Mileage with Shell V-Power 91 - FordTough.ca - Home of Canadian Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Ranger Forum ALL YEARS ALL MODELS

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 24 (permalink) Old 04-23-2012, 10:53 PM Thread Starter
 
b4000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northeastern BC
Posts: 996
Mileage with Shell V-Power 91

Since I've been involved in giving my opinion on the effect of ethanol on fuel mileage on these forums, I just had an opportunity to put my opinions to an informal test, just to see if I'm blowing smoke.

Yesterday I drove back from a work trip out of town. The drive back was about 469 km, and I started out with a full tank of Shell V-Power 91 fuel. Today, after a bit of city driving to run some errands, I had 1/8 of a tank left before I filled up again at 490 km. The highway part of my trip was mostly with the cruise control set about 5 kph over the speed limit, around 115, with a few faster bursts to pass, and one or two smoke breaks.

The last 30 km, roughly, was at around 130 kph. I really needed to take a leak.

By my calculation:
7/8 of a tank used @ 490 km
8 * 490 / 7 = 560 km

Therefore (assuming my fuel guage is halfway accurate), I should have gotten 560 km from a tank of Shell V-Power gas.

This more or less jibes with my previous feeling that I was getting better mileage with the V-Power 100% gasoline vs. the watered-down 90% gasoline.

The notable thing about V-Power gas is that it contains zero ethanol. Regular 87 octane, it says on the pump, "May contain up to 10% ethanol".

Of course, the real concern is what is the cost difference?

My experience is that if I got 500 km out of a tank of regular gas, I'd be damn lucky with highway driving. Most times it's closer to around 450 km. Other Ranger / B4000 owners can chime in here. But I'll be reeeeal generous and call it 480 km.

Sooo, the price at the pump when I filled up @ Shell this evening was as follows:

Bronze 87 "May contain up to 10% ethanol" -- 116.9
Silver 89 "May contain up to 5% ethanol" -- 125.9
V-Power 91 "Contains no ethanol" -- 130.9

Percentage price difference between Bronze and V-Power = +12%

Percentage mileage difference between Bronze and V-Power
480 vs. 560 = +16.6%

Premature and unscientific conclusion: Using the expensive gas actually saves you money. Although V-Power costs 12% more, you get 16% better mileage.

Also, since V-Power contains more additives that aren't useless and harmful crap like ethanol, you save money by not having to buy bottles of fuel system cleaner.

Disclaimer: obviously this is a just a casual one-off test, and it's not terribly scientific. However, if nothing else, my driving is pretty darn consistent (except when I've got to pee, then I pin it).

Also, don't drag in the red herring of fuel octane rating. That'll have no effect. 99% of engines are quite happy with 87 octane. The main point is that V-Power isn't watered down with magic David Suzuki treehugger fluid. It's 100% gasoline.

Let the sissy slap fighting begin!

If Princess Auto were a real girl, I'd ask her to marry me.
b4000 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 24 (permalink) Old 04-23-2012, 11:13 PM
 
Viper238's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Woodstock, Ont
Posts: 3,353
Send a message via MSN to Viper238
how many litres do you purchase per tank?
Viper238 is offline  
post #3 of 24 (permalink) Old 04-24-2012, 12:04 AM Thread Starter
 
b4000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northeastern BC
Posts: 996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viper238 View Post
how many litres do you purchase per tank?
Tonight I bought 58.582 litres.
So, about 12 litres / 100 km, mostly highway this time. That's really good for my truck.

Tank capacity as listed in owner's manual is 73.8 L.

But this raises a discrepency.

58.6 / 73.8 = 79.6 % empty tank.

And by my sooper-dooper accurate fuel guage:

7 / 8 = 87.5 % empty tank.

Doh ...

Okay, I'll modify my conclusion to say I probably break even by using real gas. Heck, even if it cost me more, it's worth it just to give environmentalists the finger.

If Princess Auto were a real girl, I'd ask her to marry me.
b4000 is offline  
 
post #4 of 24 (permalink) Old 04-24-2012, 01:05 AM
 
Viper238's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Woodstock, Ont
Posts: 3,353
Send a message via MSN to Viper238
If you use the liters you purchase and convert that to L/100kms and stay away from the % stuff till the end you will get more accurate number.

Also make sure your filling the tank up to about the same spot.
Viper238 is offline  
post #5 of 24 (permalink) Old 04-24-2012, 01:53 AM
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alberta
Posts: 291
IMO, you should get a bit better gas mileage than 12 L/100 km. I am assuming a 4.0 L Ranger 4x4 auto and 4.10 gears. No mods.

In early March, I did a moderately long trip on the hwy.....I was down to 11.6 L/100 km....would be even lower if I ran it dry (probably a 1/3 of the tank was leftl between fillups). That's with studded winter tires and 250-300 pounds of sand bags over the rear axle. Driving at the speed limit of up to 100 kph. Used 87 octane gas from either Mohawk, Husky or Esso. With tonneau cover.

Dave

2010 Ford Ranger FX4
Armaguard sprayed on bed liner
Truxedo Low Pro QT tonneau cover
Studded General Altimax Arctic P245/75-16 winter tires on black steelies
DavidY is offline  
post #6 of 24 (permalink) Old 04-24-2012, 05:37 PM
 
Destructicon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Stoney Creek, Ontario
Posts: 1,527
Garage
I did something similar, a few years ago. My conclusions were if you had a smaller engine, ie. 4 cylinders, the payoff was large enough to warrant using high octane, 6 cylinders v type engine was pretty much breakeven although the performance was enhanced, inline 6 cylinder engines and v8 engines didn't get a positive savings but had a greater negative savings, meaning you didn't gain but lost less. The hardest part is keeping your foot off the pedal because of the performance gains. Retuning a v8 computer may get you too breakeven point but it won't want 87 anymore. The only difference was I did it with Sunoco Ultra 94. Wish I saved the numbers because I got to do this with several vehicles and engine configurations.

Electrician, powered by Tim Hortons, brought to you by Ford. Java Inside!
The Past - 1976 F-350 Crew Cab 1992 - 2006 RIP
The Past - 1995 F-150 XL Enforcer All Gear Drive 2008 - 2015
The Present - 1993 F-250 XLT Turbo Diesel Super Cab 4x4 2015 - ?
The Future - Who knows?
Destructicon is offline  
post #7 of 24 (permalink) Old 04-24-2012, 09:31 PM Thread Starter
 
b4000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northeastern BC
Posts: 996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viper238 View Post
If you use the liters you purchase and convert that to L/100kms and stay away from the % stuff till the end you will get more accurate number.

Also make sure your filling the tank up to about the same spot.
Yeah, I was getting tired and lazy.

Still, I would have gotten significantly more miles out of the tank than with 10% ethanol fuel, no matter how I slice it. I figure anywhere from 60 to 100 km, depending on how I drive.

DavidY- I've found that what kills mileage with these trucks more than anything (and why I only got 12l/100 km) is city driving and going over 100 kph, and I did a bit of city driving on that tank.

If I could lope along at around 80 kph on a highway, I'm sure the mileage would increase a lot. You start going faster than that, and I find the fuel consumption increases exponentially. These things have the aerodynamics of a brick.

If Princess Auto were a real girl, I'd ask her to marry me.
b4000 is offline  
post #8 of 24 (permalink) Old 04-24-2012, 11:10 PM
 
Viper238's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Woodstock, Ont
Posts: 3,353
Send a message via MSN to Viper238
i noticed that with the big brother cinder block as well.

anything over 100 it goes down. best is roughly 80-85 i found.
Viper238 is offline  
post #9 of 24 (permalink) Old 04-24-2012, 11:55 PM
 
FX4Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: London, ON
Posts: 23
idk why everyone thinks ethanol is a bad thing, it has great cleaning and anti knock qualities, which is why they use it. if you could run it pure you would get worse economy because the stoich on it is much lower, 9:1 i think. though pure it has a very high octane rating, go to a supermodified race and you will see how great the stuff is in those cars

07 FX4 Level II Ranger
Locked/Lifted/Tuned, and some other toys

89 Bronco II
Rust in Pieces
FX4Ranger is offline  
post #10 of 24 (permalink) Old 04-27-2012, 04:31 PM Thread Starter
 
b4000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northeastern BC
Posts: 996
Quote:
Originally Posted by FX4Ranger View Post
idk why everyone thinks ethanol is a bad thing, it has great cleaning and anti knock qualities, which is why they use it. if you could run it pure you would get worse economy because the stoich on it is much lower, 9:1 i think. though pure it has a very high octane rating, go to a supermodified race and you will see how great the stuff is in those cars
I disagree. Any hypothetical benefits of ethanol is not why it is put in gasoline. It is put in gasoline because it is government mandated -- not because customers or the marketplace wanted it. More like in spite of the public's wishes. And it was mandated for some very misguided reasons by politicians for political reasons -- not engineers.

Ethanol has 1/3 less energy per volume compared to gasoline.

Ethanol is corrosive in nature, and in older vehicles or in high enough concentration, it will FUBAR the fuel system and engine.

Ethanol production is highly subsidized by taxpayers.

Ethanol is very energy inefficient, as it takes more energy to produce than it produces.

It's all well and good that ethanol is used in racing cars, but I'm not driving a racing car. Also, unlike race-car drivers, I'm not competing in a race where winning is the main priority -- not fuel economy and getting the best value for my money when purchasing fuel.

If Princess Auto were a real girl, I'd ask her to marry me.
b4000 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gas Mileage lynger F-150 Pre-1997 Forum 15 04-16-2010 08:38 PM
Actual Mileage with 6.4 HTRDDSL Super Duty Forum 24 11-12-2008 12:15 PM
Fuel Mileage redbull2008 Ranger Forum 34 08-17-2008 05:53 PM
Fuel mileage truckpilot F-150 2004 to 2008 Forum 8 08-13-2008 03:12 PM
Mileage on your truck fordtough.ca Gas Engines 4 06-17-2007 11:01 PM

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome