Shell v power or tesco momentum. Which 99 is better for tuned 2.0 Tfsi KO4
- Thread starter WeeG
- Start date
Poverty
Guest
I always thought this, but from what ive figured, its far easier for an engine to detect pre-det/pinking from going from 99 to 95 than it is for an ecu to adapt from running 95 then running 99, logically the ecu will adapt in increments advancing ignition/ boost/ fueling etc until it once again detects pre-det or reaches its desired ignition timing , if you all of a sudden stick 95 in it'll knock as soon as its purged through and the ecu will adapt right away pulling the timing etc,
pure speculation, but its one theory,
& me too, no cf's or boost issues running tescos 99, never really used v-power,
Last edited:
Cheers for all the opinions folks tests momentum is closer to me. As long as the car runs fine with both that's Kl with me
tests momentum is closer to me. As long as the car runs fine with both that's Kl with me
There was a thread posted a week or so ago with the link, I don't have it to hand but it should come up in a search
Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2
Fair enough. I use momentum and am more than happy with the performance and price. Also glad to see price has dropped 5p in a week too
check thorney motorsport....apparantly the summary concluded IIRC that they all performed the same (or very similar) but the tesco 'felt' quicker in the real world
plus i can use my tesco card
plus i can use my tesco card
Fair enough. I use momentum and am more than happy with the performance and price. Also glad to see price has dropped 5p in a week too
This is the link
http://www.thorneymotorsport.co.uk/tuning/Fuel_Test_Results_Update.shtml
I still run regular / premium unleaded as the cost is far to much for the miles I do in my cupra
Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2
Cheers. For the £3 extra per tank I get about 30 miles more than standard 95 & added performance.
The ECU is a computer that has multiple sensors (stating the obvious, I know ) to 'keep an eye' on what's happening within the engine and other systems, it reacts instantly to any changes. A change in fuel should be recognized pretty much immediately by an ECU as the increased octane level will change what is happening within the combustion chamber which is something the ECU will react to within milliseconds .... not sure where the idea of the need of running the car in on a full tank came from but it seems to be a common one?
Most of the point of higher octane fuels is also to reduce the tendency of similar density fuels to detonate (knock) under compression due to higher activation energy requirements and therefore makes them more efficient and better for the engine. This becomes important at full throttle where the manifold pressure can be equal to or > atmospheric pressure (in the case of turbo charged engines). In my view the less likely the fuel is to 'knock' then the more efficient it will be, particularly at full throttle, giving an increase in power produced and smoother power curve.
A common misconception seems to be that higher octane fuels increase the hydrocarbon or oxygen availability and therefore produces an increase in power and fuel efficiency, which is not the case as a higher octane fuel have no direct effect on hydrocarbon or oxygen availability.
The effect will be on the air/fuel ration with higher octane fuels being more efficient and therefore not needig to be as high in the ration mix, using less fuel I know I commonly achieve 5-8mpg more on higher octane fuels.... but then I do like to open the throttle
Without meaning to be offensive, the idea that there is only a placebo affect in using higher octane fuels in performance engines is ridiculous and disproven in many tests, even those done by 'car mags'.
I have not researched to find out the reasons that might be behind why I find Tesco Momentum 99 RON fuel not as smooth and certainly not as efficient as BP/Shell 97 RON fuel.... maybe it was a bad batch that I used in the cupra, only tried it once. I know have preferred T99 in previous cars .... maybe i'll give it another go?
) to 'keep an eye' on what's happening within the engine and other systems, it reacts instantly to any changes. A change in fuel should be recognized pretty much immediately by an ECU as the increased octane level will change what is happening within the combustion chamber which is something the ECU will react to within milliseconds .... not sure where the idea of the need of running the car in on a full tank came from but it seems to be a common one?Most of the point of higher octane fuels is also to reduce the tendency of similar density fuels to detonate (knock) under compression due to higher activation energy requirements and therefore makes them more efficient and better for the engine. This becomes important at full throttle where the manifold pressure can be equal to or > atmospheric pressure (in the case of turbo charged engines). In my view the less likely the fuel is to 'knock' then the more efficient it will be, particularly at full throttle, giving an increase in power produced and smoother power curve.
A common misconception seems to be that higher octane fuels increase the hydrocarbon or oxygen availability and therefore produces an increase in power and fuel efficiency, which is not the case as a higher octane fuel have no direct effect on hydrocarbon or oxygen availability.
The effect will be on the air/fuel ration with higher octane fuels being more efficient and therefore not needig to be as high in the ration mix, using less fuel
I know I commonly achieve 5-8mpg more on higher octane fuels.... but then I do like to open the throttle Without meaning to be offensive, the idea that there is only a placebo affect in using higher octane fuels in performance engines is ridiculous and disproven in many tests, even those done by 'car mags'.
I have not researched to find out the reasons that might be behind why I find Tesco Momentum 99 RON fuel not as smooth and certainly not as efficient as BP/Shell 97 RON fuel.... maybe it was a bad batch that I used in the cupra, only tried it once. I know have preferred T99 in previous cars .... maybe i'll give it another go?
That sort if hits the nail on the head. I find straight away my mpg improves with a higher octane fuel. But because power I's only minimal. Average 5 bhp you won't really notice it like a kick I'n the back but it I's their. Try doing a top speed run with both fuels and then u will see the difference more clearly.
The ECU is a computer that has multiple sensors (stating the obvious, I know
Most of the point of higher octane fuels is also to reduce the tendency of similar density fuels to detonate (knock) under compression due to higher activation energy requirements and therefore makes them more efficient and better for the engine. This becomes important at full throttle where the manifold pressure can be equal to or > atmospheric pressure (in the case of turbo charged engines). In my view the less likely the fuel is to 'knock' then the more efficient it will be, particularly at full throttle, giving an increase in power produced and smoother power curve.
A common misconception seems to be that higher octane fuels increase the hydrocarbon or oxygen availability and therefore produces an increase in power and fuel efficiency, which is not the case as a higher octane fuel have no direct effect on hydrocarbon or oxygen availability.
The effect will be on the air/fuel ration with higher octane fuels being more efficient and therefore not needig to be as high in the ration mix, using less fuel
Without meaning to be offensive, the idea that there is only a placebo affect in using higher octane fuels in performance engines is ridiculous and disproven in many tests, even those done by 'car mags'.
I have not researched to find out the reasons that might be behind why I find Tesco Momentum 99 RON fuel not as smooth and certainly not as efficient as BP/Shell 97 RON fuel.... maybe it was a bad batch that I used in the cupra, only tried it once. I know have preferred T99 in previous cars .... maybe i'll give it another go?
Totally agree, possibly the transition from running 95-98/99 is noticed gradually since its usually a mix of 95/98 if not refueled from an empty tank,
& i think its partly a miss-guided marketing strategy from the fuel companys saying it gives you more power, which is does, but only due to the fact the chance of /or actual pre-det/knock is reduced & allows further advanced ignition ,
I was also under the impression that it was only of advantage to vehicles that have adjustable ignition timing/knock sensors, a conventional SPI engine or carb fed Dissy ran engine wouldnt see any improvement,
Last edited:
I found the opposite, I put a tank of the Shell V power in and got 50 miles less from the tank, don't recall driving any different
Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2
loool people dont use this fuel for economy!!!!!! Better engine longevity and a nippier car, thats all
Similar threads
