Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just wondering if anyone has tried Shell V-Power petrol?

Its 98 octane and replaces Shell Optimax - and Shell's website/brochures claim it gives better performance etc. than optimax.

There is also V-Power Racing which is 100 octane with 5% ethanol - which I presume is similar to the 100 octane optimax (cant remember the name).

I might give vpower a go next and see how it compares to bp ultimate. Have only ever used ultimate in the past.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/144856-shell-v-power-fuel-anyone-tried-it/
Share on other sites

Its the same as the optimax, just changed the name.

er, nope. read the shell website - they reckon more performance than optimax. that pretty much means its not the same...

quote from the website:

"New Shell V-Power with Friction Modification Technology is designed to give you better responsiveness and improved performance in comparison with Shell Optimax, the fuel that it replaces."

and another line from the website:

"New Shell V Power leaves Shell Optimax behind."

would be interesting to see how much better it is...

Edited by pixel8r

I've used both V-power and Ultimate. Can't say I noticed any difference but then I wasn't really doing a detailed comparison.

Hey emsta, 8k's to the litre isn't real good. Is that in lots of stop/start traffic?

I've only ever used bp ultimate in my stagea and I get 12.5L/100km on average.

I'll hafta try out the new shell juice next time I need fuel and will see how it goes...

unfortunately I dont have a shell servo near me that sells it...but if its noticeably better I'm sure I'll find a way to get it... ;)

EDIT:

just noticed a thread in the SA section by someone else asking essentially the same thing...

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...howtopic=144857

Edited by pixel8r
Hey emsta, 8k's to the litre isn't real good. Is that in lots of stop/start traffic?

Yep - your right, its mostly stop start traffic. I dont usually use the car for lots of highway driving or long cruising etc. But last time I filled up, I did lots of highway/freeway driving as well as stop/start traffic - returned around 8.7ks/ltr.

I've tried it.

Noticed no increase or decrease in economy and wasn't able to dial in any more ign. :D

My conclusion.. its just another 98ron fuel. :)

Wasn't optimax meant to be quite bad at one stage or was that just a rumour floating around?

This is the first us here in SA have seen a 98ron fuel from Shell.

Shell Optimax 100 RON (been using it since January) versus Shell V Power Racing 100 ron (been using it for a month).

Same A/F ratios

Same knock readings

Same injection tune

Same ignition tune

If there is a difference, it is too small to measure with my equipment

:) Cheers :)

Extreme/V Power Racing is the shit. Gives me 10KW over Optimax/V-Power

I thought V Power racing / Extreme was not good for skylines due to the 5% ethonol blend. :D So is it ok for me to try v power racing? stock ecu, fmic, exhaust, pod, 11psi.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • @Haggerty you still haven't answered my question.  Many things you are saying do not make sense for someone who can tune, yet I would not expect someone who cannot tune to be playing with the things in the ECU that you are.  This process would be a lot quicker to figure out if we can remove user error from the equation. 
    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
×
×
  • Create New...