W204 C280 Sport Fuel comparisons

[PeterC280]

First 12 months and car runs well. No measurable benefit from Shell V-Power though, in fact 95 Octane best and worst!? A little better overall than I anticipated.

----- Miles Gallons MPG Fuel Type ______ Period
----- 1884 66.19 28.46 Shell V-Power Summer - Autumn
----- 1102 42.82 25.74 Shell 95_1 _____ Winter
----- 1143 37.67 30.34 Tesco 99 ______ Spring
----- 1262 38.79 32.54 Shell 95_2 Late Spring - Summer
Total 5391 185.47 29.07 - -

The contrast between the first period on Shell 95 Octane and the second period highlights the impact of cold weather and having the heater on from start up! Mixed driving with about 75% of miles at motorway and cross contry speeds.

Only gripe so far is the rear tyre noise at motorway speeds on anything but the smoothest of surfaces. The Conti Sports may be the culprit?

PeterG

 

[markjay]

Those who fill-up with Premium fuel and expect immediate results are likely to be disappointed.

One of the claims regarding Premium fuels is that they are cleaner and have detergents added, which will keep the engine clean and/or clean-up older engines. This in turn will have long term effect on fuel consumption and performance.

Any such benefits can not be observered (proven or disproven) by running the car on Premium fuel one day, and 95 RON the other.

The only potentially measurable differences under these circumstances will be BHP or instant MPG - and I doubt these will be noticible on anything other that high-tuned performance engines.

I have been using only Premium fuels on my cars over the past 10 years. I believe they keep the engine healthy and help prevent deterioration of performance and fuel consumption with age/mileage.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

Interesting but I would think that it's too small a sample of each and too little variation for meaningful results.

I know that it depends more on driving style and road types than anything else, but my C350 Sport Petrol with the same sort of annual mileage is currently showing 31.7mpg over its first two years. Its usage varies from weekly 1 mile trips to the supermarket, to 5 mile journeys to the golf course, to 50/50 motorway/country road days out, to hard driving up the Alps, to 150mph Autobahn blasts. I enjoy all the 306 horses under the bonnet so I'm more than delighted with the economy.

I'm with you on the tyre noise - I put it down to the 18" rims and low profile tyres. Other than that, an amazing car.

 

[PeterC280]

Those who fill-up with Premium fuel and expect immediate results are likely to be disappointed.

One of the claims regarding Premium fuels is that they are cleaner and have detergents added, which will keep the engine clean and/or clean-up older engines. This in turn will have long term effect on fuel consumption and performance.

Any such benefits can not be observered (proven or disproven) by running the car on Premium fuel one day, and 95 RON the other.

The only potentially measurable differences under these circumstances will be BHP or instant MPG - and I doubt these will be noticible on anything other that high-tuned performance engines.

I have been using only Premium fuels on my cars over the past 10 years. I believe they keep the engine healthy and help prevent deterioration of performance and fuel consumption with age/mileage.

I wasn't sure what to expect with the C280. Previously I had run a 2.5V6 Omega mainly on Optimax for 9 years but if I put in 95 Octane there was a noticeable coarseness and lack of low end torque compared to the higher octane fuels. This was felt within a few miles of filling up with a near empty tank. Similarly so with a 58 plate Honda Civic I ran for 5 years but the consumption was slightly worse with V-power than with 95 Octane whereas the Omega benefitted on average by 3 MPG.

From past experience I anticipated the V-power would better suit the higher compression M272 engine but it seems not so because my perception is the engine is smoother and quieter with Shell 95 Octane. When I bought it, no-one at the Mercedes dealership could confrm there was any advantage using higher octane and so it seems to be the case.

I may give it a few tankfuls of the Esso 95 and 97 Octane fuels in the future because Mercedes and the Exxon (Mobil, Esso) group work together so that seems to make sense.

Just one query though because you refer to Premium fuel and 95 octane as though they were different fuels but they are one and the same. 97+ Octane is Super Unleaded.

PeterG

 

[PeterC280]

Interesting but I would think that it's too small a sample of each and too little variation for meaningful results.

I know that it depends more on driving style and road types than anything else, but my C350 Sport Petrol with the same sort of annual mileage is currently showing 31.7mpg over its first two years. Its usage varies from weekly 1 mile trips to the supermarket, to 5 mile journeys to the golf course, to 50/50 motorway/country road days out, to hard driving up the Alps, to 150mph Autobahn blasts. I enjoy all the 306 horses under the bonnet so I'm more than delighted with the economy.

I'm with you on the tyre noise - I put it down to the 18" rims and low profile tyres. Other than that, an amazing car.

Almost 32 MPG from the C350 seems really good. Almost went for a C350 Elegance ... maybe I should have done so.

I don't know if it is to MPG detriment but mine came with a Brabus dual twin port exhaust fitted. Dealer confirmed engine not chipped, but maybe the C350 engine better suited to the car with 7-speed auto? I've seen as low as 18 MPG driving through the city with multiple traffic light stops and as high as 37 MPG on a 160 mile Motorway run at legal speeds. No doubt it is a car that benefits from longer distance higher speed runs and keeping moving!

Car certainly has character.

PeterG