 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / UK Car Forums / General Car Topics (UK group) / July 2009Tesco diesel...
Yes I know it all comes from the same pot but...... After filling up on nowt but Shell, BP and Esso for the last 6 months, I put a tank full of Tescos best quality DERV in the Mondeo. Within 20 miles it was running like a bag-o-shite with a few flat spots during acceleration and fuel economy has dropped off about 10% too. Ah well. Only another 580 miles to go then it can have some decent stuff and a squirt of Wynns.  SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams > Yes I know it all comes from the same pot but...... > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Ah well. Only another 580 miles to go then it can have some decent > stuff and a squirt of Wynns. It's the additives - of lack thereof - that makes the difference. For what it's worth, Tesco's 99 RON superunleaded _appears_ to show noticeably poorer mileage in my turbopetrol compared with all other fuels I've so far tried. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com > It's the additives - of lack thereof - that makes the difference. > > For what it's worth, Tesco's 99 RON superunleaded _appears_ to show > noticeably poorer mileage in my turbopetrol compared with all other fuels > I've so far tried. Weirdly, I always used to think the extra couple of RONs in the Tesco stuff compared to, say, BP Ultimate, made it the better choice - though I never made anything remotely near to a proper comparison. What's the general consensus in terms of what's better out of BP Ultimate or Shell Optimax (if they're still using that brand name) ? Signature"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died." > > It's the additives - of lack thereof - that makes the difference. > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > What's the general consensus in terms of what's better out of BP Ultimate or > Shell Optimax (if they're still using that brand name) ? For most cars, it won't make any difference at all. However, I do suffer less carb icing on the shite old Ducati if I run it on Super in cooler weather. My friendly Duke mechanic looked at me as if I was some kind of pikey when he found out I used 'normal' fuel in it! SignatureSteveH 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo' Alfa 156 TSpark Sportwagon Veloce Selespeed - Alfa 75 TSpark Lusso - Ducati 750SS - BMW R100RT - Toyota Prius T-Spirit >> What's the general consensus in terms of what's better out of BP Ultimate >> or >> Shell Optimax (if they're still using that brand name) ? > > For most cars, it won't make any difference at all. Aye, it's only the Activa, but from what I've heard/read/guessed, a 150bhp 2 litre turbo petrol engine is on the cusp of the sort of power level where it'll start to be worthwhile putting the better stuff in. It *seems* slightly better with Ultimate compared to the normal stuff, but that's a hunch more than anything. > However, I do suffer less carb icing on the shite old Ducati if I run it > on Super in cooler weather. > > My friendly Duke mechanic looked at me as if I was some kind of pikey > when he found out I used 'normal' fuel in it! LOL! Signature"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died." "AstraVanMann" <peter@swerveweb.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > Aye, it's only the Activa, but from what I've heard/read/guessed, a > 150bhp 2 litre turbo petrol engine is on the cusp of the sort of power > level where it'll start to be worthwhile putting the better stuff in. > It *seems* slightly better with Ultimate compared to the normal stuff, > but that's a hunch more than anything. The TurboCT engine has a base map for 98RON, with a knock sensor. On 95, the boost is pulled back slightly. That's the engine that was in the XM I had for seven years... >> Aye, it's only the Activa, but from what I've heard/read/guessed, a >> 150bhp 2 litre turbo petrol engine is on the cusp of the sort of power [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The TurboCT engine has a base map for 98RON, with a knock sensor. On 95, > the boost is pulled back slightly. Cool. I'll do the Shell thing from now on! > That's the engine that was in the XM I had for seven years... Cracking engine, though it doesn't feel anywhere near as grunty as the 2.0 8v (with 1.8 head) in the Golf. Mainly 'cos the cabin's a lot more muted, I guess. I look forward to getting the Golf back on the road, but equally I'm bloody tempted to hang on to the Xantia, get things working 100% on it, and maybe keep it for trackdays :-) Signature"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died." >>> Aye, it's only the Activa, but from what I've heard/read/guessed, a >>> 150bhp 2 litre turbo petrol engine is on the cusp of the sort of power [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > but equally I'm bloody tempted to hang on to the Xantia, get things > working 100% on it, and maybe keep it for trackdays :-) I recommend getting bored with the Xantia and selling it to me :-p You can still come and play with it Mike P >> Cracking engine, though it doesn't feel anywhere near as grunty as the >> 2.0 8v (with 1.8 head) in the Golf. Mainly 'cos the cabin's a lot more [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > You can still come and play with it Don't tempt fate, for that outcome could end up being a pissibollity..... Signature"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died." >>> Cracking engine, though it doesn't feel anywhere near as grunty as the >>> 2.0 8v (with 1.8 head) in the Golf. Mainly 'cos the cabin's a lot [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Don't tempt fate, for that outcome could end up being a > pissibollity..... My drive has room. Just about :-) Mike P >>>> Aye, it's only the Activa, but from what I've heard/read/guessed, a >>>> 150bhp 2 litre turbo petrol engine is on the cusp of the sort of power [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > I recommend getting bored with the Xantia and selling it to me :-p Or me ;) > You can still come and play with it Ditto... >>> Cracking engine, though it doesn't feel anywhere near as grunty as the >>> 2.0 8v (with 1.8 head) in the Golf. Mainly 'cos the cabin's a lot more [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> > Ditto... Bloody hell, for the first time ever, loads of people are coming out of the woodwork just at the right time! Signature"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died." > Bloody hell, for the first time ever, loads of people are coming out of the > woodwork just at the right time! ITYM "closet" not "woodwork". > > Bloody hell, for the first time ever, loads of people are coming out of the > > woodwork just at the right time! > > ITYM "closet" not "woodwork". Oh I don't know, to quote "Woodwork squeaks and out come the ..." ;) SignatureCarl Robson Get cashback on your purchases Topcashback http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/skraggy_uk/ref/index.htm Greasypalm http://www.greasypalm.co.uk/r/?l=1006553 "AstraVanMann" <peter@swerveweb.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> That's the engine that was in the XM I had for seven years... > Cracking engine, though it doesn't feel anywhere near as grunty as the > 2.0 8v (with 1.8 head) in the Golf. Mainly 'cos the cabin's a lot more > muted, I guess. It's a very deceptive engine. Lots of people think it's an LPT, because of the low peak power - it's not, it peaks at about 0.8bar boost. But the boost is managed to cope with a relatively high compression and to give one serious torque curve. > "AstraVanMann" <peter@swerveweb.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like > they were saying: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the boost is managed to cope with a relatively high compression and to > give one serious torque curve. Same engine i had in my XM Estate. Lovely motor. Surprised a few people who didn't expect a car the size of a small house to go quite so fast round corners.. Mike P >> "AstraVanMann" <peter@swerveweb.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like >> they were saying: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > who didn't expect a car the size of a small house to go quite so fast > round corners.. I concur. Great engine. I would write, "I love low pressure turbos" even though it isn't, it merely feels like it. Saab's 150 bhp 1.8t (2.0 LPT) produces 0.5 bar of boost. The 175 bhp 2.0t (2.0 LPT) produces 0.7 or 0.75 bar as I remember. I think the 210 bhp 2.0T produces 0.85 bar. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com >>> What's the general consensus in terms of what's better out of BP >>> Ultimate or [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > *seems* slightly better with Ultimate compared to the normal stuff, but > that's a hunch more than anything. I have a 250bhp twin turbo and got the same or worse fuel consumption with the high octane stuff, Optimax or Tesco. In driving the difference is hardly noticeable, it certainly doesn't seem any more powerful. Its funny how people assume that its generally 'better' just because it costs more. The 'better' fuel for your car is the one that your engine has been set up for. The higher octane is only there to prevent knocking (detonation or pinging), it does not add power in itself. If your car isn't compensating for knocking on normal octane petrol then you get absolutely no benefit from the high octane stuff. That is why they sell it on the benefit of additives that supposedly keep your engine 'cleaner'. In the US their premium unleaded is about the same octane as our regular and their regular is lower than ours. My car is from the US so that probably explains why I don't see any benefit with our premium stuff. So if you're not seeing any quantifiable benefit from using super, then you're probably wasting your money, unless you like imagining that your engine is now nice and shiny on the inside. Z >>>> What's the general consensus in terms of what's better out of BP >>>> Ultimate or [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > In driving the difference is hardly noticeable, it certainly doesn't seem > any more powerful. Reading that backwards... you do detect some difference, then..? > Its funny how people assume that its generally 'better' just because it > costs more. Precisely, but then look at the majority of company cars parked around the country. > The 'better' fuel for your car is the one that your engine has been set up > for. The higher octane is only there to prevent knocking (detonation or > pinging), it does not add power in itself. If your car isn't compensating > for knocking on normal octane petrol then you get absolutely no benefit > from the high octane stuff. Yes absolutely - unless it can do something with the ability of the fuel not to burn so quickly, it cares not. > That is why they sell it on the benefit of additives that supposedly keep > your engine 'cleaner'. > In the US their premium unleaded is about the same octane as our regular > and their regular is lower than ours. My car is from the US so that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > you're probably wasting your money, unless you like imagining that your > engine is now nice and shiny on the inside. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com >> It's the additives - of lack thereof - that makes the difference. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > stuff compared to, say, BP Ultimate, made it the better choice - though I > never made anything remotely near to a proper comparison. Sort of - there's more to petrols than the RON rating. On super, a low pressure turbo (boost limited, whatever, heh) probably won't produce more outright power in the UK climate. It might be able to use more boost at the extremes of the rev range. > What's the general consensus in terms of what's better out of BP Ultimate > or Shell Optimax (if they're still using that brand name) ? "It depends." I have an application that logs my fuel usage ("surely not") and since I tell it where and what RON, it spits out what the mileage has been. My driving is very consistent... Over the last 20,600 miles and 2,467 litres, it tells me that for the following fuels the car has returned the following consumption figures. * * * * * BP 95 RON 37.3 BP 97 RON 37.5 So basically the same. Shell 95 RON 37.9 Shell 99 RON 39.1 Shell's V-Power appears more economical. Tesco 99 RON 37.1 I've not used Tesco's 95 RON fuel. Total 95 RON 39.2 Total 97 RON 39.7 Small difference. * * * * * At this point the data isn't reliable enough as this is only over a year, but it _looks_ as though Tesco's fuel is less economical. Total petrol is consistently more economical but their Excellium 97 stuff isn't worth it. In fact, no superunleaded is worth it from a MPG perspective in mine. Where the superunleaded may come into its own is in high ambient air temperatures, high load conditions... but in order to be seeing >38 mpg overall from a 1,350 kg, 2.0 turbocharged petrol car, well you can guess how often the car experiences these sorts of conditions! :) SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com >>> It's the additives - of lack thereof - that makes the difference. >>> [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > overall from a 1,350 kg, 2.0 turbocharged petrol car, well you can guess > how often the car experiences these sorts of conditions! :) My Saab 900 FPT was slightly less economical running on optimax. That's probably because I was using the bit of extra boost I got from it not knocking though. On OPtimax, the boost gauge went noticeably higher than on 95 ron in normal weather. However, in cold weather the same effect could be had just from the ambient temp with 95 ron Mike P > My Saab 900 FPT was slightly less economical running on optimax. That's > probably because I was using the bit of extra boost I got from it not > knocking though. On OPtimax, the boost gauge went noticeably higher than > on 95 ron in normal weather. However, in cold weather the same effect > could be had just from the ambient temp with 95 ron I pretty much always use Supermarket fuel. When I had the 84 T16S I used to use Sainsburys fuel because they had Super on the pumps when most supermarkets only had 95, LRP, Diesel on. I found that using Sainsburys 97 over 95 mean't fuel consumption stayed the same, but the engine ran just slightly cooler on the temp gauge. Rock solid level, just slightly low. SignatureCarl Robson Get cashback on your purchases Topcashback http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/skraggy_uk/ref/index.htm Greasypalm http://www.greasypalm.co.uk/r/?l=1006553 >> My Saab 900 FPT was slightly less economical running on optimax. That's >> probably because I was using the bit of extra boost I got from it not [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the same, but the engine ran just slightly cooler on the temp gauge. > Rock solid level, just slightly low. I'm not fussy. I use whatever is nearest when I need some... Mike P > "It depends." I have an application that logs my fuel usage ("surely > not") and since I tell it where and what RON, it spits out what the > mileage has been. > > My driving is very consistent... The weather isn't. Petrol is made of molecules between C3 and C15 with the mix varying seasonally. Consumption by fuel mass will vary less than consumption by volume because the SG can change by about 8%. I never bothered to record where I filled up but a seasonal effect of that sort shows in a car I owned for 10 years. If you are going to make comparisons the numbers can only make sense if you take a sample of each and measure the SG. Even so, I doubt you can say that your driving is consistent seasonally either - when driving in good daylight your anticipation will be almost certainly be better than in the dark. "DavidR" <curedham@4bidden.org.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> "It depends." I have an application that logs my fuel usage ("surely >> not") and since I tell it where and what RON, it spits out what the >> mileage has been. >> >> My driving is very consistent... > The weather isn't. Petrol is made of molecules between C3 and C15 with > the mix varying seasonally. Consumption by fuel mass will vary less than > consumption by volume because the SG can change by about 8%. I never > bothered to record where I filled up but a seasonal effect of that sort > shows in a car I owned for 10 years. Even ignoring the seasonal effect on fuel, cold starts require a richer mixture for longer when the weather's cold. >> "It depends." I have an application that logs my fuel usage ("surely >> not") and since I tell it where and what RON, it spits out what the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the numbers can only make sense if you take a sample of each and measure > the SG. Heh. I do have temperatures for a good proportion of the driving, but as you say there are so many variables so now, all I do is fill in what it wants. > Even so, I doubt you can say that your driving is consistent seasonally > either - when driving in good daylight your anticipation will be almost > certainly be better than in the dark. Hmm. Can't be proven one way or the other. There's the traditional summer rise, winter fall, associated with the fuel (more so with diesel than petrol) and the temperature (more so with petrol than diesel, heh), perhaps less so with my driving. The driving remains as consistent as ever. It takes the same amount of time from engine start up to reach given markers on my commute in, for example, plus or minus a minute or so (statistical noise). The consumption range is 33.1 to 42.1 with a beautiful bell curve for the results (i.e. very few at the extremes, lots in the middle). Meh. Too tired to worry about it now! SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com > "DavidR" <curedham@4bidden.org.uk> wrote in message >>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > you say there are so many variables so now, all I do is fill in what it > wants. You can record as many variables as you like but you still need to know the properties of the petrol. >> Even so, I doubt you can say that your driving is consistent seasonally >> either - when driving in good daylight your anticipation will be almost [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to reach given markers on my commute in, for example, plus or minus a > minute or so (statistical noise). Sorry, I can't accept average speed as proof of consistent driving style. >> "DavidR" <curedham@4bidden.org.uk> wrote in message >>>> [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > Sorry, I can't accept average speed as proof of consistent driving style. Fair dues; it works for me. I don't have OBD-II Calculated Load, Throttle Setting for all of the driving either, but the cruise control works the same way, I see the same average speed and consumption day in, day out... SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com > Fair dues; it works for me. I don't have OBD-II Calculated Load, Throttle > Setting for all of the driving either, but the cruise control works the > same way, I see the same average speed and consumption day in, day out... You have far too much time on your hands. >> Fair dues; it works for me. I don't have OBD-II Calculated Load, >> Throttle Setting for all of the driving either, but the cruise control >> works the same way, I see the same average speed and consumption day >> in, day out... > > You have far too much time on your hands. It is somewhat worrying innit? SignaturePete M - OMF#9 '62 Rover P4 100 '61 Rover P5 3 litre '72 Rover P6 3500 Auto '78 Escort 1300 Sport '96 Volvo 850 T5 CD Estate "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move." >>> Fair dues; it works for me. I don't have OBD-II Calculated Load, >>> Throttle Setting for all of the driving either, but the cruise control [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > It is somewhat worrying innit? Meh; not really as the car tells me these things. I unfortunately have to work with statistics day in, day out and can't help remembering statistics. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com > Yes I know it all comes from the same pot but...... It doesn't; Tesco diesel is Greenergy bio-diesel, from their own dedicated tanks with the possibility of their own special silicon-based additives. > After filling up on nowt but Shell, BP and Esso for the last 6 months, > I put a tank full of Tescos best quality DERV in the Mondeo. Within 20 > miles it was running like a bag-o-shite with a few flat spots during > acceleration and fuel economy has dropped off about 10% too. |
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
|
©2009 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.