| Author |
Message |
Leigh_f
Site Subscriber
Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Posts: 458
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 23, 2005 5:06 am |
|
|
|
|
Roger Red Hat
Site Subscriber
Joined: 13 Oct 2004
Posts: 4722
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 23, 2005 9:45 am |
|
fules got cheaper latly anyway. |
|
|
|
|
Stephen
Level 8 User
Joined: 14 Apr 2004
Posts: 278
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 23, 2005 9:58 am |
|
Just bought some for 84.9 last night. |
|
|
|
|
touring_19_16v
Level 10 User
Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 620
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 24, 2005 2:38 am |
|
84.9 jesus the cheapest down ere is 88.9 |
|
|
|
|
astrojon007
Site Subscriber
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 731
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 24, 2005 2:43 am |
|
Tesco got that new super stuff for 91.2p although I'm still not touching any Tesco shite. Shell all the way but still 87.summit. |
|
|
|
|
Neal
Forum Moderator
Joined: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 7432
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 24, 2005 4:30 am |
|
That 99RON Tesco stuff is apparently 97RON but with 5% bio fuel in it, that's how they can sell it cheap as they get tax relief for the use of bio fuel or something, can't remember exactly |
|
|
|
|
touring_19_16v
Level 10 User
Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 620
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 24, 2005 4:40 am |
|
i been using the tesco 99 ron cant see much of a difference tho in performance |
|
|
|
|
Roger Red Hat
Site Subscriber
Joined: 13 Oct 2004
Posts: 4722
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:09 am |
|
anyone see fifth gear were the did a test on all the diffrent types of fules?
was also tested on the new clio.
no imporvemen on bhp tho. |
|
|
|
|
touring_19_16v
Level 10 User
Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 620
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:18 am |
|
nope dint see it, what fuels they use? |
|
|
|
|
Roger Red Hat
Site Subscriber
Joined: 13 Oct 2004
Posts: 4722
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:19 am |
|
shell optimax
and
bp ultimate i belive
along with reg fuel
3 cars,
run about (clio 1.4)
sporty hothatch (golf gti)
and a perforamce car (scooby)
each on the rolling road (well like it) each with fuels see what makes the best perforance. |
|
|
|
|
touring_19_16v
Level 10 User
Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 620
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:23 am |
|
and they all performed the same, its funny coz a mate of mine has got a P1 scoob and he was using optimax before tescos 99 and he said there was a good improvement to the throttle response and mpg now all the scooby drivers in sussex apperently use it |
|
|
|
|
Roger Red Hat
Site Subscriber
Joined: 13 Oct 2004
Posts: 4722
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:28 am |
|
no on the clio there was no improvement i ment. The scoob had a big improve ment on optimax made an extra 15 bhp i belive
the conclusion was, if you have a big powerful engine the better fule will benifit
hot hatches etc, will have an improvement but nothing really noticable
and run about cars wont see any improvement.
according to the program. |
|
|
|
|
touring_19_16v
Level 10 User
Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 620
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:39 am |
|
ah ok so thats why i dint see much improvement in the 19 |
|
|
|
|
astrojon007
Site Subscriber
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 731
|
| Posted:
Fri Nov 25, 2005 6:57 am |
|
On the old mans 350 it sais in the manual that although it will run on 95 ron stuff it's designed for a higher rating, specifically mentions optimax as well.
I wonder if that means it's 300bhp rather than 280 with optimax or if 95 ron takes it down to 260  hmmmmm |
|
|
|
|
touring_19_16v
Level 10 User
Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 620
|
| Posted:
Fri Nov 25, 2005 7:00 am |
|
95 ron prob take it dwn to 270-275 wudnt it? the scoob if ran on 95 goes from 401 to 393.2 or summik, but wats this i hear about 100ron jap fuel shell will be doin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
