BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > M3 (E90 / E92 / E93) > Regional Forums > Canada
 
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      01-07-2014, 03:25 PM   #1
Harpua
Private
Canada
0
Rep
99
Posts

 
Drives: 2008 E90 M3
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Ontario

iTrader: (0)

Fuel consensus?

Are most ontarians using shell vpower 91 over petro canada ultra 94 due to the ethanol levels?
Thanks in advance.
Appreciate 0
      01-07-2014, 04:39 PM   #2
KmndntKlink
Lieutenant
KmndntKlink's Avatar
Canada
4
Rep
421
Posts

 
Drives: 2010 e92 m3
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harpua View Post
Are most ontarians using shell vpower 91 over petro canada ultra 94 due to the ethanol levels?
Thanks in advance.
94 octane would be nice, but I use vpower specifically because of 0 ethanol. They're the only one. I get better fuel economy. Esso sucks balls. Apparently ethanol is only good if you got a FI motor.
__________________
E92 ///M3 in Dakar Yellow, M-DCT, iDrive, 220M OEM rims, Active Autowerke Green filter, Turner Motorsport test pipes, BPM stage 2 tune, Stoptech ST-40 F+R in yellow.
Appreciate 0
      01-07-2014, 11:41 PM   #3
Irishace
ElevenPointFive
Irishace's Avatar
Canada
32
Rep
2,052
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by KmndntKlink View Post
94 octane would be nice, but I use vpower specifically because of 0 ethanol. They're the only one. I get better fuel economy. Esso sucks balls. Apparently ethanol is only good if you got a FI motor.
Why the hate for ethanol, Ultra 94 is less than 10% content, that will give you far better performance and have no impact on your engine or fuel pump.
__________________
2008 Jerez Black - 6MT E92 M3
Evolve | H&R | Apex | Exotics Tuning
2015 Pearl Black - DSG MK7 GTI
Burger Motorsports Beta Tester
Appreciate 0
      01-08-2014, 08:13 AM   #4
BMWNTHZST
Enthusiast
BMWNTHZST's Avatar
Canada
18
Rep
1,018
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 E92 M3
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (25)

Garage List
Shell V-Power whenever possible
__________________
2011 E70 X5 ///M Black Sapphire Metallic / Black
2008 E93 335i Black Sapphire Metallic / Saddle Brown
1997 840Ci Jet Black / Black
2004 E46 ///M3 Laguna Seca Blue / Black
2011 E92 ///M3 Alpine White / Black (gone but not forgotten )
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2014, 01:50 AM   #5
Lone Wolf Pack
New Member
0
Rep
14
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 M3 6MT
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (0)

As a follow-on question, what are people getting in terms of fuel consumption numbers during the winter months? I've been using Shell V-power, and no matter how conservative I drive, the lowest fuel consumption I get is 18.7 l/100km. I don't try to be heavy footed. Just seeing how close I can get to the 15.3 published values for in-city driving. Btw, I drive a 6MT 2011 M3.
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2014, 08:51 AM   #6
tokic_o
Private First Class
Canada
1
Rep
178
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lone Wolf Pack View Post
As a follow-on question, what are people getting in terms of fuel consumption numbers during the winter months? I've been using Shell V-power, and no matter how conservative I drive, the lowest fuel consumption I get is 18.7 l/100km. I don't try to be heavy footed. Just seeing how close I can get to the 15.3 published values for in-city driving. Btw, I drive a 6MT 2011 M3.
So you get like...330km on a tank??

I get about 15.7L/100KM city a tank in the winter driving conservatively

This most likely doesn't make a difference on mileage but I use Petro and not Shell just because me and the family all use Petro and collect the points etc etc
__________________
"But a tell tale sign is when we don't even need to say, "BMW M3". All we need to say is, "M3" and even folks with little to no interest in automobiles, know what it is. They recognize the model name and can tell by the huge smile on our faces that it's something very special..."
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2014, 09:46 AM   #7
Thik
Private First Class
6
Rep
146
Posts

 
Drives: 2010 Space Grey E92 M3 6spd
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lone Wolf Pack View Post
As a follow-on question, what are people getting in terms of fuel consumption numbers during the winter months? I've been using Shell V-power, and no matter how conservative I drive, the lowest fuel consumption I get is 18.7 l/100km. I don't try to be heavy footed. Just seeing how close I can get to the 15.3 published values for in-city driving. Btw, I drive a 6MT 2011 M3.
Are you letting the car idle for a long time before driving off? That may be the problem.

Let the car idle for 30 to 60 seconds max at initial startup to circulate the oil. Then start driving at a moderate pace to warm up the engine. It's better for the engine, your wallet and the environment. By driving off at a moderate pace, you warm up the oil faster, thus providing more protection for the engine.
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2014, 09:58 AM   #8
Thik
Private First Class
6
Rep
146
Posts

 
Drives: 2010 Space Grey E92 M3 6spd
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (0)

I am sticking to Shell V Power because it's ethanol-free. It's also slightly cheaper than Ultra 94. Shell takes Air Miles so there's cash back on top of the points I get with my credit card. Pretty sweet deal.

When I track, I will definitely fill with Ultra 94. I do feel more power and responsiveness with the higher octane. I can tolerate the possible negative effects of ethanol for one or two tanks of ethanol laced gas.
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2014, 04:46 PM   #9
KmndntKlink
Lieutenant
KmndntKlink's Avatar
Canada
4
Rep
421
Posts

 
Drives: 2010 e92 m3
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishace View Post
Why the hate for ethanol, Ultra 94 is less than 10% content, that will give you far better performance and have no impact on your engine or fuel pump.
From what I've ready (alot of posts) ethanol burns dirtier and eats away at the fuel hoses. This makes sense to me chemically speaking. I thought 94 was up to 15% ethanol, esso 91 up to 10%. They get the higher octane by using more ethanol that combusts lower & with a bigger bang. Sure 94 octane would be nice, but apparently its more lik 91 RON anyway (or something like that, I always get the acronyms mixed up). Canadian gas sucks. Hence I get the cleanest burning one I can get. I also found that on esso 91, I lost 50-100km per tank compared to Shell. That is HUGE in my opinion and I can only imagine it being worse on 94. Everyone says they get shitty mileage on 94. On the track is a different story.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lone Wolf Pack View Post
As a follow-on question, what are people getting in terms of fuel consumption numbers during the winter months? I've been using Shell V-power, and no matter how conservative I drive, the lowest fuel consumption I get is 18.7 l/100km. I don't try to be heavy footed. Just seeing how close I can get to the 15.3 published values for in-city driving. Btw, I drive a 6MT 2011 M3.
Dude that is stupid bad fuel economy. I get ~12.5l/100km on winter gas, about 11 on summer. I do a lot of highway. My economy has gotten a little worse as I've been driving harder, but still 18.7 is CRAZY. You should invest in the tune shows you when to eco-shift! hint: don't let it go past 4k lol.
__________________
E92 ///M3 in Dakar Yellow, M-DCT, iDrive, 220M OEM rims, Active Autowerke Green filter, Turner Motorsport test pipes, BPM stage 2 tune, Stoptech ST-40 F+R in yellow.
Appreciate 0
      01-14-2014, 05:31 PM   #10
Lone Wolf Pack
New Member
0
Rep
14
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 M3 6MT
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tokic_o View Post
So you get like...330km on a tank??

I get about 15.7L/100KM city a tank in the winter driving conservatively

This most likely doesn't make a difference on mileage but I use Petro and not Shell just because me and the family all use Petro and collect the points etc etc
Well I'm judging by the computer reading on my console. It tends to be around 18.7l/100km if I drive ultra conservative. If I do highway, it will go lower slowly. I do not floor it or rev high when I'm cruising. I would shift from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 3rd at around 2500rpm. This rpm is where I sense the matching engine/rev speed such that the car doesn't jerk at the gear shift point.
Appreciate 0
      01-14-2014, 05:33 PM   #11
Lone Wolf Pack
New Member
0
Rep
14
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 M3 6MT
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thik View Post
Are you letting the car idle for a long time before driving off? That may be the problem.

Let the car idle for 30 to 60 seconds max at initial startup to circulate the oil. Then start driving at a moderate pace to warm up the engine. It's better for the engine, your wallet and the environment. By driving off at a moderate pace, you warm up the oil faster, thus providing more protection for the engine.
No I don't idle the car at all. In fact, I ride off after about 10 secs right after the revs come down after initially jumping up. I would drive about 3km before hitting the highway.

Based on my computer reading, my tank would give me maybe 380km range.
Appreciate 0
      01-14-2014, 05:38 PM   #12
Lone Wolf Pack
New Member
0
Rep
14
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 M3 6MT
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Dude that is stupid bad fuel economy. I get ~12.5l/100km on winter gas, about 11 on summer. I do a lot of highway. My economy has gotten a little worse as I've been driving harder, but still 18.7 is CRAZY. You should invest in the tune shows you when to eco-shift! hint: don't let it go past 4k lol.
Yeah, that's why I asked what everyone else was seeing. I'm not sure why my gas consumption is so high. A tank gets me around 380km or so based on the reading in the console. If I add highway driving I can get it to around 17.7l/100km. I don't rev high at all either. I'm cruising around 110km/h on the DVP at around 3K rpm in 6th gear.

Are you getting 12.5l/100km based on how many kilometers you actually can get on a tank of gas (and dividing by your gas tank capacity), or based on the consumption reading you see on the console?
Appreciate 0
      01-14-2014, 05:44 PM   #13
Z K
Colonel
Z K's Avatar
United_States
26
Rep
2,174
Posts

 
Drives: E90 M3, MK6 GLI
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Francisco

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by KmndntKlink View Post
From what I've ready (alot of posts) ethanol burns dirtier and eats away at the fuel hoses. This makes sense to me chemically speaking. I thought 94 was up to 15% ethanol, esso 91 up to 10%. They get the higher octane by using more ethanol that combusts lower & with a bigger bang. Sure 94 octane would be nice, but apparently its more lik 91 RON anyway (or something like that, I always get the acronyms mixed up). Canadian gas sucks. Hence I get the cleanest burning one I can get. I also found that on esso 91, I lost 50-100km per tank compared to Shell. That is HUGE in my opinion and I can only imagine it being worse on 94. Everyone says they get shitty mileage on 94. On the track is a different story.
That is BS! Ethanol does not damage your fuel system on a modern car. All cars built within the past 5-10 years have fuel systems that can handle 10% ethanol or more. If you have an OLD car, like over 15 years old, you may have to worry about ethanol.

A lot of people modify their cars to run E85 (85% ethanol) in their cars because it has a higher octane (105 octane AKI/RON avg) and makes a lot more power vs non-ethanol gas.

And Ethanol is better for the environment. It burns cleaner and produces less pollutants. An E85 running car will pass tailpipe emissions tests even without a catalytic converter and much cleaner than regular gas car running a catalytic converter.
__________________
Auto Detailing Enthusiast!

Last edited by Z K; 01-14-2014 at 06:00 PM.
Appreciate 0
      01-14-2014, 06:22 PM   #14
KmndntKlink
Lieutenant
KmndntKlink's Avatar
Canada
4
Rep
421
Posts

 
Drives: 2010 e92 m3
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lone Wolf Pack View Post
Yeah, that's why I asked what everyone else was seeing. I'm not sure why my gas consumption is so high. A tank gets me around 380km or so based on the reading in the console. If I add highway driving I can get it to around 17.7l/100km. I don't rev high at all either. I'm cruising around 110km/h on the DVP at around 3K rpm in 6th gear.

Are you getting 12.5l/100km based on how many kilometers you actually can get on a tank of gas (and dividing by your gas tank capacity), or based on the consumption reading you see on the console?
12.5 is what the console says. IT's been averaged over a while so it should be accurate. I get about 5-550km/tank. You should definitely look into it more, maybe you have a leak somewhere? 380 is pathetic for a 65L tank.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Z K View Post
That is BS! Ethanol does not damage your fuel system on a modern car. All cars built within the past 5-10 years have fuel systems that can handle 10% ethanol or more. If you have an OLD car, like over 15 years old, you may have to worry about ethanol.

A lot of people modify their cars to run E85 (85% ethanol) in their cars because it has a higher octane (105 octane AKI/RON avg) and makes a lot more power vs non-ethanol gas.

And Ethanol is better for the environment. It burns cleaner and produces less pollutants. An E85 running car will pass tailpipe emissions tests even without a catalytic converter and much cleaner than regular gas car running a catalytic converter.
Maybe, I actually heard the opposite, that ethanol burns dirtier. I could be wrong, I'm no expert. All I know is that my mileage is definitely worse and I don't notice any improvement in performance. HAven't tried esso 94 though. Next track day I will.
__________________
E92 ///M3 in Dakar Yellow, M-DCT, iDrive, 220M OEM rims, Active Autowerke Green filter, Turner Motorsport test pipes, BPM stage 2 tune, Stoptech ST-40 F+R in yellow.
Appreciate 0
      01-15-2014, 01:08 PM   #15
tokic_o
Private First Class
Canada
1
Rep
178
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by KmndntKlink View Post
12.5 is what the console says. IT's been averaged over a while so it should be accurate. I get about 5-550km/tank. You should definitely look into it more, maybe you have a leak somewhere? 380 is pathetic for a 65L tank.


Maybe, I actually heard the opposite, that ethanol burns dirtier. I could be wrong, I'm no expert. All I know is that my mileage is definitely worse and I don't notice any improvement in performance. HAven't tried esso 94 though. Next track day I will.
wow 12.5 ?! that's impressive... do you only do hwy cruising or something? lol

My consol shows 15l/100km and my idrive shows 50km left when I have driven around 360kms a tank
__________________
"But a tell tale sign is when we don't even need to say, "BMW M3". All we need to say is, "M3" and even folks with little to no interest in automobiles, know what it is. They recognize the model name and can tell by the huge smile on our faces that it's something very special..."
Appreciate 0
      01-15-2014, 01:27 PM   #16
HPF_E92
Private First Class
1
Rep
148
Posts

 
Drives: E92
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: GTA

iTrader: (2)

wow 12.5 and 18.7 is just two extreme end, I guess I am also on the high side around 16.5 - 17.5 L / 100 km and that's what most people are getting?? I am not revving it hard either, I think the DCT works a little better than manual regarding this department.
__________________
E92 M3 DCT - Sold
E90 M3 6MT - Exhaust / Pulley / BPM Tuned
Appreciate 0
      01-15-2014, 09:32 PM   #17
KmndntKlink
Lieutenant
KmndntKlink's Avatar
Canada
4
Rep
421
Posts

 
Drives: 2010 e92 m3
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tokic_o View Post
wow 12.5 ?! that's impressive... do you only do hwy cruising or something? lol

My consol shows 15l/100km and my idrive shows 50km left when I have driven around 360kms a tank
Yeah and I'm light on the throttle (well no, maybe it's just that I left off the gas alot and 'coast' to a stop). I also do a lot of highway or at least high limit roads with lighter traffic. In downtown core I'd get 18L too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF_E92 View Post
wow 12.5 and 18.7 is just two extreme end, I guess I am also on the high side around 16.5 - 17.5 L / 100 km and that's what most people are getting?? I am not revving it hard either, I think the DCT works a little better than manual regarding this department.
DCT is more fuel efficient because it money shifts for you. manuals can do it too, if you get feature coding done you can easily add a display to the instrument cluster that gives you little arrows on when to eco-shift.

The best I've had was 10.8 lol. Didn't last though, traffic is so bad in the GTA. mid 11 on summer gas, mid 12 on winter seems to be my avg. I just replaced my o2 sensor so I'm expecting 12.8 to go down to low 12s hopefully. I'm impressed with how fuel efficient this car is. The c63 is hoooorrrible. It's a 6L but still, we're talking single digit MPG.
__________________
E92 ///M3 in Dakar Yellow, M-DCT, iDrive, 220M OEM rims, Active Autowerke Green filter, Turner Motorsport test pipes, BPM stage 2 tune, Stoptech ST-40 F+R in yellow.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2014, 09:57 PM   #18
Irishace
ElevenPointFive
Irishace's Avatar
Canada
32
Rep
2,052
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Z K View Post
That is BS! Ethanol does not damage your fuel system on a modern car. All cars built within the past 5-10 years have fuel systems that can handle 10% ethanol or more. If you have an OLD car, like over 15 years old, you may have to worry about ethanol.

A lot of people modify their cars to run E85 (85% ethanol) in their cars because it has a higher octane (105 octane AKI/RON avg) and makes a lot more power vs non-ethanol gas.

And Ethanol is better for the environment. It burns cleaner and produces less pollutants. An E85 running car will pass tailpipe emissions tests even without a catalytic converter and much cleaner than regular gas car running a catalytic converter.
Bingo, if we had E85 here I would be begging for a flex fuel kit to run it. Ultra 94 is the best gas in Canada, full stop. It is a true 94 octane.
__________________
2008 Jerez Black - 6MT E92 M3
Evolve | H&R | Apex | Exotics Tuning
2015 Pearl Black - DSG MK7 GTI
Burger Motorsports Beta Tester
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2014, 10:01 PM   #19
NELSON.MLGB
Captain
NELSON.MLGB's Avatar
Canada
8
Rep
679
Posts

 
Drives: 2010 E92 JB M3
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary,AB

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishace View Post
Bingo, if we had E85 here I would be begging for a flex fuel kit to run it. Ultra 94 is the best gas in Canada, full stop. It is a true 94 octane.
exactly, ultra 94 is one of the top tier gas.. it is the best indeed.
Appreciate 0
      01-17-2014, 12:07 PM   #20
Z K
Colonel
Z K's Avatar
United_States
26
Rep
2,174
Posts

 
Drives: E90 M3, MK6 GLI
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Francisco

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishace View Post
Bingo, if we had E85 here I would be begging for a flex fuel kit to run it. Ultra 94 is the best gas in Canada, full stop. It is a true 94 octane.
A cool thing is if you are behind an E85 car with no cat, it smells like popcorn. Most of the ethanol in the USA is made from corn.
__________________
Auto Detailing Enthusiast!
Appreciate 0
      01-17-2014, 02:39 PM   #21
///Matt.BLU
Private First Class
///Matt.BLU's Avatar
1
Rep
171
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (1)

I don't know how you guys get such low figures like 12.5L/100km. I've never seen mine under 14L/100. Driving conservatively gets me around 15.4L/100km, and I consider that to be my low. I rarely ever see 300km a tank before refuelling. I drive around 90% city though, so maybe that explains the huge discrepancy.
__________________
Frozen Blue | ZCP | Akrapovic Evolution| BMC | ARKYM lip | GTS-V diffuser | KW Sleeves | Macht Schnell | LUX | ModMyNav | iND | Volk Racing TE37 |
Appreciate 0
      01-17-2014, 09:17 PM   #22
Harpua
Private
Canada
0
Rep
99
Posts

 
Drives: 2008 E90 M3
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Ontario

iTrader: (0)

So...... Ethanol good? Bad? Neither, go with highest octane? Seriously, why are people choosing one grade/brand over the other?


BTW, the other day during some inclement weather I was forced to drive along rural highways keeping speeds between 80-~90kph -- My L/100km over the 80km drive was under 10! What's all this about gas guzzling M3s, hmm?
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:48 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST