Does Costco Petrol Result In Reduced Mileage?

Irate Monk on 09/03/2018 - 17:10
Last edited 09/03/2018 - 17:11

I'm increasingly hearing from auto mechanics and also car owners, that fuel from Costco and Liberty pumps result in lower milage for vehicles. This is rrespective of Regular/ Premium, when similarly compared with other dealers. Allegedly the above said establishments sell low Octane fuel. Another reported tell-tale was increased engine knocking. The sub par fuel hypothesis corroborates my personal observations too- our otherwise reliable Camry Altiese currently returns an average 4.5 km/litre- way too low- even for a V6. In retrospection, this deterioration in efficiency was noticeable after we switched to Costco fuel for savings. Plus, we intermittently tops up from our neighborhood Liberty too.

Any OzBargainers have had similar experiences? Which brands give maximum value? Having learned that cheap petrol would not lead to real savings, if/when it gives poor milage, I would appreciate the OzB collective wisdom on this.

Thanks for reading.

Automotive

Related Stores

Costco Wholesale
Costco Wholesale

Comments

  • dcep on 09/03/2018 - 17:16
    +1

    e10 ?

    • Irate Monk on 09/03/2018 - 17:21

      Do they sell E10?

      • npc on 09/03/2018 - 17:22
        +1

        Yes, and it is hard not to notice if your are filling at Costco.

        • Irate Monk on 09/03/2018 - 17:26

          Thank you andyvolk
          This is info I can use.

  • npc on 09/03/2018 - 17:19
    +2

    For me it seems that your car is broken as averaging approx. 20 l per 100 km. This is way too high for camry.

    And yes, liters of petrol consumed per 100 kms travelled is the proper unit of measuring the light vehicle fuel consumption in this country.

    edit - im averaging 10 with 3.5 V6

    • Irate Monk on 09/03/2018 - 17:24

      Agreed. But unit of measurement notwithstanding, here I'm talking about the noticed dip in efficiency after we switched to Costco. Driving behaviour, the routine of vehicle use, all remain constant. No other variables.

      • Scrooge McDuck on 10/03/2018 - 09:46
        +1

        Let's rule out causes leading with the most obvious:

        • Does everyone drive the vehicle with the handbrake completely off?
        • Does anyone rest their foot on the brake pedal whilst driving?
        • Is the Check Engine light on, on the dashboard?
        • Are the power delivery and sound of the engine normal?

        My guess is faulty sensor or hose, but we'll get to that…

        • Irate Monk on 10/03/2018 - 15:29

          Not driving with handbrake on, No resting feet on brake pedal, and no… no warning lights of any kind lit up.
          Yes; power delivery, and engine sounds seems normal.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 10/03/2018 - 15:47

          @Irate Monk:

          The next step is to check for any faults using the OBD2 connector.

        • Irate Monk on 10/03/2018 - 16:33

          @Scrooge McDuck: Once the mechanic handed me the car keys, I straight away connected the OBD2 connector and started up. The ABS warning light started flashing! So, I disconnected.

          Now checking the Web, this seems a common problem- not just with the ELM327. Anyhow, will get it scan for errors again, later.

          Gotta install the Xiaomi 70 minutes dash cam as well….

          BTW, The mechanic had replaced an almost completely ruined air filter.
          Hope the dirty filter was the root of my low mileage problem, and that I'll now see an improvement.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 10/03/2018 - 17:25

          @Irate Monk:

          Hope the dirty filter was the root of my low mileage problem,

          That's a slim chance. The filter should be replaced at its service interval. Has the car been serviced regularly?

        • Irate Monk on 10/03/2018 - 17:56

          @Scrooge McDuck: Yes; never missed a service (always within +100-200 kms of the recommended intervals), or the recommended parts replacements.

          CMI Toyota had been servicing this car, but the service logs show no air filter having been replaced in the last 60 K kms!
          They had not given any heads up on its condition, in the last three periodic services I had with them either.

          Lousy bunch.

    • Scrooge McDuck on 10/03/2018 - 09:31

      4.5 km/L = 22 L/100 km

    • pegaxs on 10/03/2018 - 10:34
      -2

      liters of petrol consumed per 100 kms travelled is the proper unit of measuring the light vehicle fuel consumption in this country.

      Source? What regulation states that? Is that an ADR regulation? Maybe something NMI oversees? Cant seem to find it on Standards Aus. website. Curious to know where it is documented that lt/100 is the "proper" way to measure fuel consumption.

      It's not the "proper" unit of measurement, it's just the one that people have the most contact with. It's just a simpler way of looking at fuel usage for people who cant maths very well and want a system that shows "big= bad, low = good" system for consumption. That's all it is. And it's per 100, because per 1 would read like "0.082/km, and little numbers don’t seem to convey information that people want. Why not /1000km??

      It would be a good unit to measure with IF your car did exactly units of 100km/tank. Unfortunately, I fill my car with "liters" litres of fuel. If I want to know how far my tank will take me, I multiply the number of fuels by the number of consumptions. It takes 1lt to go 8.2km. I put 60 litres in my tank. 60x8.2 = expected km. If I want to go somewhere and want to know how much fuel I will use, its a reverse of that. 863km drive, divide by average consumption gives me how many fuels I will use.

      With the goofy lt/100km, lets say you get 8.2lt/100… it's, 60lt in, 60/8.2 = how many blocks of 100 you have. It's a silly system, because if you don’t fill your tank or you put an odd amount in or destinations are not in neat block of 100km away, it's harder to calculate. Multiplying in your head is always much easier than dividing.

      And as someone who checks fuel usage and fuel burn on a very regular basis, this whole lt/100km is a bullshit measurement. So, OP is right on a fuel consumption thread to quote km/lt, not lt/100…

      • npc on 10/03/2018 - 15:25
        -1

        Too many words here used by you to explain not quite accurate use of word proper. And yes, common might have been used by me instead of proper.

        One can certainly measure his bodyweight in ounces and volume of the fridge in barrels. But this behaviour could be a good indication of underlying psychological issues.

        Same with the fuel efficiency. Why on earth would you use something that needs conversion to the commonly accepted unit of measure.

        • pegaxs on 10/03/2018 - 16:57

          Unfortunately, I am all out of crayons and butchers paper to explain "in a simple way" why things just are.

          So, it has gone from "proper" to "commonly accepted"? It wasn’t long ago that the "commonly accepted" way to measure fuel consumption was "miles to the gallon" (or km to the litre for metric people…)

          I have outlined in my post above why car makers use "lt/100km" It's because it's easier for dumb folk to get their head around. Big number = bad, little number = good.

          The "correct" version of lt/100km is lt/km. But if I said to you, my car get 0.082lt/km and that another gets 0.095lt/km, these numbers are too small for simpletons to interpret them into anything meaningful. Same for lt/1000km. Min gets 82, yours gets 95! sounds MASSIVE! so lt/100km makes it nice and easy. It's not incorrect, but the reason for it being more common is so slow people can get their brains to readily interpret it.

          And comparing an x/z measurement is nowhere near the same as weighing a fridge in ounces or coconuts. To be the same, you can either measure "fridges per house", or "houses per 100 fridges". I know what one I would use…

          If one is to track fuel "usage", then the easier way to do this is through using km/lt. If you wanted to work out how much fuel you would use in a trip, you would use km/lt. If I was doing any dyno consumption tests, it would get measured in km/lt. If i wanted to test a car, i would put 1lt of fuel in and see how car it would go.

          But this is OzB and the internet and people can't be educated, so, if it helps you to easily work out how your car is going to use lt/100km, you go at it. The car makes had people like you in mind when this system was being written into the cars systems…

          conversion to the commonly accepted unit of measure.

          It doesn’t need conversion, it is its own unit of measurement and lt/100km not the "commonly accepted" unit of measure, it is just "another" unit of measure (albeit for simple people.)

          You just keep using the one that you understand and helps you.

        • JIMB0 on 10/03/2018 - 17:09

          @pegaxs: I prefer to use rods/hogshead for measuring fuel consumption.

        • pegaxs on 10/03/2018 - 17:19

          @JIMB0:

          At work, I personally use UK floz/4970chain…

          At work, we are looking at a software update for next year. We might even go to cups/54nautical miles…

        • npc on 10/03/2018 - 17:31
          +1

          @pegaxs: Man, take it easy with typing:) Why do you need to overcomplicate this or show off the the skills in the multi dimensional units of measure and multiplication.

          All modern cars are using either l/100km or miles per gallon as the default UOM - it makes it easy to compare the figure at a glance and tell somebody that his or her Camry is bloody thirsty and needs a repair. You can certainly use whatever you think is right within the limitations of math, physics and maybe SI system. Free country.

          I've seen a number of people referring to $ per 100km and were VERY confident that they are the smartest people on the earth when it comes to measuring the fuel efficiency.

          Also:
          - standard UOM for volume is m^3, but somehow the common household volume metric is litre, which is 1000 times smaller… never wondered why?
          - L or l is a proper haha commonly used to represent litres not lt.

        • pegaxs on 10/03/2018 - 20:02
          -2

          @andyvolk:

          or miles per gallon (aka: kilometers per litre) as the default UOM

          So, it's gone from "proper" to "commonly accepted" to "also used"…

          standard UOM for volume is m^3, but somehow the common household volume metric is liter litre…

          Because "cubic" is the measurement of volume. How about cubic cm. How about cubic mm. Cubic metre is not the "standard".

          Litre is a measurement of 1000 "cubic" millimetres. And I'm all to happy for you to go into you local corner store and order 0.003 cubic metres of milk.

          Anyway, like I said, your going off topic and no amount of information is going to make a difference. You dig your heels in, ok.

          And for that reason… I'm out.

        • ozzpete on 24/03/2018 - 10:29

          @pegaxs:
          At work as a LOCKSMITH ?
          You claimed to be a locksmith yesterday, but conveniently "not in your area" LMAO
          "I am a locksmith, but.."

          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/368344
          Make up your mind at your cyber-job and imaginaty expertise … then stick to it . LOL

        • pegaxs on 24/03/2018 - 12:18

          @ozzpete:

          You claimed to be a locksmith yesterday, but conveniently "not in your area"

          a: soliciting for work/sales on the forums is not permitted. So I can only offer advice.
          b: Australia is a big place. Chances of me living close to them is very small.
          c: I want more locksmith work, so I find it decidedly "inconvenient" I don’t live closer.

          Why is it so alien to you that people can do more than one job? Or have more than one type job at a time?

    • Louis89 on 22/03/2018 - 11:05

      gotta say ur camry got a Landcruiser heart!

  • coco1458 on 09/03/2018 - 17:30

    I drive a 3.5L Aurion, I've used Costco fuel before with no change to efficiency compared to 7-Eleven, Caltex, Shell, Mobil averaging between 8.5-8.8L/100km
    What made a real difference for me was changing engine oil, Valvoline would give me almost 10L/100km but changed to Penrite and was pretty happy with it being in the mid-high 8's

    • npc on 09/03/2018 - 17:42

      Wow, 8.8 average is very good for Aurion, what are the driving conditions? I see below 9 figures only on a selected trips with relaxed freeway driving. Best I had seen was 7.6 on one trip.

      • coco1458 on 09/03/2018 - 17:43

        I can drive at 7.6-8 on freeways
        8.8 is mixed heavy traffic and freeway

        • Scrooge McDuck on 10/03/2018 - 09:48

          Which grade of Penrite?

          I'm a fan of HPR15 for older Japanese performance motors.

        • coco1458 on 10/03/2018 - 10:05

          @Scrooge McDuck: I just use the normal 5W-30 Full Synthetic, I may try the 5W-40 HPR5 next time there's a sale.
          I find that with my driving about 12,000km on the oil is where it starts getting a little cranky so 10,000km changes are fine for me

    • Irate Monk on 09/03/2018 - 17:43

      Thanks. Now to think about it, I may have to look closer into the fluids changed, on the last periodic at CMI Toyota.

      I have less trust on those guys, ever since I requested a thorough electric system evaluation and they A-OKeyed my aged battery. It gave up the ghost three days later in Bum (profanity), Egypt.

      • Scrooge McDuck on 10/03/2018 - 09:50
        +1

        It's a long drive from Egypt!

        Have you cleaned any sand out of the air filter?

  • [Deactivated] on 09/03/2018 - 17:42
    +1

    You could have another mechanical concern, like an o2 sensor on its way out or gone. Try another fuel for 3-4 tanks and see what you get. Might be worth a trip to the machanic/auto sparky and scan the live data.
    (Haven’t used Costco fuel so not sure of quality)

    • Irate Monk on 09/03/2018 - 17:54

      Car is at the mech ATM. They suggest testing with BP reg ULP and see if efficiency improves. And thereafter to move to 98 Octane stuff.

      On a side note, anyone using the OBD2 diagnostic device? Is it useful in similar situations?
      I got one lying around from an earlier OzB deal https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/348077
      Thinking I'd get it installed and give it a whirl.

      • [Deactivated] on 09/03/2018 - 18:58

        Just plug it in and find an app to run it. Some you can run as a Head Up Display (HUD) with your phone in a cradle. It’ll give you an idea of sensors are cutting out or not.

  • chumlee on 09/03/2018 - 19:03
    +11

    Australia only has a couple of refiners left so regardless of which servo brand you buy fuel from you are most likely putting the same fuel in

    • DiceySlicey on 10/03/2018 - 07:21

      Yes this is true. 7-11 fuel comes from BP distilleries up here in Brisbane.

      • Scrooge McDuck on 10/03/2018 - 09:52
        +1

        Oh really!? What is the ABV?

  • AdosHouse on 09/03/2018 - 19:27
    +1

    Holy crap, you get 22L/100Km??? Are you a lead foot driver?

    Mate I fill up about half the time at Costco and half the time at Caltex, and I get an average of about 11L/100kM (low 10s if I baby it), with a 2004 VY V6 Commodore.

    • coco1458 on 09/03/2018 - 20:12

      22L/100km is 300km on a tank. That's just crazy!

  • nomoneynoproblems on 09/03/2018 - 20:21
    +1

    Nope, costco fuel has been good to me.

  • [Deactivated] on 09/03/2018 - 20:33
    +7

    Mechanic and others don't know what they're talking about.

    There are like two refineries left in Australia so it's likely that you're getting identical fuel regardless of where you buy it.

    Putting in higher octane than what your car is made for won't help anything.

  • Euphemistic on 09/03/2018 - 21:35
    +2

    I can’t see how different fuel would double your fuel consumption. Variation of 10% would be normal between different fuel fill based on a number of factors.

    Going from 10l/100km to 20 is a sign something is wrong with the car. It is possible that a dodgy fill up may cause it, but more likely something else that coincided with buying fuel from Costco.

  • pegaxs on 09/03/2018 - 23:19

    Agree with most people on here already… not that many refineries left in Australia, so the chances you are getting the same fuel as most other places is pretty high.

    Using higher octane fuel is not the answer, as a Camry only requires 91 anyway. Putting 98 in is a waste of money.

    If your fuel consumption is dropping from 8km/lt down to 4km/lt, you have another issue with the car that is not related to the fuel. BUT! The service station that you fueled up at may have a really bad batch of fuel that is either contaminated with water or just low grade garbage fuel that was supplied.

    If changing fuel from another station causes the problem to go away, I would say it sounds more like contaminated fuel at the Costco station.

  • Lukeng on 10/03/2018 - 15:32

    Costco would get base product with no additives,but that wouldn't make your car so heavy on juice. To get additives you have to pay a licencing fee.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join