to 60,000km on our vehicles each year, plus boats, watercraft and sleds. The savings is fairly significant.
TOworker, interesting comment on the marketting.. I would say about the same thing with most domestic beers. I may drive a Porsche, but I drink Lakeport while working in the garage or in the basement. I get ribbed about it to no end.
I also tease my bro-in-laws about marketting and their MBA's.... They work for the big 3 mobility companies, and I always kid them that the pimplefaced teenager at the Wireless Wave kiosk probably sold more cell phones than they did.....
P
We probably put close to 60,000km on our vehicles each year, plus boats, watercraft and sleds. The savings is fairly significant.
TOworker, interesting comment on the marketting.. I would say about the same thing with most domestic beers. I may drive a Porsche, but I drink Lakeport while working in the garage or in the basement. I get ribbed about it to no end.
I also tease my bro-in-laws about marketting and their MBA's.... They work for the big 3 mobility companies, and I always kid them that the pimplefaced teenager at the Wireless Wave kiosk probably sold more cell phones than they did.....
P