What Petrol To Use
Discussion
It will adapt itself to either fuel without an issue, so it's really down to personal choice at the end of the day.
The way I look at it, if you only use the car for trundling around town, with very little out of town driving - Run in on standard unleaded.
If you do more driving out of town, and performance is more important to you than economy - Run it on super unleaded.
(Saying that, despite the extra cost, I always run my car on super unleaded regardless. The one time I decided to use standard unleaded, 3 days later the crank sensor failed! BMW said it was totally unrelated to the fuel, and just a coincidence, but I told them: "No!, she knew I'd filled up with the cheap fuel and got her own back on me, making me pay for it!". From the next tank onwards I only ever used super unleaded, and have had no engine issues since!
)
The way I look at it, if you only use the car for trundling around town, with very little out of town driving - Run in on standard unleaded.
If you do more driving out of town, and performance is more important to you than economy - Run it on super unleaded.
(Saying that, despite the extra cost, I always run my car on super unleaded regardless. The one time I decided to use standard unleaded, 3 days later the crank sensor failed! BMW said it was totally unrelated to the fuel, and just a coincidence, but I told them: "No!, she knew I'd filled up with the cheap fuel and got her own back on me, making me pay for it!". From the next tank onwards I only ever used super unleaded, and have had no engine issues since!
)I had an E36 I-6 for 19 years. It could run on 91 to 99. For that car the V-power/Nitro was definitely better. It gave an extra 2mpg, so that paid for the extra cost, but it was also more powerful, smoother, and with better pick up. I would occasionally go back to 95 for a while, and then up it to 98/99 to re-check, it was always better on the 98/99. Just test it yourself and see.
I've pretty much always used 95 ron on all my previous cars, however after about six months of ownership of my current 340i I thought I'd give super a go, comparing long term MPG on 95 and 98, on average the 98 is around 7% more efficient for a full tank of fuel (I generally get 370-380 miles from a tank between fills) When I filled up today at Sainsburys (pretty much where I always go, the nectar points pay for the xmas booze) super was 5p more, so about 4% more expensive than 95 ron.
For me running the car on super is marginally more cost efficient, I haven't really noticed any difference in performance.
For me running the car on super is marginally more cost efficient, I haven't really noticed any difference in performance.
My Z4 Coupe threw up an amber EML so I took it to my BMW Indy for a diagnosis and it was pre-cat codes.
He cleared them and gave it a dose of Cataclean with a follow-up dose 6 months later and it's been fine since that - but he did recommend using "super-plus" which is all mine has had for the last 18 months or so, and thankfully no issues since!
He only ever uses "super-plus" in a petrol BMW, so that's what mine get now.
He cleared them and gave it a dose of Cataclean with a follow-up dose 6 months later and it's been fine since that - but he did recommend using "super-plus" which is all mine has had for the last 18 months or so, and thankfully no issues since!
He only ever uses "super-plus" in a petrol BMW, so that's what mine get now.
It’s either the fuel engine cleaner at £20 every 2 months (archoil is one of the better ones) to minimise having carbon build up/walnut blasting/injector probs or V-power/bp equivalent. It works out to about the same for me on the man maths
I’ve gone for the latter, given the driver’s card gets me £15-17 off every 3 months/freebies and it’s easy.
There is an improvement in fuel consumption (about 30-40 miles on the 3l diesel), which is more due to keeping the carbon desposits down on my diesel and probably cleaning and more power on the petrol.
A comprise would be Vpower every alternate tank to keep the fuel cost down - I do this on OH petrol car.
I’ve gone for the latter, given the driver’s card gets me £15-17 off every 3 months/freebies and it’s easy.
There is an improvement in fuel consumption (about 30-40 miles on the 3l diesel), which is more due to keeping the carbon desposits down on my diesel and probably cleaning and more power on the petrol.
A comprise would be Vpower every alternate tank to keep the fuel cost down - I do this on OH petrol car.
540i will cost more to run on 95ron than it will on 98ron as it has a knock sensor and is mapped for 98ron.
You can put 95 in it, but it will retard the timing to stop it knocking, and you lose a fair bit of power and also MPG.
I use Tesco 99 now as it is as cheap as Shell 95.
My 335i was down 30hp on 95 ron compared to 98ron, proved on a rolling road.
My consumption on 95 was just a smidge under 25mpg, on 98 ron it was just under 28mpg. This was repeatable, every time my missus put 95 in you could feel the lack of bite on the car and sure enough you could not get the MPG above 25. I used to do the same run over a tankful every 4 days, so easy to test.
Recommendation on the filler cap is always the lowest you can put in, so will say 95ron, however if you read your manual it states "Output and consumption figures apply to RON 98 fuel".
Why buy a car like a 540i and throw away 30+ BHP for the sake of a fiver?
People used to spend 10's of thousands of pounds to get 30hp gain on petrol cars, you can have it for a few quid each week.
You can put 95 in it, but it will retard the timing to stop it knocking, and you lose a fair bit of power and also MPG.
I use Tesco 99 now as it is as cheap as Shell 95.
My 335i was down 30hp on 95 ron compared to 98ron, proved on a rolling road.
My consumption on 95 was just a smidge under 25mpg, on 98 ron it was just under 28mpg. This was repeatable, every time my missus put 95 in you could feel the lack of bite on the car and sure enough you could not get the MPG above 25. I used to do the same run over a tankful every 4 days, so easy to test.
Recommendation on the filler cap is always the lowest you can put in, so will say 95ron, however if you read your manual it states "Output and consumption figures apply to RON 98 fuel".
Why buy a car like a 540i and throw away 30+ BHP for the sake of a fiver?
People used to spend 10's of thousands of pounds to get 30hp gain on petrol cars, you can have it for a few quid each week.
If you look at the many threads on this, especially on M and M Performance models, there seem to be two reasons why people opt for V-Power: power and cleaning. If you read the Shell material, then the power claims are very carefully phrased, but the cleaning claims are pretty direct and specific. So if you believe what Shell says, then keeping your performance engine clean seems to be the main reason, with a bit of extra performance thrown in as icing on the cake.
People understandably also approach the choice differently across the spectrum from those who (a) lease because the job needs a car, does a high mileage and gets replaced every 3 years all the way to (z) bought their performance car from new, outright, don't necessarily do a high mileage, and intend to keep it for a long time. With various combination inbetween.
You can consider it all a conspiracy, with the V-Power advantages just smoke and mirrors. It's pretty impossible to do anything like a systematic and consistent comparison of standard vs V-Power. Shell claim they do 2-engines-side-by-side long-term comparison bench tests that justify their claims.
Personally, I believe what Shell claims for V-Power cleaning advantages and given I bought my M235i from new and intend to keep it indefinitely, I'm prepared to use V-Power for the cleaning properties alone. If it gives slightly better performance, that's nice, but 330BHP in a 2 Series chassis is hardly under-powered for public roads anyway.
People understandably also approach the choice differently across the spectrum from those who (a) lease because the job needs a car, does a high mileage and gets replaced every 3 years all the way to (z) bought their performance car from new, outright, don't necessarily do a high mileage, and intend to keep it for a long time. With various combination inbetween.
You can consider it all a conspiracy, with the V-Power advantages just smoke and mirrors. It's pretty impossible to do anything like a systematic and consistent comparison of standard vs V-Power. Shell claim they do 2-engines-side-by-side long-term comparison bench tests that justify their claims.
Personally, I believe what Shell claims for V-Power cleaning advantages and given I bought my M235i from new and intend to keep it indefinitely, I'm prepared to use V-Power for the cleaning properties alone. If it gives slightly better performance, that's nice, but 330BHP in a 2 Series chassis is hardly under-powered for public roads anyway.
msej449 said:
If you look at the many threads on this, especially on M and M Performance models, there seem to be two reasons why people opt for V-Power: power and cleaning. If you read the Shell material, then the power claims are very carefully phrased, but the cleaning claims are pretty direct and specific. So if you believe what Shell says, then keeping your performance engine clean seems to be the main reason, with a bit of extra performance thrown in as icing on the cake.
People understandably also approach the choice differently across the spectrum from those who (a) lease because the job needs a car, does a high mileage and gets replaced every 3 years all the way to (z) bought their performance car from new, outright, don't necessarily do a high mileage, and intend to keep it for a long time. With various combination inbetween.
You can consider it all a conspiracy, with the V-Power advantages just smoke and mirrors. It's pretty impossible to do anything like a systematic and consistent comparison of standard vs V-Power. Shell claim they do 2-engines-side-by-side long-term comparison bench tests that justify their claims.
Personally, I believe what Shell claims for V-Power cleaning advantages and given I bought my M235i from new and intend to keep it indefinitely, I'm prepared to use V-Power for the cleaning properties alone. If it gives slightly better performance, that's nice, but 330BHP in a 2 Series chassis is hardly under-powered for public roads anyway.
The fuel company can't claim more power though, only the car manufacturer can do that. People understandably also approach the choice differently across the spectrum from those who (a) lease because the job needs a car, does a high mileage and gets replaced every 3 years all the way to (z) bought their performance car from new, outright, don't necessarily do a high mileage, and intend to keep it for a long time. With various combination inbetween.
You can consider it all a conspiracy, with the V-Power advantages just smoke and mirrors. It's pretty impossible to do anything like a systematic and consistent comparison of standard vs V-Power. Shell claim they do 2-engines-side-by-side long-term comparison bench tests that justify their claims.
Personally, I believe what Shell claims for V-Power cleaning advantages and given I bought my M235i from new and intend to keep it indefinitely, I'm prepared to use V-Power for the cleaning properties alone. If it gives slightly better performance, that's nice, but 330BHP in a 2 Series chassis is hardly under-powered for public roads anyway.
You will only see gains if your car is set up for 98ron.
This isn't snake oil, it isn't some myth, if the car is set up to take advantage of 98 ron you will see a drop off in performance and mpg if you run it on 95ron.
Your car will lose around 30hp if you run it with 95ron.
This is discussed at length on the German forums, mainly because they can get 102ron over there too, all the tests show that 102ron quietens the engine and smoothes it out more, but unless you have a custom map to take advantage of it (often sold by race tracks where custom maps can take advantage) there is not power or MPG gain, like the jump from 95 to 98 ron.
The confusing thing is often the UK websites don't say the car is set up for 98 ron.
My E350 is a good example, UK site says unleaded, German site says Super Benzin Plus (89ron).
bad company said:
Hi all.
I run a 2017 540i x-drive. I’ve been running it on Shell 95 Ron as I thought the V-Power was a waste of £’s.
Any thoughts?
On the same basis then buying a 540i was equally a waste of money, when you could have bought a 520i instead..... I run a 2017 540i x-drive. I’ve been running it on Shell 95 Ron as I thought the V-Power was a waste of £’s.
Any thoughts?
I only ever ran my previous 135i on V-Power in the 6 years I owned it, to run it on 95 is like buying a dog and barking yourself....
The only time I ran mine on 95 was when the petrol tanker drivers went on strike and for a couple of weeks the V-Power pumps were dry, and the car ran noticeably worse on 95, and it averaged about 2mpg worse over the same period.
Gassing Station | BMW General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff