Petronas RON95 extra, can be used? pls share your experience

[initialM]

Thanks Haywire, that was a quick one. Some told me older cars should use better fuel possible so as to not burden the engine, all sorts of 'hear say' and having spent so much on my cars, i am just sceptical to try the 95. But looking at this thread, it seems many of you had tried and satisfied with it. Perhaps i'll give it a try.

My only concern is ron 97 really better for engine ? Or myth ?

Even at fuel cap stated Ron 91 to 98 acceptable. Why worry? Better to change engine oil regularly to keep the engine healthy

 

[haywire]

Recent conversation with our members here who works in the oil and gas business, the 95 and 97 came from the same refined petrol from Petronas or Shell (only 2 brand refineries here even the esso and others are using these fuels) To make it 95 or 97 they add in the subsequent mixtures/additives to make it 95 or 97. Not an expert here but thats what I heard, could be talking complete rubbish here. Somebody please tell me.

Also these 95 and 97 thingies refer to the knocking properties, your car has knock sensors, which will alter the way the engine is run based on the type of Ron. My car at least says I can use Ron91-98, I tend to believe what BMW says rather than some rumours.

 

[EuJax]

I think i read that somewhere as well. Thanks again. I believe in BMW as well of course. Just that always wanted to give my best to the car but if paying the premium for 97 really dont make any difference to the engine, i might as well save that extra and put it in something else for the car. Thats my thought. Appreciate your comment and info, thanks again.

 

[JFT63]

Yeap haywire, should trust our BMW engineers than rumours..:top::top:

 

[seewai]

Ini gambar dari paultan.org baik punya:.......

 

[Geoffhead]

Been using shell 95 for 2 years now on my 545. Can't feel any difference compared to V power.
In summery, go with 95.

 

[abuhasan]

alrdy 2 weeks wit 95xtra
a gud alternative cos RM1 less than 97vp.
engine quite stable but hard to exceed 180km/hr wit D drive
after change M, then only can accelerate to exceed 200km/hr

 

[Jerman]

Been using shell 95 for 2 years now on my 545. Can't feel any difference compared to V power.
In summery, go with 95.

Try two full tanks of Petronas Primax 95 and bet you will feel the difference!

 

[EL118]

I ve been using RON95 for the past few years and recently changed to RON97. i can feel that there is slight difference in power compared to RON97. i asked myself that since i am willing to spend on BMW to enjoy the power, so is it wise to save on the fuel that might reduce power? (though probably only few HP).

Assume monthly travell 2,500km. at fuel consumption of 11l/100km. the savings of using RON95 @ 1.9 compared to RON97 @ 2.9 would be RM275 per month and RM3,300 per year. quite substantial actually. so again is to individual 's choice!

 

[lwloh]

hello all, just to add from my experience in the O&G. company shell used to add additional additives for the V Power. Additives from Repco if i still remember correctly. So whether it is much better or not, depends on what you feel la. we all just pay additional for additives.

 

[Fireuz]

Recent conversation with our members here who works in the oil and gas business, the 95 and 97 came from the same refined petrol from Petronas or Shell (only 2 brand refineries here even the esso and others are using these fuels) To make it 95 or 97 they add in the subsequent mixtures/additives to make it 95 or 97. Not an expert here but thats what I heard, could be talking complete rubbish here. Somebody please tell me.

Also these 95 and 97 thingies refer to the knocking properties, your car has knock sensors, which will alter the way the engine is run based on the type of Ron. My car at least says I can use Ron91-98, I tend to believe what BMW says rather than some rumours.

Yes.. correct.. correct... You're correct... Ron95 and ron97 not different by energy content hence this do not enhance power. Ron95 and ron97 different in anti-knock agent & chemical which smoothen the combustion in engines. If you're driving turbo charged car you might feel the slight increase as higher Ron allow greater compression of fuel air mixture allowing more power. Otherwise, your pocket the one that feel the different.

Most of people says, they getting more power when using RON97 is only to sedapkan hati je.. They try to make it worth for money...

For me, RON96 is always the best.. (half tank RON95 + another half RON97) :top:

 

[Apiz]

now im sticking to ron95 extra ...its okay i guess... but my mom and dad still using ROn97 Vpower racing everyday ... i dun have that much money LOL!

 

[Eggie86]

Petronas convert.

Single handedly one of the best decision I had made.

No longer using Shell ever since my first 95Xtra tank.

 

[B33mEr]

If i'm not mistaken BMW rated output for M54 engines (i.e. M54B30 - 231hp) is based on RON98. Anything lower than 98 will result in loss of power due to the DME adjusting the ignitions timings. The question is just how much power loss are we talking about if using RON95? Could be as little as 1% or up to 5% . As mentioned by bro haywire it all depends on the additives put by petrol companies. And yes it's safe to use RON95 :4:

 

[B33mEr]

Petronas convert.

Single handedly one of the best decision I had made.

No longer using Shell ever since my first 95Xtra tank.

Have you tried esso95?

 

[EL118]

Yes.. correct.. correct... You're correct... Ron95 and ron97 not different by energy content hence this do not enhance power. Ron95 and ron97 different in anti-knock agent & chemical which smoothen the combustion in engines. If you're driving turbo charged car you might feel the slight increase as higher Ron allow greater compression of fuel air mixture allowing more power. Otherwise, your pocket the one that feel the different.

Most of people says, they getting more power when using RON97 is only to sedapkan hati je.. They try to make it worth for money...

For me, RON96 is always the best.. (half tank RON95 + another half RON97) :top:

Hi friend, if u think no difference in ron95 and ron97, why r u mixing 95 & 97 to get 96? nothing better to do?

 

[Fireuz]

Hi friend, if u think no difference in ron95 and ron97, why r u mixing 95 & 97 to get 96? nothing better to do?

If you understand my statement, yes, I admit that the the higher Ron will provide the higher compression of fuel air mixture. But as bro B33mEr told us, the loss of power between this two Rons is very little (on normal city driving). Why would fuel company need to add special additive to Ron 97 and not Ron 95? Reason simple, for most car they don't feel the difference so this is bad for marketing. So might as well add extra additive to enhance the power. So you feel the difference in power most probably from the extra additive which Ron 95 do not have, not because of difference in Ron. But, this is clearly depends on what type of car you're driving (turbo or n/a), the compression situation, and some other reasons.

Back to the ques, I mix both two because I'm using my car in high compression mode most of the time which I need the addictive to improve my compression in my combustion system (long distance drive). But for the normal city driving, I will fill up my tank full with Ron95 for sure, or Ron93 if there's any..:30:

 

[aoch88]

How did you mix them? You mean you'll pump half with RON95 and then RON07 at the same time? Does it really work to mix this way and any pre-cautions or drawbacks in the long run?

 

[Fireuz]

Since both fuel is Ron, and not diesel, or any other type of petroleum product, so there's no special instruction or pre-caution need to be taken bro, .. Just doing it by follow your heart.. But must remember, do not smoking :smokin:while refueling and turn your ignition off :wink:..

My normal practice, I will empty my tank first before refuel it with Ron97, followed by Ron95... Then :vroam: Vroammmm....

 

[2wenty6]

Thanks Haywire, that was a quick one. Some told me older cars should use better fuel possible so as to not burden the engine, all sorts of 'hear say' and having spent so much on my cars, i am just sceptical to try the 95. But looking at this thread, it seems many of you had tried and satisfied with it. Perhaps i'll give it a try.

My only concern is ron 97 really better for engine ? Or myth ?

The knock sensors will compensate for the fuel quality, you're not gonna toast your engine. On my m50b25, the petrol cap specifies RON 91-98.
Whether 97 is better for engine, more myth than fact. May have additional cleaner additives in there compared to 95 of the same brand, but I believe it doesn't make that big a difference.

In the US where petrol prices aren't regulated, the difference in price between a name-brand petrol (Philips 66, Shell, etc) vs a budget brand (Loaf n Jug, Kum n Go) is the amount of additives and cleaner in the petrol. Apparently the base stock (i.e petrol) are all the same, what separates them is the brand specific additives.

If you really read into what the RON rating actually means (knock resistance), then from that point of view, 97 will be a waste if your engine will not implode on 95. Especially so if you're just daily driving..

So much myth and hearsay and very few people bother to find out for themselves..I may not be 100% correct, but using 95 or 97 is within BMW's specification. :top: