Do You Notice Petrol from Different Servos Yield Different Mileage?

wisdomtooth on 22/12/2024 - 14:47
Last edited 23/12/2024 - 14:18 by 1 other user

I do. I seem to get 15-20% better mileage from BP than from Mobil/7-Eleven. At least according to the dashboard (of a 2010 Toyota Kluger). Do you have the same experience? Is there an app or site that takes that into account when comparing prices across servos?

UPDATE: Wow, I didn't expect this post to turn out so controversial. I see many here scoff at the notion of product quality varying by vendor, confident that "the othorities wouldn't allow it", but many others have observed and experienced the same. Especially risible are the claims that a difference can only be considered if proven in a wind tunnel with some industry lab multi-million dollar testing equipment, but hilariously do not hold the claim of absence of difference to the same standard of evidence.

Automotive Car Fuel Toyota

Comments

    • Some Random Guy on 24/12/2024 - 23:52
      -1

      Fuel is fuel, end of story. Slight changes in additives, but only enough to legally be able to make claims about being "a different better fuel than competitor".

      If you ever have a engine fault code you have a issue with your hardware of your vehicle, not fuel (unless its like E10 in a non E10 car, diesel in petrol car, U91 in U98 etc, and in these cases you car will either not run, run like pure shite or a O ring will crack and you'll be leaking like a (inset joke here))

      My polo had a intermittent engine fault code (car woukd go into limp mode i.e. revs stay at 1.5k) could be disabled on the fly while driving using OBD2. I thought it was speed dependent, or maybe incline dependent, or millions of things except the one which is cold hard cash out of my pocket to fix the broken part (electronic throttle body in my case).

      Anyways, when in doubt and you can't remember when you last had your service done and you car is driving worse than usual, make a list of the following (hoping to lord you have been up to date with oil changes and other manufacturer recom services (belts etc)):

      Air filter (cabin filter while you're at it)
      Spark plugs
      Spark plug leads
      Coilpack/distributor
      Fuel filter
      Check over everything (no vacuum leaks, clean throttle body, everything is connected etc)

      If you're having issues will anything regarding turning air and fuel into combustion, this should sort you as now you have fresh sparks, clean air and filtered fuel. You could maybe have dirty valves on direct injection cars or bad injectors so have those checked and cleaned/swapped (but only after you know the rest are good as these are more pricey services)

      • stickingly on 25/12/2024 - 07:33

        I don't actually notice any difference in performance when the engine light is on, it is just concerning as I know something is obviously not right. It is a 15 year old car.

        I always used to fill up at the same Ampol near me and my engine light was on more than 50% of the time.
        Now that I fill up at a local Shell I hardly ever see the engine light

        There might not be any scientific reason, but that is my observation. Maybe that particular Ampol has something dodgy about it??

    • CurlCurl on 25/12/2024 - 20:33

      Coincidence???

      Yes,

      What code did the mechanic get when he used his scannwe?

  • someone else on 22/12/2024 - 20:07
    +3

    It's an old problem and a legitimate question.

    https://www.choice.com.au/transport/cars/maintenance/article…

    https://www.drive.com.au/news/adulterated-fuel-sold-to-drive…

    It's still common to find contaminated fuel in Australia, usually related to car damage.

    Although there were changes designed to inhibit the practice, the regulatory system is not transparent and related information is not released to the public. There are no reports or data about that.

    https://www.nsw.gov.au/legal-and-justice/consumer-rights-and…

    https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/emissions-reduction…

    "We cannot share information about specific fuel monitoring activities, including fuel testing results for individual sites, businesses or entities. We do have authority under the Act to share this information with other government agencies. This assists with administrating and enforcing taxation and consumer protection laws."

    • Cave Fire on 25/12/2024 - 05:46

      Hint there was to always get the receipt. Especially if the pumps look old or refilling is taking place.

  • doodlejones on 22/12/2024 - 21:58
    -2

    On a full tank, my car delivers 600 km with U98, 500 km with U91, and 400–450 km with E10, using 7/11 fuel and driving mostly in the city. I’ve noticed that fuel type makes a significant difference. Although my car is recommended to run on E10, I find its performance is best with U98. So, I usually fill up with U98 when it’s cheaper; otherwise, I opt for U91.

    • SBOB on 22/12/2024 - 22:20
      +2

      If AI tried to write a post to troll @pegaxs, this would be it :)

      • pegaxs on 22/12/2024 - 23:21
        +2

        I just read it and though… ”JFC, not this shit again…”

        It’s not even worth replying to any more…

        Ironically, “username checks out”.

        • Protractor on 23/12/2024 - 09:15

          He's one of the better LNP guys who did the costings for nuclear in Straya.

    • Cluster on 24/12/2024 - 17:06
      +1

      E10 contains 3% less energy than 91. If you're getting 500km with 91, you should on average get 485km on E10.

      If you're getting 450km then that's 10% less than on 91. You're literally saying the ethanol in the fuel has zero energy content.

      If you're getting 400km then not only is the ethanol delivering zero energy to your car, it's actually actively removing energy from the remaining fuel.

      Think about it.

    • Pussqunt on 25/12/2024 - 02:00

      98 is more stable than 95, 95 is more stable than 91. Hence 98 has the least energy. That's why 98 is a performance fuel, as a motor can have tighter tuning to make more power.

      Also as Cluster said, E10 will have less energy than pure 91 (although 91 can have upto 10% ethanol, so this can vary from brand to brand).

  • unco on 22/12/2024 - 22:19
    +3

    Here’s my recorded stats from my previous car (2.5L Mazda3 SP25) recorded over approx 70,000km.

    https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/32825/118592/img_0833.…

    My main takeaway was they’re much of a muchness.
    The higher octane might have produced slightly better efficiency but not enough to cover the higher cost. I did feel a bit better throttle response but could’ve been a placebo.

    • welcomeUniverseWorld on 22/12/2024 - 22:25

      7-Eleven 95 seems to have the best mileage for you?

    • welcomeUniverseWorld on 22/12/2024 - 22:26

      United 91 and 7-Eleven E10 seems to fair worst for you?

      • unco on 22/12/2024 - 22:30
        +1

        Yes but please take it with a grain of salt and see I didn’t use those fuel types for much mileage so they could also be outliers.

      • brendanm on 23/12/2024 - 10:17

        E10 will always be worse as it has less energy density.

    • unco on 22/12/2024 - 22:33
      +1

      Note: to do this I would always fill up to full for every visit to the servo so I could record the distance travelled and fuel volume as accurately as possible.

      When switching fuel types, I ran the previous tank reasonably low so the next fill could be majority of the new fuel type.

      I logged all of this through the ‘Road Trip MPG’ iOS app.

      • lgacb08 on 23/12/2024 - 22:00

        Doing this type of experiment with a mazda 3 is flawed due its fuel tank design and overflowing mechanism. You will never know how much of a full filling tank because you can just keep topping it up and fuel line keep dropping down but at some point you will smell petrol inside the cabin. Also when remaining distance reaching zero you can pretty much drive another 70km before it's completely dead so you will never know how much is left.

        • Euphemistic on 23/12/2024 - 22:54
          +1

          When you log the odometer and litres you can get averages. Tank to tank will always vary, but over time youll see trends. If you always fill when buying fuel its easier to calculate. You compare how many kms you've travelled since the last fill and the litres you just put in to fill up again. Yes, youll get slight variation in how full it actually gets, but averages will help with that.

        • unco on 25/12/2024 - 19:43

          Yep as Euphemistic also said, recorded the odometer and amount to fill to full. It’s not scientific by any means but it gives you a good idea of some kind of trend if you log enough kms.

          Wasn’t using the zero remaining kms reading as that changes based on your driving style and conditions for that tank and as you mentioned the remaining litres at that point always varies.

  • Sammy2000 on 22/12/2024 - 23:26
    +1

    Yes, because some pumps are broken and don't fill accurately.

    • wisdomtooth on 23/12/2024 - 07:44

      "broken"? That's called fraud where I come from…

      But unless all 7-Eleven have broken pumps, and BPs don't, that's not what I observe…

      • Protractor on 23/12/2024 - 09:18

        Can you post the ambient temps of the days you filled up and the temps per the hours the car was driven.(I'll need it in 30 min increments) Also tyre pressures before and after each run. DL the wind stats per day and the exact travel log of your vehicle. Note how many passengers,items on board,windows up/down etc.Times stopped at lights, number of right/left turns and angels of bends so I can overlay on the wind stats, etc.

        • wisdomtooth on 23/12/2024 - 09:33

          To his credit, @Euphemistic did pretty much that.

          • Protractor on 23/12/2024 - 09:39

            @wisdomtooth: It's only fraud if there's a policing element. And then charges,courts etc.
            A better example of fraud would be fuel cartels gouging customers, because they can.(using spurious reasons) . Or the ACCC claiming to have our back, while they do nothing, about this price fixing racket..Or politicians saying they can't do anything about it.
            Fraud is like saying Fuelwatch is a solution, by doing nothing except listing prices (gouged when they wish) and telling us to shop around for the lowest gouged price.

            • Sammy2000 on 23/12/2024 - 11:25
              +1

              @Protractor: The Google reviews of the 7 11 and independent stores that I noticed a problem say the same thing. I just avoid them now. There is no one regulating that their pumps are broken and the owners don't care. (edit: unsure why reply keeps tagging people automatically)

            • wisdomtooth on 23/12/2024 - 11:38
              -1

              @Protractor: I grew up in a country that the price of fuel was literally fixed by the govt (at the time, not sure now). Sure, the market is an oligopoly, but is govt price fixing a better solution? Is monopoly better than oligopoly?

              I don't get your argument; are saying an act is only criminal if outlawed? And before it is, it's a-ok?

              • Protractor on 23/12/2024 - 12:55

                @wisdomtooth: Firstly I'm saying there is a better way of regulating fuel prices than allowing fuel cartels to rort it as a business practise, that is unrelated to the wholesale price,stock-markets,fuel supply levels etc. They fix prices when and where they wish and the wank factor we were given as a solution was a self regulated compensation called Fuelwatch.Fraud is saying 'oh look it's Christmas and Easter, time to jack up the price, and we can't help it'.
                The govt has enabled this situation.
                and
                Pretty sure if something is outside the law, then there's a law.If it's outside a law it is an offence or a crime.
                If there's no law or regulation to break,….. well you should be able to join the dots.

                • wisdomtooth on 23/12/2024 - 13:50

                  @Protractor: Yeah, well, energy prices and supply are manipulated at the source; petrol fuels geopolitics, not just automobiles. Everything else is downstream from that.

                  • Protractor on 23/12/2024 - 14:30

                    @wisdomtooth: That's no excuse for what happens after the product lands here.They use geopolitical excuses when there are some, and also where there are no upward forces on price or supply.It's a scam (dressed as price cycling) only fuel cartels get to rort.

  • Meho2026 on 23/12/2024 - 08:06
    +5

    There was an argument going on a while ago about whether one fuel brand was better than the other. The conclusion was all the servos are pretty much supplied with the exact same fuel but apparently BP have more frequent and stricter quality checks. So their pumps are calibrated for accuracy more often and their holding tanks are maintained and monitored for contamination more frequently. Dunno if that’s true or whether it’s just pub talk

    • Jolakot on 23/12/2024 - 20:26
      +3

      A relative of mine used to work at BP as a risk safety engineer, said much the same with them having stricter policies and more frequent inspections than other petrol companies they'd worked for

      • CommuterPolluter on 23/12/2024 - 21:34
        +2

        Partly true. BP is going to have a more far robust management system than any of the rinky dink Aussie players we have left here (Shell isn’t run by Shell).

        That being said some companies will get their fuel from shithouse 2-bit refineries in India. Maybe they meet the nominal specs for U91 but quality probably worse on metrics in general.

      • Baysew on 24/12/2024 - 18:22

        A relative of mine used to work at BP as a risk safety engineer

        At Deepwater Horizon?

        • Jolakot on 25/12/2024 - 11:35

          Thankfully not, most of their job was just analysing soil data to check for oil leaks and corrosion byproducts, with the occasional tank replacement.

  • jemson on 23/12/2024 - 08:37
    +2

    When I had an unleaded company car I did find I would get better mileage when I filled at BP. Not the 15-20% mentioned, but maybe 5-10%.
    Being a company car it didn't matter to me so never took any records. Was just more noticing that I would get high 600km/low 700kms from BP and mid-low 600s from fuel elsewhere.

  • singingwolf on 23/12/2024 - 09:34
    +3

    We recently switched from 7/11 to BP as BP are now 30c cheaper per litre in our area. My wife mentioned the other day she gets more out of a tank. I stopped looking at how many ks I get long ago so haven't noticed anything.

  • mjuice7 on 23/12/2024 - 10:18
    -2

    triple treat today! definitely festive season. again, thx for the good belly laugh.

    • Protractor on 23/12/2024 - 12:58

      You sceptic!
      Some servos have invisible silicon fairy dust emitters that mist the cars randomly, so every now and then, a 'special' customer experiences better fuel economy as his car slides effortlessly through the traffic, coated in a Tinkerbell slipstream covering..

  • Paraya on 23/12/2024 - 11:18
    +1

    Agree they tamper the pump to deliver less fuel

  • Liamhos08 on 23/12/2024 - 19:43
    +1

    Yes. It was over 10 years ago now but I use to have a R31 skyline & would see a noticeable increase in Ks from a tank of BP ultimate compared to Caltex, Shell or Mobil premium fuels. I can't remember exactly how much now but I would only go to BP if I planned to fill up with premium.

  • Cluster on 23/12/2024 - 20:57
    +2

    All fuel in Adelaide comes from the same source. The additive packages may be different, but that's as far as it goes. Some fuel may help to keep your fuel system cleaner and in the very long run deliver better fuel economy, but literally every fuel company claims to have special additives. Also they won't mention that petrol and ethanol are great solvents in themselves.

    I've tried various brands in my 2024 petrol car and never noticed a consistent difference. Yes, sometimes fuel economy would be 0.5L/100km better on average on a particular fill, but averaged out there was no difference between brands. 98 octane fuel delivered 1.5% better fuel economy over 10 fills, and E10 3.2% worse, so don't waste money buying 95/98 if your car doesn't need it either. You're not giving your car a 'treat'.

  • Hugh G Rection on 23/12/2024 - 21:51
    -5

    i use costco, it is a top tier fuel

    my next favourite Top Tier Fuel is Shell if i am too lazy to go to costco.

    Mobile and BP aren't Top Tier Fuels

    The results showed that, on average, non-Top Tier Fuel had 19 times more carbon deposits on injectors, on intake valves, and in the combustion chamber than Top Tier Fuel had.

    • wisdomtooth on 24/12/2024 - 06:10
      -1

      What "results"? Was that a study or your experience and observation?

    • TEER3X on 24/12/2024 - 18:35
      +2

      Costco uses Mobil

  • Darude Sandstorm on 23/12/2024 - 22:05
    -1

    Not a real thing.
    Only difference is additives.
    Even all fuels now use PEE, the main ingredient in Injector Cleaner, so Injector Cleaner is essentially useless. (Note the difference between having injectors cleaned/flow tested vs dumping a bottle of repco special sauce into your tank)

    • Jolakot on 24/12/2024 - 11:49
      +3

      all fuels now use PEE

      And to think, I've been flushing mine down the toilet like a sucker

  • SuperMid on 24/12/2024 - 09:04

    Yes, the authorities never lie, just take covid for example.

    • Cluster on 24/12/2024 - 17:01

      That is a non sequitur. What does a possible fuel economy difference between different brands of fuel have to do with COVID-19?

      • SuperMid on 24/12/2024 - 19:25

        Anyone who actually uses the term non sequitur does not belong on this planet.

        • SBOB on 24/12/2024 - 19:55
          +3

          Anyone who actually uses the term non sequitur does not belong on this planet.

          It's simply a non sequitur to make such a conclusion.

  • Low Battery on 24/12/2024 - 09:08
    +1

    I've never noticed any difference but YMMV

  • AustriaBargain on 24/12/2024 - 15:26
    +1

    If they were adulterating fuel then they would get shut down if caught wouldn't they? I'm sure it happens but surely random checks are done?

  • RealUltimatePapo on 24/12/2024 - 18:02

    Especially risible

    Do you find it… risible?

  • Randolph Duke on 24/12/2024 - 18:05

    Yes, I do. It coincides when I use E85 instead of 98.

  • Baysew on 24/12/2024 - 18:26

    Previous post from 2019 about fuel - Best Friend Stole Car and Went on Joyrides Stealing Fuel and Thrashing The Car

    Car is a FG XR6 Turbo with a sunroof, full cream leather interior, full engine mods and tune. All its life the car has had BP Ultimate 98 put in and the friend stole fuel putting in the incorrect fuel that it wasn't tuned for which is Caltex and Shell.

  • domo on 24/12/2024 - 18:33

    I remember filling up a 5L mower fuel tin at Freedom fuels and it taking nearly 8L

  • Some Random Guy on 25/12/2024 - 00:13

    Easiest thing that would explain any of this placebo:

    For people saying "I would get x from a full tank here and y from full tank there":

    No one ever drives their car to empty tank and also no one ever has 100% full tank, human variation in daily activities is quite large (think mundane tasks you do and how you occasionally stuff them up (not closing door whole way, sock put on slightly awkwardly, adding too much pasta to boil). Hence one "full tank" is not another "full tank". However, if you know the size of your tank (I doubt many people do) and you fill to the top and do a couple clicks to make sure it's like as full as it can get, reset your trip counter, and then next time you fill up you record theamount of fuel filled along with the distance travelled and do the maths (or use a site) and like ensure you are doing like for like driving then yes I'll accept you are right and lmk what petrol you using! (But then again I doubt anyone is taking time out their day for that). PS you car computer saying "this many KMs left" is not that accurate! It's more so to stop people from running out of fuel (horribly thing to cute for science but that episode of Seinfeld where Kramer takes the car for a test drive)

    For the "my car computer says I get z litres per 100km". Again not that accurate and doesn't account for conditions, same arguments can be used and these numbers are generated across a very long time so usually people would see the average of their driving for the past 3 years, reset the numbers, fill up at servo F, drive, be like "wtf my consumption so high" (consumption is distorted upon reset due to acceleration taking up a disproportionate amount of the elapsed driving time and acceleration used the most fuel). Anyways, then person goes to servo H, doesn't reset, continues driving and is like "WOWOWWEEEEE lower consumption!". And if your consumption figures change very often you could have a polo (mine reset every time I filled up (but like residual fuel exists so not a very good way to check between brands)).

    Anyways ramble over, and for anecdote my mum swears she can't drive her kia carnival on BP fuel (experiences issues) sooooo

    And to add, a Ridgy didge servo might have altered or old pumps with iffy metets so even then the manual check isn't that great as we assume the pumps are 100% correct.

    Anyways fuel indictors and senders can also be dodgy, for examples my mirage has needle on E, 50L tank, only 35L goes in. Sometimes only 30L. Purely a bad fuel sender I don't care to change as better to fill up with fuel in than to run dry. Anyways, now without receipt of transaction, I suspect a servo has better fuel, confirmation bias hits and then servo Q is better than servo J because last time the needle was on empty I went like 4 more days without needing to fill or I needed to fill up less fuel.

  • Ahoon on 25/12/2024 - 00:46
    -1

    I follow a simple rule wherever I go. Check the petrol station closest to the airport and get fuel from the same brand. BP is the winner in Melbourne, Sydney, and Hobart. My reasoning is quite simple, airports are where you’ll find more luxury cars, so the brand that is most accessible is likely to have the highest quality fuel to cater to the wealthy in the best possible way.

    • Pittyh on 20/01/2025 - 13:26

      How is your coffee grinder going?

      I bought one based on your recommendation lol

      • Ahoon on 20/01/2025 - 14:49

        It still does the job. How do you like it so far? Try a few tanks of fuel from BP if you are happy with my coffee grinder choice lol.

        • Pittyh on 20/01/2025 - 16:53

          It hasn't arrived yet, was just curious if it still worked, my old lady bought a cheap $30 one and it lasted 1 day :D

    • wisdomtooth on 20/01/2025 - 18:34

      My reasoning is quite simple…

      Yes, very simple indeed 😄

  • 2025 on 25/12/2024 - 00:52

    No I haven’t.

    But I did notice that bottled water is wetter with some brands compared to others.

    It’s suspicious that there is no evidence disproving that.

    Someone told me that the difference can only be considered if proven in a industry lab with multi-million dollar testing equipment, but hilariously do not hold the claim of absence of difference to the same standard of evidence.

    Is there an app or site that takes that into account when comparing prices across servos?

    Yes, it’s called brain. Try it out, it’s free.

  • serpserpserp on 25/12/2024 - 01:03

    There could be merit to what OP is saying. Likely the real difference is probably less than 5%. If it is true of course. Not saying it isn't, but hard to prove it is unless the whole wind tunnel things etc.

  • BadAtNames on 25/12/2024 - 04:35

    It's literally the same stuff. I am sometimes suss on the pumps themselves but I put that down to me a issue.

  • valuer on 25/12/2024 - 07:03

    I have found that the estimated range displayed on the dash can be quite unreliable. I had 25km only left the other day, so put $6 in at a local station to get me along the trip to where a cheaper station was. The range still showed 25km when I started it up and slowly INCREASED as I drove, and was around 30km when I reached the other station some 35km away. The warning light stayed on until after the second stop.

    It's fine as a general estimate over a longer time period.

    • wisdomtooth on 25/12/2024 - 07:16
      -1

      Isn't that bc the CPU resets the fuel efficiency estimate? Does your dashboard show that, in addition to the estimated range? Mine shows 30 L/100,000km, so of course the estimated range is low after putting in petrol, and increases as the fuel efficiency estimate calibrates downward.

      • valuer on 25/12/2024 - 09:58

        The car does ~6L per 100km. If I added $6 or around 3 litres it should simply recalculate that it has another 50km or range, or less if the recent kms have been slow and suburban.

        That was the reality of the drive, but the estimate started out wrong and was wrong all the way - getting less wrong the further I went.

        I still think that the estimate after refilling was wrong, but I generally go with best price for fuel and haven't tried to see if (like milk) there is more good stuff in (some of) the more expensive brands.

        • Euphemistic on 25/12/2024 - 12:31

          The car doesnt know how many litres you put in. It estimates based on the fuel level. When the fuel level is low, not only are many fuel tanks more innacurate, but the slope of the road etc makes more difference to the percieved level.

          Not only that, but your recent usage may have changed enough for the car to estimate a different range. If youve been doing lots of stop/start and your next 25kms are at a consistent speed its going to add some range to your DTE.

          • valuer on 26/12/2024 - 13:04

            @Euphemistic: It was an easy drive to the first station and the second.

            The point is that range estimation is not something all cars do very well all of the time and, further, isn't something accurate enough to be evaluating fuel types over.

            • Euphemistic on 26/12/2024 - 13:26

              @valuer: Yes, range estimation is poor. Consumptuon is more accurate as it measures thr amount of fuel used and the kms travelled.

              The main variable with dusplayed consumption is how long its been measuring for. Is it the last drive, the last fill, the last xxx hours or since you reset it.

  • Lancerx on 25/12/2024 - 10:06
    -1

    Yeah nah..time to take your med.

  • ATTS on 25/12/2024 - 11:00

    Jsut curious is the marketing of 95 98 ron fuel just marketing in regards to additives?

    For eg no benefit filling 95 or 98 when recommended minimum was 91

    • Euphemistic on 25/12/2024 - 12:32
      +1

      Its been done before. Unless your car is tuned for higher rated fuel you are unlikely to get any real benefit, other than a lighter bank balance.

      • ATTS on 25/12/2024 - 13:51

        Thanks, thought that might be the case. Who was the test been done by btw?

        • Euphemistic on 25/12/2024 - 14:43

          "Everyone". Its been discussed plenty of times here and all over the internet.

          By all means go and try it in your car. But only trust numbers. The fact youve paid more and out a 'premium' product in your car skews your butt dyno big time.

    • Tomhaigh1 on 26/12/2024 - 23:07

      Unless 98 is cheaper than 91 or 95 :D (costco)

      • ATTS on 26/12/2024 - 23:28

        Lol yeah

  • Hangryuman on 25/12/2024 - 16:01

    TLDR all the comments but I did see TV comparing different octane fuel and finding it gave different milage - up to you to decide whether to use more of the cheaper lower octane fuel or less of the more expensive higher octane fuel - I think I went with higher octane because I felt it gave and wanted the extra performance from my 1.5 litre engine.

    I seem to remember at one stage Caltex may have had the highest octane of the different brands.

  • Bignudge on 25/12/2024 - 16:04

    Man, only if someone could test calorific values of each brand's range of fuels…

  • JIMB0 on 26/12/2024 - 09:27
    +2

    Can confirm, I filled up at the Thredbo BP petrol station and drove down the mountain to Cooma. The fuel economy was incredible, best I've ever seen in fact.

  • McFly on 26/12/2024 - 16:49

    Name doesn't check out.

  • R4 on 26/12/2024 - 17:37

    No

  • Dr Prepper on 26/12/2024 - 18:57

    Metro is the worst

  • SydStrand on 26/12/2024 - 22:58
    +2

    Especially risible are the claims that a difference can only be considered if proven in a wind tunnel with some industry lab multi-million dollar testing equipment, but hilariously do not hold the claim of absence of difference to the same standard of evidence.

    This is the dumbest sh^t conspiracy theory ever. There are a million and one factors that can confound perceived on-road mileage including aero, average speed, road conditions, gross weight, etc. If you want a like-for-like comparison, then you need a controlled setting, including wind tunnel and dynamo. Or…. just test the fuel, which is already being done nationally and for all intents and purposes, they're all the same.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join