Fuel for 156 2L TS

[Neil Choi]

Hello there,


Just wondering on current opinions and real life experiences on fuelling for a 156 2L TS, 95 vs 98.


Now in general I use 98 only, usually Shell or Caltex due mostly to convenience, the BP is out of the way.


But 156 fuel label says 95 RON.  I went to fuel up and pulled into a pump but it was only 95 and couldn't be bothered backing up to the 98 pump.  So I fueled up with 95.


So question is, given 95 is adequate and quoted, will 98 be better, fuel economy wise, is there better power, is it going clean or keep my injector clean etc.  Or should I save the 5-6 cents a litre and just use 95.  I do notice most Euro cars only ask for 95.


Comments please.

[bix]

In my opinion I think car manufacturers couldn't be that cheeky and expect owners to fill-up with 98RON which is priced sky high.

We could test it out at Dyno day (scheduled 21/7) and see if there was any output difference between the two fuels.

[Garibaldi]

I have run my 2004 147 Twin Spark on both 95 & 98 Ron. I have found that the engine is more responsive and seems to accelerate better on 98. The fuel consumption is exactly the same @ 8.4L per 100klm. For a few cents a litre extra I reckon it's worth it. As Bix said the only way to find out which is better is to put two identical cars on the Dyno. Given the variances we were getting in horsepower with identical cars on the last Dyno day even that may not tell the true story.

[Stuart Thomson]

Hi All,

Firstly, let's dispel the myth that higher RON = More power, this is simply untrue.  You may have noticed that Shell 98RON is advertised as Performance Enhancing, rarely do they mention power, when they do mention power gains it's not from the RON of the fuel, it's from friction modifiers in the fuel.  All  the other manufacturers make similar claims, but none claim more power from the higher octane rating.

Now that we have that one out of the way, there are benefits to running higher octane fuel.  IF your car has a map for 98 RON fuel, you'll notice a performance benefit as the car can advance the ignition without pinging, which, generally gives more power.  If you use carnies, they may need rejecting before any benefit would be noticed.  The higher octane fuel should be slightly more dense, so more fuel per unit volume, hence slightly better fuel economy, possibly not that much of a benefit over 95 RON though.  It smells nicer due to it containing more Xylenes.

I find the difference between 95 and 98 RON is typically not much, so mine get pampered with the 98, no particular reason, just that it's only a couple of bucks every fill.

Cheers
Stuart

[Neil Choi]

Anyone got any real life fuel economy readings on the 2L TS? 

What should I be expecting, in gridlock, urban and freeway driving, race track conditions!!! etc. 

Running 10W60 and have stuck in 98RON regardless.

[colcol]

JTS, 156 sedan, 2 litre, run to Winton and back, Rossana to Kilsyth and back, some traffic, some freeway, suburban running, Castrol Edge 10 -60, manual 5 speed, barge ar5e driver, 98 octane rating Caltex Vortex, 63 litre fuel tank, 827 kays until it run out, Colin.

[bteoh]

I thought the Penrite website recommends the Ten Tenths 10w70 for the GTA? Original Alfa specs recommends 10w40 I think.
I would have thought 10w70 was too thick for the GTA? Wonder why Penrite advises that ?

[colcol]

I run Castrol edge 10-60, Mobil 1 5-50, Shell 10-60, Valvoline 10-50, about to try Penrite 15-60 'full Zinc', all fully synthetic, the oils seem to work as good as each other, i usually use the thinner Mobil 1 5-50 in the winter and the 10-60 brands in the summer, best to change the [tiny] oil filter at every change, currently running Castrol Magnatec 10-40 mineral oil, seems to work ok with no oil burning or noisy tappets or variators.
The reason why i am using Magnatec, is that i had to remove the sump, as it was leaking, and i wanted to put a cheap oil back in case it leaked again, this is what happens when you use a dodgy mechanic!, Colin.

[Davidm1600]

I can't be bothered paying the extra cost for 98 in my 03 JTS 156, I have pretty much always used for the past 6 + years 95 RON.  When on those relatively rare occasions I have had no option but to use 98 I havn't detected any difference in performance. The difference being simply to my wallet.  Oh and I have never worried about whether Caltex/Shell/BP.  Down here in Tassie it all the same anyway. 

I even have used the part ethanol based fuels in my 156 on occasions and again not subjectively noticed any difference in performance etc.

Beyond undertaking valid scientifically based testing, I would therefore assume for the average punter doing perfectly normal driving, you really cannot make anything else than largely subjective assessments on such matters.