09-01-2014, 11:49 AM | #23 |
Lieutenant
178
Rep 467
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-01-2014, 12:06 PM | #24 | |
Lieutenant
168
Rep 507
Posts |
Quote:
This is true, and that's a good thing since most Canadian gasoline has 10% ethanol. My understanding is you are best to buy your E10 gasoline from high volume stations where there is less chance of water in it. Also, if your car is going to sit for a long time, better to have gasoline with no ethanol in it. Since gasoline has more energy per litre than ethanol, my uninformed understanding is the Shell V-Power 91 should actually give better mileage than Petro-Canada Ultra 94, and you don't have to worry about possible ethanol problems. But, I really have no idea. Organic chemistry was one of my worst subjects in school! |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-01-2014, 03:50 PM | #25 |
Lieutenant
112
Rep 501
Posts
Drives: 2015 M3, 2020 M340i, 2019 X5
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Ottawa
|
Shell 91 should give better mileage. But in my experience with my S4, I was getting slightly better mileage with Ultra 94. Was the minimal increase in mileage worth the increase in price? I'm not too sure.
__________________
2015 Alpine White ///M3 | Black Full Merino Leather | DCT | 19" Black Light Alloy 437M Wheels | Premium, Tech & Exec Pkg | Adaptive M Suspension |Carbon Fibre Roof and interior Trim
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-02-2014, 09:25 AM | #27 | ||
Lieutenant
127
Rep 451
Posts
Drives: 2015 M4 - SO/SS, 6MT
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Toronto, ON
|
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.ontario.ca/environment-an...hanol-gasoline Hmmm, took a second look and it said "all fuel at your location combined". Therefore, I guess if the lower grades are E10, then by volume Shell's V-91 can be ethanol free... hmmm |
||
Appreciate
0
|
09-02-2014, 09:56 AM | #28 |
Major General
812
Rep 7,888
Posts |
I notice a slight improvement of about 5% in milege using Shell 91 over Ultra 94 in my E92 M3.These days it is easy to keep track as I am driving 6-800 kms per week.
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-02-2014, 10:32 AM | #29 |
Lieutenant
127
Rep 451
Posts
Drives: 2015 M4 - SO/SS, 6MT
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Toronto, ON
|
wow, so confused. Which is better??
1) 91 octane with no ethanol OR 2) 94 octane with ethanol |
Appreciate
0
|
09-02-2014, 10:41 AM | #30 | |
Advocatus Douchebagus. Sex Marxist.
2415
Rep 3,415
Posts
Drives: Lucy.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada
|
Quote:
In theory, 94 Octane should be better. but as any amount of internet research will tell you, the risk of ethanol is that the alcohol can collect water condensate, which (to get technical) is very bad for your car's insides. So many drivers avoid ethanol like death. In reality, ethanol is probably not the best thing and it has risks, but like most things a 'risk' means that, most of the time, you will be fine. Lots of non-premium gas has ethanol and most people likely fill up their regular cars with that gas all the time. However, sometimes the odds work against you. I tend to avoid ethanol (I use either Coop premium in Calgary or Shell V-Power if on the road, both 91 octane, both ethanol free) but that is largely out of loyalty/points collection issues. If in a jam, I will use the odd tank of Esso or whatever. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-02-2014, 10:49 AM | #31 | |
Lieutenant
127
Rep 451
Posts
Drives: 2015 M4 - SO/SS, 6MT
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Toronto, ON
|
Quote:
Also, the actual octane would depend on the amount of ethanol right? If they mix 5% ethanol, then you would be down to 89.3% octane (0.94 * 0.95)? So, would that not make Shell better, but then I lose my 5 cents saving |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-02-2014, 11:25 AM | #32 | |
Advocatus Douchebagus. Sex Marxist.
2415
Rep 3,415
Posts
Drives: Lucy.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-02-2014, 11:57 AM | #33 |
///M Uber Alles
329
Rep 1,601
Posts |
I think the paranoia about Ethanol was caused by all the fuel pump issues that the N54 engine had that may have been related. Anyway, they should have fixed the problem by now and there should not be any concern about using 10% ethanol gas. I never had any problems (fuel pump or otherwise) running higher octane gas with ethanol in my tuned 335, so I am going to stick with my practice of running Husky 94 (the only HO pump fuel available in these parts) in the summer and Shell 91 in the winter.
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-02-2014, 01:13 PM | #34 |
Lieutenant
59
Rep 553
Posts |
When I purchased my '14 Cayenne GTS they told me that the issue with the ethanol is that the fuel with it burns hotter. This can negatively affect seals in the engine. I am good with teeth, not so hot with engine components. Having said that, I was told that Porsche had cleared their vehicles for ethanol use, but AFAIK, BMW has not.
Not sure what to make of this, as I ran my e46 M3 exclusively on Petro Canada 91 for 75K km without an ounce of problems. However, not sure that I would do it again. I figure if Shell V Gold is good enough for Ferrari, it's good enough for me. |
Appreciate
0
|
09-03-2014, 04:50 PM | #35 | |
Major
269
Rep 1,417
Posts |
Quote:
For me Shell V power, I save my gas receipts... hoarder. See FAQ 2, bullet 3: •Shell V-Power premium gasoline in Canada does not contain ethanol. http://www.shell.ca/en/products-serv...power/faq.html Bronze 10, V power 0, Silver is a mix yielding 5%. Most by bronze so easy to meet 5% rule. Also, the pumps that I go to in GTA is written on the pump, Vpower NO ethanol. I am happy, so far. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-04-2014, 10:00 AM | #37 | |
Brigadier General
421
Rep 4,499
Posts |
Quote:
I am going to dyno soon, so we have a M4 6spd manual that will have 94 in it. So we just need another.
__________________
Have BT Tool professional, will scan and clear codes on your BMW. And now I am able to code my 2011 335is and M4
Link to my M4 euro delivery! http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho....php?t=1006526 |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-04-2014, 10:01 AM | #38 | |
Lieutenant
79
Rep 401
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-04-2014, 10:11 AM | #39 |
INSTAGRAM: @yaasplease
166
Rep 1,023
Posts |
I'm less worried about condensation, and more about detonation. Ethanol or not, BMW recommends 93 to avoid detonation and hence ignition timing retardation. So I'm going above that.
__________________
2015 ///M4: M/Vorsteiner Aero, P3Cars, HRE R101, Dinan S2, Coils & Intake; Eis/Akra Exhaust
2013 WRX Hatchback: LED Conversion, Blacked Out, Rally Armor 2015 Macan Turbo: Techart Exhaust, Cargraphics Lowering Module, Blacked Out |
Appreciate
0
|
09-04-2014, 11:51 AM | #40 |
Lieutenant
127
Rep 451
Posts
Drives: 2015 M4 - SO/SS, 6MT
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Toronto, ON
|
Ditto to that. I have been with Petro Canada long time and planning to stay... Come on Shell guys...
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-13-2014, 04:53 PM | #41 | ||
First Lieutenant
365
Rep 358
Posts
Drives: '16F80,TR6,Defender,PA23-250T
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: CYVR
|
Quote:
Ethanol is supposedly in the fuel mixture to create a cleaner exhaust by ensuring everything is burnt. But in reality, not necessary, and perhaps we should ask the corn grower government lobbyists to explain why they need to put ethanol in our fuel. Quote:
Chevron has a 94 octane without ethanol. Plus, it uses a separate hose, so we don't get 2 litres of "whatever octane+ethanol" the previous purchaser pumped. Big consideration if you have a motorbike... less so on a bigger tank. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
09-15-2014, 08:24 PM | #43 | |
Lieutenant
178
Rep 467
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|