I knew it! I'm in Kelowna, I've felt as though Chevron not only produces low power, but it is unreliable in the way it produces that power. Some times the car would completely fall on its face, feeling more like a Tiguan than a Golf R. In our previous 392 Challenger Chevron produced the same results. The car would feel, seat of the pants SLOW. And this was further noticed with Hot ambient temps. I reached out to Shell, Petro, Husky and Chevron for the RON ratings of their highest rated premium fuel. Shell responded proudly, immediately with "96 to 97" RON depending on variables for their 91 V Power. Petro was a day behind responding. 98 RON with their "Ultra 94 10% ethanol" and 94 RON with their 91 10% Ethanol. Husky took a week to respond. They were 94 RON on their 91, and say it didn't contain ethanol even though the pump says it does. Chevron responded with a link for another email address. No response from that address. I reached out two more times via e-mail with no response and only after a phone call.... they responded with they "did not know" Shell V Power FTW!
Would have been more accurate to do the dyno test same day - same fuel. Winter fuel isn’t the same as summer fuel- Way too many factors that play into effect here .
When there is discrepancy, it is inconclusive. I run the Shell. As I remember, they had claimed the nitrogen mix would be absent, and in need, of some oxygen, so molecules would bond and pull in more oxygen. Works great in track testing- with added VP octane and VP fuel additives.
Great video! Have been trying to tell people this for years. Chevron may claim a tested AKI rating of 94, but every local tuner I have talked to has said Shell 91 is far more reliable in our area for the least timing pull and lowest chance of a bad tank of gas. Just wish we had access to better choices. Someone get me some real 93/4 or e85 on the island, then we will see some serious power!!
Bret you might want to ask Greg about the 30hp increase. He recalibrated the dyno and it shows higher numbers by like 10%. My HP went from 165whp to almost 180whp with zero changes to engine or fueling. I actually went from a 5 speed FWD to a 6 speed AWD, so I should have had some loss. He then showed me the numbers at the old calibration and sure enough I had some loss. So I do believe your numbers are off due to this.
This was a cool test. Shell always pulls the best for me. Chevron runs smooth, has a nice off idle response and a nice induction note, but the economy and power is always better with Shell. You pretty much have to run Shell.
I would like to mention that the intake air temperature you are reading on the P3 Cars is NOT turbo inlet temperature, but throttle inlet temperature. To improve and provide a stable air temperature, an upgraded intercooler is a better upgrade path.
I have a 370Z and run either Chevron Supreme 91, Mobil 1 Synergy 91 and Shell Nitro+ V-power. I consistently get better mileage and a little better feeling on the butt dyno with the Shell.
I’ve been having major issues with my 93 tune on my 15 5.0 and I’m running 94, it seems better with the 91 tune and the dead spots seemed to disappear with a 3 point octane booster. I’m going to run V power next weekend and see if it helps my quarter mile times because the Co-op 91 definitely did by almost 2/10’s but da can effect that a lot too.
I started using shell 91, I notice there’s a sweet smell comes from the exhaust at startup, and some griesh smoke last for about 4-5 second ! Is that common with shell ?
Well sounds like the chevron station is a private ownership station and you got a tank of regular 87 octane.. They do that to ripeoff folks. Modern autos ecm will adjust for the fuel. And the station owner makes more money.
Kudos for testing but there are several inaccuracies. Drive train loss won't be anywhere near 20-30%. Closer to 12-15% for a fwd based awd car like the golf R. The A/F ratio is not 14.7:1 when under full throttle. It's going to be much richer, especially with a turbo car. More like 11 or 12:1. Unfortunately given the long time between runs, this just isn't valid testing. A recent test done by a CDN YT channel found Shell 91 caused significant timing retardation and HP losses.
@@twowheels87 But chassis dynos are notoriously poor at giving accurate crank hp figures, there are so many factors after the crank, gearbox oil temp/viscosity, diff oil temp/viscosity, tyre temp, tyre pressure. You can run an engine on a engine dyno and get repeatable results on each run, try that with a chassis dyno!
@@DepakoteMeister Using a chassis dyno as a tool to compare wheel horsepower and torque is valid if it is done on the same car and under the same conditions. Corrections can be made for different temperatures, air density and humidity.
Very confusing since someone else made the same test and results showed shevron was better and increased power .. in this video it’s the opposite,go figure. By the way the music in this video is extremely annoying.
It’s actually quite simple, I live on Vancouver island. He lives in Vancouver. Our fuel is not the same quality. The island gets a lower quality fuel. Mainland gets an entirely different source of fuel and it’s a better quality. The music has to be something copyright free/ royalty free. So it’s hard to find anything that’s not annoying. But Do you know what I find annoying? Negative people! No wonder I quite making videos… thanks bud
I've been using Chevron gas for years on all my vehicle's. Like 20 years plus and my cars and trucks always run smooth and zero issues. Same I saw a video where Chevron made more power than shell . Someone is not telling the truth or something is not being done right
@@superior3384 depends on where you buy your fuel. On Vancouver island we get different fuel than Vancouver. In Vancouver chevron is a lot better. Also depends on the engine. In my opinion Turbocharged engines run better on island shell vs island chevron. Where as carbureted Sport bikes run better on island chevron. Also why would I not be truthful about the results? What would be the point in spending my own money, waisting my own time to not be truthful?
I knew it! I'm in Kelowna, I've felt as though Chevron not only produces low power, but it is unreliable in the way it produces that power. Some times the car would completely fall on its face, feeling more like a Tiguan than a Golf R. In our previous 392 Challenger Chevron produced the same results. The car would feel, seat of the pants SLOW. And this was further noticed with Hot ambient temps.
I reached out to Shell, Petro, Husky and Chevron for the RON ratings of their highest rated premium fuel.
Shell responded proudly, immediately with "96 to 97" RON depending on variables for their 91 V Power.
Petro was a day behind responding. 98 RON with their "Ultra 94 10% ethanol" and 94 RON with their 91 10% Ethanol.
Husky took a week to respond. They were 94 RON on their 91, and say it didn't contain ethanol even though the pump says it does.
Chevron responded with a link for another email address. No response from that address. I reached out two more times via e-mail with no response and only after a phone call.... they responded with they "did not know"
Shell V Power FTW!
Here at Puerto Rico Shell Premium is 93-octane. Weird.
Would have been more accurate to do the dyno test same day - same fuel.
Winter fuel isn’t the same as summer fuel- Way too many factors that play into effect here .
When there is discrepancy, it is inconclusive. I run the Shell. As I remember, they had claimed the nitrogen mix
would be absent, and in need, of some oxygen, so molecules would bond and pull in more oxygen. Works great in track
testing- with added VP octane and VP fuel additives.
Great video! Have been trying to tell people this for years. Chevron may claim a tested AKI rating of 94, but every local tuner I have talked to has said Shell 91 is far more reliable in our area for the least timing pull and lowest chance of a bad tank of gas. Just wish we had access to better choices. Someone get me some real 93/4 or e85 on the island, then we will see some serious power!!
Better detergent too
Would love to see a dyno for Chevron 94 summer blend for a fairer comparison. Can't wait to see which intake you decide to go with!
Bret you might want to ask Greg about the 30hp increase. He recalibrated the dyno and it shows higher numbers by like 10%. My HP went from 165whp to almost 180whp with zero changes to engine or fueling. I actually went from a 5 speed FWD to a 6 speed AWD, so I should have had some loss. He then showed me the numbers at the old calibration and sure enough I had some loss. So I do believe your numbers are off due to this.
A back to back test of Shell 91 vs Chevron 94 would be good. Can’t compare winter and summer gasoline blends.
Very articulate.. Great job.. easy and to the point!
Sergio Garcia Thank you!
Mobil is best for regular gas. Shell is best for premium.
Get rid of The thrasher music it's distracting and I would like to hear the engine
Right. I watched about half the video. Couldn't take any more of that crap, garbage music. It causes me to suspect the guy's independence.
Great video. Lose the music.
I always felt like shell what the best and more consistent. Awesome video
Nice doggo😆
This was a cool test. Shell always pulls the best for me. Chevron runs smooth, has a nice off idle response and a nice induction note, but the economy and power is always better with Shell. You pretty much have to run Shell.
As others already pointed out, you should be comparing fuel from the same time of year, since the formulation varies through the year.
How about testing mobile premium gasoline on the dyno
Great Video, very professional. Music is sometimes a bit annoying but content is awesome.
Thanks for the important fuel testing research!
I would like to mention that the intake air temperature you are reading on the P3 Cars is NOT turbo inlet temperature, but throttle inlet temperature. To improve and provide a stable air temperature, an upgraded intercooler is a better upgrade path.
I have a 370Z and run either Chevron Supreme 91, Mobil 1 Synergy 91 and Shell Nitro+ V-power. I consistently get better mileage and a little better feeling on the butt dyno with the Shell.
Same here with shell 👍🏼
It seems like the ECU tuned the timing automatically to more advanced since it has better gas
Nice vid. Thanks for this.
Thanks dude
That’s why when I put in chevron 94 I feel the car is slower. Did you notice any difference between the two power wise when you’re driving?
I’ve been having major issues with my 93 tune on my 15 5.0 and I’m running 94, it seems better with the 91 tune and the dead spots seemed to disappear with a 3 point octane booster. I’m going to run V power next weekend and see if it helps my quarter mile times because the Co-op 91 definitely did by almost 2/10’s but da can effect that a lot too.
I'm surprised your to the wheel power is just slightly higher then a tuned jetta
I started using shell 91, I notice there’s a sweet smell comes from the exhaust at startup, and some griesh smoke last for about 4-5 second ! Is that common with shell ?
Use Chevron if you want your engine to last forever
Well sounds like the chevron station is a private ownership station and you got a tank of regular 87 octane.. They do that to ripeoff folks. Modern autos ecm will adjust for the fuel.
And the station owner makes more money.
Kudos for testing but there are several inaccuracies. Drive train loss won't be anywhere near 20-30%. Closer to 12-15% for a fwd based awd car like the golf R. The A/F ratio is not 14.7:1 when under full throttle. It's going to be much richer, especially with a turbo car. More like 11 or 12:1. Unfortunately given the long time between runs, this just isn't valid testing. A recent test done by a CDN YT channel found Shell 91 caused significant timing retardation and HP losses.
Are ypu aware that it takes about 150 km for the ECU to fully adapt to a fuel ?
vwbora26 The two tests were months apart
3:19 in the video is his gas log.
Good vid! Love the shirt, where'd you get it?
bluesnyth I don’t remember. If I find it I will repost. But there’s a lot of good stuff on sun frog
@@twowheels87 what time do you have? Unitronic Stage 1+,2?
Try some Lucas UCL.
I bet your car is tuned for 91 not 94
94 tune should be able to add more timing equalling more power
In this video the car is bone stock/factory tune
Costco 91 For the win!
@@deleted2462 why is it bad?
Did you lose your warranty since you did a Dyno?
Rizky No, nothing wrong with going on a dyno. It’s just a rolling road
You can't use a chassis dyno to get accurate engine hp figures.
DepakoteMeister I was only trying measure a difference in fuel quality. Using the same dyno and only changing the fuel
@@twowheels87 But chassis dynos are notoriously poor at giving accurate crank hp figures, there are so many factors after the crank, gearbox oil temp/viscosity, diff oil temp/viscosity, tyre temp, tyre pressure. You can run an engine on a engine dyno and get repeatable results on each run, try that with a chassis dyno!
@@DepakoteMeister Using a chassis dyno as a tool to compare wheel horsepower and torque is valid if it is done on the same car and under the same conditions. Corrections can be made for different temperatures, air density and humidity.
You're driving a golf cart
Lose the " music ".
Chevron
WHY THE HEAVY ROCK MUSIC!! DROP THE TUNES AND JUST GET ON WITH MAKING THE VIDIO FFS
I call bullshit you wouldn’t even make that difference with race fuel
Very confusing since someone else made the same test and results showed shevron was better and increased power .. in this video it’s the opposite,go figure. By the way the music in this video is extremely annoying.
It’s actually quite simple, I live on Vancouver island. He lives in Vancouver. Our fuel is not the same quality. The island gets a lower quality fuel. Mainland gets an entirely different source of fuel and it’s a better quality. The music has to be something copyright free/ royalty free. So it’s hard to find anything that’s not annoying. But Do you know what I find annoying? Negative people! No wonder I quite making videos… thanks bud
I've been using Chevron gas for years on all my vehicle's. Like 20 years plus and my cars and trucks always run smooth and zero issues. Same I saw a video where Chevron made more power than shell . Someone is not telling the truth or something is not being done right
@@superior3384 depends on where you buy your fuel. On Vancouver island we get different fuel than Vancouver. In Vancouver chevron is a lot better. Also depends on the engine. In my opinion Turbocharged engines run better on island shell vs island chevron. Where as carbureted Sport bikes run better on island chevron. Also why would I not be truthful about the results? What would be the point in spending my own money, waisting my own time to not be truthful?