Click for enlarged image
It’s just been a month since Shell was supposed to have officially rolled out their new RON95 fuel, but now they’ve decided to introduce an updated formula.
Their fuel is now called Shell FuelSave Unleaded 95 and Shell FuelSave Unleaded 97, and Shell claims it can help motorists save up to 1 litre from every full tank – with a full tank calculated as 50 litres of course.
Savings of 1 litre out of 50 litres can be said a few ways to better help understand it. It can either be a 5% fuel saving, or an extra 10 to 12km depending on how much fuel your engine normally drinks, or RM1.80 per tank.
Shell claims the new formula contains an ingredient that is active in your engine from the moment you start using it, not just after one full tank. It’s called and Efficiency Improver and it’s designed to help lubricate engine parts where normal engine oils cannot easily reach, as the fuel comes in from the top and naturally engine oil has to fight against gravity.
I personally have not tried the fuel yet but if you decide to give it a shot please share your experiences here. I’ve actually seen the promo posters for this before the launch today so you could already have this new formula in your fuel tank if you’ve pumped a full tank in the past 2 or 3 days.
After dabbling for years in the IT industry, Paul Tan initially began this site as a general blog covering various topics of personal interest. With an increasing number of readers paying rapt attention to the motoring stories, one thing led to another and the rest, as they say, is history. An avid electronic gadget aficionado as well as big-time coffee lover, he's also the executive producer of the Driven motoring TV programme.
Hopefully this is for real cos recent feedback from
lotsa motorist that the current Ron95(all petrol brands)
gives them about 20% less mileage per tankful.
Personally I used to be able to go from low 500s to high 500s (km) by switching from Shell Super 97 to Shell V-Power 97. This was during the simple cheap RON97 days… no RON95 around. Feel like that's about 10% improvement already. But the Shell station near my house… their pumps started getting really slow, I have no patience to pump there. So I pump Petronas if I am on my way out from home, and BHPetrol if I am on my way back home.
It doesnt make any different, 1litre is just 2.5% of my full tank. My myvi get extra 10% mileage for each litre and my dad xtrail get extra 10% mileage using petronas. And these came from formerly strong supporter of Shell. But ever since we discovered Petronas fuel giving more mileage. It's history!
i tink thy had to respond to too many complains of the ron 95…i used it twice for waja and accord and its frankly horrible…makes the engine sound so rough…its like its mixed with water or sting…no more shell for me watever ron thy have….from thn on i use petronas or esso only and no complains there..smooth and worth it
you know paul, it would be great if all the readers chip in a little money into a 'fuel testing' fund thing. Get 5 person to participate, pump full tank from all petrol station, get the data… and help us save money
My mom drives a myvi, switched frm Shell 95 to bhp. Even my mom noticed the difference! Son bhp made the engine / driving like it's new!
When Shell 1st introduce the 95RON petrol it seem it lack of power and less milage than previous 97RON. I do hope this new fuel is really what it said. As i'm aware of, BHP petrol slightly better than those 95RON Shell. I used it myself.
Yea…. saw a lot of complains saying that Shell RON95 have the worst fc.
hehe … I can identify with Paul. I chose petrol stations based on speed, have been switching from Pet to Shell and now to Caltex really because of the pump speed and reliability/speed of the credit card machine. Really hate it when the credit card machine is slow or not functioning; if it happens the third time, bye bye station, am never going there again.
I wonder how many readers out there think this way, rather than really care / or believe in differences of the fuel brands.
Something for the station operators to take note. Maintain your stations!!
O'really? Help lubricates engine parts? Worth a try.
I has been switching to Petronas since RON95 due to all the reasons stated above.
Calvin, I think it will better just let the readers share their experience, we are not short of travellers here.
For my experience, I found BHPetrol RON95 is the greatest among other brands' RON95 available. I tried it on motorbike (Kriss 2) before I used it on my car.
To support my suggestion, I have also checked the motorbike's spark plug. With Shell fuel, there have deposits on the center electrode; with BHPetrol, they have been cleared and the color of the center electrode become brownish. For Petronas RON95, I found the motorbike engine still having the rough revolution, sounds like 'sore throat'. but after another another 1-2liters of BHPetrol poured in. It revs smoother. I also tried Caltex RON95, it is better than Petronas RON95 but not better than BHPetrol RON95.
Will try again on Shell new formulated (if they do) RON95 again after my motorbike on low fuel. Hopefully, its not going to disappointed me again like previous 'Fuel Economy formula'
All my findings are based on my experience on RON95 only. Just for sharing. Happy motoring.
yeah, after RON95 is out.. Heard many complains too to Shell RON 95.. but i haven't try it personally.. I was a supporter for Petronas Ron97 and now still using Petronas Ron95..
Mobil/Esso/Caltex/Petronas RON 95 is not bad too..
But BHP RON95 is abit slow & rough when pickup if compare to Mobil/Esso/Caltex/Petronas RON 95 [Wira 1.5L (A)]
Does those 2 chicks in the pictures got anything to do with the new formula..?
haha…just kidding =)
Well no big deal. At least I got roughly 30km more from BHP95. 1 litre only translates to about 12km merely for my car.Sack the Marketing Director of Shell for such unconvincing idea. He He He
MY Saga BLM get a whopping 400 Km/32 liters with Caltex Ron95, which is 12.5Km/L. My saga used to consumed the whole tank for a stupid 260 – 300Km, which is around 10km/L!
i used to use Shell, but their 95 is too low powered and consumed more than they stated! i get a stupid 9.5Km/L in average!
Paul Tan said,
October 7, 2009 @ 1:23 am
.. But the Shell station near my house… their pumps started getting really slow, I have no patience to pump there. So I pump Petronas if I am on my way out from home, and BHPetrol if I am on my way back home.
———————————————————-
Mine is the other way around. The Shell pump is really fast while Petronas is like a snail, really hate it when you are late to work.
All this marketing hogwash. I remember there was an article on The Star saying that RON95 is better for our cars. That may be true, but it's definitely not better for our pockets. I'd like to echo the loss in mileage after the switch from RON97 to RON95 (Petronas fuel). RON95 is garbage…I'm looking at an average of about 14% increase consumption from 10.5L/100km using RON97 to 12.0L/100km using RON95 (based on my car's electronic fuel consumption measurement) at each fill up. Simple math tells me it costs the same to fill up with either fuel grade with respect to mileage. I won't have a gripe with RON95 if it were sold at RM1.70 as first announced.
my experience for ron95…
BHP & Caltex the best, Petronas ok….shell the worst (will only fill up wt shell as last resort)..planning to try esso nxt
Sell ron95 is so outofpower. (no wonder now they start to advertise and enhance it – well… marketing propaganda) . The best one tested is Petronas Primax95 and BHP.
Ron97 is hard to find anyway. Not many station offer it yet for now.
Latest FC Report (based on right by the first time warning light flash with more than 10 cycle test. this is the average km)
Petronas
Myvi on RON95 – RM50 – 450km (used to be 400km back with RON97)
Savvy on RON95 – RM40 – 335km (not keeping track seldom use RON97)
Esso/Mobil
Myvi no track (always on Petronas)
Savvy on RON95 – RM40 – 335km (used to be 300km back with RON97)
Lambo Murcielago (no track coz never own one)
Different between Petronas and Esso. I find that RON95 Petronas give louder engine sound compare to non-existant different on RON95 Esso.
interesting for the comments…
but for me….both works the same and fine…
Shell 95 and petronas 95 return me similar result…
Oh btw, I will just wait a few more days to wait the nearby Shell to flush out all their old stock and pump in fresh container of the new fuel?
im using saga blm (MT) and already try for ron95 petrol
here the result for 32liter of petrol and 80% City daily use
shell = 305km ( engine sound loud, performance down )
petronas = 340km ( performance down )
caltex = 340km ( good performance )
esso = 375km ( good permance same like use ron97 )
bhp = 385 ( so so performance )
for me i choosed esso coz everything running smooth for me….nice esso
i do maintain using shell ron 95 within raya week with i monitor that my myvi can reach 400++ km per full tank… will try for petronas ron 95 within a week to get comparison… if only once top up then just do the conclusion i think not the best way… at least we had keep fullfill our tank atleast 1 week or several times and do try short & long distance then take the average… then share to the whole world lah…
So, which one in the end should we stick to? In terms of overall mileage and engine performance…..
BHP, Petronas or Esso? Appreciate if anyone could suggest the best choice.
I dont know what to say, but since used RON95 from petronas, my sparks plug get rust easily, just change 2 month ago, and now change new one, if got water inside my engin, there now way water get in. Just my theory..
If you don't know what to say, then STFU!
I used Ron 95 for 1 full tank.mine is a civic 1.8.it lacked power.
Switched back to 97 n everything seemed ok from then on.
Driving a old waja, been using RON97 until date without change to RON95 since after reading all the comments, save 10% of $$, but lost 10% of mileage, what is the point. Also, lately switching from BHP RON97, Caltex RON97, and Petronas, then Shell RON97. It seems RON97 is really slightly different only depends on driving style. BHP and Caltex gives a good acceleration feel, and Petronas/Shell gives quiet feel. So if a driving pattern is really slow and easy, i guess Petronas/Shell is the choice since its more quiet. BHP and Caltex gives better motion though. Will try out the new SHELL RON97 and see if any different. Sorry RON95 not my choice. I rather drive slowlier/less to save some $$ rather than pump in the coughing RON95
and who knows my old waja can last longer..hopefully.
Well, seeing that Shell's 95 has a worst mileage than other brands, (assuming ppls complains hold true), then this little increase in "fuel save" isn't really gonna make it lead the pack in terms fuel economy, but hopefully it will be better than the current 95and on par with the other brands..
Current Shell 95:
decreased mileage
louder engine
less able to rev, and when you really push sounds like the engine's about to explode!… V power used to give me the smoothest revs but wasn't as economical as the Shell 97…
Been using Shell for my estima on ron 97 and recently 95. Difficulty starting my car a couple of times and now I changed to BHP. Ok so far…………
errrr.. bagus juga bila satu syarikat mendakwa petrol keluaran dia lebih baik dari petrol keluaran syarikat lain.
lepas ni, syarikat lain pulak kata dia punye petrol lagi bagus.
penghujung cerita nanti, pengguna jugak yang dapat faedah nye..
faedah kena tipu…. huhuhu
haiya just another gimmick to trick the rakyat, just bring down the price la, apa susah-susah, no need to proof this and that, wasting money saja ooo…
Cant help but think this is probably just a marketing ploy to counter allegations that their fuel is the worst compared with the others based on negative feedback received so far but imo, all RON95 fuel is the pits.
previously using Shell 97 gave me about 11.5 to 11.88 km/l, sometimes when traffic was good, close to even 12 km/l but after Shell 95 was launched, I got less than about 10.5 km/l, based on 2 rounds of rufueling. Hence, changed back to Esso / Mobil and the results is now reversed, previously Esso 97 have me only about 10.5 to 11 km but now, with Ron 95, its about 11.5 km/l and the station near my hse has double reward points, hence, 3% rebate and my cc gives 2% rebate. Nowadays, must really save $$$ where possible
I think Shell is just doing a campaign to win back its customers who switched to other brands. Where got such thing called 'Efficiency Improver'? But I'd sure be efficient if those two hot chicks are in my car. …. hehehe…..
'go chick power'…..
haiyya..just marketting strategy .. to many costumer switch to other brand,….
before ron95 launch, i was shell customer…but after a lot of complaint, i decide try all brand petrol..the result is:
caltex 1 Liter = 14.85714286 km
bhp 1 liter = 14.7666666km
mobil 1 liter = 15.46779661 km
petronas 1 liter = 14.5880597km
shell …still try trying…i'm sure it still cannot beat mobil…
start from next week, i change to mobil for sure…huhuhh
p/s i'm using iswara lmst 1.3 carb
I am a Waja Campro ('07 auto) owner. I've been using Petronas ron 95 ever since it was introduced, and I have always recorded my fc. Full tank with petronas ron95 (~RM100 till the brim) gives me almost ~600km (580-599km to be precise) depending on my driving for that particular week (I use the DUKE daily to work). I have ALWAYS averaged ~RM0.165/km. I tried Shell's ron 95 twice and it gave me RM.187/km for the first time and RM0.181/km the second. So it's kinda stupid for me to use Shell again….Well, with a benefit of a doubt, I will try their so-called 'new formula' the next time around and will share my consumption figures with you guys. Cheers.
i dont take any data but ron95 from shell definitely the worst. loudest sound from engine too. and that 'dr fuel' guy looks like a paedo.
HYE ALL READERS !!
For sure this is my result of testing on Shell RON 95 ~~~~
Proton Wira 1.5 Manual GLi
Used Shell Ron 95
Perfomance : Engine much smoother and lighter than RON 97
RM/KM : 1. RM 20.00 / 187 KM ( highway used at 90 km/h – 110 km/h )
2. RM 20.00 / 79 KM ( city used )
Commend : I have satisfy for using Shell RON 95 than Petronas RON 95. Besides, I will got Bonus on KM and prevent my engine car from knocking. I have tried on Petronas RON 95 and result my engine knocking and feel heavier.
When will BHP open their new station in Bandar Baru Bangi area ???
Hard to find the station….
I hope they did improve the RON95 as it was the worst ever. Maybe other brands have put a lot of effort by putting extra addictives that smoothen engine and increase mileage while shell was stingy on it. Upon realising this, shell had to improve its fuel before losing more customers on RON95. ESSO and BHP are the best RON95 for me.
shell introduce new formula after 1 month they introduce ron95… do you think why is that happen? is it they thier formula cannot finish RnD at 1 sept? or just another advertisment to win back their x-costumer..?? hehehhe i'm sure shell rugi last month…huhuhu
so all in all.
best ron95 fuel standings.
1: BHPetrol
2: Petronas
3:Caltex?
4:Shell
anyone care to update? i using petronas so far original tank of 97 still haven empty yet. but my c class 1995 sees no difference in switching from shell 97 to 95.
The best of RON95….
1. BHP
2. Esso/Mobil
3. Caltex
i using essos/mobile for myvi, it run so so but fast pick up.
while try on city, whole car like a dead fish and mileage drop significantly.
http://2hard2lie.blogspot.com/2009/09/which-ron-9…
above is my study of FC.
I am surprise the Saga BLM that posted above has just 10km/l
my ten yrs Iswara 1.3M with 100% city drive has a near 15km/l FC.
I just think you may need to use the prudent way to check ur FC.
to me.. tested on my wira 1.5 auto. only caltex 95, bhp95 amd mobil 95 can be used..
Govt supposed to phase out RON97 & introduce RON95, and then price RON95 RM1.75. This way rakyat have choice of either cheap RON95 (RM1.75) or cheaper RON92 (RM1.70). High performance cars like Ferrari that require RON97, owner must be super rich thus can buy after market octane booster for their cars.
i think Shell marketing dept has lost it….barely 1 months plus they have came out with another "fuel save" formula….common sense if products is good, would you introduce a "better" product in less than 2 months period??? surely this is desperate move…..
other theory could be that they fail to finalized their product b4 sept 1, taking for granted their market share thus they simply came out with marketing gimmick , assuming it was sure win strategy…..now eat dust lol……
my self haven't tried shell for full tank since sept 1, due to my tank was full & when i need to pump, there were lots of bad comment about shell fuel already….i only topup 15litre on highway, sure can't feel any different.
i drive KIA sportage and whenever I fill up the car with Shell RON95….the car feels sluggish….and this never happened before (used to Shell Ron97)!
I thought I was wrong until I read the comments..above!
Now, I am switching to Petronas Ron95 ( almost 2 months now, since), and my car feels smoother like it should be..
Tried Esso Ron95.. not that bad either!But no miracle either..
So far, shell is the worst!
On the other hand, my other car (the Honda City) is less fussy in what brand or type of fuel you fill it up with!
lazyf said,
October 7, 2009 @ 9:48 pm
The best of RON95….
1. BHP
2. Esso/Mobil
3. Caltex
Yesss lazyf!!..I totally 200% agree wifv ur ranking..my cps engine is very smooth and excellent pickup when using BHP..good milage too..
Tested on my car RON95, Esso and Petronas are good and feel no difference with the previous RON97. BHP feel slightly sluggish but its ok. Agreed that Shell your car feel no pickup.
I guess damage is already done. I think is difficult for Shell to regain back its customers. I was using shell for 20 years until 2 months ago. Engine was rough and pick up was pretty bad. Its BHP for me now. Sorry Shell.
Petronas=Dynamic Diesel.
Shell =Efficiency Improver.
BMW =EfficientDynamics.
It's all abt branding plus if u throw in a contest (with attractive cash & cars) then the whole view point is changed.!!
Yes, agree with Ronnie. It's all bout branding your fuel with 'special terms'…. stupid marketing gimmick. But the chicks are real, man.
the girl on right looks hot!
1. I get LESS kilometres with RON 95.
2. RON 95 costs me the same as RON 97 previously, if RM1.70 then it is still acceptable.
3. The G and the newspapers keep saying RON 95 is better for the environment –> yeah right!! are you saying RON 97 is worse for the environment because it has higher tolerence for engine knocking? how that sums up?
4. I COULDN'T find RON 97 around PETRONAS station at my place (Rawang). This su*ks big time!
5. I get LESS kilometres again with RON 95!!
mmh..seems like the result is getting clear:
1) BHP
2) ESSO/Caltex
3) Petronas
4) Shell
Infact, this RON95 helps to bring the traditional RON97 Shell/Petronas users to the alternative due to market competitiveness! which is a good thing, since only with competitive, there is improvement.
Imagine big name like SHELL rolls out lousy RON95 product and care less about the quality due to market share. We drivers are the victim if we have no choice! Brand cant sell, quality do when the battleground is equal.
Lucky the BHP/ESSO/Caltex still around to give us alternative. Imagine the country only has Petronas and Shell monopolized.
CALTEX IS THE BEST
well, seeing all of your comment, i make a research and end up with wikipedia. this is what Wikipedia tells on RON number:-
Many high-performance engines are designed to operate with a high maximum compression, and thus demand high-octane premium gasoline. A common misconception is that power output or fuel mileage can be improved by burning higher octane fuel than a particular engine was designed for. The power output of an engine depends in part on the energy density of its fuel, but similar fuels with different octane ratings have similar density. Since switching to a higher octane fuel does not add any more hydrocarbon content or oxygen, the engine cannot produce more power.
another interesting reading on the RON number myth:-
http://www.carsales.com.au/advice/2008/myth-busti…
Whatever the RON and saving is my main concern is the sluggishness of Shell's Ron95 – that is definitely has to do with their addictive.
I've a normal VTEC City (just normal ride for anyone) and been a loyal Shell Ron97 user for years until recent change to Ron95. It was shocking to me that my car goes really sluggish in power BUT yes better savings. Generally I'm getting 13KM/liter as shown with Shell Ron95.
Since it's sluggish, I tried other Ron95 like Esso, Petronas and Caltex – in this case, Esso is the worst but still better than Shell Ron95, Petronas rank second and Caltex gives me very similar to Shell Ron97 performance.
I might be wrong but would like to be proven on this case – until then I'm not turning back to Shell Ron95 unless Shell can prove that whatever addictive in Ron97 is in Ron95.
But generally, other brands Ron95 gives me at 11KM/litre vs Shell Ron95. Got job on this BUT also good luck on the sluggishness!
I've always used Shell, used to pump V-Power exclusively but it got too expensive.
Then switched to Shell RON97, didn't find it too good.
Using Esso/Mobil now, seems great so far. Will do some mileage tests.
So far tho Esso seems to give more power than Caltex RON97.
can someone tell me whether the BHP petrol good or not?
IMHO, more to concern rather than the RON info you've got. What about the fuel quality, fuel additive package, the entire fuel content, the ACTUAL RON of the particular brand's fuel (may be its RON94.55, RON94.98), your engine's present compression…etc.
From my experience, I have found my car's engine has different performance on RON95 than using RON97 (could it be RON96.98 only, lol) even though it suits to use RON95.
Just use whichever brands of fuel that you think that's good for your car or your pocket.
Anyone noticed that before the RON 95 hit the market, there would be an advantage list below the RON 92 pump and a longer list for the RON 97 pump.
However, both listings have mysteriously been omitted after RON 95 hit the market.
Have been using BHP before the 95 was introduced and so far no major differences felt compared to other brands.
The 92 and 95 grades felt a bit underpowered and noisier so I am now back with 97 until they decide to increase the price again.
hope the new fuel is better. if not need to change other brand. my place have only shell. petronas, bhp, esso, mobil very2 far…… terpaksa use shell lor…….
just used Shell Fuelsave 95 and i felt it got better performance compared to Pet95 or BHP95. I'm using Waja Campro-E 07 Manual. Better pickup and can reach faster to 130km/h compared to old formula or other company. Later give you the mileage.
caltex 1 Liter = 14.85714286 km
bhp 1 liter = 14.7666666km
mobil 1 liter = 15.46779661 km
petronas 1 liter = 14.5880597km
p/s i’m using iswara lmst 1.3 carb
updated:
shell 1 liter: 14.53846153km.. using shell lebih kilometer..don't want to try new formula coz i thinks it's only same..just wasting money …( beside this, marketting dept in my factory always do like this when some product not sold…marketting strategy.
for sure i switch to mobil now… bye bye shell ( regular costumer since 4 years ago)
Esso Mobil, should be a good choice.
i try already for shell fuel save…
no more engine loud, good performance, more mileage
full tank for saga blm 32Liter…
370km for rm56….yes more kilometer….proven..good job shell
now i got two choice for ron95 petrol..
1st – esso
2nd – shell
Was a strong supporter for Shell RON97 but RON95 is just so bad in terms of perfomance (not much difference in fuel save), after trying all the RON95 in the market, this list goes like this:
Car: Nissan Sentra SG (1.6L Auto)
My preferences after taking in the performance/fuel save considerations.
1st. BHP
2nd Esso / Mobil
3rd Petronas / Caltex
4th Shell (it is now the worst among the lot)
apparently BHP and esso gain the higher score among the users.
i've tried shell (previous ron95 and the latest fuelsave formula), petronas and caltex.
caltex: similar driving experience as ron97
petronas: not so impress
shell: the fuelsave formula did improve engine smoothness, but no different in the mileage.
will try the BHP and esso shortly. hard to find at my area.
mobil 1 liter = 15.46779661 km -
caltex 1 Liter = 14.85714286 km -
bhp 1 liter = 14.7666666km – (1st try)
petronas 1 liter = 14.5880597 –
shell 1 liter: 14.53846153km –
mobil 1 liter = 15.176649km (2nd try) this one worse (but still good compare other brand) maybe because valve dirty after using shell… what a waste
mobil 1 liter = 16.170490km (3rd try)
mobil 1 liter = 16.218367km (4th try)
from the data, i can see everytime i fill mobil, i got more mile age… did u see same??
i think esso is the best. shell is just crappy fuel and it makes my engine roar. which i dont want it to.
i have been using shell for the past 15 years. when they change to RON 95, my car has been roaring ever since (engine sounds really coarse)