Which is the best petrol

[commsirac]

Had the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time etc, and atually watched ACA last night. They did a test to find the petrol that drove you further.

I was astounded, dont know who decided on the test procedure, but it looked like something an 8th grader would dream up.......possibly the idea of the publicity department at gmh who supplied the cars for the test.

The details are in print and video at A Current Affair > The latest news on Australia's most current affairs

Wouldnt be surprised if the non Caltex companies take ACA to task on the dodgy method.......if they can be bothered.

[minux]

I seen this being advertised. Do i really want to follow the link?

From what i seen on the ADS it didn't exactly look like any sort of controlled test. More looked like a paid section of advertising for X Oil company wanting to drum up some new business.

[ProphetVX]

I seen this being advertised. Do i really want to follow the link?

From what i seen on the ADS it didn't exactly look like any sort of controlled test. More looked like a paid section of advertising for X Oil company wanting to drum up some new business.

Don't bother...
They used four separate cars (will always be slight variations in fuel economy), four separate drivers (always going to be variations in driving manners), over a 170km trip, and caltex got up by like a litre...

One of the dumbest comparisons I've ever seen. They then proved it on the way back by putting different types of drivers at each wheel and compared the results.

[Bravotwozero]

It wasn't a bad test really. They did go to some lengths to make sure there was some parity. Won't really matter though because those who use BP will claim it is the best & those that use Shell will claim that is the best & so on & so on. I think the difference was 7% between the best and the worst. Or about 600ml for the 100 kilometres driven. 2 tenths of f all really.

But the difference between aggressive driving and sedate driving was somewhere along the line of 30% difference. I found it somewhat interesting. Better than the usual tripe put forth by ACA.

Don't bother...
They used four separate cars (will always be slight variations in fuel economy), four separate drivers (always going to be variations in driving manners), over a 170km trip, and caltex got up by like a litre...

One of the dumbest comparisons I've ever seen. They then proved it on the way back by putting different types of drivers at each wheel and compared the results.

Not dumb at all. They hardly said it was a scientific test did they?
The test on the way back was to compare different driving styles to see what effect they had on economy. How does that relate to the first test?

[1991_Vn2nV]

They could have used a track/ring or something using the same car with each different fuel..draining the tank between each go.

[ProphetVX]

It wasn't a bad test really. They did go to some lengths to make sure there was some parity. Won't really matter though because those who use BP will claim it is the best & those that use Shell will claim that is the best & so on & so on. I think the difference was 7% between the best and the worst. Or about 600ml for the 100 kilometres driven. 2 tenths of f all really.

But the difference between aggressive driving and sedate driving was somewhere along the line of 30% difference. I found it somewhat interesting. Better than the usual tripe put forth by ACA.

Except for the fact that the variances were so minimal and they were claiming caltex as a massive trump card. Many of the external factors could have influenced the results. Yet they finished the fluff piece with "If you drive on Caltex fuel, and smoothly, you may as well be driving for free"

None of the components were controlled. Should have been a closed circuit with no traffic, same driver, same car, same tyre pressures etc etc.

[Bravotwozero]

Think there are some BP fanboys miffed by the results.

[ProphetVX]

Think there are some BP fanboys miffed by the results.

I use Shell V Power....

Couldn't care less about the results, if I wanted fuel economy I wouldn't own an SS.

It was an inaccurate test. Just like every other ACA one. Using more than one car and one driver is always going to produce massively flawed results. All it takes is one driver with a marginally more twitchy foot and you can see a massive difference in fuel economy over 200km.

[minux]

Think there are some BP fanboys miffed by the results.

Personally, using BP for me has proven its results, Caltex was always too inconsistent, having friends work in various parts of Shell i refuse to use the fuel etc.

I will stick with BP simply because it works for me. I guarantee you run the same test with different drivers, you will see different results again. I am happy with the 11-11.5 average i can get around town in the Senator

[Bravotwozero]

Personally, using BP for me has proven its results, Caltex was always too inconsistent, having friends work in various parts of Shell i refuse to use the fuel etc.

I will stick with BP simply because it works for me. I guarantee you run the same test with different drivers, you will see different results again.

Of course you will. I'm sure most people would have enough intelligence to work that out as well. Personally I have used them all at one stage or another and don't notice any difference whatsoever.

[commsirac]

Along with the other comments on the faults of the test, there was a claim that the trip computer fuel use meter was accurate to the nearest 10mls. Now, I know the readout is to the nearest 10mls, but thats a big difference to saying that its going to measure out say 10Litres or so to the nearest 10mls. Its probably consistent in the one car, but absolute accuracy?

[Emackulation]

Catlex 98 RON FTW!

[EvoVIIIJDM]

Hell no Mack, Got to be Mobil 8000.

[CSP]

Anything on ACA, Today Tonight etc etc isn't going to have a great deal of real world credibilty. Although I did change from AAMI to NRMA last week for my car insurance after being at Mum's when she had something on about AAMI. It wasn't the main reason though - I need to get occasional wedding and formal car hire insurance and AAMI won't do it. Only NRMA or Shannons recognise occasional hire use. Oh and I didn't know AAMI were the only insurer in Australia that didn't let you choose your own repairer.

Anyway, back on topic, I am also a Caltex 98RON user based largely on an independant test I read of 98RON fuels. I refuse to use Shell fuels and only use Mobil 8000 if I have to.

Caltex Vortex98 and BP Ultimate give me similar results and if I can't get find a Caltex, BP it is.

Here's the test I read. I think it's worth the read. Maybe someone should send this to ACA and tell them that THIS is how you test multiple fuels!
http://www.users.on.net/~kn079/Capab...on%20Fuels.pdf

[minux]

Hell no Mack, Got to be Mobil 8000.

So you like a modified BP Ultimate eh?

[Not_An_Abba_Fan]

Along with the other comments on the faults of the test, there was a claim that the trip computer fuel use meter was accurate to the nearest 10mls. Now, I know the readout is to the nearest 10mls, but thats a big difference to saying that its going to measure out say 10Litres or so to the nearest 10mls. Its probably consistent in the one car, but absolute accuracy?

The trip computers between each car are bound to be different.

What an amaturish test procedure. They may as well have done the comparison between a HK monaro with a 350 in it and a Toyota Prius.

I didn't watch the show, but how many Caltex fuel ads were on during it?

[EvoVIIIJDM]

So you like a modified BP Ultimate eh?

go on....... im intrigued and uninformed.......

[calais_304]

I've now moved onto V-Power after using BP Ult. for the last 6-8 months, i find v-power to be the better one out of the 2 and i've been on it for 1 month now.

and im sure i've tried em all now

[minux]

go on....... im intrigued and uninformed.......

Synergy 8000 is a blend of Ultimate with a few additives by mobil, well it was. Not sure if things have changed. Its why when Ultimate runs out i switch to synergy. Minimal differences.

[EvoVIIIJDM]

ah ok. additives make it go good.

[CSP]

I've now moved onto V-Power after using BP Ult.

Well that's a move in the completely wrong direction... V-Power has detergent in it! lol

I wouldn't put it in my lawnmower. If I had a lawnmower that is.

[calais_304]

Well that's a move in the completely wrong direction... V-Power has detergent in it! lol

Please inform on how you know which fuel works better in my car, as i've only notice good things from using this fuel.

[CSP]

Please inform on how you know which fuel works better in my car, as i've only notice good things from using this fuel.

Please inform me where it says I know which fuel works better in your car...

Fact: V-Power is not the best 98RON fuel. There's nothing in that fact about your car mate.

[calais_304]

Please inform me where it says I know which fuel works better in your car...

Right here

Well that's a move in the completely wrong direction...

all i ask is how the hell would you know

[EvoVIIIJDM]

Right here

all i ask is how the hell would you know

where does it say he knows which is better? I must not be able to read properly all of a sudden. It states it is a step in the wrong direction.... dont get your panties in a knot.