Clubjazz - Honda Jazz & HR-V Forums

Honda Jazz Forums => Honda Jazz Mk1 2002-2008 => Topic started by: Wilderbeest on November 15, 2020, 05:55:04 AM

Title: FUEL
Post by: Wilderbeest on November 15, 2020, 05:55:04 AM
Recently since May, due to an EML , on the dash , I decided to try 99 octane  fuel , from Tesco.
What a  difference it makes to my old Jazz.  (132000M)

Its positively lively, responds better , and is a pleasure to drive.
Ok , the fuel is a bit dearer , but, just the throttle response is worth it.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Kremmen on November 15, 2020, 06:36:24 AM
Interesting, because these engines are optimised for 95 RON.

I did a lengthy mpg comparison many years ago with a 1.8 Civic using Shell, BP and Tesco, using 95, 97/98, and 99 RON depending on what each company supplied.

Same commute roads, same time of day,  etc. Taking in motorways, A and B roads.

I could find no driving difference and the mpg increase was tiny < 3mpg, even though, at the time, BP were quoting a large tank range increase.

Since then I've stuck with Tesco 95 without issue.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: peteo48 on November 15, 2020, 11:39:08 AM
I have been using premium fuel in my Mk3 for the last 4 fill ups. I have noticed no discernible difference in mpg - indeed other variables like driving style, ambient temperature and traffic density all much more significant imho.

But I am now convinced the car is livelier with the higher octane fuel although, here again, that could be down to the engine loosening up (bought new in January). I also note that, on the Mk3, the compression ratio is high - 13.5:1. Does this mean the knock sensor has allowed the timing to advance?

I'm going to do another premium fuel fill then go back to 95 RON and see, after a few fill ups, if the car feels less lively.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Westy36 on November 15, 2020, 01:11:29 PM
The great fuel debate! I've read the pros and cons and have oscillated between supermarket and branded fuel for years. So, its interesting to read Kremmen post and his conclusion.

I now use either our local Texaco, which has a good reward scheme and the family that own it are so friendly, or our local Asda. I can tell no difference between the fuels, so I shop based on convenience at the time.  :D
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Jocko on November 15, 2020, 01:48:11 PM
I felt the car felt slightly livelier when I used 99 RON (possibly just placebo effect) and I saw a marginal improvement in mpg but not enough to justify the increased cost. Hence, I reverted to 95 RON supermarket fuel.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: VicW on November 15, 2020, 02:25:58 PM
Like Kremmen I have carried out extensive long term use of higher octane fuels and my conclusion was that they are not cost effective.
You have got to do several fill-ups before you are running on neat higher octane fuel as it is otherwise being diluted by the lower octane stuff in the tank.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: equaliser on November 15, 2020, 03:19:34 PM
Shell V-Power (99 RON) definitely makes a difference on my MK3 CVT, it'll hold onto lower RPM climbing hills. I live up a hill and also my workplace is on a hill, with the standard 95 RON the engine runs at 3000rpm to climb the hills but on 99 RON it'll stay at 2000 rpm at the same speed (40mph). I also felt the difference in torque and sharper throttle response with my previous MK9 Civic which made it nicer to drive. I only do about 4-5000 miles per annum so the additional cost is negligible to me. Your mileage may vary as they say but I'm a believer!
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Kremmen on November 15, 2020, 03:39:04 PM
Tesco jollop is actually Esso.

Many a time I've seen an Esso tanker at the filling station. You also get Tesco clubcard points at Esso stations so there's some collaboration going on.

I don't have any hills near me and my acceleration is not miles per hour but miles per fortnight so 95 does me nicely.


Just found my post on Civinfo from July 2009:

Quote
I've tried BP Ultimate Super Unleaded (97RON), Tesco High Octane 99RON), normal BP Ultimate (95RON) and normal Tesco unleaded (95RON).

To make the test more realistic, in my case (200 miles a week), I needed to use each for a month to ensure that on the last week I was still not running a cocktail of petrol.

and the results in my 1.8 i-shift = ........................

.............not a blind bit of difference with my mpg staying constant throughout, and no noticeable change in engine smoothness or performance !

The Which? magazine did a similar test with the same results across a range of vehicles.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Westy36 on November 15, 2020, 03:57:42 PM
I felt the car felt slightly livelier when I used 99 RON (possibly just placebo effect) and I saw a marginal improvement in mpg but not enough to justify the increased cost. Hence, I reverted to 95 RON supermarket fuel.

I think thats part of it, the placebo effect. "I've paid more so it must be better"

The only time Ive used 99 RON, is in a car we had that would only run on 99 RON. Back when it was selling for £1.60 a litre and the car did sub 30mpg. Oh how I love the Jazz economy of 50+ mpg and 95 RON at current prices.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Wilderbeest on November 15, 2020, 05:51:56 PM
I drive my car extremely hard , using all the revs where possible.  And that's where I have noticed the difference , at the performance end of its use.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: springswood on November 16, 2020, 10:36:59 AM
I didn't know my Jazz had a performance end  ;)
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Westy36 on November 16, 2020, 11:42:15 AM
I didn't know my Jazz had a performance end  ;)

 :D 
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: peteo48 on November 16, 2020, 12:03:17 PM
Tesco jollop is actually Esso.

Many a time I've seen an Esso tanker at the filling station. You also get Tesco clubcard points at Esso stations so there's some collaboration going on.

I don't have any hills near me and my acceleration is not miles per hour but miles per fortnight so 95 does me nicely.


Just found my post on Civinfo from July 2009:

Quote
I've tried BP Ultimate Super Unleaded (97RON), Tesco High Octane 99RON), normal BP Ultimate (95RON) and normal Tesco unleaded (95RON).

To make the test more realistic, in my case (200 miles a week), I needed to use each for a month to ensure that on the last week I was still not running a cocktail of petrol.

and the results in my 1.8 i-shift = ........................

.............not a blind bit of difference with my mpg staying constant throughout, and no noticeable change in engine smoothness or performance !

The Which? magazine did a similar test with the same results across a range of vehicles.

Pretty sure Greenergy supply both Tesco and Esso so I reckon you are spot on.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: olduser1 on November 16, 2020, 09:47:41 PM
Maybe its all about driver choice, over 35 years running Subaru's on Shell I found the car travelled further & performance improved.
Swopping over to BP superunleaded a few years ago with 2011 Jazz much better running.
When V Power reached £1.48 p litre changed to Esso .
Current Jazz on Tesco 99 oct @ £1.16 smoother running. its your choice.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: bus_ter on November 22, 2020, 05:30:13 PM
I occasionally put premium (Shell VPower usually) in the tank. Maybe every 5 or 6 fill ups. I do it for the alleged cleaning properties, figuring it will help keep the engine internals a little cleaner.

I've not noticed any apparent performance or MPG change. If the engine is not tuned to make use of higher RON fuel and tighter timings (which I don't believe it is), then there's no way you will gain any extra performance?
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: equaliser on November 22, 2020, 05:46:41 PM
I occasionally put premium (Shell VPower usually) in the tank. Maybe every 5 or 6 fill ups. I do it for the alleged cleaning properties, figuring it will help keep the engine internals a little cleaner.

I've not noticed any apparent performance or MPG change. If the engine is not tuned to make use of higher RON fuel and tighter timings (which I don't believe it is), then there's no way you will gain any extra performance?

I'm sure you're right about the earlier Jazz engines but the MK3 with it's high compression and knock sensors certainly does alter the tune for higher octane, you can see it clearly advancing the ignition further compared to 95RON if you monitor the timings like I do with the ODBII Car Scanner app. As for alleged cleaning abilities, that remains to be seen but it can't hurt!
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Jocko on November 22, 2020, 05:58:50 PM
The Mk 1 does too. ScanGauge shows that. But the improvement doesn't justify the cost as far as I an concerned.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: peteo48 on November 23, 2020, 10:53:25 AM
I occasionally put premium (Shell VPower usually) in the tank. Maybe every 5 or 6 fill ups. I do it for the alleged cleaning properties, figuring it will help keep the engine internals a little cleaner.

I've not noticed any apparent performance or MPG change. If the engine is not tuned to make use of higher RON fuel and tighter timings (which I don't believe it is), then there's no way you will gain any extra performance?

I'm sure you're right about the earlier Jazz engines but the MK3 with it's high compression and knock sensors certainly does alter the tune for higher octane, you can see it clearly advancing the ignition further compared to 95RON if you monitor the timings like I do with the ODBII Car Scanner app. As for alleged cleaning abilities, that remains to be seen but it can't hurt!

Really interesting. I've been looking for proof, one way or the other, for some time. My low mileage means I fill up less than once a month and, frequently, when the tank is nowhere near empty if there is an offer going on. The extra cost is insignificant if you don't do many miles. I'd think differently if I was still doing 10,000 miles a year but I've only done 2100 since January.

On premium fuels, John Cadogan did a You Tube video about Toyota and other hybrids needing premium fuel. In Australia the bog standard fuel is 91 and 95 is seen as premium so I'm sure using our 95 petrol won't do any harm.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: equaliser on November 23, 2020, 03:45:53 PM
Really interesting. I've been looking for proof, one way or the other, for some time. My low mileage means I fill up less than once a month and, frequently, when the tank is nowhere near empty if there is an offer going on. The extra cost is insignificant if you don't do many miles. I'd think differently if I was still doing 10,000 miles a year but I've only done 2100 since January.

On premium fuels, John Cadogan did a You Tube video about Toyota and other hybrids needing premium fuel. In Australia the bog standard fuel is 91 and 95 is seen as premium so I'm sure using our 95 petrol won't do any harm.

Certainly nothing wrong with 95RON, as you say it's more premium than other countries. If I was you and not doing a lot of miles then I would use the higher RON petrol as it won't degrade as quickly as the the lower RON when left sitting in your tank, just a thought!
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Jocko on November 23, 2020, 04:22:03 PM
From Wiki.

Australia: "regular" unleaded fuel is 91 RON, "premium" unleaded with 95 RON is widely available, and 98 RON fuel is also reasonably common. Shell used to sell 100 RON fuel (5% ethanol content) from a small number of service stations, most of which are located in major cities (stopped in August 2008). United Petroleum used to sell 100 RON unleaded fuel (10% ethanol content) at a small number of its service stations (originally only two, but then expanded to 67 outlets nationwide) (stopped in September 2014). All fuel in Australia is unleaded except for some aviation fuels. E85 unleaded fuel is also available at several United service stations across the country. Recently E10 fuel has become quite common, and is available at almost every major fuel station, except in Western Australia. The Australian government makes stations advertise E10 as 94 RON.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: degzi on November 25, 2020, 01:23:17 AM
If you notice a difference then your ready for a service.

Clean and gap your plugs and get a new air filter. You can wash your old air filter and re-use once dry.

Should be done every 6months to keep in tip top condition.





Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: knobbly on February 11, 2021, 01:03:56 PM
Excuse me reviving this thread, this may be useful.

Running a 1.9tdi Fabia, almost on 100% supermarket fuel the engine was lumpy, especially at the low revs.  After  advice from Honest John, who I  found to be very good(a fan of all Jazz models too) I used regular BP diesel. After the first fills the engine was smoother allowing a higher gear sooner.  Pulling smoothly 300 rpm sooner, may not seem much, but at town speeds it makes a difference.  With MPG over a considerable time over all types of journeys there was an improvement. Previously giving 58-60mpg during warmer months, it improved to 60-64mpg. The car is  more pleasant to drive and well worth a cost if there is no saving, as the gearbox and engine get an easier time.

In addition, I mistakenly put 16L of petrol in before topping up with diesel and 2 stroke oil for the injectors.  It ran  quite roughly for the next 600 miles as I topped up with diesel when I could.  It then ran as new on a 140k engine.  Its now on 178K and runs wonderfully, its a shame that the electrics are not the same!  So for PD engines the sometimes prescribed method of a gallon petrol does work.  These are the only engines where this is a good idea, the injectors are lubed by engine oil and not reliant on the lubricating properties of the diesel itself.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Jocko on February 11, 2021, 04:39:27 PM
They do reckon that premium diesel makes a more significant difference than premium petrol. Have you tried reverting to supermarket diesel to see if your petrol incident maybe cleaned things out?
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: knobbly on February 11, 2021, 10:46:45 PM
Jocko

I have been forced to use supermarket fuel a few time since(5yrs ago) and found the engine lumpier.  There was of course contamination of one into the other, so it was not scientific and really requires a long term test.  That I have kept using branded diesel, now Esso at the same garage is testament in itself. Especially as I am tight as your nationality suggests you are!

Nigel
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Kremmen on February 12, 2021, 05:23:36 AM
Round me Esso and Tesco is the same stuff. Many a time I've seen Esso tankers topping up Tesco pumps.

Also, you get Tesco clubcard points at Esso stations so there is a link.

I've been using Tesco jollop for decades and never had a single issue, cars have run perfectly.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: peteo48 on February 12, 2021, 11:54:33 AM
Round me Esso and Tesco is the same stuff. Many a time I've seen Esso tankers topping up Tesco pumps.

Also, you get Tesco clubcard points at Esso stations so there is a link.

I've been using Tesco jollop for decades and never had a single issue, cars have run perfectly.

I'm trying to work out when I became exercised by the fuel issue. For years and years I used mostly supermarket fuel (95 RON) with no ill effect on a large number of different cars. The 2 diesels I owned (both VW - a Bora and later a Golf) were also run on Tesco diesel. I genuinely didn't give it a thought although I have always been scrupulous in getting the car serviced on time.

I reckon it's since I retired! It was about the same time that I became obsessed with wash sponges causing swirl marks on the paint. I've now got a shed full of car care products!

The devil finds work for idle minds?

On fuel I think Kremmen and VicW have it right. Common sense and my own experience should tell me that using supermarket fuel is not harmful. 
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: guest4871 on February 12, 2021, 03:46:09 PM
All petrol and diesel is produced by everyone to a set regulated specification for a particular standard e.g. 95RON, 99RON etc.
 
Whether it be branded Shell, Esso, BP, Morrison, Sainsbury, Apple, Chevron, Tesco or whoever, the base product is exactly the same.  The only difference between brands is the additives each brand adds.

The supplier and distributor for Tesco and Esso fuels is the same. The additives will be different.

https://www.greenergy.com

Greenergy is the distributor in UK for Esso.
 
https://www.greenergy.com/esso

Tesco is a major shareholder in Greenergy, the distributor for the Esso brand.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/nov/28/tesco-petrol-retail-industry

I am not sure any oil majors now do their own distribution of the finished product or even refine it for their own exclusive sale as they used to or now even own their own refineries. Think Ineos.

So the refining and distribution of fuel is now an open secondary market not operated by the oil majors. Most of the oil majors now only franchise out their brands to retail site owners.

And there is a very close distribution relationship between Tesco and Esso via Greenergy. Same unliveried tankers I expect.

All base petrol and diesel fuel is exactly the same. Different brands add different additives when the tanker is loaded at the common distribution source for delivery to their own branded retail sites. So an Esso liveried tanker may deliver to Tesco. If it is delivering to Tesco, it is not delivering Esso fuel!

(Geenergy are also working with Shell on the Thames Oil Port:

"Thames Oilport
We are building Thames Oilport on the site of the former Coryton refinery in the UK, as a joint venture with Shell. We are turning the former refinery into a modern import [distibution] terminal capable of meeting growing fuel demand in the South East of England".)

https://www.greenergy.com/manufacturing-and-infrastructure

Hope all that makes sense! Nothing is what it seems!

You pays your money and takes you choice.



Greenergy used to publish the analysis of their base products on their website – they may still do.

You’ll have to work very hard to find which brands add what additives and what they do (mostly detergents IIRC)!
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: knobbly on February 16, 2021, 09:33:37 AM
There is more to this than just the power/mpg equation.  Just because your car runs ok does not it is running optimally.  If you are doing lots of short runs, there will be lots of residue from incomplete combustion which will build up.  There is a reason that some cars suffer from EGR problems and give worse MPG figures.  It is my feeling that there is a build up in injectors and Egr depending on Fuel. Oil and journey length.  The infamous Italian tune-up does help, so there is a basis for this and not just a gut feeling.
In the motorbike world, there were famous cases where the early Firebaldes gave more power if they were worked from the off.  There were many cases to confirm and  5-8% power gain, so not just a whim.

There is a parallel here with the infamous Input shaft bearing. Some wear, some don't, yet Honda products are very consistent.  I would love to know what is the variable factor, my guess is high revs in lower gears with little load.  I cannot imagine it is load related as the demographics suggest Jazz owners are more mature in age and driving habits!!!!
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Westy36 on February 16, 2021, 09:59:48 AM
In the motorbike world, there were famous cases where the early Firebaldes gave more power if they were worked from the off.  There were many cases to confirm and  5-8% power gain, so not just a whim.
I've heard this before. The only brand new machine I've ever had was a Suzuki Bandit in '98. I followed the running in process to the letter, but some bikers swear that if you just use it fully from day one it will be more powerful !!
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: richardfrost on February 16, 2021, 10:51:22 AM
In the motorbike world, there were famous cases where the early Firebaldes gave more power if they were worked from the off.  There were many cases to confirm and  5-8% power gain, so not just a whim.
I've heard this before. The only brand new machine I've ever had was a Suzuki Bandit in '98. I followed the running in process to the letter, but some bikers swear that if you just use it fully from day one it will be more powerful !!
I have long believed that the days of 'running in' an engine are behind us. I was advised back in the '80s just to take it easy for the first 250 miles until all the fluids have been 'splashed about a bit' and then you're good to go.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Westy36 on February 16, 2021, 11:09:18 AM
I have long believed that the days of 'running in' an engine are behind us. I was advised back in the '80s just to take it easy for the first 250 miles until all the fluids have been 'splashed about a bit' and then you're good to go.
You may be correct. Other than my new Suzuki, ever other car or bike I've owned has already gone way past its running in period. For example, MK2 Cavalier has 180,000 miles on the clock when I bought it!
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Jocko on February 16, 2021, 11:13:41 AM
Owner's manual doesn't advise running in.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: culzean on February 16, 2021, 11:29:58 AM
I have long believed that the days of 'running in' an engine are behind us. I was advised back in the '80s just to take it easy for the first 250 miles until all the fluids have been 'splashed about a bit' and then you're good to go.
You may be correct. Other than my new Suzuki, ever other car or bike I've owned has already gone way past its running in period. For example, MK2 Cavalier has 180,000 miles on the clock when I bought it!

My new Suzuki motorbike said 'do not exceed 5000 revs** for first 750 miles'  red line is at 11,000 ( and that has no cylinder liners, it has a ceramic coating straight onto aluminium bore ) - I always think that it pays to at least take things easy for first 1000 miles, and they still advise not to use straight synthetic until after first oil change ( 2000 miles ) because it is 'too good' and does not allow parts to bed in. 

**Even 5000 revs would get you a speeding ticket though  :o
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: embee on February 16, 2021, 01:00:00 PM
FWIW I can relate what my experience has been from 35+ years in the engine industry.
I cannot think of any serial engine manufacturer which uses anything other than a regular service spec oil as initial factory fill.
For development work we always carried out a "break-in" procedure, the details depended on the manufacturer but all were of a similar concept. Start at low speeds and light loads for maybe 15mins to warm up thoroughly (and allowing checks of system functions etc), then up to perhaps 1/4 speed light load, and gradually ramp the load up to perhaps 1/4 load (BMEP) over maybe 15mins, hold for maybe 15mins. Reduce to light load and increase speed (maybe 1/2 max rpm), hold, ramp up load to 1/4, return to lower speed and ramp up load to 1/2, return to mid speed and ramp up load to 1/2, reduce load and increase speed to 3/4 etc etc.
It is usually this sort of sawtooth type sequence, gradually and progressively increasing the speeds and ramping up loads until you reach max power speed and load after a few hours. It would then be held at Pmax for perhaps 15mins. The whole process is typically 10hrs, sometimes a little less.
 At the initial stages the speed is the critical parameter, load is not so important to begin with. The break-in is principally for the "piston/bore interface", i.e. bore, rings, skirt. The bore surface technology is sophisticated these days, the preparation in manufacture to achieve the optimum bearing area ratio (running surface area vs oil retention volume) is very carefully engineered. However good the processes, there is always an "excess roughness" which is derived to achieve a controlled wear process between the rings and bores to optimise the running conditions after a short bedding-in time. The peaks of the material surfaces will project through the oil film and will be worn away, the risk initially is that with high pressure contact at these peaks the friction can result in micro-welding and tearing of the surfaces, which does not subsequently "heal". It will polish over, but it doesn't give the optimum surface. The idea is to achieve a running surface between Mr1 and Mr2 on the picture below to maximise service life with an optimised oil retention volume. The Rpk is the height of the peaks (asperities) which are worn off during a break-in to get down to the straight line part of the diagram.
This is the sort of thing https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:820446/FULLTEXT01.pdf

(https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0257897215005733-gr4.jpg)

Engines are engineered to be "tolerant" of abuse but this doesn't necessarily result in the optimum conditions for maximum service life. There is usually a piston scuff test where an engine will be built with minimum bore clearances, it will get the minimum build process running (often 2mins) then will be taken directly to max power. This will be the worst case scenario and it must be able to survive it.

Car manufacturers don't specify any process because it can cause confusion and dispute, so they engineer the product to tolerate the worst and hopefully be treated well. Usually new owners will drive a car more or less reasonably anyway. If you get a new engine the best thing is to use the engine progressively, the rpm being the most important. Start using modest speeds, increase load a bit, then work up the combinations of speeds and loads. On the road I would suggest 20hrs or 500mls is ideal to get to the point where you are using full throttle and near max revs on regular occasions, you don't do the engine any favours by being too gentle at this stage, they are made to run at max power and you will not harm it.

There is some degree of truth in the "Italian tune-up" theory, the worst possible conditions are when an engine is used for repeated low speed short runs, 2mls to the shops once a week. Valve rotation (to even out wear and sealing) usually starts around 2500-3000rpm, and I always try to give an engine a short time at 3k or more (once fully warm) especially if I've been driving in traffic at low speeds a lot.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: John Ratsey on February 16, 2021, 05:42:53 PM
Owner's manual doesn't advise running in.
But this doesn't exclude performance limits being programmed into the ECU with these limits being progressively relaxed as the miles are accrued - people often sense that the engine runs better after a few throusand miles.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Jocko on February 16, 2021, 05:58:06 PM
people often sense that the engine runs better after a few throusand miles.
I wouldn't know. I have never owned a car less than 3 years old.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: sparky Paul on February 16, 2021, 06:03:48 PM
But this doesn't exclude performance limits being programmed into the ECU with these limits being progressively relaxed as the miles are accrued

I suppose that could be done, but unlikely I would have thought. The mk1 ECU doesnt have any access to the mileage anyway - unlike some other car ECUs which keep a secondary register as an anti-clocking measure.
Title: Re: FUEL
Post by: Westy36 on February 16, 2021, 07:22:55 PM
@embee - Great post! Very informative, thank you.  :D

unlike some other car ECUs which keep a secondary register as an anti-clocking measure.
This is very true. Modern complex machinery have many ECUs that all store the mileage. I heard of a case recently where a Mercedes W205 was back to the dealers for a software update on its hugely complex sat nav command device. The dealer was unable to complete the update due to one of the ECUs have a different mileage reading logged in it. Head office was involved and it got sorted, but just imagine trying to deal with something like that when the car is well used. I expect it will be beyond economical repair if more than a headlight bulb goes at 10+yrs old.