Hello, Richard. Great video as always. Very informative and well presented. Being a bit of a car-nut myself I have done a lot of research into E10 and it's drawbacks and everything you said reflects what I have learned over the years as well. Few notes I'd like to clarify. Having E10 fuel does not mean you have less energy in fuel. Yes, it is a fact that ethanol has less energy in it. But there are nuances. Petrol/ gasoline(murica) has to conform to certain standards. One of those standards is the evaporation rate of the fuel. Usually petrol is blended from refineries from lighter blendstock. This means the molecules are lighter and the density of the fuel is on the lower side. In EU the density of petrol/gasoline(murica) is supposed to be between 0.720 and 0775. And from my experience, usually, the ethanol free or even E5 comes in at around 0.730 kg/l @15c. This density usually satisfies the evaporation requirements as well. But when ethanol gets blended into petrol some chemical magic happens and the evaporation rates go up. To counter that, the blendstock for E10 petrol has to be on the heavier side and usually the E10 petrol density is at around 0.750 or more. Even when accounting the denser ethanol, the basic petrol before blending has to be at around 0.740-0.745. Why is this important? It's because density is the actual measurement of how much energy per liter of fuel you're really getting. The denser the fuel, the more you get. Granted, to make 98 octane fuel, the blendstock also has to be on the denser side. My experience shows that 98 E5 usually comes in at around 0.74 - 0.745. So even if you're getting the 98 octane with less ethanol, it will not guarantee at all that you are getting more energy from your fuel. I have also inspected a lot of dyno test results that are available over the interwebs. Even youtube videos are a great resource for that kind of information. Quick recap - E10 fuel usually makes very similar top power and torque compared to 98 or more premium fuels. There's a lot of murican test data available where they use their 87 octane E10 fuels, which would be equivalent of european 92 octane fuel and make similar power to racing fuels or 98 octane fuels. This is especially true for normal everyday cars. Yes, race cars and tuned engines will make a bigger difference on higher octane fuels but it's a moot point because none of us are using race engines in our everyday driving. Ah, yes. Ethanol is a great octane enhancer. Usually our european E10 fuels come with octane rating of 96 or more. I have had 95 E10 that had RON rating of 97.8. How do I know that? I am fairly confident that this is EU wide, but in my country the fuel retailer is required to present you with a fuel test certificate upon request. So I request it fairly often to see what I'm getting. Since I'm a lazy bastard I never go to the fuel station. Instead I e-mail the retailer's customer service and request a fuel certificate for an automated fuel station ( you know, the ones with no shop, just a card machine to pay for fuel ). They are required to e-mail me the certificate. I have a nice database of the 5 major fuel retailers fuel specs and quality in my country ( small country, not many fuel terminals. Data shows they all get their fuel at the same place one time or the other ). Final note - I have also logged my car's fuel consumption in over 100 000 kilometres. I have used E10 and ethanol free 95 and 98 E5. 98 performs the worst in fuel economy. E10 performs the best. Differences are minor and negligible. Basically a rounding error. So there's that :)
Passed my driving test first try the other day with only one minor (I grinded a gear). I've watched so many of your videos I can probably mark a test myself. Watching your videos were definitely a massive help so thank you for that. :)
The reason it says premium fuel minimum 95 RON is because in some countries they have 91 RON fuel and 95 so 95 is considered premium in those countries and 98 super or performance
Exactly, the UK used to have 'standard' grade 91 RON available as 2 star leaded prior to 1990 but it was withdrawn to make way for 98 RON 'Super' Unleaded on the forecourts. This then meant there was an unleaded fuel available with comparable RON to the then common 4 star leaded, allowing that to be phased out in 2000 (some cars built for 4 star can be damaged by 95 as the octane is too low - they need 98 super UL). 95 RON 'Premium' unleaded has been available since the mid 1980's and quickly became the 'normal grade' unleaded fuel, in part because modern cars (early 1990's onward) with their higher compression engines and catalysts don't really tolerate octanes lower than 95. I think in eastern Europe they had a lot of older vehicles that were fine on 91 and sometimes lower octanes so there was a good market for a 'standard' 91 RON unleaded there but the UK never got that and I suspect given that cat converters have been standard for 30+ years now, 95 is basically the norm everywhere.
'Project Farm' who tests everything from tools to lubricants,tested this. One test was to fill two, gallon glass jars, and place Rubber, Aluminium, Plastic into each jar and leave for 3 months. The E10 components were seriously damaged, while the E5 components were undamaged. So it isn't just price. My Kawasaki ZZR1200 gets better mpg on the good stuff and components suffer less than E10.
Yes that is true. However, vehicle manufacturers do change the make-up of those components to resist the additional ethanol. Vehicles which are designed to run E10 can happily be run on E10 for their lifetime.
In europe cars manufactured after 2000 should tolerate E10 just fine... this is why TOTAL can sell E10 95 octane fuel only in their petrol station. they also have premium E5 98 but it's expensive... they also don't have E5 95 Corsica only has E10 95 too !
I used to have a Mitsubishi Space Star with the 1.8 GDI, engine that was the annoying exception to the rule (built after 2000, not E10 compatible 😑) Overall, I can't say it was a great car.
In my 30+ year old V6 Fords, the premium fuels were cheaper per mile (V-Power), despite the extra expense per litre, such was the improvement in fuel economy because of the fuel. About 15% more efficient.
same here, commuted to my internship with a 91 celica and instantly noticed that the cheaper fuel had waaaay worse fuel economy. Old vehicles werent made for ethanol
@@stug45not just the fuel lines it’s any rubber in the fuel system. Seals etc. criminal as the government knew about this as it’s set out in the consultation document. It’s a green washing exercise. If cars do less mpg then they burn more petrol and produce more emissions. Also if you can’t run on E10 you have to buy premium fuel which makes the government more money.
I had the same experience in a 2018 jaguar xjr. Very significantly better mileage on motorway runs and you could actually tell it responded better. My little 2 cylinder salvage Fiat also runs significantly better on vpower.
Can't say whether it's an issue with my car or not, but what I can vouch for is that E5 stored in a 20 Litre jerrycan for two years plus, with regular small amounts taken out to fill my petrol lawnmower, seems to work fine. A local lawn mower mechanic told me that one of the biggest issues people have is the fuel going 'off' in the tank of the mower. or container. Perhaps they should use E5 for that purpose! Good video. Thank you.
The higher octane fuel is less resistant to knocking, therefore it is better when driving on track which puts more stress on the car - as knocking can damage the engine. Tesco momentum 99 is the go to fuel for my Twingo RS Racecar.
you shouldnt be experiencing knock at any time, so if you are changing your fuel isnt a fix, its a bandage, sort the issue out, which could be over heating or running hot
Agree - my Boxster runs quite happily on regular 95 and I don’t seem to get any measurable economy improvement using Super (Porsche just state “95/98” without elaborating) but when I track it I use the highest octane I can find locally (Tesco 99) as 1) I can notice a marginal improvement in torque, and 2) as you say it is by definition less stressful on the engine.
@@jonyb4 Better knock resistance means the car's ECU can advance the timing closer to ideal. Modern ECUs are adaptive to fuel quality, particularly advantageous in performance engines where they will usually produce more power on higher octane fuel. Less important in your 1.2 litre naturally aspirated Dacia
@@pgr3290 you will never have your ignition advance more than is needed, on a typical engine passing a certain advance degree will have diminishing returns Putting 99 in won't suddenly unlock your engines potential, it was only ever mapped to a baseline figure, on 95 or even less
E10 is bad news for some vehicle as it supposedly attacks some rubber components like O-rings etc. I also understand that it more readily absorbs water, so let your vehicle stand for a while and you might be in for trouble and expensive flushing/servicing. I'm sticking to E5 thank you.
E10 is absolutely fine for everything build 2012 or after. Emissions even get tested with E10 because it has the lowest emissions. In regards to water, from what I understand, the fuel play no role in how much water enters your tank and after its in there it might actually be useful if the fuel mixes with it to a certain degree instead of the system needing to cope with pure water.
@@jonyb4 The fuel system isn't sealed. Where do you think the air comes from that fills your tank when you use the fuel that was there before? Or what about the air than can freely move around while fuelling the car. That air holds water and condensation will cause it to turn into a liquid that can be pumped into your engine.
Even before pumps displayed the 'E' content, the lead free fuel we were using wrecked the fuel tank on my 1972 VW camper. The fuel guage sender (basically a float sliding up and down a steel rod with a wire either side) stuck in the 1/4 tank position! When I removed it, I found out that it was covered in rusty gunk and stuck solid! Oh, it also gummed up the jets in the carb on my petrol mower! Oh ethanol, lovely stuff! 😖
general rule of thumb for petrol vehicles in the last 20 years, if you use the engine daily and will use the fuel up, use E10. if you use the vehicle not so often, use E5. still down to the car owner to work out what is best for their vehicle. i prefer to use E5 in my 2021 motorbike because i get more miles to the tank, have been on a ride once or twice and had to be careful as a petrol station shut and next one touch and go if i will make it there. i also use E5 for old engines in some of the equipment i use, petrol generator, whacker plate, chainsaw, powerfab digger and so on, as none of them are new engines or fuel lines.
E10 is ok if not left in the tank. It’s time related absorption of water that ruins the inside of the engine. It is evidenced that the e10 is ruination of garden machinery. A lot of industrial gardeners are reverting to electric tools. A lot of other countries run on much less that 95 ron
when I drove to Scotland in my Sportage I always had to fill up at Carlisle. When I used E5 I got way past Edinburgh - so E5 it was for long trips - far more economical. Ive also started putting E5 in my lawn mower and it runs far better
Pretty sure this is just confirmation bias / placebo, as the video says. The energy content difference will be negligible, and the RON increase won't make a significant difference if your engine isn't setup for RON 98.
For lawn mowers we actually recommend fuel without Ethanol. I dont how its called in britain, but for us germans its Super Plus. Shell calls it V-Racing or ultimate at Aral. The reason behind it is, that fuels with Ethanol tend to clock up faster in the Carburator, when the mower is standing for a longer time (like in Winter or long rainy Phases). In the long run it tends to save money because the engines live longer and you dont have to buy new Carburators so often (you cant clean them to often because the valves get damaged during cleaning with ultrasonic cleaners) Edit: for the Same reason close the fuel valve and let the engine run dry before Winter. (or empty the Tank when the mower has no fuel valve)
My ford focus mileage dropped crazily when I used e10, so I've used E5 constantly and the mileage is much better. Only use the E10 in an emergency and don't put too much in.
Interesting video, I grew up in the days of 5 star and 4 star fuel, had a sports motorbike so used high octane fuel, back in thise days around 30,000 miles needed an upper engine overhaul, head off, polish and valve clean, nowadays not sure anyone does that now. When I was an instructor myself because of the mileage and type of driving I used to use STP and molyslip in the oil and sometimes Redex in the fuel. More peace of mind rather than any obvious benefit. I don't cover much mileage now but use E5 fuel as I am suspicious of requirements introduced for green targets, they will not be beneficial to mechanics but technology may overcome their disadvantages.
Interesting. I would have thought trading standards might have something to say about the variable amount of ethanol found in petrol. If it was an accurate test. Personally I use E5, even though my car can run E10. It runs better and I get better mileage. The premium fuels tend to have cleaning additives in them too. As for the extra cost, I couldn't give a fig, frankly. I'm paying for a better driving experience. No different to paying for premium beer or clothes et al. Yes the other stuff does the job but sometimes that little extra is worth it.
Actually really interesting and educational. still no definitive answer apart from fuel companies finding another way to squeeze a bit more money out of us.
This isn't a criticism of your car, but I think in general, it is either too modern and/or low powered to benefit from the more expensive fuel. Cheaper fuel may have worked out for you, but my experience when I commuted 70 miles a day in my Fords that were both over 30 years old at the time, I ran them exclusively on V-Power. Both were 2.8 V6 (Capri and Granada limousine) on a journey that was 30 miles at highway speeds each way and under 5 miles at town speeds. One benefit was that older cars are more vulnerable to wear caused by high ethanol. The other benefit was that the cruising drive allowed for more miles per pound, despite being more expensive per litre. I calculated around an extra half a mile per pound of fuel: 2.5 miles per pound on E10, 3 miles per pound on E5. Each 30 year old V6 Ford averaging above 30mpg on fuel it wasn't designed to run on (because they were built for leaded 4-star).
Would be interesting if you made a similar video to this or a comparison type video with low cost fuels compared to traditional, more expensive fuels. I don't know if they are very popular in the UK, but they definitely are here in Spain
4:05 I think 95 octane is considered premium because 95 octane is pretty high. There are some places where one can find fuel that is less then 95 octane, for example in Russia you can find 92 octane fuel, which also probably equivalent to US's 86 octane (because they measure them differently)
95 octane is only for certain engines, mostly more sporty cars that require such fuel and would get problems with lower octane fuel. Vice versa the same. If you have a regular car and fuel it with 95 octane, it either has no advantage or might even cause some trouble due to the confused fueling system.
Interesting. My previous car (2008 Honda Jazz) performed considerably better on the E5, with better engine performance and aout 15% higher mpg. The new car (2016 Jazz) seems to perform equally well on either. I assume it's down to differences in the way the ECU is programmed. Mind you, if the E5 or E10 is simpoly a maximum rather than an actual figure, simple comparison isn't easy!
Finally someone doing accurate figures, instead of your average Joe on the internet who says they get 20-30% percentage better fuel economy with E5 over E10. I’ve asked countless people to explain how a 5% difference in ethanol content can make nearly as much difference in fuel usage as it would if using E85 compared to straight petrol. When using E85 it’s well documented that you need about 30% more fuel.
My 300hp Spanish estate car with GPF runs ok on 95. However I run it on 97/99: 95 when I have no choice. Power delivery is better, no hesitation, smoother, quieter, better low down response. Car is nicer to drive than on 95. V Power is expensive but car loves it, noticeably so. I'd love 102 RON but I don't live in Germany 😂😂😂. Admittedy when I ran a TSI 150 Leon, 99 made very little difference except for reduced hesitation at lower rpm. But in my house we have also a Seat 3 pot turbo and it flies on 99.
I make my own alcohol using vegetable food waste. Replaced rubber fuel components with steel and copper. I pay zero tax on my fuel, and I never will. Allegedly. 😉✅
I have a Polo BlueGT 150BHP, I did a test a while ago I run the car on E10 and after filling up three times and found I was getting 400 miles per tank full and the car was a bit sluggish, I switched to E5 and cycled through 3 tank fulls to clear out any E10 and was getting 450 miles per tank full, E5 is 7 pence per litre more, so 44L in my tank costs me £3.08 more to fill the tank, I now buy E5 and wont use E10
Similar story with my golf 1.5tsi 150. Car seems to have more low down torque and then DSG learns after a bit and shifts up sooner. Less pedal pressure needed to accelerate. Makes no difference to urban drives but it does on a run approx 53 plays approx 49mpg.
I ran extensive tests on my Toyota Aygo commuter car, my findings were that I got 57-63mpg on E5 and it easily achieves 65 sometimes upto 70mpg on E10, I also found that shell's E10 gave the best economy. So just goes to show that it all depends on the car itself
Have used E10 since it come out, had no problems at all, use it on a 2008 Honda CRV, 2000 Nissan Micra, 1989 2.0lt pinto Mk3 Transit, 2004 Honda Jazz 1.4 and my lawn mower, just changed the older engines fuel pipe for ethanol fuel, as fuel prices are all over the place can really see no big hit on mpg.
That's great I have a 2008 1.8 Civic and have had 4 injectors replaced and fuel pump issues since E10, I don't use it now. I've also heard stories from multiple mechanics that fuel system issues have dramatically increased since the launch of E10
I go for E5 cause I have a classic car, 1967, along with some lead replacement additive that has some anti corrosion to make sure my engine isn't corroded from the ethanol. If you drive a modern car that is designed for E10, I'd say just go for E10. (In future I may either replace the engine or overhaul the current engine to convert to unleaded fuel, but for now with the original fuel lines and engine, I'm limited to the minimum ethanol content and lead replacement additive)
I also have a classic - a 1962 skoda. For such an old vehicle E10 or E5 is basically irrelevant as long as you replace the rubber flexi fuel lines with ethanol resistant ones - this is very easy as there's rarely more than 3 or 4 lines to replace. The reason they recommend not to use E10 in older cars is because the rubber is not rated to withstand high ethanol content, but in old cars like we have the only rubber components that see fuel by design are the hoses - there are no valve stem seals made of rubber for example. So as long as you have a refurbished head and valves to withstand unleaded fuel (which you absolutely should, lead replacement additive is not sufficient to solve this), and you replace the fuel lines, then you may as well use E10... Although my car coming from the Eastern bloc will run on basically anything so your mileage may vary 😂
@@matthewturnock8725 Yeah, my vehicle has only been taken out of the garage a few months ago, and was in there since 1993, the lines currently aren't rated. Eventually if I refurbish the valve seats and replace the fuel lines then I'll be able to, but for now E5 is the safest choice. 1967 Wolseley Hornet, same engine as the Austin/Morris Mini.
Considering you two have classic cars, I think you use them not as a daily driver. In that case, why not bite on your lips and spend extra to get RON100+ which is ethanol-free? We can get it at some places here in the Netherlands so I'd figure it should be possible in the UK as well. Race gas would work too, being sent in drums. Yes both of these are more expensive than running normal pump gas, but for a classic that isn't driven much... does the price premium matter even?
Go to ESSO. They have a RON rating of 99 if you go for their synergy supreme+ option. It's also ethanol free so older cars will run on it with no issues. If it's your daily driver then it will be expensive to fill up constantly but if not i'd highly recommend using it so you don't have a big repair bill later on.
I use my own car for business and claim a set mileage rate for business miles, so the fuel consumption is important to me. My Skoda VRS runs on E5 whenever possible because after doing very detailed tests on motorway journeys, I realised that the car produces 8% more miles on a tankful of E5 than E10. My local petrol station has a 5% difference in price between E5 and E10. There is a small noticeable power gain with E5 when using the car in a “spirited driving” manner, but around town it is not noticeable. The car ECU automatically compensates for the different octane rating and tunes the engine without me having to do anything.
Great video mate. It may be niche now but my humble opinion would love a comparative diesel video too. Safe motoring and I look forward to the next video regardless!
An informative one, as usual. Please do a content on premium vs mid range tyres or on tyres as general . I am sure with 200k plus miles on your car, you will have a good database.
@@sidathwijeratne7168 I've had it repaired and protected but yep they all suffer from bulkhead and chassis leg rust and if not caught early can be expensive to fix so people end up parting them out for spares. There's only 200 left on UK roads at the moment.
I have a Pontiac Firebird I've had it for 22 years and it only gets used on dry day's during the summer. I always make sure that when I put it away for the winter I brim the tank so that no condensation can form in there. At the end of winter (sometimes two years later) I put in a litre of Isopropanol to absorb any moisture that might be in there. I replaced the fuel tank the very first year I bought the car because it was holed and was leaking fuel. It's mint 22 years later so I recommend doing this as a good way to store your car. Obviously, don't always use Isopropanol as it's corrosive to rubber!
Great video. I did a check on my car recently. I filled up after emptying the tank with premium petrol. I ran to empty 3 tank fulls of premium fuel. I then filled up with standard 95. After running the car doing the same journey I can confirm that I get 3 to 4 mpg more from the cheaper standard petrol. So unless you have to use higher octane, save your money and use 95. That’s right, I got better mpg with the cheaper stuff!
I always use e5, but I now don’t believe it has better cleaning abilities. Last year I’d done a 3 hour journey north, went to go home and the car started misfiring. A thrash with a bottle of redex later and it was fine again!
Depends if your using your car regular or parking up for a long time and using just in the summer months, if you do this put the one with less ethanol in your tank, has the higher ethanol one is likely to absorb water and break down if left for long periods.
in germany, e5 and e10 have the same octane (95). super plus has 98, which is mostly for sports cars or some older cars used it as well for some reason. shell has 100 octane with a max of 0.8% ethanol, aral (bp) has 102. personally, on a turbo charged car you can feel the difference, especially if it has turbo lag. same with premium diesel fuels.
My 2.5t mondeo prefers the full fat version, also the detergents help keep the internals and injectors clean. More expensive but worth it in my opinion.
This is the subtle Conquer Driving / Auto Shenanigans crossover I didn't know I needed. I accidentally filled up with E5 the time before last, and my anecdotal evidence is that acceleration from my Kona's piddly little Kappa II felt fractionally smoother and faster (although that could have been placebo) and the fuel economy went up by 3.5MPG urban. So not a game changer either way after factoring in the increased cost, but maybe something I'll consider before the next long motorway journey where I'd expect the MPG increase to be a little more significant. I am intrigued by the idea of E5 being more resistant to water absorption though. My wife sometimes leaves her car for weeks without regular use, so the extra cost for E5 might be worth thinking about.
The higher ethanol content is more corrosive if you have an older car not built for e10 fuel and leave the tank standing for extended periods I'd think it can cause damage to fuel lines
i ran e85 on my 04 volvo s60 t5 with stock fuel system, didnt corrode anything or break down hoses. People speaking horror stories on e85 on cars that didnt come from factory for it breaking them had me spooked for awhile though lol
Had the same dilema years ago with my car. It's a reasonably powerful car, my friend recomended Premium E5 because he felt it made his car run more "smoothly". I gave it a try with one or two tankfuls, couldn't notice any difference and I've run it on standard E10 ever since. I think manufacturers cause a bit of confusion with their naming of fuel as Premium, because in other countries they have fuels with even more ethanol in their petrol, so E10 RON95 is actually Premium in those countries.
I only buy ESSO E5 because it is actually E-Zero. For what little extra it costs, I get far better mpg so it pays for itself. Also, because I don't use the car too often, I don't get the ethanol separating and absorbing water.
@@RJAI think that heavily depends on area and timing, in my area Morrisons is normally cheapest but in the city next me the Tesco is normally cheapest but there has been tikes where even BP has been the cheaper option. Esso is a normally somewhere in-between
Remember this. Etnonol is hydroscopic. That means it collects water That will destroy a lot of engines. We see it all the time here in Norway. If you have a carburated engine , do not by any fuel that has ethonol added. If you have an injection engine, be very sure that it can tolerate ethonol.
I have recently started using Tesco momentum full time and my Alfa 1.4 Multi-air seems happier on it and the mpg is marginally better. Hard to say if it’s all fuel. I do about 9K a year so I suppose it’s worth doing.
@@jonyb4Got to disagree mate. I have a small turbo car, a large N/A car and bikes (obviously n/A). I've put Tesco momentum and 'regular' in all of them and the one you can feel the difference in is the turbo.
@@jonyb4 well I regularly do a 100 mile drive to and from London. On E10 fuel it’s tricky to get over 40 mpg and on E5 it is noticeably easier to obtain it. I do tend to switch between the fuels often enough to notice a tiny difference. Plus my car is over 12 years old / 105K miles so I’d do anything to help it keep going (re. Ethanol and pipes)
I have had many performance cars, most tuned, and buying E5 or what is now effectively higher octane fuel makes most sense. Marked additional performance especially in turbocharged engines, and slightly superior fuel economy to the tune of 1-2 MPG. That does in part mitigate the cost increase. Higher powered turbo engines really do benefit from the increased knock resistance.
Really good analysis. I have an MX-5 mark 3 1.8, and have heard different things about whether or not to use premium fuel. You have convinced me it’s not necessary, and I would not be noticeably any better off for doing so!
RON rating of fuel has zero correlation to power. It relates to the ability to withstand detonation under compression. Premature ejack’ if you shall. A higher compression ratio engine like a performance petrol engine will missfire and perform poorly on 95 RON as it’s shooting its load before it’s even in yet. Engine size doesn’t matter. But the octane rating does 😉✅💪 ehhhhh lads!
I have 2 motorcycles, a single and a twin, one Japanese, the other Chinese, both 2 years old +- and both set up for E5. On occasions when E5 is not available and I fill up with E10, both perform very badly…..sluggish by comparison. As a result of that, when I buy petrol for the business machines, chain saws and the like it is usually E5 and again a slight power gain…..very slight ….. is noticeable, but importantly, the 2 strokes seem to start more easily. With the motorcycles, the difference in power delivery is well worth the extra few pence per litre. If I were filling a car’s tank and then find myself sitting in a queue, it matters not a jot and I would no doubt use E10. An interesting video, thank you.
super is petrol in germany, it comes from a time where in 70s there was "normal" and "super" and i dunno what exactly happened but "normal" went away and "super" was the norm i guess super premium is probably for the countries that dont have good fuel quality
I have used 102 octane fuel in all my engines and occasionally drop a can of PEA-based cleaner in the fuel system to get rid of malice in the combustion palace. It gives me that warm, fuzzy feeling. I also cut a lot of maintenance intervals in half, following the advice of the Motor Oil Geek who knows a thing or two about tribology and engine oil chemistry.
@@johnnybgood7812 Nope, E10 is mandatory throughout the EU/UK and has been since 2022. The option is E5 Super Unleaded which is not the same fuel and considerably more expensive in the UK as it’s taxed at a higher rate.
2012 Volvo T5, always run premium (97 or above) night and day differences between power. 247hp and a big turbo, mean fuel thats resistant to detonation as its compressed is the key i believe
My car as standard has to have minimum 97 RON, according to the sticker inside the fuel cap. Now its tuned, super unleaded is a minimum. I add reputable octane boosters to super unleaded. I also never use 'supermarket' fuel...
@@jonyb4well not never, but your point is valid regardless. The ECU has failsafes built in anyway (on most modern cars) and fuel isn’t going to make a blind bit of difference. I’m sure you know this by the way, I’m talking to people who don’t.
@@AI-Records24 exactly, this ain't the 80s anymore, and especially now we're using such small engines that are pushing silly amounts of cylinder pressures, you won't find one without atleast 1 knock sensor
You must only use E5 if you are using 2 stroke machines. The 2 stroke mixture in a Strimmer, made with E10, will cause your Strimmer to Bog out on you, if you have to run it at the higher throttle speeds. I can run the Lawnmowers with regular petrol, but I use Premium E5 now, in case I use the Petrol for the lawnmower, to make a mixture for the Strimmer, and hedge trimmer.
So funny I am seeing this. I filled up using E5 full tank for the first time in years the other day, normally use E10. Have a seat Leon 2020. Was doing 43mpg using E10 and was expecting a bump up of around 5/10% fuel economy. Omg. The worst fuel I have put in. Am only doing 39mpg. I remember using the E5 back in 2020 and 2021, and it was doing 48mpg, then it converted to E10 with the extra ethanol and my mpg went down to 45. The the fuel economy dropped down to low 40’s for the last 2 years. Over the last few weeks I have noticed it creep up a bit, maybe 43 even 44mpg, but gosh, putting that E5 fuel in and paying an extra £4 for a tank of it and doing 39mpg. Never again
I’ve been using standard esso recently and it seems to be less fuel efficient than the standard BP. BP V-Power is great but the price premium over standard seems to be a lot more than it used to be, so I don’t use it so much anymore.
Thank you so much for all the videos you have shared As an PDI I have learned so much from you on how to teach Much appreciated if you get a chance to make a video on how to pass the ADI part 3 test please 🙏
I have 2 classic bikes, made in 1978 and 1980, so I always use E5 in both of them, because the fuel systems weren't made for ethanol. In addition, the 1978 Triumph Bonneville was designed to run on 4-star 98 octane, so runs better on the higher octane super unleaded.
My 2008 Prius TSpirit Hybrid was fine running 95RON E5 - then they downgraded 95RON to E10. My Prius certainly didn’t like it. The engine was noisy, vibrated, acceleration was sluggish too. The most annoying part was loosing 50 miles minimum in range from my 45 litre fuel tank. The engine vibrations were quite disconcerting - as if the engine was about to fall apart - and it took forever to warm up - which very badly affected the MPG - I was struggling to hit 60 mpg in summer. Then in frustration, I switched to Esso Supreme 99+ E5. The difference was astounding within under a minute of driving out of the Petrol Station. Engine returned to being smooth as silk, running smoothly, quietly, and smooth linear acceleration almost without effort compared to E10. Icing on the cake was easily getting 65mpg out of a 45L tankful and over 600 miles to boot. My record in Summer 2022 (heatwave assisted, no doubt) was 69.4mpg and a total of 653 miles out of 45 litres of E5. With E10, I struggled to make 495 miles! This was my experience with my 2008 Prius Hybrid - E10 might make no difference in other more modern vehicles, but in this Hybrid, it was a dogs dinner. I literally stopped using E10 after that and I haven’t looked back since. Disclosure: I had a Mazda MX-3 with a sticker that suggested Premium fuels over standard ones. I had the same experience with 95RON back then. I filled it with V-Power and all the vibrations and noisy engine stopped. I only ever used V-Power back then. E5 works well for me - I’m driving a 16 year old car with a silky smooth engine and the hybrid synergy drive propulsion system operates perfectly and efficiently with this E5 fuel. Don’t care if anyone thinks I’m wasting money; my old Prius with 157,000 miles is happy and I’m happy too! 😊 p.s. My next car won’t even use petrol…!!! 😃
E5 is nonsense for fuel economy but worth it for protecting the engine. Evidence shows higher ethanol warps rubber seals. I’ve never used anything other than E5 in my more expensive car
between E5 and E10 - E5 is less hydroscopic meaning less chance of damaging internal components. but between 95 ron and 98 ron. in economy cars, both will produce the same power. in performance cars. its a huge difference. Mk5 Golf Gti for example, it can run on 95 ron all day long, producing 178BHP. but on 98ron you get the claimed 197bhp
My own experience… Honda Jazz 1.3 2019 (This engine is designed for E5/E10/E10+…does that mean E15?) it states this in the handbook. Early on using E5, the max range I got was 401 miles. We switched to E10 w/out issues. Last month on E10 the new max range achieved was 410 miles with 18 remaining on the computer. The computer showed i was averaging 56.8mpg for that specific tank of fuel. In terms of economy, imo so many things affect it such as temperature (seasons-lose about 30 miles in winter), how much weight it’s carrying, terrain-do you have hills?, traffic flow (completely useless right now due to roadworks everywhere-and idle stop doesn’t fully mitigate the drop in economy). I know from online forums, in ideal conditions my car can do even more miles but my problem is hills. Driving up hills on a cold or barely warm engine makes the economy drop fast. As indicated in the video, there’s a difference between having an engine that can use E10 and one that is deigned to run on E10 from the design stage. Would be interesting to assimilate many experiences of both and find out what that difference looks like in real terms on economy.
Because of this video, i ran a tank of Costco e10 through my Kamiq 1.5 TSI, having only ever run it on E5, and i actually think its running more efficiently now. 64MPG with real mixed driving, it’s still hitting 60MPG but seems to be getting there easier. I wonder if the cool in properties of it help, because modern engine are designed to run very hot. Either this, or during the same time, we have been experiencing very warm weather between 26c and 32c. Will wait to see what economy this tank delivers.
I have to be honest and having an ST 2.3 I notice the difference between lesser grade fuels, lots of people say they never notice any difference in performance and economy but I do. Yes they're thirsty and nothing like the "claims" made by ford but I do notice if I use V-power it seems to give me the same response and sharpness in normal mode as sports mode - strange? But then its recommended the minimum fuel is 97ron. Thats just me, I'm one that notices the difference because I don't hammer it everywhere and tend to drive it sensibly so I guess I do notice the extra power. Thanks for the vid!
Very interesting video. I have a Toyota PHEV and one tankful of petrol lasts a year. After watching this I will fill up with E5 if only to offset the 'aging' of the petrol and possible damage to the fuel system. Cheers!
When you were mentioning octane I was waiting for ignition advancement to follow but it didn't. You won't know diddly-squat unless you are trained and experienced in engine tuning. As long as you don't put in diesel anything of the green pump will do. Debris in the fuelling system is the biggest problem anyone will face. If you are happy buying oranges instead of lemons!
Others have mentioned that ethanol inevitably includes water. That water brings corrosion risks and contains no energy, but in the cylinder it turns to vapour and contributes to expansion (and hence power). This is (an admittedly minute) equivalent to water injection that can be used explicitly to increase power.
It’s fine as long as it is not in contact with water, but if it’s in a tank that includes moist air for a while, it prefers to mix with the water (hydroscopic) rather than the petroleum compounds in the fuel, then the dissolved ethanol will tend to settle at the bottom of the tank. Not nice if it gets sucked into the engine.
Motorcycle news researched this. E5 gave an improvement in range at roughly the same percentage as its increased cost. But less engine damage. E5 all the way.
Fill up with super unleaded and diesel. I have proved to myself that super is no more expensive to use than E5 because the improved mileage counteracts the price premium. Besides, super is better for your engine and fuel systems. The Govt acknowledge the reduction in fuel mileage of E10 over even E5. Super is currently labelled as E5 but that has been proved to be mostly a fallacy with the worst having 2-3% Ethanol and in some parts of the country no ethanol at all as confirmed by Shell and Esso. Ethanol loves water so it allows corrosion and eats brass as found in fuel systems in older cars/engines. It also reduces the shelf life of the fuel to around 2 months for E10, 6months for E5 compared to 12-18months for fuel without ethanol. This means that super is the only fuel to use for your horticultural machines, which may sound perverse but the lawn mower, the hedge trimmer, the strimmer etc all have small engines full of brass bits and are often left for lengthy periods, say over winter between uses.
E 7.5 half a tank of each.. Plus also there is a difference in the octane level and is the biggest con we've had after E5 95 ron is no longer available at the pump. The E5 is available now super unleaded and has a ron of 97 to 99 and most cars don't need that higher octane fuel. So 7.5 gives you somewhere in the middle and is best imo for my pocket and my car.
Hi from Czechia, here we got the e10 treatment back in february and actually I had a single tank of it for half a year (because of a short lived diesel affair) by the end it ran horribly.I didn't noticed, beacuse it was still better that diesel 😂, but short time after filling up the cat had started run noticeably smoother and quieter as the fresh petrol got to the injectors. BTW when I was a child we had "91 special" (leaded) and "96 super" (unleaded).
Only use E5 in my motorbike and lawnmower, the slight extra cost is nothing compared to the problems of it being sat long term (higher ethanol tends to solidify and gel over time) and I'm also not going to risk failing gaskets and hoses that E10 brings.
I use supermarket E5 fuel and my car feels like it runs better on it. I tried E10 for a while, but it seemed a little down on power and smoothness, so I went back to E5. It's a turbocharged car with around 200hp, so that might explain why I can feel the benefit from the E5, but as I have port injection on the car as well as direct, I get the benefit of inlet port cleaning too.
I used to drive a '97 Nissan Primera GT and I felt that the premium fuel was noticeably quicker - this may have been placebo effect but that's not really relevant as I wasn't timing anything, it's just about feel. I also worked out that the extra mpg that I got (I calculated it and it agreed with the numbers from the trip computer) actually meant that the overall cost was about the same, although this was in the days when fuel was just under a pound / litre. I then replaced this car with a 2003 Lotus Elise 111S (the last of the Rover VVC engines for the car nerds), and when I repeated the experiment, not only couldn't I tell the difference, but the mpg was identical between the two fuels. Slightly counter-intuitive that a newer sports car couldn't take advantage but an older saloon could... Since then, I've been driving 2 Honda Civic 1.8iVTECs and I haven't tried the premium fuel as the price gap has increased to such a level that I find it difficult to imagine that it could possibly be worth it.
Fifth Gear did an experiment on this subject when your car was nearly new. The conclusion was that only big or powerful engines benefit from the higher octane / premium fuel ua-cam.com/video/D5w1-d0GeVk/v-deo.html
Brilliant video, ive lost my wit at many threads on fb forums over this topic, and the amount of clueless comments over E10, this will be my new go to video to shut them up
My wife's Picanto Sport actually 'pinks' on E10, you can hear it when driving along. We only put E5 in everything as it only makes a couple of quid difference per tank.
What about wear and tear in the long run when using E10? I remember it was a topic when it was introduced, but it has become strangely silent. I also know that the vast majority is still strictly using E5 petrol, although E10 has been on the market for almost 15 years now. Not sure if there is any data about the actual damages it causes in the long run, but I'm also skeptical, especially if you have an older car.
My bike get's E10 as long as it's in regular use, before the winter i fill it up with E5 just to be on the save side. My petrol cars get E10 no matter what. The Focus (2018) has done 180k km without a problem, the Fiesta (2.0 ST 150) has done 60k km since i bought it 4 years ago without any problems either.
I have used e10 for ower 25 years and no motor problems… the car rusting, robber parts getting apart are the problems, not the fuel! But if you car is not made for e10, don`t use e10 because your motor is made from less corrosive resistant parts!
in the country where i live we have E10 E20 E85 and normal benzene (which is massively more expensive) my car accepts up to E20 i fill E10 if i'm not gonna drive much i fill E20 if i'm driving long distances (and using the fuel up right away) - so i save the parts from corrosions from the hydrophilia effects of ethanol
I have an LPG Dacia Duster and as I mostly just use LPG, I use texaco 99 only in the petrol tank. Simple reason being its going to sit there a long time and its probably a bad idea to have any ethanol at all in such a situation. The savings I make on LPG are massive and I rarely put petrol in it anyway so it may aswell have the good stuff.
If you drive regularly then E10 will probably be fine. If you leave your car standing for long periods there is more chance of the ethanol separating out from the petrol (it’s water based), so that’s worth considering.
If fuel is injected directly and car has recirculating exhaust gas into intake then coal and dirt will have to be cleaned. This doesn’t really depend on fuel. You can use ethanol to clean it. And spray some into intake every now and then. To keep it more clean. Or you may vent crank case into air.(but it is illegal in some countries) This is a problem in newer cars..
I use 99 RON but my car is turbo charged and the ECU is set-up to take advantage and change the timing accordingly. Other similar cars have been shown on a dyno to have more performance with higher RON
ethanol ensures the car has less knock etc. Back in the day ethanol was expensive so they used lead to stop knock. We stopped using that cuz lead makes people dumb and now we use ethanol hence why ethanol is so easily changed in quantities.
Great vid! I used to have a fiesta that simply would not run right on standard fuel. It was really noticeable - the drop in power that is, when i tried to sneak a cheaper fill up into it. I guess it comes down to the user experience and ultimately how the car feels
In Brazil we went from E10 to E27 - imposed by the government so you can see a dramatic drop in mileage in this case. I drive nearly the same car/engine (2nd gen Honda Jazz) here in the UK as I did in Brazil and it makes for like a 20% difference. Also here I've been preferring E5 as it seems to make a slightly higher mileage but more importantly the car rests the whole week parked so having better fuel is better due to slower degradation.
Hello, Richard. Great video as always. Very informative and well presented.
Being a bit of a car-nut myself I have done a lot of research into E10 and it's drawbacks and everything you said reflects what I have learned over the years as well.
Few notes I'd like to clarify. Having E10 fuel does not mean you have less energy in fuel. Yes, it is a fact that ethanol has less energy in it. But there are nuances.
Petrol/ gasoline(murica) has to conform to certain standards. One of those standards is the evaporation rate of the fuel. Usually petrol is blended from refineries from lighter blendstock. This means the molecules are lighter and the density of the fuel is on the lower side. In EU the density of petrol/gasoline(murica) is supposed to be between 0.720 and 0775. And from my experience, usually, the ethanol free or even E5 comes in at around 0.730 kg/l @15c. This density usually satisfies the evaporation requirements as well. But when ethanol gets blended into petrol some chemical magic happens and the evaporation rates go up. To counter that, the blendstock for E10 petrol has to be on the heavier side and usually the E10 petrol density is at around 0.750 or more. Even when accounting the denser ethanol, the basic petrol before blending has to be at around 0.740-0.745.
Why is this important? It's because density is the actual measurement of how much energy per liter of fuel you're really getting. The denser the fuel, the more you get.
Granted, to make 98 octane fuel, the blendstock also has to be on the denser side. My experience shows that 98 E5 usually comes in at around 0.74 - 0.745. So even if you're getting the 98 octane with less ethanol, it will not guarantee at all that you are getting more energy from your fuel.
I have also inspected a lot of dyno test results that are available over the interwebs. Even youtube videos are a great resource for that kind of information. Quick recap - E10 fuel usually makes very similar top power and torque compared to 98 or more premium fuels. There's a lot of murican test data available where they use their 87 octane E10 fuels, which would be equivalent of european 92 octane fuel and make similar power to racing fuels or 98 octane fuels. This is especially true for normal everyday cars. Yes, race cars and tuned engines will make a bigger difference on higher octane fuels but it's a moot point because none of us are using race engines in our everyday driving.
Ah, yes. Ethanol is a great octane enhancer. Usually our european E10 fuels come with octane rating of 96 or more. I have had 95 E10 that had RON rating of 97.8. How do I know that? I am fairly confident that this is EU wide, but in my country the fuel retailer is required to present you with a fuel test certificate upon request. So I request it fairly often to see what I'm getting. Since I'm a lazy bastard I never go to the fuel station. Instead I e-mail the retailer's customer service and request a fuel certificate for an automated fuel station ( you know, the ones with no shop, just a card machine to pay for fuel ). They are required to e-mail me the certificate. I have a nice database of the 5 major fuel retailers fuel specs and quality in my country ( small country, not many fuel terminals. Data shows they all get their fuel at the same place one time or the other ).
Final note - I have also logged my car's fuel consumption in over 100 000 kilometres. I have used E10 and ethanol free 95 and 98 E5. 98 performs the worst in fuel economy. E10 performs the best. Differences are minor and negligible. Basically a rounding error. So there's that :)
Thanks for all the info!
Passed my driving test first try the other day with only one minor (I grinded a gear). I've watched so many of your videos I can probably mark a test myself. Watching your videos were definitely a massive help so thank you for that. :)
@@BeanMaster0790 that's fantastic to hear! Thank you for your generosity and congratulations on passing!
I’d love a tenner aswell mate cheers
The reason it says premium fuel minimum 95 RON is because in some countries they have 91 RON fuel and 95 so 95 is considered premium in those countries and 98 super or performance
Exactly, the UK used to have 'standard' grade 91 RON available as 2 star leaded prior to 1990 but it was withdrawn to make way for 98 RON 'Super' Unleaded on the forecourts. This then meant there was an unleaded fuel available with comparable RON to the then common 4 star leaded, allowing that to be phased out in 2000 (some cars built for 4 star can be damaged by 95 as the octane is too low - they need 98 super UL).
95 RON 'Premium' unleaded has been available since the mid 1980's and quickly became the 'normal grade' unleaded fuel, in part because modern cars (early 1990's onward) with their higher compression engines and catalysts don't really tolerate octanes lower than 95. I think in eastern Europe they had a lot of older vehicles that were fine on 91 and sometimes lower octanes so there was a good market for a 'standard' 91 RON unleaded there but the UK never got that and I suspect given that cat converters have been standard for 30+ years now, 95 is basically the norm everywhere.
or 93
Probably Spain? Given it's a seat
@@paultasker7788 xD you mean Germany?
And in some states in the US, you can get as low as 85 octane
'Project Farm' who tests everything from tools to lubricants,tested this. One test was to fill two, gallon glass jars, and place Rubber, Aluminium, Plastic into each jar and leave for 3 months. The E10 components were seriously damaged, while the E5 components were undamaged. So it isn't just price. My Kawasaki ZZR1200 gets better mpg on the good stuff and components suffer less than E10.
Yes that is true. However, vehicle manufacturers do change the make-up of those components to resist the additional ethanol. Vehicles which are designed to run E10 can happily be run on E10 for their lifetime.
In europe cars manufactured after 2000 should tolerate E10 just fine... this is why TOTAL can sell E10 95 octane fuel only in their petrol station. they also have premium E5 98 but it's expensive... they also don't have E5 95
Corsica only has E10 95 too !
I used to have a Mitsubishi Space Star with the 1.8 GDI, engine that was the annoying exception to the rule (built after 2000, not E10 compatible 😑)
Overall, I can't say it was a great car.
Rubbish.
E10 is water rubbish
In my 30+ year old V6 Fords, the premium fuels were cheaper per mile (V-Power), despite the extra expense per litre, such was the improvement in fuel economy because of the fuel. About 15% more efficient.
same here, commuted to my internship with a 91 celica and instantly noticed that the cheaper fuel had waaaay worse fuel economy. Old vehicles werent made for ethanol
The fuel lines might not like the ethanol
@@stug45not just the fuel lines it’s any rubber in the fuel system. Seals etc. criminal as the government knew about this as it’s set out in the consultation document.
It’s a green washing exercise. If cars do less mpg then they burn more petrol and produce more emissions.
Also if you can’t run on E10 you have to buy premium fuel which makes the government more money.
I had the same experience in a 2018 jaguar xjr. Very significantly better mileage on motorway runs and you could actually tell it responded better. My little 2 cylinder salvage Fiat also runs significantly better on vpower.
The difference between E10 and E5 is 1,2 % so 15% is just not possible
Can't say whether it's an issue with my car or not, but what I can vouch for is that E5 stored in a 20 Litre jerrycan for two years plus, with regular small amounts taken out to fill my petrol lawnmower, seems to work fine. A local lawn mower mechanic told me that one of the biggest issues people have is the fuel going 'off' in the tank of the mower. or container. Perhaps they should use E5 for that purpose! Good video. Thank you.
The higher octane fuel is less resistant to knocking, therefore it is better when driving on track which puts more stress on the car - as knocking can damage the engine. Tesco momentum 99 is the go to fuel for my Twingo RS Racecar.
*more resistant
you shouldnt be experiencing knock at any time, so if you are changing your fuel isnt a fix, its a bandage, sort the issue out, which could be over heating or running hot
Agree - my Boxster runs quite happily on regular 95 and I don’t seem to get any measurable economy improvement using Super (Porsche just state “95/98” without elaborating) but when I track it I use the highest octane I can find locally (Tesco 99) as 1) I can notice a marginal improvement in torque, and 2) as you say it is by definition less stressful on the engine.
@@jonyb4 Better knock resistance means the car's ECU can advance the timing closer to ideal. Modern ECUs are adaptive to fuel quality, particularly advantageous in performance engines where they will usually produce more power on higher octane fuel. Less important in your 1.2 litre naturally aspirated Dacia
@@pgr3290 you will never have your ignition advance more than is needed, on a typical engine passing a certain advance degree will have diminishing returns
Putting 99 in won't suddenly unlock your engines potential, it was only ever mapped to a baseline figure, on 95 or even less
E10 is bad news for some vehicle as it supposedly attacks some rubber components like O-rings etc. I also understand that it more readily absorbs water, so let your vehicle stand for a while and you might be in for trouble and expensive flushing/servicing. I'm sticking to E5 thank you.
E10 is absolutely fine for everything build 2012 or after. Emissions even get tested with E10 because it has the lowest emissions. In regards to water, from what I understand, the fuel play no role in how much water enters your tank and after its in there it might actually be useful if the fuel mixes with it to a certain degree instead of the system needing to cope with pure water.
Yeah re water as far as I’ve been told and talking about boat outboards. These often have older fuel v a car and I was told - get e5 👍
@@user-to7ds6sc3p people comment about water ingress, where do they suppose the water is coming from on a sealed system? lol
@@jonyb4 The fuel system isn't sealed. Where do you think the air comes from that fills your tank when you use the fuel that was there before? Or what about the air than can freely move around while fuelling the car. That air holds water and condensation will cause it to turn into a liquid that can be pumped into your engine.
Even before pumps displayed the 'E' content, the lead free fuel we were using wrecked the fuel tank on my 1972 VW camper. The fuel guage sender (basically a float sliding up and down a steel rod with a wire either side) stuck in the 1/4 tank position! When I removed it, I found out that it was covered in rusty gunk and stuck solid! Oh, it also gummed up the jets in the carb on my petrol mower! Oh ethanol, lovely stuff! 😖
general rule of thumb for petrol vehicles in the last 20 years, if you use the engine daily and will use the fuel up, use E10. if you use the vehicle not so often, use E5. still down to the car owner to work out what is best for their vehicle.
i prefer to use E5 in my 2021 motorbike because i get more miles to the tank, have been on a ride once or twice and had to be careful as a petrol station shut and next one touch and go if i will make it there.
i also use E5 for old engines in some of the equipment i use, petrol generator, whacker plate, chainsaw, powerfab digger and so on, as none of them are new engines or fuel lines.
I use E5 - it gives me better mpg and charges my electrons as well. 55 mpg is easily achievable in my 2010 Honda CR-Z.
you are either stupid or stupid
I do as my 04 fiesta prefers 99 ron
E10 is ok if not left in the tank. It’s time related absorption of water that ruins the inside of the engine. It is evidenced that the e10 is ruination of garden machinery. A lot of industrial gardeners are reverting to electric tools. A lot of other countries run on much less that 95 ron
In Jordan, where I went on holiday, they often had 90 RON petrol standard and 95 premium, so I understand why the 'premium' marking exists
when I drove to Scotland in my Sportage I always had to fill up at Carlisle. When I used E5 I got way past Edinburgh - so E5 it was for long trips - far more economical. Ive also started putting E5 in my lawn mower and it runs far better
That's also my experience. Seems to make the biggest difference on a long journey at a steady pace.
Yeah, I've also noticed a difference putting E5 Tesco Momentum in my 09 S80
Pretty sure this is just confirmation bias / placebo, as the video says. The energy content difference will be negligible, and the RON increase won't make a significant difference if your engine isn't setup for RON 98.
@@madattaktube Mine's imported from Japan so might be different Octane requirements there
For lawn mowers we actually recommend fuel without Ethanol. I dont how its called in britain, but for us germans its Super Plus. Shell calls it V-Racing or ultimate at Aral.
The reason behind it is, that fuels with Ethanol tend to clock up faster in the Carburator, when the mower is standing for a longer time (like in Winter or long rainy Phases).
In the long run it tends to save money because the engines live longer and you dont have to buy new Carburators so often (you cant clean them to often because the valves get damaged during cleaning with ultrasonic cleaners)
Edit: for the Same reason close the fuel valve and let the engine run dry before Winter. (or empty the Tank when the mower has no fuel valve)
My ford focus mileage dropped crazily when I used e10, so I've used E5 constantly and the mileage is much better. Only use the E10 in an emergency and don't put too much in.
Interesting video, I grew up in the days of 5 star and 4 star fuel, had a sports motorbike so used high octane fuel, back in thise days around 30,000 miles needed an upper engine overhaul, head off, polish and valve clean, nowadays not sure anyone does that now. When I was an instructor myself because of the mileage and type of driving I used to use STP and molyslip in the oil and sometimes Redex in the fuel. More peace of mind rather than any obvious benefit. I don't cover much mileage now but use E5 fuel as I am suspicious of requirements introduced for green targets, they will not be beneficial to mechanics but technology may overcome their disadvantages.
Interesting. I would have thought trading standards might have something to say about the variable amount of ethanol found in petrol. If it was an accurate test. Personally I use E5, even though my car can run E10. It runs better and I get better mileage. The premium fuels tend to have cleaning additives in them too. As for the extra cost, I couldn't give a fig, frankly. I'm paying for a better driving experience. No different to paying for premium beer or clothes et al. Yes the other stuff does the job but sometimes that little extra is worth it.
6:13 Wiki say a T-rex was about 7 tones, if we assume 1:1 rate for "dino fuel", this driving instructor burnt thru 4 x T-Rex worth of fuel.
But how much fuel comes from one Dino?
Dinosaur Juice powers my car
Sadly, oil is 98% plant, 2% animal (approximate)
Actually really interesting and educational. still no definitive answer apart from fuel companies finding another way to squeeze a bit more money out of us.
This isn't a criticism of your car, but I think in general, it is either too modern and/or low powered to benefit from the more expensive fuel. Cheaper fuel may have worked out for you, but my experience when I commuted 70 miles a day in my Fords that were both over 30 years old at the time, I ran them exclusively on V-Power. Both were 2.8 V6 (Capri and Granada limousine) on a journey that was 30 miles at highway speeds each way and under 5 miles at town speeds. One benefit was that older cars are more vulnerable to wear caused by high ethanol. The other benefit was that the cruising drive allowed for more miles per pound, despite being more expensive per litre. I calculated around an extra half a mile per pound of fuel: 2.5 miles per pound on E10, 3 miles per pound on E5. Each 30 year old V6 Ford averaging above 30mpg on fuel it wasn't designed to run on (because they were built for leaded 4-star).
You have to go back pretty far though, early 2000s turbo cars are probably the newest ones that benefit from higher octane fuel :/
@@RWoody1995 That's modern to me. My cars were already many decades old by that point. I avoid driving 21st century cars, even to day.
Would be interesting if you made a similar video to this or a comparison type video with low cost fuels compared to traditional, more expensive fuels. I don't know if they are very popular in the UK, but they definitely are here in Spain
4:05 I think 95 octane is considered premium because 95 octane is pretty high. There are some places where one can find fuel that is less then 95 octane, for example in Russia you can find 92 octane fuel, which also probably equivalent to US's 86 octane (because they measure them differently)
95 octane is only for certain engines, mostly more sporty cars that require such fuel and would get problems with lower octane fuel.
Vice versa the same. If you have a regular car and fuel it with 95 octane, it either has no advantage or might even cause some trouble due to the confused fueling system.
@@Asto508 here in germany 95 is the default and 98 or 100+ is considered premium for sporty cars. I guess it depends on the country.
@@mhcrayz Right, my bad, confused those.
@@mhcrayz as I mentioned, US measures octanes differently. Their 93 is similar to our 95.
@@hikkamorii similar to our 98 even
I use premium electrons, way better than the cheap ones. 😁
😂
I also use premium electrons. 😂
Important thing to remember, though, is that the premium electrons come in litres, and substandard electrons in gallons
@@johnnodge4327 Slightly more expensive but my car runs rough otherwise. Don’t get me started on Supermarket electrons either.
I use premium air when pumping up the tyres, unfortunately price has risen a lot the past year due to inflation
Interesting. My previous car (2008 Honda Jazz) performed considerably better on the E5, with better engine performance and aout 15% higher mpg. The new car (2016 Jazz) seems to perform equally well on either. I assume it's down to differences in the way the ECU is programmed.
Mind you, if the E5 or E10 is simpoly a maximum rather than an actual figure, simple comparison isn't easy!
Finally someone doing accurate figures, instead of your average Joe on the internet who says they get 20-30% percentage better fuel economy with E5 over E10.
I’ve asked countless people to explain how a 5% difference in ethanol content can make nearly as much difference in fuel usage as it would if using E85 compared to straight petrol. When using E85 it’s well documented that you need about 30% more fuel.
My 300hp Spanish estate car with GPF runs ok on 95. However I run it on 97/99: 95 when I have no choice. Power delivery is better, no hesitation, smoother, quieter, better low down response. Car is nicer to drive than on 95. V Power is expensive but car loves it, noticeably so. I'd love 102 RON but I don't live in Germany 😂😂😂.
Admittedy when I ran a TSI 150 Leon, 99 made very little difference except for reduced hesitation at lower rpm. But in my house we have also a Seat 3 pot turbo and it flies on 99.
Makes a big difference in the ea888 engines I’ve noticed this too
Tesco 99 will be ad good.
OMG, thank you for giving Auto Shenanigans a shout out 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
I make my own alcohol using vegetable food waste. Replaced rubber fuel components with steel and copper.
I pay zero tax on my fuel, and I never will.
Allegedly.
😉✅
I have a Polo BlueGT 150BHP, I did a test a while ago I run the car on E10 and after filling up three times and found I was getting 400 miles per tank full and the car was a bit sluggish, I switched to E5 and cycled through 3 tank fulls to clear out any E10 and was getting 450 miles per tank full, E5 is 7 pence per litre more, so 44L in my tank costs me £3.08 more to fill the tank, I now buy E5 and wont use E10
I should add I use Momentum 99,
@@Simon-rx7svit’s a great price for 99!
Similar story with my golf 1.5tsi 150. Car seems to have more low down torque and then DSG learns after a bit and shifts up sooner. Less pedal pressure needed to accelerate. Makes no difference to urban drives but it does on a run approx 53 plays approx 49mpg.
@@paultasker7788 Yep definitely less responsive on E10, might be it affects turbo cars more?
It's mostly in your head
I ran extensive tests on my Toyota Aygo commuter car, my findings were that I got 57-63mpg on E5 and it easily achieves 65 sometimes upto 70mpg on E10, I also found that shell's E10 gave the best economy.
So just goes to show that it all depends on the car itself
Have used E10 since it come out, had no problems at all, use it on a 2008 Honda CRV, 2000 Nissan Micra, 1989 2.0lt pinto Mk3 Transit, 2004 Honda Jazz 1.4 and my lawn mower, just changed the older engines fuel pipe for ethanol fuel, as fuel prices are all over the place can really see no big hit on mpg.
That's great I have a 2008 1.8 Civic and have had 4 injectors replaced and fuel pump issues since E10, I don't use it now. I've also heard stories from multiple mechanics that fuel system issues have dramatically increased since the launch of E10
I go for E5 cause I have a classic car, 1967, along with some lead replacement additive that has some anti corrosion to make sure my engine isn't corroded from the ethanol.
If you drive a modern car that is designed for E10, I'd say just go for E10.
(In future I may either replace the engine or overhaul the current engine to convert to unleaded fuel, but for now with the original fuel lines and engine, I'm limited to the minimum ethanol content and lead replacement additive)
I also have a classic - a 1962 skoda.
For such an old vehicle E10 or E5 is basically irrelevant as long as you replace the rubber flexi fuel lines with ethanol resistant ones - this is very easy as there's rarely more than 3 or 4 lines to replace.
The reason they recommend not to use E10 in older cars is because the rubber is not rated to withstand high ethanol content, but in old cars like we have the only rubber components that see fuel by design are the hoses - there are no valve stem seals made of rubber for example.
So as long as you have a refurbished head and valves to withstand unleaded fuel (which you absolutely should, lead replacement additive is not sufficient to solve this), and you replace the fuel lines, then you may as well use E10... Although my car coming from the Eastern bloc will run on basically anything so your mileage may vary 😂
@@matthewturnock8725 Yeah, my vehicle has only been taken out of the garage a few months ago, and was in there since 1993, the lines currently aren't rated. Eventually if I refurbish the valve seats and replace the fuel lines then I'll be able to, but for now E5 is the safest choice.
1967 Wolseley Hornet, same engine as the Austin/Morris Mini.
Considering you two have classic cars, I think you use them not as a daily driver. In that case, why not bite on your lips and spend extra to get RON100+ which is ethanol-free? We can get it at some places here in the Netherlands so I'd figure it should be possible in the UK as well. Race gas would work too, being sent in drums. Yes both of these are more expensive than running normal pump gas, but for a classic that isn't driven much... does the price premium matter even?
Go to ESSO. They have a RON rating of 99 if you go for their synergy supreme+ option. It's also ethanol free so older cars will run on it with no issues. If it's your daily driver then it will be expensive to fill up constantly but if not i'd highly recommend using it so you don't have a big repair bill later on.
you say engine corroded from the ethanol, what part do you think you are experiencing corrosion exactly?
I use my own car for business and claim a set mileage rate for business miles, so the fuel consumption is important to me. My Skoda VRS runs on E5 whenever possible because after doing very detailed tests on motorway journeys, I realised that the car produces 8% more miles on a tankful of E5 than E10. My local petrol station has a 5% difference in price between E5 and E10. There is a small noticeable power gain with E5 when using the car in a “spirited driving” manner, but around town it is not noticeable. The car ECU automatically compensates for the different octane rating and tunes the engine without me having to do anything.
Great video mate. It may be niche now but my humble opinion would love a comparative diesel video too. Safe motoring and I look forward to the next video regardless!
An informative one, as usual.
Please do a content on premium vs mid range tyres or on tyres as general .
I am sure with 200k plus miles on your car, you will have a good database.
As an Accord Type R owner (a 25 year old car), using 95RON pinks like mad, so I've always run Shell VPower. That's what they're set up for :)
Does yours have a rusty bulkhead? Many have been scrapped cos of that
@@sidathwijeratne7168 I've had it repaired and protected but yep they all suffer from bulkhead and chassis leg rust and if not caught early can be expensive to fix so people end up parting them out for spares. There's only 200 left on UK roads at the moment.
I have a Pontiac Firebird I've had it for 22 years and it only gets used on dry day's during the summer. I always make sure that when I put it away for the winter I brim the tank so that no condensation can form in there. At the end of winter (sometimes two years later) I put in a litre of Isopropanol to absorb any moisture that might be in there. I replaced the fuel tank the very first year I bought the car because it was holed and was leaking fuel. It's mint 22 years later so I recommend doing this as a good way to store your car. Obviously, don't always use Isopropanol as it's corrosive to rubber!
Great video. I did a check on my car recently. I filled up after emptying the tank with premium petrol. I ran to empty 3 tank fulls of premium fuel. I then filled up with standard 95. After running the car doing the same journey I can confirm that I get 3 to 4 mpg more from the cheaper standard petrol.
So unless you have to use higher octane, save your money and use 95.
That’s right, I got better mpg with the cheaper stuff!
I always use e5, but I now don’t believe it has better cleaning abilities. Last year I’d done a 3 hour journey north, went to go home and the car started misfiring. A thrash with a bottle of redex later and it was fine again!
Depends if your using your car regular or parking up for a long time and using just in the summer months, if you do this put the one with less ethanol in your tank, has the higher ethanol one is likely to absorb water and break down if left for long periods.
in germany, e5 and e10 have the same octane (95). super plus has 98, which is mostly for sports cars or some older cars used it as well for some reason. shell has 100 octane with a max of 0.8% ethanol, aral (bp) has 102.
personally, on a turbo charged car you can feel the difference, especially if it has turbo lag. same with premium diesel fuels.
My 2.5t mondeo prefers the full fat version, also the detergents help keep the internals and injectors clean. More expensive but worth it in my opinion.
This is the subtle Conquer Driving / Auto Shenanigans crossover I didn't know I needed.
I accidentally filled up with E5 the time before last, and my anecdotal evidence is that acceleration from my Kona's piddly little Kappa II felt fractionally smoother and faster (although that could have been placebo) and the fuel economy went up by 3.5MPG urban. So not a game changer either way after factoring in the increased cost, but maybe something I'll consider before the next long motorway journey where I'd expect the MPG increase to be a little more significant.
I am intrigued by the idea of E5 being more resistant to water absorption though. My wife sometimes leaves her car for weeks without regular use, so the extra cost for E5 might be worth thinking about.
Finally some shoutouts to other top tier British UA-camrs; Auto Shenanigans and The Late Brake Show.
The higher ethanol content is more corrosive if you have an older car not built for e10 fuel and leave the tank standing for extended periods I'd think it can cause damage to fuel lines
Did my car in.
i ran e85 on my 04 volvo s60 t5 with stock fuel system, didnt corrode anything or break down hoses. People speaking horror stories on e85 on cars that didnt come from factory for it breaking them had me spooked for awhile though lol
then replace the lines, not a difficult or expensive job, non issue
Had the same dilema years ago with my car. It's a reasonably powerful car, my friend recomended Premium E5 because he felt it made his car run more "smoothly". I gave it a try with one or two tankfuls, couldn't notice any difference and I've run it on standard E10 ever since. I think manufacturers cause a bit of confusion with their naming of fuel as Premium, because in other countries they have fuels with even more ethanol in their petrol, so E10 RON95 is actually Premium in those countries.
I only buy ESSO E5 because it is actually E-Zero.
For what little extra it costs, I get far better mpg so it pays for itself.
Also, because I don't use the car too often, I don't get the ethanol separating and absorbing water.
Comes with ethanol now
Esso fuel prices tend to be cheapest too. One near me is around £1.40 sometimes less.
@@RJAI think that heavily depends on area and timing, in my area Morrisons is normally cheapest but in the city next me the Tesco is normally cheapest but there has been tikes where even BP has been the cheaper option. Esso is a normally somewhere in-between
Remember this. Etnonol is hydroscopic. That means it collects water That will destroy a lot of engines. We see it all the time here in Norway. If you have a carburated engine , do not by any fuel that has ethonol added. If you have an injection engine, be very sure that it can tolerate ethonol.
"hygroscopic".
I have recently started using Tesco momentum full time and my Alfa 1.4 Multi-air seems happier on it and the mpg is marginally better. Hard to say if it’s all fuel. I do about 9K a year so I suppose it’s worth doing.
its not happier its all in your head, if you used the wrong pump unknowingly youd not be writing this
@@jonyb4Got to disagree mate. I have a small turbo car, a large N/A car and bikes (obviously n/A). I've put Tesco momentum and 'regular' in all of them and the one you can feel the difference in is the turbo.
@@jonyb4 well I regularly do a 100 mile drive to and from London. On E10 fuel it’s tricky to get over 40 mpg and on E5 it is noticeably easier to obtain it. I do tend to switch between the fuels often enough to notice a tiny difference. Plus my car is over 12 years old / 105K miles so I’d do anything to help it keep going (re. Ethanol and pipes)
@@anthonymeek4248 it absolutely does get you better mpg, my st170 will get 42mpg on E5/99 where it's about 39 with e10
These sorts of talks need to be part of learner lessons. Some ‘might’ but everyone should.
I have had many performance cars, most tuned, and buying E5 or what is now effectively higher octane fuel makes most sense. Marked additional performance especially in turbocharged engines, and slightly superior fuel economy to the tune of 1-2 MPG. That does in part mitigate the cost increase. Higher powered turbo engines really do benefit from the increased knock resistance.
Really good analysis.
I have an MX-5 mark 3 1.8, and have heard different things about whether or not to use premium fuel.
You have convinced me it’s not necessary, and I would not be noticeably any better off for doing so!
RON rating of fuel has zero correlation to power. It relates to the ability to withstand detonation under compression. Premature ejack’ if you shall.
A higher compression ratio engine like a performance petrol engine will missfire and perform poorly on 95 RON as it’s shooting its load before it’s even in yet.
Engine size doesn’t matter.
But the octane rating does 😉✅💪 ehhhhh lads!
I have 2 motorcycles, a single and a twin, one Japanese, the other Chinese, both 2 years old +- and both set up for E5. On occasions when E5 is not available and I fill up with E10, both perform very badly…..sluggish by comparison. As a result of that, when I buy petrol for the business machines, chain saws and the like it is usually E5 and again a slight power gain…..very slight ….. is noticeable, but importantly, the 2 strokes seem to start more easily.
With the motorcycles, the difference in power delivery is well worth the extra few pence per litre. If I were filling a car’s tank and then find myself sitting in a queue, it matters not a jot and I would no doubt use E10.
An interesting video, thank you.
super is petrol in germany, it comes from a time where in 70s there was "normal" and "super" and i dunno what exactly happened but "normal" went away and "super" was the norm
i guess super premium is probably for the countries that dont have good fuel quality
I have used 102 octane fuel in all my engines and occasionally drop a can of PEA-based cleaner in the fuel system to get rid of malice in the combustion palace. It gives me that warm, fuzzy feeling. I also cut a lot of maintenance intervals in half, following the advice of the Motor Oil Geek who knows a thing or two about tribology and engine oil chemistry.
E10 is just another stealth tax on drivers.
@@johnnybgood7812 watered down fuel does less MPG, so you buy more of it and pay more tax.
@@johnnybgood7812 Nope, E10 is mandatory throughout the EU/UK and has been since 2022. The option is E5 Super Unleaded which is not the same fuel and considerably more expensive in the UK as it’s taxed at a higher rate.
@@neilturner6749 so buy E10 then? From your clip there’s really no reason not to do so?
E5 will only he available for a few more years
@@johnnybgood7812 E10 is destructive , wilfully !
2012 Volvo T5, always run premium (97 or above) night and day differences between power. 247hp and a big turbo, mean fuel thats resistant to detonation as its compressed is the key i believe
My car can take both but when I use E5,
My car runs better with E5, the car runs smoother and doesn't sound as rough and is less lethargic than E10.
My car as standard has to have minimum 97 RON, according to the sticker inside the fuel cap. Now its tuned, super unleaded is a minimum. I add reputable octane boosters to super unleaded. I also never use 'supermarket' fuel...
I'd use premium fuel for track days because of the knock protection, regardless of power.
you should never be experiencing knock, if you are youve got a problem and swapping fuel is not a fix
@@jonyb4well not never, but your point is valid regardless. The ECU has failsafes built in anyway (on most modern cars) and fuel isn’t going to make a blind bit of difference. I’m sure you know this by the way, I’m talking to people who don’t.
@@AI-Records24 exactly, this ain't the 80s anymore, and especially now we're using such small engines that are pushing silly amounts of cylinder pressures, you won't find one without atleast 1 knock sensor
You must only use E5 if you are using 2 stroke machines. The 2 stroke mixture in a Strimmer, made with E10, will cause your Strimmer to Bog out on you, if you have to run it at the higher throttle speeds. I can run the Lawnmowers with regular petrol, but I use Premium E5 now, in case I use the Petrol for the lawnmower, to make a mixture for the Strimmer, and hedge trimmer.
So funny I am seeing this. I filled up using E5 full tank for the first time in years the other day, normally use E10. Have a seat Leon 2020. Was doing 43mpg using E10 and was expecting a bump up of around 5/10% fuel economy. Omg. The worst fuel I have put in. Am only doing 39mpg. I remember using the E5 back in 2020 and 2021, and it was doing 48mpg, then it converted to E10 with the extra ethanol and my mpg went down to 45. The the fuel economy dropped down to low 40’s for the last 2 years. Over the last few weeks I have noticed it creep up a bit, maybe 43 even 44mpg, but gosh, putting that E5 fuel in and paying an extra £4 for a tank of it and doing 39mpg. Never again
That E5 is probably sitting far longer in the pumps than the E10 is
I’ve been using standard esso recently and it seems to be less fuel efficient than the standard BP. BP V-Power is great but the price premium over standard seems to be a lot more than it used to be, so I don’t use it so much anymore.
Thank you so much for all the videos you have shared
As an PDI I have learned so much from you on how to teach
Much appreciated if you get a chance to make a video on how to pass the ADI part 3 test please
🙏
I have 2 classic bikes, made in 1978 and 1980, so I always use E5 in both of them, because the fuel systems weren't made for ethanol. In addition, the 1978 Triumph Bonneville was designed to run on 4-star 98 octane, so runs better on the higher octane super unleaded.
My 2008 Prius TSpirit Hybrid was fine running 95RON E5 - then they downgraded 95RON to E10.
My Prius certainly didn’t like it.
The engine was noisy, vibrated, acceleration was sluggish too. The most annoying part was loosing 50 miles minimum in range from my 45 litre fuel tank.
The engine vibrations were quite disconcerting - as if the engine was about to fall apart - and it took forever to warm up - which very badly affected the MPG - I was struggling to hit 60 mpg in summer.
Then in frustration, I switched to Esso Supreme 99+ E5.
The difference was astounding within under a minute of driving out of the Petrol Station.
Engine returned to being smooth as silk, running smoothly, quietly, and smooth linear acceleration almost without effort compared to E10.
Icing on the cake was easily getting 65mpg out of a 45L tankful and over 600 miles to boot.
My record in Summer 2022 (heatwave assisted, no doubt) was 69.4mpg and a total of 653 miles out of 45 litres of E5.
With E10, I struggled to make 495 miles!
This was my experience with my 2008 Prius Hybrid - E10 might make no difference in other more modern vehicles, but in this Hybrid, it was a dogs dinner.
I literally stopped using E10 after that and I haven’t looked back since.
Disclosure: I had a Mazda MX-3 with a sticker that suggested Premium fuels over standard ones.
I had the same experience with 95RON back then.
I filled it with V-Power and all the vibrations and noisy engine stopped. I only ever used V-Power back then.
E5 works well for me - I’m driving a 16 year old car with a silky smooth engine and the hybrid synergy drive propulsion system operates perfectly and efficiently with this E5 fuel.
Don’t care if anyone thinks I’m wasting money; my old Prius with 157,000 miles is happy and I’m happy too! 😊
p.s. My next car won’t even use petrol…!!! 😃
We've noticed our 2019 Ibiza 1.0TSi takes longer to start on E10 than E5. Even after the spark plugs have been replaced.
E5 is nonsense for fuel economy but worth it for protecting the engine. Evidence shows higher ethanol warps rubber seals.
I’ve never used anything other than E5 in my more expensive car
Very informative, seems I'm better off with E-5 than E-10, will be changing next time I'm at the pumps with my 20 year old, 221,500 mile petrol car!
between E5 and E10 - E5 is less hydroscopic meaning less chance of damaging internal components. but between 95 ron and 98 ron. in economy cars, both will produce the same power. in performance cars. its a huge difference. Mk5 Golf Gti for example, it can run on 95 ron all day long, producing 178BHP. but on 98ron you get the claimed 197bhp
My own experience…
Honda Jazz 1.3 2019
(This engine is designed for E5/E10/E10+…does that mean E15?) it states this in the handbook.
Early on using E5, the max range I got was 401 miles.
We switched to E10 w/out issues.
Last month on E10 the new max range achieved was 410 miles with 18 remaining on the computer. The computer showed i was averaging 56.8mpg for that specific tank of fuel.
In terms of economy, imo so many things affect it such as temperature (seasons-lose about 30 miles in winter), how much weight it’s carrying, terrain-do you have hills?, traffic flow (completely useless right now due to roadworks everywhere-and idle stop doesn’t fully mitigate the drop in economy). I know from online forums, in ideal conditions my car can do even more miles but my problem is hills. Driving up hills on a cold or barely warm engine makes the economy drop fast.
As indicated in the video, there’s a difference between having an engine that can use E10 and one that is deigned to run on E10 from the design stage. Would be interesting to assimilate many experiences of both and find out what that difference looks like in real terms on economy.
Because of this video, i ran a tank of Costco e10 through my Kamiq 1.5 TSI, having only ever run it on E5, and i actually think its running more efficiently now. 64MPG with real mixed driving, it’s still hitting 60MPG but seems to be getting there easier. I wonder if the cool in properties of it help, because modern engine are designed to run very hot. Either this, or during the same time, we have been experiencing very warm weather between 26c and 32c. Will wait to see what economy this tank delivers.
I have to be honest and having an ST 2.3 I notice the difference between lesser grade fuels, lots of people say they never notice any difference in performance and economy but I do. Yes they're thirsty and nothing like the "claims" made by ford but I do notice if I use V-power it seems to give me the same response and sharpness in normal mode as sports mode - strange? But then its recommended the minimum fuel is 97ron. Thats just me, I'm one that notices the difference because I don't hammer it everywhere and tend to drive it sensibly so I guess I do notice the extra power. Thanks for the vid!
Very interesting video. I have a Toyota PHEV and one tankful of petrol lasts a year. After watching this I will fill up with E5 if only to offset the 'aging' of the petrol and possible damage to the fuel system. Cheers!
How many miles do you do per year?
@@dw4525 3000 - mostly trips less than 20m.
When you were mentioning octane I was waiting for ignition advancement to follow but it didn't.
You won't know diddly-squat unless you are trained and experienced in engine tuning.
As long as you don't put in diesel anything of the green pump will do.
Debris in the fuelling system is the biggest problem anyone will face.
If you are happy buying oranges instead of lemons!
One thing to note is ethanol content, a lot of E5 fuels are actually 0% ethanol and some older cars definitely don't want ethanol in them.
Others have mentioned that ethanol inevitably includes water. That water brings corrosion risks and contains no energy, but in the cylinder it turns to vapour and contributes to expansion (and hence power). This is (an admittedly minute) equivalent to water injection that can be used explicitly to increase power.
It’s fine as long as it is not in contact with water, but if it’s in a tank that includes moist air for a while, it prefers to mix with the water (hydroscopic) rather than the petroleum compounds in the fuel, then the dissolved ethanol will tend to settle at the bottom of the tank. Not nice if it gets sucked into the engine.
Motorcycle news researched this. E5 gave an improvement in range at roughly the same percentage as its increased cost. But less engine damage. E5 all the way.
Fill up with super unleaded and diesel. I have proved to myself that super is no more expensive to use than E5 because the improved mileage counteracts the price premium. Besides, super is better for your engine and fuel systems. The Govt acknowledge the reduction in fuel mileage of E10 over even E5. Super is currently labelled as E5 but that has been proved to be mostly a fallacy with the worst having 2-3% Ethanol and in some parts of the country no ethanol at all as confirmed by Shell and Esso.
Ethanol loves water so it allows corrosion and eats brass as found in fuel systems in older cars/engines. It also reduces the shelf life of the fuel to around 2 months for E10, 6months for E5 compared to 12-18months for fuel without ethanol. This means that super is the only fuel to use for your horticultural machines, which may sound perverse but the lawn mower, the hedge trimmer, the strimmer etc all have small engines full of brass bits and are often left for lengthy periods, say over winter between uses.
E 7.5 half a tank of each..
Plus also there is a difference in the octane level and is the biggest con we've had after E5 95 ron is no longer available at the pump. The E5 is available now super unleaded and has a ron of 97 to 99 and most cars don't need that higher octane fuel. So 7.5 gives you somewhere in the middle and is best imo for my pocket and my car.
Great video as usual!
Hi from Czechia, here we got the e10 treatment back in february and actually I had a single tank of it for half a year (because of a short lived diesel affair) by the end it ran horribly.I didn't noticed, beacuse it was still better that diesel 😂, but short time after filling up the cat had started run noticeably smoother and quieter as the fresh petrol got to the injectors. BTW when I was a child we had "91 special" (leaded) and "96 super" (unleaded).
Petrol is only guaranteed to meet specification (in the UK) for 6 weeks from the date of purchase, after which time it begins to degrade.
Only use E5 in my motorbike and lawnmower, the slight extra cost is nothing compared to the problems of it being sat long term (higher ethanol tends to solidify and gel over time) and I'm also not going to risk failing gaskets and hoses that E10 brings.
I always go with Shell e5. Less people go in there because it's expensive, and I get pretty good mpg with it. My car always runs solid.
I use supermarket E5 fuel and my car feels like it runs better on it. I tried E10 for a while, but it seemed a little down on power and smoothness, so I went back to E5. It's a turbocharged car with around 200hp, so that might explain why I can feel the benefit from the E5, but as I have port injection on the car as well as direct, I get the benefit of inlet port cleaning too.
I used to drive a '97 Nissan Primera GT and I felt that the premium fuel was noticeably quicker - this may have been placebo effect but that's not really relevant as I wasn't timing anything, it's just about feel. I also worked out that the extra mpg that I got (I calculated it and it agreed with the numbers from the trip computer) actually meant that the overall cost was about the same, although this was in the days when fuel was just under a pound / litre.
I then replaced this car with a 2003 Lotus Elise 111S (the last of the Rover VVC engines for the car nerds), and when I repeated the experiment, not only couldn't I tell the difference, but the mpg was identical between the two fuels. Slightly counter-intuitive that a newer sports car couldn't take advantage but an older saloon could...
Since then, I've been driving 2 Honda Civic 1.8iVTECs and I haven't tried the premium fuel as the price gap has increased to such a level that I find it difficult to imagine that it could possibly be worth it.
I go for E5 because I drive a turn of the century Micra (only cost me £600 13 years ago). Hope that’s the best decision.
Fifth Gear did an experiment on this subject when your car was nearly new. The conclusion was that only big or powerful engines benefit from the higher octane / premium fuel ua-cam.com/video/D5w1-d0GeVk/v-deo.html
Brilliant video, ive lost my wit at many threads on fb forums over this topic, and the amount of clueless comments over E10, this will be my new go to video to shut them up
My wife's Picanto Sport actually 'pinks' on E10, you can hear it when driving along. We only put E5 in everything as it only makes a couple of quid difference per tank.
What about wear and tear in the long run when using E10? I remember it was a topic when it was introduced, but it has become strangely silent. I also know that the vast majority is still strictly using E5 petrol, although E10 has been on the market for almost 15 years now. Not sure if there is any data about the actual damages it causes in the long run, but I'm also skeptical, especially if you have an older car.
My bike get's E10 as long as it's in regular use, before the winter i fill it up with E5 just to be on the save side. My petrol cars get E10 no matter what. The Focus (2018) has done 180k km without a problem, the Fiesta (2.0 ST 150) has done 60k km since i bought it 4 years ago without any problems either.
I have used e10 for ower 25 years and no motor problems… the car rusting, robber parts getting apart are the problems, not the fuel!
But if you car is not made for e10, don`t use e10 because your motor is made from less corrosive resistant parts!
its gone silent because there is no or little evidence of any damage thats why
in the country where i live we have E10 E20 E85 and normal benzene (which is massively more expensive)
my car accepts up to E20
i fill E10 if i'm not gonna drive much
i fill E20 if i'm driving long distances (and using the fuel up right away) - so i save the parts from corrosions from the hydrophilia effects of ethanol
I have a 2016 Ford Moneo 1.5 petrol and I get an extra 70-80 miles extra per tank from the E5
I have an LPG Dacia Duster and as I mostly just use LPG, I use texaco 99 only in the petrol tank. Simple reason being its going to sit there a long time and its probably a bad idea to have any ethanol at all in such a situation. The savings I make on LPG are massive and I rarely put petrol in it anyway so it may aswell have the good stuff.
If you drive regularly then E10 will probably be fine. If you leave your car standing for long periods there is more chance of the ethanol separating out from the petrol (it’s water based), so that’s worth considering.
If fuel is injected directly and car has recirculating exhaust gas into intake then coal and dirt will have to be cleaned. This doesn’t really depend on fuel.
You can use ethanol to clean it. And spray some into intake every now and then. To keep it more clean.
Or you may vent crank case into air.(but it is illegal in some countries)
This is a problem in newer cars..
I use 99 RON but my car is turbo charged and the ECU is set-up to take advantage and change the timing accordingly. Other similar cars have been shown on a dyno to have more performance with higher RON
ethanol ensures the car has less knock etc. Back in the day ethanol was expensive so they used lead to stop knock. We stopped using that cuz lead makes people dumb and now we use ethanol hence why ethanol is so easily changed in quantities.
I think the lesson is it's worth putting a premium option out there, people will buy it whether it benefits them or not.
Great vid! I used to have a fiesta that simply would not run right on standard fuel. It was really noticeable - the drop in power that is, when i tried to sneak a cheaper fill up into it. I guess it comes down to the user experience and ultimately how the car feels
In Brazil we went from E10 to E27 - imposed by the government so you can see a dramatic drop in mileage in this case. I drive nearly the same car/engine (2nd gen Honda Jazz) here in the UK as I did in Brazil and it makes for like a 20% difference. Also here I've been preferring E5 as it seems to make a slightly higher mileage but more importantly the car rests the whole week parked so having better fuel is better due to slower degradation.
Didn’t realise you knew your car stuff like this 👏