 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Australian Car Forums / General Car Topics (Australian group) / October 2006Shell V-Power changeover from Optimax
I've been occasionally filling up with Optimax over the years and the trip computers in both my Fairmonts (1997 EL and 2002 AUIII) have ALWAYS reported higher than normal consumption, around 14.5L/100km. Normal unleaded averages around the mid-high 13's Recently a full of Optimax tank was showing in the low 12's. The other day I filled up with the new "V-Power" and this tank is also showing in the low 12's. Did they cut over to the new mix before changing the name? Assuming the trip computer is reasonably accurate it looks like a nice change. If it can consistently pull off low-mid 12's consumption in my car then it will actually be marginally cheaper than standard unleaded... to the tune of about $1.50 per year. ;) >Recently a full of Optimax tank was showing in the low 12's. The other >day I filled up with the new "V-Power" and this tank is also showing in >the low 12's. Did they cut over to the new mix before changing the >name? Since it's highly likely that both brands come from the same bulk terminal, most likely the refinery (or terminal) supplying your area has changed. Caltex and Shell have reciprocal arrangements in various parts of Australia, as do most other oil companies. A bit of time with google would probably reveal what distribution arrangements apply in your particular locality.  SignatureJohn H >Caltex and Shell have reciprocal arrangements in various parts of >Australia, as do most other oil companies. A bit of time with google >would probably reveal what distribution arrangements apply in your >particular locality. Apolgies for misreading it... I thought you'd changed brands. Looks like they're now selling the same stuff under different names for the same brand as well as different names for different brands. Not that I ever bother to read what it says on their bowsers... it only confuses the issue. :) SignatureJohn H >>Caltex and Shell have reciprocal arrangements in various parts of >>Australia, as do most other oil companies. A bit of time with google >>would probably reveal what distribution arrangements apply in your >>particular locality. > >Apolgies for misreading it... I thought you'd changed brands. >Looks like they're now selling the same stuff under different names >for the same brand as well as different names for different brands. > >Not that I ever bother to read what it says on their bowsers... it >only confuses the issue. :) and is Shell Optimax ethanol 98? >>> Caltex and Shell have reciprocal arrangements in various parts of >>> Australia, as do most other oil companies. A bit of time with google [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> only confuses the issue. :) > and is Shell Optimax ethanol 98? Nope Shell optimax98 is full blend shell optimax plus/vpower racing is 100 octane 5% ethanol blend >>> Caltex and Shell have reciprocal arrangements in various parts of >>> Australia, as do most other oil companies. A bit of time with google [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> only confuses the issue. :) > and is Shell Optimax ethanol 98? Nope Shell optimax98 is full blend shell optimax plus/vpower racing is 100 octane 5% ethanol blend > I've been occasionally filling up with Optimax over the years and the > trip computers in both my Fairmonts (1997 EL and 2002 AUIII) have [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > car then it will actually be marginally cheaper than standard > unleaded... to the tune of about $1.50 per year. ;) I hope your Fairmonts are V8s, those are pretty bad figures. I got mid 13's from my EB and EF XR8's (sadly, these were not quarter mile times). Brett > > I've been occasionally filling up with Optimax over the years and the > > trip computers in both my Fairmonts (1997 EL and 2002 AUIII) have > > ALWAYS reported higher than normal consumption, around 14.5L/100km. > > Normal unleaded averages around the mid-high 13's [...] > I hope your Fairmonts are V8s, those are pretty bad figures. I got mid 13's > from my EB and EF XR8's (sadly, these were not quarter mile times). Nup, standard inline 6. Can you really compare two drivers living in two different areas directly anyway? >> > I've been occasionally filling up with Optimax over the years and the >> > trip computers in both my Fairmonts (1997 EL and 2002 AUIII) have [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Nup, standard inline 6. Can you really compare two drivers living in > two different areas directly anyway? Probably not without some explanation. I can only assume you drive up very steep hills through stop-start traffic to get figures that bad. Brett > >> > I've been occasionally filling up with Optimax over the years and the > >> > trip computers in both my Fairmonts (1997 EL and 2002 AUIII) have [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Probably not without some explanation. I can only assume you drive up very > steep hills through stop-start traffic to get figures that bad. Could be that the automatic climate control keeps the A/C going regardless of the temp. (Of course in cooler weather its duty cycle is a low lower) I live in a fringe suburb so the trips that would normally be done on foot closer to the city are just a little too far, but not really *long*. I'm also a big guy (197cm / 120kg) , and have to cart around a pram and baby seat regardless of whether the little darling is in the car with me :) Anyways, the point of the thread... relative to my usage, v-power seems more efficient than standard unleaded. I'll fill up a couple more times and see how it goes. > I've been occasionally filling up with Optimax over the years and the > trip computers in both my Fairmonts (1997 EL and 2002 AUIII) have > ALWAYS reported higher than normal consumption, around 14.5L/100km. > Normal unleaded averages around the mid-high 13's ~~~~~~~~~~~~ You're wasting money on higher octane fuel. -- Go.RON91.as.your.car.is.designed.for.that. >> I've been occasionally filling up with Optimax over the years and the >> trip computers in both my Fairmonts (1997 EL and 2002 AUIII) have [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > -- > Go.RON91.as.your.car.is.designed.for.that. Correct. Some wally claimed high octane fuel had better energy density (i.e. kJ/kg) but extensive testing on my old XR8 a few years ago seemed to prove that wasn't the case. Brett > I've been occasionally filling up with Optimax over the years and the > trip computers in both my Fairmonts (1997 EL and 2002 AUIII) have [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > car then it will actually be marginally cheaper than standard > unleaded... to the tune of about $1.50 per year. ;) It's all quite simple really. NEVER put anything in your car it doesn't need, especially a Ford. Because it is a Ford it will need lots and lots of genuine parts every day, but you get over it.. thankyou. > > I've been occasionally filling up with Optimax over the years and the > > trip computers in both my Fairmonts (1997 EL and 2002 AUIII) have [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > need, especially a Ford. Because it is a Ford it will need lots and lots of > genuine parts every day, but you get over it.. Still waiting for someone to tell me why I shouldn't use v-power if it works out equal or CHEAPER to standard unleaded..... what's wrong with the product? > Still waiting for someone to tell me why I shouldn't use v-power if it > works out equal or CHEAPER to standard unleaded..... what's wrong with > the product? If it doesn't cost you more to run the car on V-power then you should use it IMHO, as it's supposed to be cleaner than regular unleaded resulting in less injector problems, according to my mechanic. SignatureBen Car related lyric of the week: "Can't you see me, overtakin? All the while I'm salivating. Won't you let me push a little thrust up you?" >> Still waiting for someone to tell me why I shouldn't use v-power if it >> works out equal or CHEAPER to standard unleaded..... what's wrong with [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > use it IMHO, as it's supposed to be cleaner than regular unleaded > resulting in less injector problems, according to my mechanic. Had a meeting on the new Caltex E10 yesterday(they started to deliver it to servos WITHOUT telling us) even caltex told us that the E10 has a lower energy content and your car would not be as efficient(use more fuel) and that E10 does not produce lower harmful emissions than normal ULP and then you still have the problem of water, though this you can test for yourself, get some water finding paste, place some fuel from the bowser into a clean stainless steen container with a smear of paste on teh bottom, if no colour change happens then you can check for water suspended, take a stainless steel rod, again with a smear of paste and swirl around in the fuel, again if no colour change happens then the fuel should be fine to use by all means use it if your car runs better on it, but make sure you monitor your engine and fuel system and be very suspicious of "Joe's Discount Petrol" Kev > Had a meeting on the new Caltex E10 yesterday(they started to deliver it > to servos WITHOUT telling us) > even caltex told us that the E10 has a lower energy content and your car > would not be as efficient(use more fuel) and that E10 does not produce > lower harmful emissions than normal ULP I think some people in this thread have been confused by the similar names that Shell have given to two very different products... "V-Power" has no ethanol. This is the product I'm talking about. "V-Power Racing" does contain ethanol. FWIW, I was one of the people confused too. The only hint that "racing" was a different fuel was the mention of ethanol by one poster, when I had seen it stated in the V-Power FAQ that it did *not* contain ethanol. If I hadn't read that FAQ, or seen the ethanol post, then I would have assumed they were referring to the same thing. Way to go, Shell. :) >>Had a meeting on the new Caltex E10 yesterday(they started to deliver it >>to servos WITHOUT telling us) [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > would have assumed they were referring to the same thing. Way to go, > Shell. :) yeah their pump markings are a bit lacking in info and can be a bit confusing Kev > Still waiting for someone to tell me why I shouldn't use v-power if it > works out equal or CHEAPER to standard unleaded..... what's wrong with > the product? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V-power costs about 8 cpl more than ULP. If you're consuming 11 ltrs/100km of ULP, you should do better than 10.3 ltrs/100km of V-Power to get the benefit. Are you achieving that with V-power? -- It's.all.simple.maths I cant get from Junee to Newcastle on a full tank (40 L) of regular unleaded. (No premium or Ultra in Junee) which is about 610 km. But I can drive from Newcastle to Junee (same distance) and 1 or 2 trips in to Wagga (around 725-750 km) on ultra.. Haven't tried V-Power yet but I will as soon as my tank is empty. My new Swift Sport only runs on Ultra, but I will certainly be trying V-Power Racing.. >> Still waiting for someone to tell me why I shouldn't use v-power if it >> works out equal or CHEAPER to standard unleaded..... what's wrong with [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > -- > It's.all.simple.maths > I cant get from Junee to Newcastle on a full tank (40 L) of regular > unleaded. (No premium or Ultra in Junee) which is about 610 km. But I can [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> -- >> It's.all.simple.maths You might not if it's still 17cpl more than regular unleaded. No WAY they can justify that IMNSHO. SignatureBen Car related lyric of the week: "Can't you see me, overtakin? All the while I'm salivating. Won't you let me push a little thrust up you?" > > Still waiting for someone to tell me why I shouldn't use v-power if it > > works out equal or CHEAPER to standard unleaded..... what's wrong with [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Are you achieving that with V-power? Assuming standard ULP costs $1.20/L and I'm travelling 100km: 13.5 litres of standard ULP is $16.20 12.5 litres of v-power (at $1.28/L) is $16.00. Cheaper. If v-power is +10c then 12.5 litres of it costs $16.25, which is 5c more than ULP (or about 25-30c per Falcon/Fairmont tank). If the consumption is a fraction lower at 12.4L/100km then once again the total cost drops below that of standard ULP. Going on these broad L/100km figures for my car, changing from standard ULP to v-power will increase efficiency by about 8%... which coincidentally is very close to the difference you pay by filling up with a premium priced fuel like v-power. The effective cost difference to fill a tank is near neutral. >> > Still waiting for someone to tell me why I shouldn't use v-power if it >> > works out equal or CHEAPER to standard unleaded..... what's wrong with [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > with a premium priced fuel like v-power. The effective cost difference > to fill a tank is near neutral. You think the oil co's don't know that? Some people here assume the oil co's know nothing and are just trying to rip us all off. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.