V Power i'm not impressed

[mick_dundee]

First time I have used V POwer and probably should run it a few more times to be fair but today I had to switch to reserve after doing only a lousy 405km or so, normally run BP ultimate and get another 30km before I hit reserve, unfortunately for me, if I am city bound then I normally head via Lygon st and no BP there, fueled up today with Castrol Vortex so see what happens in 400km or so time.

[s man]

I thought everyone knew not to use Shell fuel?

Metro at Wyong now sell 100 ron at the pump!!!
Looks like 91 is gone, 95 & 100 will be the new fuel..

[webcase]

I was warned off Shell when i bought my bike.The additive in it apparently is great for cars but up to putty for bikes.
I just recently had to drain off a tank of gas because of shit fuel.From Mobile. Sticking to BP for the moment

[photomike666]

Shell has had a bad name in carbys for along time. I have to use V-power in my 10 once or twice and it didn't affect it too much. I always use BP Ultimate if I can.

Just for the record, Vortex is Caltex, not Castrol. Castrol are owned by BP

[mick_dundee]

Tnanks Mike, missed by that much DOH! and yes I know about Shell fuels but I thoght that was eliminated once we lost OPtimax, regardless, it costs me like 30km a tank or so to use VPOwer so where possible I'll stick to BP and will post results of Vortex in 400km's or so time, won't take long to get there with a run to Jindabyne and a run to Adelaide in the next 2 weeks

[sneakypete]

shit!... i have been using ONLY V-Power...didnt know it was bad for bikes..i will be trying Vortex and see if i can notice a difference..

[hoffy]

I always use V power... Love it

[Kawawog]

From my understanding, the old V-power was bad.. The stuff they have now should be fine to run in bikes from what i was told.. Personally i still wont touch it, BP Ultimate all the way for me

[Smitty]

Vortex or Ultimate in mine.....
coz V-Power just goes in 2/3rd this distance in the 12

[gizmo]

Never had a problem with any of the 95 or 98 fuels in my zx2, zx636, cr250 or drz440.

I did rejet the zx2, but never really cared if it was shell or bp as long as it was 98.

My mates also run whatever premium 95 or 98 is about in there bikes - cbr1000, xr400, klx 450, crf 450, wr450f, xr650r etc & never a drama.

I even run the old 22r powered 4wd hilux on any premium 95 or 98 & never noticed any difference except it doesnt run on anymore, as I have flogged it abit since I took over from dad's ownership where it always got driven like a nana.

My understanding is the 100 octane is using ethanol & that's crap for our stuff. have seen the effect of using it in piston engine aircraft & varnish looking crap thru intake & took alot of carby cleaner & effort to remove so after mate showed me that we stay away from the shit....

NOT recommended for aircraft & the owner knew that but all he could get his hands on at the time for a short trip without passengers & it started running crook with minimal use.

[Naked Twin]

I can't believe there is still the bullshit flying around about Shell. Click here, yes it is from shell but spells out why some bikes had issues.

http://www.ksrc-au.com/Bike_Optimax.pdf

Perhaps it is your bike and not the fuel that needs addressing. Many bikes are not actually tuned to run on high octane (98/100) and should only run 91 or 95.

Nick

[Jonno]

I can't believe there is still the bullshit flying around about Shell. Click here, yes it is from shell but spells out why some bikes had issues.

http://www.ksrc-au.com/Bike_Optimax.pdf

Perhaps it is your bike and not the fuel that needs addressing. Many bikes are not actually tuned to run on high octane (98/100) and should only run 91 or 95.

Nick

Bang on the mark. Why waste your money on a perceived increase using higher octane fuel than the bike requires and likely cause it to run worse?

I just checked my ZX10 and it has a sticker with 95 Octane Ron and wonder if there are any bikes that only run on 98ron?


I am asking because I have a few people raise their eyebrows at me using 95 and not 98 as they do.

[fireyrob]

Bang on the mark. Why waste your money on a perceived increase using higher octane fuel than the bike requires and likely cause it to run worse?

I just checked my ZX10 and it has a sticker with 95 Octane Ron and wonder if there are any bikes that only run on 98ron?

I am asking because I have a few people raise their eyebrows at me using 95 and not 98 as they do.

I found this a realy good read and explains why Ethanol blended fuels have higher octane rating yet worse 'heating value'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

I dont think using higher rated Octane fuels than required would result in reduced performance or even better performance. But Ive been told some 98 rated fuels have better cleaning additives for motors etc. But like you Im happy to throw in 95 or 98 depending on how close to payday it is

[Naked Twin]

Jonno the only vehicles I know of that require 98 are cars (not sure of Ducatis or Agusta) as some of these bikes are high compression engines which is what really needs a higher octane to prevent pre detonation in the cylinder.

Happy to put in the tank what is at the bowser (95 - 98). I know a lad on a GSx1400 who used to race, does a lot of his own work on the bike and will happily run 91 ethanol and maintains no problems.

Each to their own.

[mick_dundee]

Each to their own indeed and personally I have always stuck 98 in the ZZR, the ZX9 and now even the more agricultural KLR, I stick whatever is cheapest in the car but in the bike I prefer to use 98 and I don't care how close to payday it is even. Not saying V Power is shit, what I am saying is that like Smitty and his 12, I get reduced fuel economy from it.