Jump to content
SAU Community

Shell V-power Is Back!

R33Turbo

By R33Turbo,
in New South Wales

 Share

Recommended Posts

R33Turbo Proficient

R33Turbo

Posted
Posted

V-power & V-power racing is back! And isn't as expensive as BP Ultimate which is a good thing for me cuz i go coles for shopping as well which gives me those receipts for d/c :)

By the way is it effective putting in v-power racing into our skylines as imports are tuned for 100RON unleaded from factory? Or does v-power racing require separate tuning?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/219377-shell-v-power-is-back/
Share on other sites
Primordial Grand Master

Primordial

Posted
Posted

Running on 100ron will decrease your chance of detonation. If your car has been tuned properly on 100 then you may get a marginal increase in power and mileage. You dont NEED to have your car tuned to run 100, its just that its probably not worth the extra money unless your car's been tuned to take advantage of it.

Be warned though, if you tune your car on 100ron it'll be less happy when you inevitably have to put 98 in it! :banana:

Thats just my "2c"... Haha... get it? Ok that was a shit joke... :)

HuH Community Regular

HuH

Posted
Posted

The advice I was given reagrding 98RON fuels, was that V-Power is actually one of the lowest quality ones available. BP's Ultimate, Caltex's Vortex 98 and even the Mobil 8000 were all ranked better by my previous mecahnic?

I say previous because he doesn't service the Skyline, only my Mini Cooper (which is now sold). He was referring specifically to using the fuel in the Mini, but that shouldn't really impact on his opinion of the fuel in general. He's someone who's opinion I hold in quite high regard and I do trust, but it does conflict with what I've heard other people saying?

Anyone got any input on this?

R33Turbo Proficient

R33Turbo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well the only backup ive got for V-power fuel are my air-fuel ratio on from dyno.

The air-fuel ratio was REAL GOOD using V-power fuel. but then again most effective way is for a power fc to detect the level of knocks on different fuels i think?

Clappa Grand Master

Clappa

Posted
Posted

I was actually surprised with the fuel price last night. Mobil in Epping was selling Unleaded for 1.37L..Cheap. I still went to pennant hills though and put V Power in my SS. For some reason, it justs likes V Power better.

Either way, V Power is back..Woo hoo...

Primordial Grand Master

Primordial

Posted
Posted
V power is the second highest rated performance fuel, I dont think you mechanic is on the right page!!

Caltex is number one, 1KW ahead.

Good im glad v power is back, caltex just flows through my tank too easily

How can you rate fuel in kw's? :thumbsup:

SL33KY Community Regular

SL33KY

Posted
Posted

So... Which is better performance/fuel pump wise? V-Power or V-Power Racing?

A while ago I was hearing a few stories of people using the V-Power Racing and it was screwing with their fuel pump, can anyone verify this? I use the BP Ultimate...

I just want what's best for my baby :D lol

Primordial Grand Master

Primordial

Posted
Posted

Higher octane fuel is denser than regular fuel, so if your fuel pump almost dead anyway then it might make it struggle to the point that it dies completely. Othewise the high octane fuel/fuel pump thing is bollocks.

Also being higher density means that the car runs richer. If your car is running rich to start with then it may not be beneficial at all to make the car run more rich. As i said before, if you're car is tuned for 100 ron then it takes advantage of the lower chance of detonation and allows you to run a more aggressive tune = more power.

At the end of the day, its only 2 ron points so its not going to be a huge difference anyway!

djr81 Grand Master

djr81

Posted
Posted
Higher octane fuel is denser than regular fuel, so if your fuel pump almost dead anyway then it might make it struggle to the point that it dies completely. Othewise the high octane fuel/fuel pump thing is bollocks.

Also being higher density means that the car runs richer. If your car is running rich to start with then it may not be beneficial at all to make the car run more rich. As i said before, if you're car is tuned for 100 ron then it takes advantage of the lower chance of detonation and allows you to run a more aggressive tune = more power.

At the end of the day, its only 2 ron points so its not going to be a huge difference anyway!

E10 is typically 3% less dense than 91 Octane ULP but has a higher octane rating. It is a similar situation for V-Power (98) and the 5% ethanol blended V-Power racing (100 octane).

Primordial Grand Master

Primordial

Posted
Posted

Yeah you're right, ethanol lowers the energy density of the fuel. I forgot 100ron is 2% ethanol. Higher octane petroleum is higher in density than its lower octane counterpart though.

Here's some interesting results on the potential power gain by using 100ron: http://www.racefuels.com.au/dynoDetail.asp?ID=59

It looks like about 3.5% peak power gain, and 4.8% peak torque gain between 98RON and 100RON Shell fuel... Keep in mind that they advanced the tuning by 2 degrees and leaned the AF ratio to take advantage of the better fuel so I wouldnt be expecting to get anything near these results without tuning or at least a car with active knock sensors.

djr81 Grand Master

djr81

Posted
Posted
Yeah you're right, ethanol lowers the energy density of the fuel. I forgot 100ron is 2% ethanol. Higher octane petroleum is higher in density than its lower octane counterpart though.

Here's some interesting results on the potential power gain by using 100ron: http://www.racefuels.com.au/dynoDetail.asp?ID=59

It looks like about 3.5% peak power gain, and 4.8% peak torque gain between 98RON and 100RON Shell fuel... Keep in mind that they advanced the tuning by 2 degrees and leaned the AF ratio to take advantage of the better fuel so I wouldnt be expecting to get anything near these results without tuning or at least a car with active knock sensors.

Yeah people get trapped and stooged to a degree.

Trapped because fuel is added to the engine in volume not by weight. So a less dense fuel can will give you a higher AFR. Add oxygen in the fuel & you can get yourself in trouble. Wonderful thing if tuned properly, however.

Stooged because you buy fuel by the litre not the kg. So your less fuel efficient E10 (measured in km/litre) costs more than it should.

T04GTR Grand Master

T04GTR

Posted
Posted
V power is the second highest rated performance fuel, I dont think you mechanic is on the right page!!

Caltex is number one, 1KW ahead.

Good im glad v power is back, caltex just flows through my tank too easily

wow a whole 0.5% improvement lol........

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • sinn3r
      R34 Skyline climate control unit transistor

      By sinn3r · Posted

      Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • Kinkstaah
      Blue slip

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • GTSBoy
      Best place to order Authetic R32 Parts in Japan

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • GTSBoy
      Ethanol Content Sensor - Always at 11%?

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • GTSBoy
      Blue slip

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...