A few people have mentioned this. The fuel consumption difference would never offset the extra cost of the premium fuel, so it’s something we didn’t bother doing. It will always cost you more for the premium fuel regardless of the small consumption saving. The only tangible benefit you get from spending more is the better engine performance and additive.
@@CarExpertAus Well I don't mind spending more on the premium fuel but saving more fuel rather than using lower grade fuel but costs more fuel l/100km😅 It's hard to refuel when you're in rural areas
@@CarExpertAus Yeah true.. In an earlier video a while back you mentioned a rough idle at times. Has your Raptor been inspected for broken valve springs?.. I noticed the Raptor content went quiet for a while straight after. Am I’m reading to much in to it?
@@w_stankyIt’s due for its first proper service at the end of December and I’ve asked them to check it out. I loaned the car to Dad for a couple of months between him selling his car and waiting for his new one.
Hi Paul, we have a FG G6E Turbo that requires at least 95ron, on occasion when 95 was unavailable running it on 98 only made minimal differences to performance and fuel consumption. However on occasions when we towed a caravan 98 was a winner in terms of performance and fuel consumption in marginal figures for both.
Hey Dennis, I have an FG F6 and it has the 98 Only sticker on it. I wonder if it’s because the FPV has the slightly larger Turbo or maybe it’s a Tuning issue?
@@MJSE-of7gsin all the years of being involved in cars and discussing tuning, iv never had one person come back and say "you mean remapping" anyway. If octane and quality of fuel didn't make a difference, nobody would bother switching fuels, including myself.
@@EYESWIDEOPEN00 I'm not sure how you "tune" an FG Ford other than remap it. I tune my lawn mower and brushcutter.... with an FG Ford where do I stick the screwdriver? :) Of course different octane fuels make a difference... I said the difference will be noticeable but marginal. IMHO RON98 in a RAPTOR will be noticeable but my goodness, it is a over 2500 kg brick. Waxing on about off the mark acceleration differences with different RON fuels is in a Raptor is silly. It is marginal in a FG Ford as well. But people are free to do whatever they want to and kid themselves their off the shelf dime-a-dozen car is so much better for it.
I've got one of the last 4.0Lt V6 Hilux SR5's and used to always run 91 but I swapped to 98 a couple of years ago, made a slight difference to the economy but the big difference is in the mountains as I spend a fair bit of my work in the Snowy Mountains. Using 98 makes it not kick back gears anywhere as much as when using 91 so drivability is so much better. I have every tank of fuel in an App on my iPad and the average has dropped from 14.7 down to 14 even over 200,000 Km.
Good to see you did this test properly by starting with premium. It can take a while for engine to adjust to better fuel but swapping to lower grade 91 the difference is felt straight away.
@@jasonfields2793 Nah, the way it works is if it detects knock it'll drop timing super quick to save the engine. Once you put in premium fuel it takes a while for the ECU to learn you have a better fuel because it detects a lack of knock and slowly feeds the timing in until it finds the happy amount of timing again.
@turbostyler they actually continue to advance timing all the time until it detects knock than it pulls back its about being as efficient as absolutely possible at all times
@@turbostylerJust here to second what Jason said. There could be a small delay but that would only be due to the actual RON entering the engine not yet being 98 due to 91 in fuel lines or rail. The ECU monitors knock on every ignition event and will adjust extremely quickly to either knock or a lack of knock. It has no RON sensor, it is reacting to knock through knock sensors mounted to engine block.
Would love to see a comparison on L/100kms on different fuel types as that is how vehicles are sold. People who live in rural eareas drive further than people in big cities
There are 2 parts to this. In terms of economy, driven without taking advantage of the extra performance, I’d expect similar gains in fuel economy with the better fuel from my experience. But the big if is what sort of engine you are running. If you are driving a normally aspirated economy car designed for 91 RON you gain virtually nothing. If you are running a high performance turbo designed to run on 98 RON the differences will be huge. To do this comparison well you should have had an ordinary car like a Camry for comparison to show the difference.
@@peterj5751 Exactly, and I think this also affects the performance result, as Paul has done in this video. The Ranger Raptor has a 3.0 litre V6 turbo engine which is always better to run on high octane petrol. I don't believe this engine can really accept RON91. Instead, it should require RON98 as a minimum, just like the Mercedes AMG.
I am interested to see the other fuel companies stacked up against each other. BP v AMPOL v Coles Express v Caltex etc - I am curious to see how their RON95/98 fuel competes with each other
@@paulsimpson8990what about some of the cheaper brands such as metro or other independents like that, are they any worse or still just the same as the big companies but cheaper.
@@paulsimpson8990 Yeah okay thanks for that info, might be worth the extra few dollars to go to one of the big ones just to be safe, is one brands additives better than any others? I have a Mini Cooper currently so I try to look after it as best I can.
I’ve only used 98 in mine so far, as I haven’t been anywhere remote enough not to have it, yet. On a related note, tried Sport mode on twisty, hilly roads for the first time last weekend. JEEEEEZUS, it’s quick, loud, angry, wild!
Confirmed what many of us have learned via experience. Use 91 for day to day in a town environment and fill with 98 for a trip (where power for overtaking is needed). Also I know from recorded observations from a 2009 AWD Territory, it would get about an extra 50km plus range from the higher octane option.
Interesting.. the wife had an 07 territory years ago… we ran 95 in it, loved it! Loved E10 aswell but was abit on the thirsty side… put 98 in it and it just played up like a second hand lawnmower.. really really weird..
Thanks for all your videos, I really value and enjoy them. When I first saw this video appear in my feed my expectation off the cuff was a L/100km economy comparison. At this point and apart from the obvious performance benefits, I'd love to be convinced about the Cost L/100km comparison and in the current economic climate it would be quite relevant. Hoping this might be something you might consider for a future video. PS while you're at it, how about Diesel vs Premium Diesel comparison as well. Thanks again.
I definitely noticed the difference of fuel grade with my motorbike, but also in each brand of fuel station. At the extremes, my 650cc parallel twin could either feel lumpy, sluggish and hard to start.... or smooth, rocket-ship-like and starting first turn.
Confirms the tests I have done on Bp fuel, 95 is the best value for money, and you still get the cleaning additive to keep your injection system clean . 95 for me . Good video
@@LIFEat110 yes, I tested them over 15 years as a sales rep, on the road every day, the 95 made the car run better and gave a small decrease in fuel use. Where the 98 made the engine run less smooth and the fuel saved wasn’t worth the extra cost. The last car I had did 200,000 Ks on Bp 95 and it still went like a rocket and never used oil or had the injectors replaced
80L fuel tank and price at the pump right now, 91 = $145.52, 95 $157.52 and 98 $163.92. 91 to 98 fill up difference is $18.40. Almost a $1000 saving over a year if you are filling up weekly.
The big difference between regular 91 and premium 95&98 is sulphur content as well. ULP is 150PPM and the premium is 50PPM. The lower the number the cleaner the fuel is. I can't wait until Dec 2024 when the new regulations kicks in that only allow 10 PPM for all fuel to see if makes a difference again.
Run anything modern on 91Ron and under load listed to that engine knock…even as a pedestrian I’ve heard cars set off and the engine pre ignition knocking like mad. Knock is out of control combustion, can cause damage in multiple parts including engine bearings and ring lands etc.
I’m not sure what you actually did to wash out each preceding fill of fuel, but the first transition seemed to happen at “26km to empty”, which means there’s still the reserve in the tank, 15-20L, so your quarter tank fill is actually diluted by the residuum. If you did a full washout, I suspect the differences would be even more significant. Anyhoo, thanks for this test, as it confirms that those of us who care about performance, should always use the best fuel they can find. However, it also demonstrates that, if you’re in the middle of nowhere, and all you can find is 91 RON, the car will run fine!
My personal experience is that if it says "91 RON or higher" then you're wasting your money going higher. Our Mercedes C300 (2l turbo) was 95 RON (or higher). I often had to run 98 in it because 95 wasn't available. All I noticed was an increased cost. I use apps to monitor fuel and other car usage. The average 1/100km figure never varied between the two grades of fuel. And with my motorbikes, one of them, a Honda 1100cc Blackbird used 91 RON. I ran 95 and 98 in them. Performance-wise, I couldn't pick it from day-to-day riding which included the mandatory fanging of said bike. Fuel economy didn't change. My current bike requires 95 or higher. Again, being a litre+ V twin it doesn't make any difference if I go higher. BUT, if I do put 91 in it as I had to recently up around the Snowies on a ride as nothing else was available, the damn thing rattled and pinged its sorry way to the next servo and I had to take it easy to stop it pinging, despite it having the fancy-dancy ECU, knock sensors and so on. Then there's diesel and "premium" diesel. Makes no difference in the 3.2 Ranger except for the cost of filling up is greater. If this article wasn't sponsored by a fuel company which enjoys massive margins when selling higher octane fuel I'd have taken it a bit more seriously. Sorry, but that's how it came across to me.
Was the 98 fuel fully purged before refilling with 91? And. Ambient temperature and humidity also play a role in performance. A test for ltrs/100 would be awesome too.
You’re not going to see the performance differences unless tuning it specifically. However, using only 98 all the time will keep the inside of the engine in better condition for longer. And it’s especially so when you have a GDi engine, they build up a hell of a lot of gunk in the intake chamber.
Over the years I've tested using 98 fuel in standard cars (ones that didn't need anything higher than 91) and I never noticed any fuel economy difference/gains. I think the people that say they do notice a difference are experiencing the placebo effect.
I have always put 98 in any of my cars as I have worked out the small extra cost over 95 was worth it in economy. The extra bonus that long term issues with clogging fuel injectors and carboned up engines with the cheaper fuel would be a non issue makes it an easier decision to go with the more expensive fuels.
When 98 first came to Australia I had a V6 4Runner with a long range tank, I spent a few months playing with it to see if it was worth it. My only metric was range, I had no way to track other performance figures. from First click to the warning light I had almost 100km range difference from a 200lt load between 91 and 98, while the cost difference at the time was about $10 between the two. Ever since then I have run 98 in all of my cars whenever it was available. Two of them I had tuned specifically for it to actually make the most out of it. The cost difference between the grades these days varies quite wildly from one servo to the next, one day to the next, so I don't really think about that anymore.
Sometimes 95 is a slightly higher rating than adervertised and 98 is sometimes lower. 95 is by far the best value. Gains in 98 are usually minimal / non-existent.
While back I had a manual DE Mazda 2 hatch, which I ran on 98 as it hardly used any fuel. Out of curiosity I tried all the other fuels, anything lower than 95 and it would take longer to crank over when cold and some hills required a gear lower to climb. Fuel economy was also noticable worse using 91 or E10. But before that I had manual BL 2.0L Mazda3 sedan, that had an adjustable crank angle sensor. Before I adjusted the sensor it was absolutely gutless in 6th gear on the highway. After the adjustment and running 98, it actually wanted to accelerate in 6th on the highway. So, really the answer to does higher octane fuel increase performance/ economy is.... it depends!
That might be another video we try. I’d never use or recommend E10 and based on what I’ve read the money you save is offset by higher fuel usage. But granted it would be another great test to do.
In markets where there's only 95 (Thailand for example) the available E20 gives a higher octane rating (approx 97)then 95. The fuel system and engine are rated for e20. So e20 will give the best performance in those markets.
Agreeing to a previous comment below; I would like to see the difference in Litres/100km for the three fuels on a long run (open road). I’m sure we will see more interesting information.
In all my cars I've noticed a significant difference when using premium. The biggest was when I had a manual v6 Jeep Wrangler 2 door. It was very eager on 98, and even kept up with cars it really shouldn't have. The best example was an xr6 turbo, the driver didn't believe me that my engine was stock! It also seemed to use about 2 litres per 100 k's less on premium 98, which usually made up for the difference in cost.
Can we please get another quick vid update on how your Raptor is going? Any new faults, i think you've had it for over a year now. Cheers for all the helpful videos 👍
I am more interested in seeing the difference in the claimed cleaning properties of the 98 fuel and if it is truly better for the engine. Project Farm video in a different setting suggested these higher octane cleaning fuels were better as long as the engine burnt it properly, but it did result in higher engine temps on some engines with greater wear on seals, exhausts and rubber/plastic items under the hood/bonnet.
Very interesting Paul, I would love to know what the difference would be you driving a diesel with Ampol fuel and the cheapest one. Is one really better than the other. Love your videos and love learning. Nick
Haven’t watched this video yet, but I did my own experiment recently and found that I get better fuel economy in my next gen Raptor using BP fuel over the others, about 1-1.5L/100km better off.
Only ever put 98 in my cars, best way to sleep well at night. Hey Paul the number plate holder, im awaiting delivery of my new Raptor, how did you customise this so is not hanging down over the radar sensor? Plate attached at the top or the bottom. Love your reviews btw. Thanks!
I have a Ford FG G6E N/A and I've found that yes 98 gives it more "pep" but that 95 and 98 see fuel consumption increase whereas with 91 that's where the best fuel consumption is achieved. I can run it on E10 which is 94 but never have. For some strange reason driving in the more remote areas at consistent high speeds (110-130kph) and car "feels" more lively performance wise even on 91 which is basically what it's designed to run on.
Seems like it could be beneficial to just use 91 when going on a long trip and day to day use then only use 98 for when your going off-road or just looking to have some fun.
I'd have loved to have seen a e10 run as well. Despite having a lower octane number the ethanol is an excellent knock suppressant. It's also the cheapest fuel and I'd bet it would have performance on par with 98.
Wheels mag did a comparison about 10 years back with a commodore. They used e85 e10 91 95 and 98.the 98 got the furthest but after doing the calculations turns out 95 is the most cost efficient fuel.
Ive got one of these raptors, interesting you mentioned putting it in sport mode, Im pretty sure there is no difference in the utes engine performance through the modes other than the sound of the exhaust, you can also change the steering and suspension but not the engine or gear changes
Yep you’re right. At full throttle the modes all do the same thing. In previous testing we have found sport mode to be the fastest when it’s in 4A. Can’t explain why - but we did extensive testing when Raptor came out and it was consistently the fastest.
Also throttle calibration and torque response is different. Try slippery/wet and you can really feel the difference in throttle response and torque demand.
Whilst I hate vehicles like the Raptor and you cannot say that the handling is very good with that body roll in the video BUT this is a very interesting comparison and the stop watch does not lie. I would be more interested though in a long term test showing economy differences and even longer showing any advantage the 95 RON and 98 RON may have in terms of cleaner engines and engine life. I always use 98 RON in my 2019 BMW 330i and am always impressed with the economy, both around town and on the open road. With lower sulphur fuel coming on line in late 2024, (whether it will still be 91 RON we do not know) it would have to be an improvement on the current 91 RON. My old 2000 E46 323i is always run on 98 RON and to date has done over 350,000 kms, so that must say something for the cleaning properties of 98.
@CarExpert ok so agreed and tbh pretty obvious in those extreme conditions of a drag race and higher speed track work( so any higher performance requirement) the 98 is always going to have the edge(0.5secs approx on the 1/4 mile and 0-100) but what about normal everyday driving, doing some 40-80km commutes mixed motorway and town driving without being a plonker on the throttle at every traffic light because you cant as there’s always traffic ahead of you and the lights keep changing during your commute. And then taking the kids to sports practice, going to visit some relatives doing a couple of 100ks round trip. In other words fill the tank and let’s see what you get out of the tank full with each type and do a cost comparison. With today’s rising costs of everything - actual cost of ownership( after initial purchase and service costs) the most expensive part is day to day and week to week budgeting. If I want to go hoon I can budget for that, if im towing the caravan for a weekend away I can budget for it.- so towing costs with different fuel would also be useful. I suppose it’s not as fun and more time consuming but certainly what most people will be interested in.
What happened to E10 wasn't it meant to be the new answer to cheap fuels when it came out it i thought it was going to be half the price of ULP but it wasn't and now some servos have it at $2.18 that's more than some servos have their PULP price at I don't get it how it's more when it's basically sugar cane lol
I only put 98 BP in my raptor. My 0-100 times have been all over the place. My best time was 5.1 seconds and it actually felt like it was that fast. The rest of my times have been anywhere from 5.7 - 6 seconds. I don’t know what I did differently to get that quick time but I can’t replicate it for some reason. I’ll check again after the Herrod upgrade coming this Thursday 🎉
@@coreyw427 it was on this app called GPS race timer. Probably not very accurate. I had another crack today and only manager 7.6 seconds. It felt slow too. I do get the feeling that my raptor is inconsistent when putting the boot into it. Like I said that one that registered 5.1 felt really fast. Missus was in the car for a few runs and she said the same about that run over the others.. same settings too
@@aaroncruisyazz8181 Yeah I reckon it’s probably the app giving inconsistent results to some extent. I would suggest getting a Dragy if you want to get good measurements. Not overly expensive and works really well - have got one. This is what Paul is using in the video.
I had a 2014 Lexus 300h Hybrid, basically a Camry , I used 98 most of the time , but I did drive from Melb to Brisbane, and tried 91 against 98 , I got a bout 80kms more on a tank of 98 ron , motor slightly more punch , but not a performance motor ,
I have a heap of scrapped cars and some have premium and some have normal, the ones with normal after sitting for about 6 months the fuel gunked up into a black tar almost, had to take the fuel pump and fuel lines apart to clean it, don't use normal if your car is going to be sitting for a while
Nice video, interesting result. BTW, is it true that in Australia, fuel brands don't matter because all fuel is produced in the same refinery per state?
yes and no is the fuel produced in the same refinery's often, it is, and the fractions will also be the same however the aditives and extras, (and sometimes the controls of those) can and do differ from brand to brand
shell still have a refinery in Australia that supplies only shell and liberty. but if I run out of fuel in front of shell, I would get a jerry can and walk to a different petrol station.
yep got told about this years ago and thought it was rubbish, back then Driving an EA Falcon i averaged about 470 kms per tank on 91, changed to 98 after a couple of tanks was getting 590 per tank, Later on my BA the difference was only about 90 ks per tank but did feel the performance difference, Great test it is quit interesting the difference between them usually more noticeable over a couple of tanks .
@wanderer397 I noticed that where I filled up my little Mazda with 91, I was putting 40-50 litres. considering my tank was not close to empty and the Mazda had a 50 litre tank something didn't add up. I switched it up and put 98 one week and only put 30-35 litres in. same amount driving similar fuel. lets say 95% of people blindly fill up with the cheap stuff but only get 90% of what they pay for.
I didn't expect that much of a change. I thought it was more about engine life. I drive an m240i I always use 93 octane (US) because sometimes I drive spiritedly and want to protect the motor. But now I know on your vehicle at least, octane makes a huge difference
Correct me if I’m wrong but the difference from 0-100 was 0.72 seconds and the quarter mile was just 0.53. Does this mean the 91 octane fuel was quicker from 100-150 hence more power and the main difference was traction off the line?
I drive the raptor on long dirt roads multiple times a week with plenty of potholes, corners but really can't feel the difference in the suspension settings. Would love to see a video detailing the modes in more detail and perhaps how they differ if you just change the suspension vs changing the entire drive mode to something like "off-road".
All he's given us is performance figures, not economy. Most people aren't out there to break land speed records, I want to know for my buck which octane is most economical.
Nice comparison mate. Do you still have rough idle issues? My gearbox occassionally shifts very rough. I also experience rough idle which is also inconsistent but more noticeable and worse in the afternoon during the hotter part of the day. Performance still seems good though
So you did a few laps around the track after your time tests. With the change of fuel to 91 and 95 did you do a few laps around the track before you did the time test in order to let the comp adjust or would it make no difference?
I know I am commenting 7 months later I run a Opel commodore V6 and I get much better fuel economy running 98 on a 700 klm trip to Sydney on the Hume as much as 1.5 ltrs per 100 is can you do a test on fuel economy for the differing petrols chris scott
How long would it actually take for the ECU to adapt to the different fuel and ensure max performance on the given fuel? Also would love to see a fuel consumption comparison on a car that usually runs on 91. 👍
The knock sensor is constantly listening so it should be as soon as it senses knock. That’ll happen as soon as the fuel octane rating changes. Keep in mind that if you go from 98 to 91, for example, you’ll have a mixed blend until the 98 has been diluted out of the tank.
l have an fg falcon with a barra 195 engine and azf 6 speed and run 98 octain all the time and l notice a significant increase in torque in contrast to 91 . 95 is recommended for the barra 195 but it runs so much better on amplify 98.
I used to run my VY commo on 91 and it ran like a dog............went to 95 and ran wonderful. I would like to see some Dyno runs with different fuels. With the tank fully drained each time etc.
Great video Paul. I’ve used 98 and 95 on my new Subaru Outback (non turbo) not for performance but for the long term cleaner engine benefits as I want to keep the car for a long time. You mention the additive in the better fuels but can you comment or explore any further the engine/reliability benefits of using higher graded fuels over 91 RON?
Be interesting to see a fuel consumption comparison.
A few people have mentioned this. The fuel consumption difference would never offset the extra cost of the premium fuel, so it’s something we didn’t bother doing. It will always cost you more for the premium fuel regardless of the small consumption saving. The only tangible benefit you get from spending more is the better engine performance and additive.
@@CarExpertAus Well I don't mind spending more on the premium fuel but saving more fuel rather than using lower grade fuel but costs more fuel l/100km😅 It's hard to refuel when you're in rural areas
@@CarExpertAus Yeah true.. In an earlier video a while back you mentioned a rough idle at times. Has your Raptor been inspected for broken valve springs?.. I noticed the Raptor content went quiet for a while straight after. Am I’m reading to much in to it?
@@w_stankyIt’s due for its first proper service at the end of December and I’ve asked them to check it out. I loaned the car to Dad for a couple of months between him selling his car and waiting for his new one.
@@aufaryafibaskarakadi4409 To help save fuel, the government should invest to replace RON91 with RON95 in the rural area.
Hi Paul, we have a FG G6E Turbo that requires at least 95ron, on occasion when 95 was unavailable running it on 98 only made minimal differences to performance and fuel consumption. However on occasions when we towed a caravan 98 was a winner in terms of performance and fuel consumption in marginal figures for both.
Hey Dennis, I have an FG F6 and it has the 98 Only sticker on it. I wonder if it’s because the FPV has the slightly larger Turbo or maybe it’s a Tuning issue?
You will notice the difference if you tune the car for each fuel. BP 98 is usually the best of the bunch also
@@EYESWIDEOPEN00 You mean remapping? The difference will be noticeable but still marginal.
@@MJSE-of7gsin all the years of being involved in cars and discussing tuning, iv never had one person come back and say "you mean remapping" anyway. If octane and quality of fuel didn't make a difference, nobody would bother switching fuels, including myself.
@@EYESWIDEOPEN00 I'm not sure how you "tune" an FG Ford other than remap it. I tune my lawn mower and brushcutter.... with an FG Ford where do I stick the screwdriver? :) Of course different octane fuels make a difference... I said the difference will be noticeable but marginal. IMHO RON98 in a RAPTOR will be noticeable but my goodness, it is a over 2500 kg brick. Waxing on about off the mark acceleration differences with different RON fuels is in a Raptor is silly. It is marginal in a FG Ford as well. But people are free to do whatever they want to and kid themselves their off the shelf dime-a-dozen car is so much better for it.
I've got one of the last 4.0Lt V6 Hilux SR5's and used to always run 91 but I swapped to 98 a couple of years ago, made a slight difference to the economy but the big difference is in the mountains as I spend a fair bit of my work in the Snowy Mountains. Using 98 makes it not kick back gears anywhere as much as when using 91 so drivability is so much better. I have every tank of fuel in an App on my iPad and the average has dropped from 14.7 down to 14 even over 200,000 Km.
Good to see you did this test properly by starting with premium. It can take a while for engine to adjust to better fuel but swapping to lower grade 91 the difference is felt straight away.
They adjust the timing several times per second in a modern engine so it will adjust faster than you could ever expect.
@@jasonfields2793 Nah, the way it works is if it detects knock it'll drop timing super quick to save the engine. Once you put in premium fuel it takes a while for the ECU to learn you have a better fuel because it detects a lack of knock and slowly feeds the timing in until it finds the happy amount of timing again.
@turbostyler they actually continue to advance timing all the time until it detects knock than it pulls back its about being as efficient as absolutely possible at all times
@@turbostylerJust here to second what Jason said. There could be a small delay but that would only be due to the actual RON entering the engine not yet being 98 due to 91 in fuel lines or rail. The ECU monitors knock on every ignition event and will adjust extremely quickly to either knock or a lack of knock. It has no RON sensor, it is reacting to knock through knock sensors mounted to engine block.
He dropped to 91 and came back up to 95 and it responded straight away. Doesn't take anywhere near as long as you think to feed timing back in.
Love this. Been wondering the same thing. Would like to see a consumption comparison too. E10 too please!!!
Would love to see a comparison on L/100kms on different fuel types as that is how vehicles are sold. People who live in rural eareas drive further than people in big cities
I also support that, but a more suitable vehicle must be chosen for this comparison.
There are 2 parts to this. In terms of economy, driven without taking advantage of the extra performance, I’d expect similar gains in fuel economy with the better fuel from my experience. But the big if is what sort of engine you are running. If you are driving a normally aspirated economy car designed for 91 RON you gain virtually nothing. If you are running a high performance turbo designed to run on 98 RON the differences will be huge. To do this comparison well you should have had an ordinary car like a Camry for comparison to show the difference.
@@peterj5751 Exactly, and I think this also affects the performance result, as Paul has done in this video. The Ranger Raptor has a 3.0 litre V6 turbo engine which is always better to run on high octane petrol. I don't believe this engine can really accept RON91. Instead, it should require RON98 as a minimum, just like the Mercedes AMG.
That's the real test provided he drained all previous grade before refilling or he has created a blend
Yeah I agree, would love to see if premium is more efficient and therefore more cost effective
I am interested to see the other fuel companies stacked up against each other. BP v AMPOL v Coles Express v Caltex etc - I am curious to see how their RON95/98 fuel competes with each other
@@paulsimpson8990what about some of the cheaper brands such as metro or other independents like that, are they any worse or still just the same as the big companies but cheaper.
@@paulsimpson8990 Yeah okay thanks for that info, might be worth the extra few dollars to go to one of the big ones just to be safe, is one brands additives better than any others? I have a Mini Cooper currently so I try to look after it as best I can.
@@paulsimpson8990 it’s direct injected, so should be fine to go with any really then?
Mobile had the best numbers when we tested on our tuned b58 might be different for other engines
I’ve only used 98 in mine so far, as I haven’t been anywhere remote enough not to have it, yet. On a related note, tried Sport mode on twisty, hilly roads for the first time last weekend. JEEEEEZUS, it’s quick, loud, angry, wild!
Confirmed what many of us have learned via experience. Use 91 for day to day in a town environment and fill with 98 for a trip (where power for overtaking is needed). Also I know from recorded observations from a 2009 AWD Territory, it would get about an extra 50km plus range from the higher octane option.
never use 91..... its dirty crap fuel in Oz.... and contains a high amount of sulphur.
Interesting.. the wife had an 07 territory years ago… we ran 95 in it, loved it! Loved E10 aswell but was abit on the thirsty side… put 98 in it and it just played up like a second hand lawnmower.. really really weird..
Thanks for all your videos, I really value and enjoy them. When I first saw this video appear in my feed my expectation off the cuff was a L/100km economy comparison. At this point and apart from the obvious performance benefits, I'd love to be convinced about the Cost L/100km comparison and in the current economic climate it would be quite relevant. Hoping this might be something you might consider for a future video. PS while you're at it, how about Diesel vs Premium Diesel comparison as well. Thanks again.
For my 2012 Volkswagen Jetta TSI I have always used 98 RON. I'm absolutely delighted the car runs as well today as the day I purchased it.
I woulld be interested to see what E10 would do for performance as it has a octane of around 94 without being a premium fuel.
I found it just as fast at the 98. The raptor loves to advance the timing when it senses it has ethanol in the fuel lines. Cheap but fast.
95 is the sweet spot, in terms of both performance & value for money!!
It appears that way!
Also for lawn mowers
I definitely noticed the difference of fuel grade with my motorbike, but also in each brand of fuel station. At the extremes, my 650cc parallel twin could either feel lumpy, sluggish and hard to start.... or smooth, rocket-ship-like and starting first turn.
Confirms the tests I have done on Bp fuel, 95 is the best value for money, and you still get the cleaning additive to keep your injection system clean . 95 for me . Good video
Do you notice a difference in fuel economy?
@@LIFEat110 yes, I tested them over 15 years as a sales rep, on the road every day, the 95 made the car run better and gave a small decrease in fuel use. Where the 98 made the engine run less smooth and the fuel saved wasn’t worth the extra cost. The last car I had did 200,000 Ks on Bp 95 and it still went like a rocket and never used oil or had the injectors replaced
Would be interesting to see 94 E10 included in this test.
80L fuel tank and price at the pump right now, 91 = $145.52, 95 $157.52 and 98 $163.92. 91 to 98 fill up difference is $18.40. Almost a $1000 saving over a year if you are filling up weekly.
IMHO anybody using RON98 in a Raptor cares little about money.
Buy a raptor and be a fuel jew! Makes sense!
its the same as putting 91 in a mustang
Its not the miles per gallon. its the smiles per gallon!
Great performance comparison but like a lot of other people I would like to see the fuel consumption difference between the fuels for everyday driving
The big difference between regular 91 and premium 95&98 is sulphur content as well.
ULP is 150PPM and the premium is 50PPM. The lower the number the cleaner the fuel is.
I can't wait until Dec 2024 when the new regulations kicks in that only allow 10 PPM for all fuel to see if makes a difference again.
91 octane has been garbage for years i won't even run it in my lawn mower
*up to 150ppm
Doesn’t mean it’s always right up there at 150
@@YZJB yes but so does the premium. Independent tests usually come up to be around 20 to 30 PPM.
@@word1901 Agree. The only time I bought 91 is to top up the hire car or work pool car because the fuel card only works on 91.
Why do you care how much sulphur is in the fuel? Not going to make one iota of difference to performance.
Run anything modern on 91Ron and under load listed to that engine knock…even as a pedestrian I’ve heard cars set off and the engine pre ignition knocking like mad.
Knock is out of control combustion, can cause damage in multiple parts including engine bearings and ring lands etc.
I’m not sure what you actually did to wash out each preceding fill of fuel, but the first transition seemed to happen at “26km to empty”, which means there’s still the reserve in the tank, 15-20L, so your quarter tank fill is actually diluted by the residuum. If you did a full washout, I suspect the differences would be even more significant. Anyhoo, thanks for this test, as it confirms that those of us who care about performance, should always use the best fuel they can find. However, it also demonstrates that, if you’re in the middle of nowhere, and all you can find is 91 RON, the car will run fine!
I still remember when Shell had 100 Ron. Noticeable difference in my xr6 turbo
Thank you for your confirmation....yes i have noticed the difference...I now only use 95 within the city and 98 when driving long trips
Great video with interesting results. Would have been good to see some dyno runs with each fuel type also. Cheers.
Insightful! Nice comparison. I was waiting for such a video. Thank you!
My personal experience is that if it says "91 RON or higher" then you're wasting your money going higher.
Our Mercedes C300 (2l turbo) was 95 RON (or higher). I often had to run 98 in it because 95 wasn't available. All I noticed was an increased cost. I use apps to monitor fuel and other car usage. The average 1/100km figure never varied between the two grades of fuel.
And with my motorbikes, one of them, a Honda 1100cc Blackbird used 91 RON. I ran 95 and 98 in them. Performance-wise, I couldn't pick it from day-to-day riding which included the mandatory fanging of said bike. Fuel economy didn't change.
My current bike requires 95 or higher. Again, being a litre+ V twin it doesn't make any difference if I go higher. BUT, if I do put 91 in it as I had to recently up around the Snowies on a ride as nothing else was available, the damn thing rattled and pinged its sorry way to the next servo and I had to take it easy to stop it pinging, despite it having the fancy-dancy ECU, knock sensors and so on.
Then there's diesel and "premium" diesel. Makes no difference in the 3.2 Ranger except for the cost of filling up is greater.
If this article wasn't sponsored by a fuel company which enjoys massive margins when selling higher octane fuel I'd have taken it a bit more seriously. Sorry, but that's how it came across to me.
Paul fit the herrod performance pack and do a vid on that. Currently theres no vids on the hugely popular pack. Cheers.
Was the 98 fuel fully purged before refilling with 91? And. Ambient temperature and humidity also play a role in performance. A test for ltrs/100 would be awesome too.
You’re not going to see the performance differences unless tuning it specifically. However, using only 98 all the time will keep the inside of the engine in better condition for longer. And it’s especially so when you have a GDi engine, they build up a hell of a lot of gunk in the intake chamber.
Did you watch the video?
Was a clear performance gain by switching from 91-98
Over the years I've tested using 98 fuel in standard cars (ones that didn't need anything higher than 91) and I never noticed any fuel economy difference/gains. I think the people that say they do notice a difference are experiencing the placebo effect.
98 is only useful in sports cars or if the fuel cap says its needed. Like the M3, BRZ, Wrx STI or AMG.
I have always put 98 in any of my cars as I have worked out the small extra cost over 95 was worth it in economy. The extra bonus that long term issues with clogging fuel injectors and carboned up engines with the cheaper fuel would be a non issue makes it an easier decision to go with the more expensive fuels.
When 98 first came to Australia I had a V6 4Runner with a long range tank, I spent a few months playing with it to see if it was worth it. My only metric was range, I had no way to track other performance figures. from First click to the warning light I had almost 100km range difference from a 200lt load between 91 and 98, while the cost difference at the time was about $10 between the two. Ever since then I have run 98 in all of my cars whenever it was available. Two of them I had tuned specifically for it to actually make the most out of it. The cost difference between the grades these days varies quite wildly from one servo to the next, one day to the next, so I don't really think about that anymore.
Sometimes 95 is a slightly higher rating than adervertised and 98 is sometimes lower.
95 is by far the best value. Gains in 98 are usually minimal / non-existent.
Only chuck in 98ron if its needed. Like for a BRZ, Mustang GT, M3 or AMG. Otherwise most sportscars and high end cars can take 95.
While back I had a manual DE Mazda 2 hatch, which I ran on 98 as it hardly used any fuel. Out of curiosity I tried all the other fuels, anything lower than 95 and it would take longer to crank over when cold and some hills required a gear lower to climb. Fuel economy was also noticable worse using 91 or E10.
But before that I had manual BL 2.0L Mazda3 sedan, that had an adjustable crank angle sensor. Before I adjusted the sensor it was absolutely gutless in 6th gear on the highway. After the adjustment and running 98, it actually wanted to accelerate in 6th on the highway.
So, really the answer to does higher octane fuel increase performance/ economy is.... it depends!
I've always used 95 in my old two litre Toyota but last time I used 91. I'm sure it's slower with 91.
E10 would have been interesting to add as well. Many people say it’s garbage would be nice to see that backed up with facts
That might be another video we try. I’d never use or recommend E10 and based on what I’ve read the money you save is offset by higher fuel usage. But granted it would be another great test to do.
In markets where there's only 95 (Thailand for example) the available E20 gives a higher octane rating (approx 97)then 95.
The fuel system and engine are rated for e20. So e20 will give the best performance in those markets.
Agreeing to a previous comment below; I would like to see the difference in Litres/100km for the three fuels on a long run (open road). I’m sure we will see more interesting information.
Hi,
I do enjoy your Segments, thankyou and keep doing a great job.
In all my cars I've noticed a significant difference when using premium.
The biggest was when I had a manual v6 Jeep Wrangler 2 door. It was very eager on 98, and even kept up with cars it really shouldn't have. The best example was an xr6 turbo, the driver didn't believe me that my engine was stock!
It also seemed to use about 2 litres per 100 k's less on premium 98, which usually made up for the difference in cost.
Would love to see a comparison between the main brands on 98 only.
What difference would you be expecting?? They're all the same octane rating.
1-bp
2-shell
3-7 eleven
Any chance of some heat soak affecting performance difference. Great video as always.
Our Kia Rio was always pinging under load with 91. Now use 95, no pinging and just drives better.
Can we please get another quick vid update on how your Raptor is going? Any new faults, i think you've had it for over a year now. Cheers for all the helpful videos 👍
I am more interested in seeing the difference in the claimed cleaning properties of the 98 fuel and if it is truly better for the engine. Project Farm video in a different setting suggested these higher octane cleaning fuels were better as long as the engine burnt it properly, but it did result in higher engine temps on some engines with greater wear on seals, exhausts and rubber/plastic items under the hood/bonnet.
We have 99RON and 102RON here and in a performance car that can take advantage of the higher octane it's quite noticeable.
Very interesting Paul, I would love to know what the difference would be you driving a diesel with Ampol fuel and the cheapest one. Is one really better than the other. Love your videos and love learning.
Nick
Hi Paul, try it with Shell and BP please.😊
Haven’t watched this video yet, but I did my own experiment recently and found that I get better fuel economy in my next gen Raptor using BP fuel over the others, about 1-1.5L/100km better off.
it would be interesting to see what a RON/Octane booster to 98 could do for performance like the STP Octane booster or similar.
Great video keep up the good work
Great video, would love to see a similar video on fuel economy for 91 vs 98 in the raptor.
So does the statement at 3:20 mean my 2001 Subaru forester will barley have any difference running 91 vs 98?
Only ever put 98 in my cars, best way to sleep well at night. Hey Paul the number plate holder, im awaiting delivery of my new Raptor, how did you customise this so is not hanging down over the radar sensor? Plate attached at the top or the bottom. Love your reviews btw. Thanks!
I have a Ford FG G6E N/A and I've found that yes 98 gives it more "pep" but that 95 and 98 see fuel consumption increase whereas with 91 that's where the best fuel consumption is achieved. I can run it on E10 which is 94 but never have. For some strange reason driving in the more remote areas at consistent high speeds (110-130kph) and car "feels" more lively performance wise even on 91 which is basically what it's designed to run on.
Seems like it could be beneficial to just use 91 when going on a long trip and day to day use then only use 98 for when your going off-road or just looking to have some fun.
Should of mention about the cleaning properties as well. I always put a tank full of 98 in my petrol car every few months
Bp ultimate 98 fan. Really noticed the difference in my ex colleague's toyota rav 4 once.
Also performed test results can vary if not controlled. Eg ambient temperature variation
0:17 no way they let you out 91 in that thing😂😂😂😂
I'd have loved to have seen a e10 run as well. Despite having a lower octane number the ethanol is an excellent knock suppressant. It's also the cheapest fuel and I'd bet it would have performance on par with 98.
its also shit for your car would not recommend
@@mrz1281 why is it shit?
Be interesting if you also tried E10 to see how much of a performance difference there is using Ethanol blend
agree 100% would be more appropriate for most people
Wheels mag did a comparison about 10 years back with a commodore. They used e85 e10 91 95 and 98.the 98 got the furthest but after doing the calculations turns out 95 is the most cost efficient fuel.
Great test. I’d always wondered how much difference it really made. 👍
Ive got one of these raptors, interesting you mentioned putting it in sport mode, Im pretty sure there is no difference in the utes engine performance through the modes other than the sound of the exhaust, you can also change the steering and suspension but not the engine or gear changes
Yep you’re right. At full throttle the modes all do the same thing. In previous testing we have found sport mode to be the fastest when it’s in 4A. Can’t explain why - but we did extensive testing when Raptor came out and it was consistently the fastest.
The tcu transmission Controller calibration is different in sport
Also throttle calibration and torque response is different.
Try slippery/wet and you can really feel the difference in throttle response and torque demand.
Whilst I hate vehicles like the Raptor and you cannot say that the handling is very good with that body roll in the video BUT this is a very interesting comparison and the stop watch does not lie. I would be more interested though in a long term test showing economy differences and even longer showing any advantage the 95 RON and 98 RON may have in terms of cleaner engines and engine life. I always use 98 RON in my 2019 BMW 330i and am always impressed with the economy, both around town and on the open road. With lower sulphur fuel coming on line in late 2024, (whether it will still be 91 RON we do not know) it would have to be an improvement on the current 91 RON. My old 2000 E46 323i is always run on 98 RON and to date has done over 350,000 kms, so that must say something for the cleaning properties of 98.
Would love to see this with E10 for cars rated for it.
@wanderer397 I've definitely read a LOT of conflicting details on it. Given the price difference to 95 the efficiency difference would need to be vast
Needs to be a blind test.
Need to see the brake boosting off the line for each run.
@CarExpert ok so agreed and tbh pretty obvious in those extreme conditions of a drag race and higher speed track work( so any higher performance requirement) the 98 is always going to have the edge(0.5secs approx on the 1/4 mile and 0-100) but what about normal everyday driving, doing some 40-80km commutes mixed motorway and town driving without being a plonker on the throttle at every traffic light because you cant as there’s always traffic ahead of you and the lights keep changing during your commute. And then taking the kids to sports practice, going to visit some relatives doing a couple of 100ks round trip. In other words fill the tank and let’s see what you get out of the tank full with each type and do a cost comparison. With today’s rising costs of everything - actual cost of ownership( after initial purchase and service costs) the most expensive part is day to day and week to week budgeting. If I want to go hoon I can budget for that, if im towing the caravan for a weekend away I can budget for it.- so towing costs with different fuel would also be useful. I suppose it’s not as fun and more time consuming but certainly what most people will be interested in.
Would be interesting to see a comparison with 98 RON mixed to E5 or E10 Ethanol if Ranger allows it.
What happened to E10 wasn't it meant to be the new answer to cheap fuels when it came out it i thought it was going to be half the price of ULP but it wasn't and now some servos have it at $2.18 that's more than some servos have their PULP price at I don't get it how it's more when it's basically sugar cane lol
Waiting to see some performance tune as well …. Herrod, BPT etc
I only put 98 BP in my raptor. My 0-100 times have been all over the place. My best time was 5.1 seconds and it actually felt like it was that fast. The rest of my times have been anywhere from 5.7 - 6 seconds.
I don’t know what I did differently to get that quick time but I can’t replicate it for some reason.
I’ll check again after the Herrod upgrade coming this Thursday 🎉
What did you measure with?
@@coreyw427 it was on this app called GPS race timer. Probably not very accurate. I had another crack today and only manager 7.6 seconds. It felt slow too. I do get the feeling that my raptor is inconsistent when putting the boot into it. Like I said that one that registered 5.1 felt really fast. Missus was in the car for a few runs and she said the same about that run over the others.. same settings too
@@aaroncruisyazz8181 Yeah I reckon it’s probably the app giving inconsistent results to some extent. I would suggest getting a Dragy if you want to get good measurements. Not overly expensive and works really well - have got one. This is what Paul is using in the video.
I had a 2014 Lexus 300h Hybrid, basically a Camry , I used 98 most of the time , but I did drive from Melb to Brisbane, and tried 91 against 98 ,
I got a bout 80kms more on a tank of 98 ron , motor slightly more punch , but not a performance motor ,
I have a heap of scrapped cars and some have premium and some have normal, the ones with normal after sitting for about 6 months the fuel gunked up into a black tar almost, had to take the fuel pump and fuel lines apart to clean it, don't use normal if your car is going to be sitting for a while
Nice video, interesting result. BTW, is it true that in Australia, fuel brands don't matter because all fuel is produced in the same refinery per state?
Good luck getting an answer with this knockout!
Almost all diesel in aus is the same. A lot of the petrol we get comes from Singapore too
yes and no
is the fuel produced in the same refinery's often, it is, and the fractions will also be the same
however the aditives and extras, (and sometimes the controls of those) can and do differ from brand to brand
shell still have a refinery in Australia that supplies only shell and liberty. but if I run out of fuel in front of shell, I would get a jerry can and walk to a different petrol station.
@@nickycrea6075 why?
What would be the way of finding out if my car has those senses to adjust for 98 because I’ve been going for the manual and I can’t find it?
yep got told about this years ago and thought it was rubbish, back then Driving an EA Falcon i averaged about 470 kms per tank on 91, changed to 98 after a couple of tanks was getting 590 per tank, Later on my BA the difference was only about 90 ks per tank but did feel the performance difference,
Great test it is quit interesting the difference between them usually more noticeable over a couple of tanks .
@wanderer397 I noticed that where I filled up my little Mazda with 91, I was putting 40-50 litres. considering my tank was not close to empty and the Mazda had a 50 litre tank something didn't add up. I switched it up and put 98 one week and only put 30-35 litres in. same amount driving similar fuel. lets say 95% of people blindly fill up with the cheap stuff but only get 90% of what they pay for.
I didn't expect that much of a change. I thought it was more about engine life.
I drive an m240i I always use 93 octane (US) because sometimes I drive spiritedly and want to protect the motor. But now I know on your vehicle at least, octane makes a huge difference
Only made a big difference on this test because he was driving like a man possessed. Drive normally and it will be a different outcome.
Here in South Africa we have 93 as entry and 95 as top of the range
Correct me if I’m wrong but the difference from 0-100 was 0.72 seconds and the quarter mile was just 0.53. Does this mean the 91 octane fuel was quicker from 100-150 hence more power and the main difference was traction off the line?
Amazing video Paul, quick question here, have you had the steering wheel wobble issue ? I saw people complaining about it.
I would love to see what e10 94 compares to the other fuels.
I drive the raptor on long dirt roads multiple times a week with plenty of potholes, corners but really can't feel the difference in the suspension settings. Would love to see a video detailing the modes in more detail and perhaps how they differ if you just change the suspension vs changing the entire drive mode to something like "off-road".
I think you bought the wrong ranger, the raptors is the sports variant and not set up for comfort.
I wouldn't say it's a total waste if the 95+ fuels have cleaning additives in them and the 91 doesn't.
I liked the video, but to take subjectivity out of it, wouldn't this type of test be better performed on a dyno?
All he's given us is performance figures, not economy. Most people aren't out there to break land speed records, I want to know for my buck which octane is most economical.
Nice comparison mate. Do you still have rough idle issues? My gearbox occassionally shifts very rough. I also experience rough idle which is also inconsistent but more noticeable and worse in the afternoon during the hotter part of the day. Performance still seems good though
Yep rough idle is back. Not as bad as it was - but definitely noticeable!
Valve spring issue?
So you did a few laps around the track after your time tests. With the change of fuel to 91 and 95 did you do a few laps around the track before you did the time test in order to let the comp adjust or would it make no difference?
Get the Herrod upgrade. And then do some further tests!
I always use 98 in my gardening power tools, they always run better
I know I am commenting 7 months later I run a Opel commodore V6 and I get much better fuel economy running 98 on a 700 klm trip to Sydney on the Hume as much as 1.5 ltrs per 100 is can you do a test on fuel economy for the differing petrols chris scott
Interesting. Any seat of the pants feel as to more performance?
Would love to see how it would go between 98 and E85.
How long would it actually take for the ECU to adapt to the different fuel and ensure max performance on the given fuel?
Also would love to see a fuel consumption comparison on a car that usually runs on 91. 👍
The knock sensor is constantly listening so it should be as soon as it senses knock. That’ll happen as soon as the fuel octane rating changes. Keep in mind that if you go from 98 to 91, for example, you’ll have a mixed blend until the 98 has been diluted out of the tank.
l have an fg falcon with a barra 195 engine and azf 6 speed and run 98 octain all the time and l notice a significant increase in torque in contrast to 91 . 95 is recommended for the barra 195 but it runs so much better on amplify 98.
I used to run my VY commo on 91 and it ran like a dog............went to 95 and ran wonderful. I would like to see some Dyno runs with different fuels. With the tank fully drained each time etc.
It was good to see what the difference was.
Do you think you’re gonna do a review on the new 2 L by turbo raptor?
Great video Paul. I’ve used 98 and 95 on my new Subaru Outback (non turbo) not for performance but for the long term cleaner engine benefits as I want to keep the car for a long time. You mention the additive in the better fuels but can you comment or explore any further the engine/reliability benefits of using higher graded fuels over 91 RON?
Not to get off topic, but did your raptor come with the mudflaps or did you buy them separate and if so, where did you get them?
Would have been nice for you to touch on E5 and and E10 symbols inside the fuel cap
The proper way to do this test should be on a dyno to compare hp and tq figures.
You should also look at the efficiency.