Which Gas Company To Use On Bmw E46

[bmwBRO]

on my 330, i switched from petro 91 to sunoco 94 and got 50km per tank more on average.. also use sunoco for the 5x points when using 94... every 4 tanks i get a free cars wash (the works)

[NIMA]

Majority of us will use Sunoco 94.........your car will run that much better...

[Mikey83]

I use 100 Octane (well only once this past weekend )

[StikiGreenZ]

I use Shell 91.

[Mystikal]

Originally Posted by propr'one

just switched from sunoco 94 to shell 91 under mystikal's advice.

i get better gas mileage.

Ha, serious? I'm glad it's not just me. Sunoco still has to go into my E30 (really aggressive map), but the M3 sees nothing but Shell.

[Bartacus]

Esso only for me.

Bart

[Marky_mark]

Shell 91 is the best overall

[europrince]

Until someone shows me a scientific study that one company's gas is better than another's, its all the same shit to me. I don't care about your 'feeling' a difference.

[Mikeee46coup]

Originally Posted by Marky_mark

Shell 91 is the best overall

^werd, BMW agrees, it's the only fuel without ethanol (paying for 10% corn is nuts...Ultra94) Shell has all of the detergents BMW reccomends and is officially endorsed too.

[Mystikal]

Originally Posted by europrince

Until someone shows me a scientific study that one company's gas is better than another's, its all the same shit to me. I don't care about your 'feeling' a difference.

Read the pumps at each station for ethanol content. You'll begin understanding there.

[europrince]

Originally Posted by Mystikal

Read the pumps at each station for ethanol content. You'll begin understanding there.

Natural Resources Canada link:
http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/publications/...27_01_1991.cfm

"What effect does using ethanol fuels have on fuel consumption?
While a 10 percent ethanol blend contains about 97 percent of the energy of "pure" gasoline, the energy loss is partly offset by the increased combustion efficiency of the engine. This could increase fuel consumption by about 2-3 percent"


So, for the average car, it'll be a 0.2 to 0.3l/100km consumption increase but cleaner exhaust. I don't think that's a big difference. Driving pattern and habit have a much larger effect.

Ok, so Shell is the only one that doesn't use ethanol?

[Mystikal]

Originally Posted by europrince

Natural Resources Canada link:
http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/publications/...27_01_1991.cfm

"What effect does using ethanol fuels have on fuel consumption?
While a 10 percent ethanol blend contains about 97 percent of the energy of "pure" gasoline, the energy loss is partly offset by the increased combustion efficiency of the engine. This could increase fuel consumption by about 2-3 percent"


So, for the average car, it'll be a 0.2 to 0.3l/100km consumption increase but cleaner exhaust. I don't think that's a big difference. Driving pattern and habit have a much larger effect.

Ok, so Shell is the only one that doesn't use ethanol?

Yeah, that increased combustion efficiency part is BS. That would only occur on a car that is designed to run on 94 (and is therefore cutting back timing to run on 91). I see a lot of government sites claiming this 2-3% business, which makes me skeptical.

That said, ethanol effects debate or not, Shell 91 is the only premium that has none of it.

[j0nblayz]

i only get gas from husky or mohawk 91+ octane in both my 330ci and x5. I never go to shell nor esso no more, last time i put gas from shell into my x5, it screwed up my fuel level sensors, said it was empty, thought it was maybe just a slow sensor, sensor never went over the mid mark. I got gas again after from esso, did the samething, i was pretty sure it was the sensors that went bad. got gas from husky afterwards, my level finally came back to normal. Dunno, but i haven't got gas from shell or esso again.

[sash]

94 octane is waste of money unless you have some serious engine work and/or engine management (high compression / advanced timing).
I use 91 octane Shell or PetroCanada.

[BSL]

Originally Posted by europrince

Natural Resources Canada link:
http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/publications/...27_01_1991.cfm

"What effect does using ethanol fuels have on fuel consumption?
While a 10 percent ethanol blend contains about 97 percent of the energy of "pure" gasoline, the energy loss is partly offset by the increased combustion efficiency of the engine. This could increase fuel consumption by about 2-3 percent"


So, for the average car, it'll be a 0.2 to 0.3l/100km consumption increase but cleaner exhaust. I don't think that's a big difference. Driving pattern and habit have a much larger effect.

Ok, so Shell is the only one that doesn't use ethanol?

This is complete BS.

A tank of gas with ethanol blend averages 70-90kms less driving distance for me.
I have tried all sorts of fuel, and tried, (without much success), getting ethanol content info on different brands.
It seems that inconsistancy is the only thing you can count on.

Everyone will notice that that they USUALLY get better mileage while using 91+ octane, and most people will also attribute that to the octane content. Wrong.
Most higher octane fuels used to have NO ethanol, that is now changing.

There are only 2 gas stations (in Peterborough) that I know ,for sure, do not blend thier fuel. They are both Esso stations. Why? I have no idea... when I ask, they tell me that ESSO requires only a percentage of thier fuel to be blended...

As a note:
I got interested in this subject when I noticed significantly crappy mileage while running Pioneer high octane fuel in my 10.5:1 compression mustang. The mileage was SOOO bad, that I started replacing O2 sensors etc. before I realized what was actually happening!
Stay away from Pioneer