[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Introducing Shell V-Power

To: "Gosling, Richard" <>, <>
Subject: Re: Introducing Shell V-Power
From: "Paul Hunt" <>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 11:31:50 +0100
It does replace Optimax, and at 1 point higher.  On my (73) roadster there
is a significant difference in pinking between ordinary unleaded at 95 and
the 'other' Supers at 97 and Optimax at 98, less so between 97 and 98.  I
use Optimax by choice, but got caught out in Yorkshire on the Dales Trail
this year by venturing into the Park without filling up first and only being
able to get 'ordinary'.  I lived with it, using a lower gear and less speed
than normal on a couple of occasions where feathering the throttle (or
paradoxically increasing it) didn't control it.  Some years ago touring
Scotland the same happened and I opted to retard the ignition a bit, but the
loss of performance and increase in running temps was very noticeable I
certainly wouldn't keep it like that by choice.  However tuning for 99 may
be a step too far if one has to resort to 95.  I've recently started
experimenting with attaching a knock-sensing retard system in place of the
vacuum (at least) advance, and that would be the ultimate solution to fuel
grade variations and distributor advance curve deterioration with age, not
that the original curves are ideal for today's fuels.


----- Original Message ----- 
>  ... maybe it's a replacement for Optimax (or just a re-branding
of Optimax to try and renew interest in it).

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>