V-Power Diesel Vs BP Ultimate?

[BenzedUP]

Hi Guys,

Just want to know what is the best diesel to use on my E320 CDi - V-power diesel or bp ultimate?

Since my ownership of the car i've always used BP Ultimate, found it really good but I have never used V-Power diesel.. am I missing out on anything here?

Whats your experience?


Thanks.

 

[lynall]

I tried all the fancy fuels in my old disco and i never noticed a thing, no difference at all, mind you it wasnt std in the engine dept.

When is was running std chip small things would make a difference ie k+n, larger intercooler, and when i mean a difference i mean so smalll you had to be **** retentive to notice them!, but once fancy chip in the differences must have been so small to be unoticable.



Lynall

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I've always used V-Power (and before that Optimax) in the C32, but have started using it consistently in the ML270 for the last month or so.

I can't feel any difference at all in the C32, but still use it. I was expecting much the same in the ML, but surprisingly it seems to have made a noticeable difference.

The engine seems to be slightly quieter/smoother - no idea why - and it does seem a little perkier. I don't think it's the placebo affect as I went in expecting nothing based upon using V-Power/Optimax for the last 7 years without noticing any real difference.

Maybe diesel's respond better?

 

[e55]

I have used both and I really cant tell the difference. I have also used the Tesco 99 RON unleaded and I found a difference in that. Whether there is a real performance difference or if its pyschological knowing that its 99 RON I dont know.

I have found this with petrol cars, maybe diesels are different

 

[ceejay]

I use both BP Ultimate and Shell V Power diesel in my E320cdi, can't tell a great deal of difference between them. Definitely get slightly better mpg than with regular fuel, and original injectors still going strong at 160k.

 

[BenzedUP]

I think BP Ultimiate gives out more bhp on the car, when I had my car remaped it was ment to have 204bhp as standard but when it was on the rolling road it pushed out 218.9bhp standard, I dont really know if thats becuase I use BP Ultimiate diesel...

I might try V-Power diesel soon and see whats that like..

 

[rf065]

I think BP Ultimiate gives out more bhp on the car, when I had my car remaped it was ment to have 204bhp as standard but when it was on the rolling road it pushed out 218.9bhp standard, I dont really know if thats becuase I use BP Ultimiate diesel...

I might try V-Power diesel soon and see whats that like..

I spoke to someone with a Dyno who said all MB's he's dyno'd put out more than their quoted bhp, probably not a fuel thing.

Russ

 

[BenzedUP]

I spoke to someone with a Dyno who said all MB's he's dyno'd put out more than their quoted bhp, probably not a fuel thing.

Russ

Thats bull**** to be honest. My friends c32 amg was 344bhp, my brothers clk320 was pushing 217bhp my dads sl55 was 491bhp when he had it remaped so that person you spoke to isnt really correct!

My previous W210 E320 CDI was pushing 197bhp so thats the same as what standard should be on a w210 cdi.

2001 E55 AMG 354bhp on RR same figures as AMG

According to Ray at west tuning most cars come bellow the standard bhp figures specially german cars because the fuel they use in Germany is better quality than the fuel we use in the UK!

 

[G.O'Rilla]

According to Ray at west tuning most cars come bellow the standard bhp figures specially german cars because the fuel they use in Germany is better quality than the fuel we use in the UK!

Sorry, that's not correct. All pump fuel sold in EU meets the same standard specifications (EN590 and EN 228) and there is very little difference in brands either since there is not much room for manoeuvre in the spec, plus they all buy blend stocks on the open market anyway and off each other. Your Shell fuel might have been processed in an Exxon refinery and simply blended by Shell. I say "might" - just as an example.

The premium fuels with higher octane or cetane numbers are said to benefit tuned/remapped engines rather than standard ones. however, I ran BP Ultimate on a remapped diesel engine over 3000 miles and managed 0.2mpg worse. Others found different, but the car felt no better so basically for me it was a waste of money. It is one of those "if it feels right, it is right" things..............

I'm in fuel testing business, by the way. Just don't ask about biofuels....................

hope that helps
best regards
David

 

[DXB]

I use V-Power, car does feel a little flat on normal go-go juice.

 

[rf065]

Thats bull**** to be honest. My friends c32 amg was 344bhp, my brothers clk320 was pushing 217bhp my dads sl55 was 491bhp when he had it remaped so that person you spoke to isnt really correct!

To be fair, he was talking about new or nearly new cars, once they have 80,000 miles on the clock, who knows what they still have.

The point was Mercedes seem to be conservative in quoting bhp figures.

Russ

 

[sms78]

i get about 5 mpg more if i use bp fuel over shell or total . wether i use utimate or normal it doesnt make a difference with my car .

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Interesting Daimler Chrysler presentation on use of GTL fuels in the 220 CDi engine:

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/deer_2004/session2/2004_deer_maly.pdf

 

[saorbust]

I've used V-Power fuels for a while now - find they are a lot smoother, particularly in the diesels. My old E320CDI had a noticable difference with V-Power Diesel (or Ultimate to be fair). I thought it was just me until my brother made a comment on a long drive to Germany and back - he said he could hear the difference.

Maybe it's my brain, who knows, but I go with what I think.....and frankly a more refined fuel makes sense in a premium car to me.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I've used V-Power fuels for a while now - find they are a lot smoother, particularly in the diesels. My old E320CDI had a noticable difference with V-Power Diesel (or Ultimate to be fair). I thought it was just me until my brother made a comment on a long drive to Germany and back - he said he could hear the difference.

Maybe it's my brain, who knows, but I go with what I think.....and frankly a more refined fuel makes sense in a premium car to me.

I can't really feel any difference in performance - not even the placebo effect - nor be confident of any difference in fuel consumption, but I do suspect the engine is a little quieter/smoother in our diesel ML.

Trouble is, now we've been using it for an extended period I can't really be sure that it's actually any quieter!!

I work on the same basis regarding premium fuel for a premium car.

In the overall cost of ownership and given the mileage we do - then V-Power doesn't cost us much more in actual pounds in my pocket.

Much of the extra 6/7p per litre is covered by the 3% cashback I get for having a Shell Mastercard, and 2p per litre for having a Shell Club card, not to mention that the four of the Shell stations I use are cheaper per litre than other filling stations nearby anyway.

I real terms it's cost me less than regular fuel from the Total station down the road.

 

[Adam230K]

The only difference i've noticed between v-power and normal stuff is the mileage i get to the tank, i get about 50 miles more out of the v-power, and im starting to think its due to the way i drive.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I've delivered what I need to for this week - except cleared my Inbox so I afforded myself the luxury of working out how much it really costs to use V-Power:

Whilst it's cheaper to run Shell regular fuel, I reckon it's cheaper to run Shell V-Power than it is running Total regular by the time I take into account the rebates - and that's even without any reduction in fuel consumption.

2% improvement in fuel consumption:

View attachment 15625

0% improvement in fuel consumption:

View attachment 15624

I hope I've done the maths right now it's published to the world!!

 

[flango]

I spoke to someone with a Dyno who said all MB's he's dyno'd put out more than their quoted bhp, probably not a fuel thing.

Russ

All the ones I have seen dyno'd put out more than the quoted MB figure, MB appear to be very conservative in the power figures.

As regards the fuel tried them all but Shell & BP premium fuels do give better performance than standard fuels if the car is sophisticated enough to handle it and tell the difference.

Mine currently on Shell standard diesel + Millers Diesel sport 4 exactly same performance as Shell V Power (Dyno tested) and works out much cheaper. Would never use anything else now.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

At risk of going off topic but following the thread of the conversation...

Certainly my car seems a little conservative.

Measured at 296 BHP at the wheels, which with just 18% transmission losses equates to the quoted 349 BHP (or 354 PS) for the C32 MAG.

I suspect being an auto the losses are higher than 18%, and so it seems a little healthier than quoted - whether that's V-Power or just the output of that engine - then 349 BHP seems conservative.

That said I recall reading magazine articles back at the launch whereby it was suggested that the performance figures quoted by MB for the C32 were conservative to avoid embarrassment for the more expensive metal.

The Autocar Roadtest timed 0-60 at 4.6s and 0-100 at 10.8s. I did some calculations and estimated that the car would need close to 400 BHP at the flywheel for that level of performance. Maybe MB supplied a particularly healthy model if they knew it was going head to head with the then new M3.

 

[Adam230K]

MBs are usually faster in a straight line than the equivalent M car as far as ive seen.
I even once saw a C43 pulling against the E46 so-called 341 bhp M3, and they were totalling equal. Quite strange.