Which fuel is best for the octavia 2.0t vrs? Regular unleaded or the higher octane ie; BP ultimate. Anyone got any figures on perfomance/economy? Thanks.:confused:

Shell V-Power - 99 ron.

Don't use BP ultimate - it's carp.

All FSi engines should be run on 98+

Shell V-Power - 99 ron.

Don't use BP ultimate - it's carp.

I take it you have tried the higher grade did you notice any differant in performance or is it a big con?

I take it you have tried the higher grade did you notice any differant in performance or is it a big con?

IMO performance is enhanced, the engine is more responsive and pulls better.

Tests have shown that it can make a difference of 5+bhp depending on the fuel and type of car.

V-Power like the man said or Tesco's 99 RON for me, 95 is dire in a vRS unless you had it specifically mapped for it. Like Lummox says (and he knows his stuff) they should be run on 98 RON +, if you wanted to use 95 then maybe the vRS is not what your looking for mate?

I notice a difference in fuels and I think the 2.0T is quite sensitive, the Tesco stuff makes my car crank for longer before firing and seems to make it idle a little rougher but with that in the car seems to run better if it's running to the red line a lot (track day, or following RevoNick and Makefish )

V-Power is the best all round fuel I have found and gives no problems or issues at all, I once had to use 95 octane when bad planning on my part caught me out and it was like someone had stuck a rolled up sock in the air intake, power down everywhere

Agreed - even my non turbo 2.0FSI feels better on Tescos 99 than Sainsburys Super which is 97. Don't touch 95. Might be imagination, but I don't think so.

Shell V-Power, cracking stuf

Even my 1.6FSI feels more responsive and quick on RON 99. Also, the car seems to idle more smoothly when I'm stationary. I only ever use the expensive stuff now - well worth the extra few pennies in my opinion. No noticeable difference on fuel economy though.

Shelll V-power or Tesco 99 get my vote.

Evo magazine did a back to back test on 97+ octane fuels in a Golf GTi (same TFSI engine as the vRS) about a year ago and published graphs for power and torque for each fuel. These two were the BEST (they used Shell Optimax at the time which was 98 octane - V-power is 99 Octane). BP Ultimate came out OK but having used this myself, subjectively, didn't give the expected umph, whereas V-power and Tesco 99 do.

Of interest; Shell now do a V-power DIESEL although it is not widely available yet.

I keep coming back to this.

I will not use the super dear stuff (98p+/litre) but Sainsburys only charge a penny premium for 97 (87p).

I had gone back to 95, but today put a full tank of Sainsburys 97 in and I really did notice the difference for the first time, just seemed to pull so much more strongly. Maybe it's more noticeable as the engine loosens up with mileage?

I had gone back to 95, but today put a full tank of Sainsburys 97 in and I really did notice the difference for the first time, just seemed to pull so much more strongly. Maybe it's more noticeable as the engine loosen up?

Just think how much MORE PULL you might get with 99 octane fuel.

Sounds like the higher Ron is the more suitable Ill give the v-power a try. Thanks

I only have a 1.4 mpi Fabia but run it on ESSO 97, drives a lot smoother, the throttle lag when moving off is reduced and idles better. However on 95 the idle shudder is more noticeable, needs more revs when moving off and even seems to be more sluggish to start.

SWMBO's H reg Orion is run on shell 95 and runs far better than on Supermarket stuff.

Just think how much MORE PULL you might get with 99 octane fuel.

Your right there Bahnstormer, no offence to anyone but why buy a vRS / hot hatch and then run it on a lower grade fuel, VAG say 98+ Octane for the TFSi's. I just don't get it, if the price of fuel or fuel economy was a major issue then why not buy a diesel

Just think how much MORE PULL you might get with 99 octane fuel.

But if the engine is tuned to run on 98, I thought that meant the maximal benefit would be seen at 98...admittedly one more than 97, but one less than 99!

Shelll V-power or Tesco 99 get my vote.

Evo magazine did a back to back test on 97+ octane fuels in a Golf GTi (same TFSI engine as the vRS) about a year ago and published graphs for power and torque for each fuel. These two were the BEST (they used Shell Optimax at the time which was 98 octane - V-power is 99 Octane). BP Ultimate came out OK but having used this myself, subjectively, didn't give the expected umph, whereas V-power and Tesco 99 do.

Of interest; Shell now do a V-power DIESEL although it is not widely available yet.

You wouldn't know what issue of EVO that was in by any chance?

Your right there Bahnstormer, no offence to anyone but why buy a vRS / hot hatch and then run it on a lower grade fuel, VAG say 98+ Octane for the TFSi's. I just don't get it, if the price of fuel or fuel economy was a major issue then why not buy a diesel

Hey Fluffmeister,

Exactly the right point; do you feed a thoroughbred racehorse on anything less than the best oats?

I run my Fabia 1.4mpi (with BBR GTi/Morego remap) on V-power plus Millers Octane Plus (maybe a little over the top here) 'cos I want the best for my car; but fuel economy is an issue for me so I have got an Octavia vRS TDI on order, which I will feed with Shell Diesel V-power.

Also I have always noticed a drop in performance whenever using any 95 octane particularly Supermarket stuff.

You wouldn't know what issue of EVO that was in by any chance?

Probably Dec 05 or Jan 06. I know I haven't got it anymore, as I send my back issues to my brother overseas, but I think there is a reference to it in a recent issue I have at home. I'll look it up tonight and let you know.

Why do Skoda say 'only lead free petrol RON 98 or lead free petrol RON 95 for 1.6 FSI/115 bhp'?

If I was to put RON 99 in my 1.6 FSI, is that ok? If it is, why don't Skoda recommend it?

Why do Skoda say 'only lead free petrol RON 98 or lead free petrol RON 95 for 1.6 FSI/115 bhp'?

If I was to put RON 99 in my 1.6 FSI, is that ok? If it is, why don't Skoda recommend it?

99 octane in your 1.6 FSI will be fine and you should notice it being a small degree perkier than using 98 octane. If you use 95 octane you ought to definitely notice a drop in performance/pick up/smoothness.

It is all down to the Engine Management and the designed advance/retard setting of the ignition to get the optimum tuning and power/performance.

Most engines these days are set to run on 95 octane but will perform better, and the engine management will take care of, a higher octane rating. High performance engines, including the VAG group FSI ones, are set to use a higher octane i.e. 98 as standard. Interestingly the 1.4 16v Fabia is set to run on 98 octane!

You can use a higher octane fuel i.e.99+ with no ill effect and often better performance, although there are limits (depending on the engine management); so if you use, say, 102 octane in a 95 programmed car it will likely be outside the progammed parameters and so there will be no additional benefit over using, say, 98/99 octane.

Make sense?

Make sense?

Yeah. Have only ever used RON 95, so want to be sure before I put anything else in it.

Cheers

Right, just been out to Tesco and filled the car up and as soon as I turned the key in the ignition I noticed something. When idle, my car revs at about 11000rpm, which I have always thought quite odd and rather loud, but with RON 99 in it, it idles at about 7000rpm and is a lot quieter.

When pulling away, the engine definately seemed to be less 'gruffy', for want of a better word and certainly felt a bit smoother.

After a quick 10 mile burst during my lunch hour, I have to say, the 4p premium doesn't seem too bad.

Right, just been out to Tesco and filled the car up and as soon as I turned the key in the ignition I noticed something. When idle, my car revs at about 11000rpm, which I have always thought quite odd and rather loud, but with RON 99 in it, it idles at about 7000rpm and is a lot quieter.

When pulling away, the engine definately seemed to be less 'gruffy', for want of a better word and certainly felt a bit smoother.

After a quick 10 mile burst during my lunch hour, I have to say, the 4p premium doesn't seem too bad.

I know its a typing error but have you had an engine transplant as well? Got a Mercedes McLaren V10? Idling at 7000 rpm? :eek:

Seriously; An instanteneous result is a bit odd as you will always have fuel in the pipe between tank and engine that will last for half a mile or so; BUT if after your 10 mile 'blat' it all feels better then it has to be said QED.

Now you will want to take the car out at 4:00am on a Sunday, perhaps ...?

I know its a typing error but have you had an engine transplant as well? Got a Mercedes McLaren V10? Idling at 7000 rpm? :eek:

See that's what happens when you are in a rush to type something

Of course I meant 700rpm

The tank was almost empty. I was going to fill up last night and couldn't make my mind up if 99 would be ok for the car or not, hence why I asked.

According to the mileage left, I had 10 miles of fuel left when I got to work this morning and the Tesco garage is literally across the way from where I work. I try not to let it get really low normally, but thought if i am going to put another level of fuel in it, do I really want to mix.

As for going out at 4am on a Sundayu, nah. I am off to the NEC on Friday night though to see a gig, so, will certainly get a better idea and feel to see how much difference it really makes.