118TSI - General Discussion

[b881]

So it turned out it was in fact a stone And I took it to my regular mechanic not VW so no charge for checking it over.

Thanks for your comments!

Just going to cross my fingers now and pray nothing else happens to it.

[Ryan_R]

Good to hear, thanks for the update.

[Rawcpoppa]

Anyone ever run RON 91 in their 118tsi?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The_Hawk]

Anyone ever run RON 91 in their 118tsi?

Mine says recommended 98 with 95 as a minimum so it's not something I have tried before.

Mind you, from what I have read E10 has a RON of 94/95 and may even be a little higher so it might be alright... of course I'm a believer in 98 anyway and have always run it in my vehicles. While it has cost a little more it tends to go a little further making it a push in terms of cost but theoretically a benefit in terms of cleaner burning fuel which provides more power.

All that aside, if you want to pull out your maths for a moment it breaks down like this based on 15,000km a year and a 20c/L differential for 98:

The urban consumption is claimed at 8.5L/100km and the combined is 6.6L/100km.

Assuming you actually get the combined that's 990L of fuel at an extra cost of $198.00 per YEAR
If you get the Urban figure it's 1,275L and $255.00 per YEAR.

It it really worth going cheap?

[Ryan_R]

+1, if you spend extra on 98 you get more mileage per tank, so no money lost, plus a cleaner engine and slightly better performance. Those who have used 91RON tend to post here later regarding serious engine problems, so don't do it.

[Bel]

+1, never put anything but 98 in mine... with my luck if I did it would stuff the engine completely!

[RosscoMK3]

+1, if you spend extra on 98 you get more mileage per tank, so no money lost, plus a cleaner engine and slightly better performance. Those who have used 91RON tend to post here later regarding serious engine problems, so don't do it.

Hi Ryan, I'm interested to know if you have ever tested the "more milage" theory betwen 95 and 98 Ron fuels. As far as I can tell there's no difference and the fuel companies don't even make the claim. Hell, they won't even say that their premium products will clean better than their regular products.
If you run the 98 program on the ECU that's a different story all together. With a 95 RON fuel the system will be constantly trying to reduce detonation which would defeat the 98 tune. That's my understanding at least.
It would be interesting to get some figures from someone with both programmes available(nudge nudge) except there are so many variables, the test results might end up as vague as the fuel producers claims.

PS. On a side note I'm still struggling to get that bloody bluetooth OBDII working but, I have found a mate with an APR ECU tuned GTI. I know the bog standard 118TSI gives up a good chase with the standard GTI (due to the bloke around the corner from me that I regularly play cat and mouse with). I managed to go for a spin in my mates GTI yesterday with the tune activated and that was inspiration enough to start getting back on the ECU tune bandwagon.
As soon as I get the Torque pro working with the bluetooth unit I'll see if I can get you some of those figures you were asking about a while back.

[Ryan_R]

I haven't done it in the Golf (only ever use 98RON) but I did test it with my old '92 Corolla which only had a 30L tank (1.6L twin cam engine). Normally got about 320L per tank (honestly can't remember if I used 91 or 95 before then), but when using V-Power I got between 380-400L. Each car will have different results, but I definitely felt a small power increase when I switched and I don't think I'd ever go back regardless of what car I owned.

And yes I have the 98 APR program running

[The_Hawk]

I haven't done it in the Golf (only ever use 98RON) but I did test it with my old '92 Corolla

Similar story here, tested with a mid 90's 626, a 99 Subaru and an 01 Hyundai and in each case the premium did give better consumption figures with my usage patterns (which at the time was more highway than urban). Since then I pretty much blindly run 98, but then I have had newer cars that recommend it anyway

[RosscoMK3]

No worries, thought it was worth asking about.
I run a business and spend a fair bit on fuel each year. Running 98RON in the ute compared to 91 RON(less the ethanol) gives pretty much the same kms/tank. 10%Ethanol 91 and 98 give similar results also ( compared to each other). Taking note of the fuel consumption is a habit I picked up several years ago.
The engine is designed to run on 91RON and adding 98RON has very limited benefit.
I guess that's another vote for the APR tune on the golf. I mean I always use Ultimate becuase the price difference is so small and most places only stock 91/98. That means I'll be saving money when I get the APR tune. "Honest darling".
Somehow I don't think the wife will buy it but it's worth a try.

Next time I go for a long drive I'll try and find some 95RON to see if it's noticable in the golf. 91RON isn't recommended so I won't even go there and have no sympathy for anyone who does.

I'd be interested to know how many people run 10% ethanol fuels in their cars and how they find it? What sort of Kms and performance?
Personally, I don't use much of the stuff unless I get stuck.