Anyone noticed any change in MPG running on the new E10 grade petrol.

I ask because I think I'm getting less. It's hard for me to tell for sure as my Panda (and my wife's) has the Twin Air engine and consumption varies so much depending the mix of short trips v longer journeys, and whether I'm in a hurry and put my foot down a lot.

But I do keep an eye on the Average MPG on the dashboard, and I'd reckon I'm about 2 mpg down, which at around 40 mpg is about 5%. If so then the whole E10 thing would seem counterproductive. If you have to use 5% more fuel, it would wipe out the environmental benefit of having an extra 5% of renewable ethanol.

Government put the reduction in economy at 1% - very hard to notice. Another website put it at 3%. What are other Panda owners experiences?

Can't say on economy, but a decent hill on the A17 now requires 5th not 6th and speed is very noticeably reduced by the top. I reserve judgement.

I’ve been running my Panda on Vpower for the last several months, with a slight if pleasing increase in performance and MPG over normal Shell unleaded (I’ve posted about this elsewhere).

Last weekend I was running low in Scotland and pulled into a filling station that only sold E10. There was a definite drop in MPG, but whether this was just back to normal unleaded levels or worse, I couldn’t say.

I won’t be using it as a matter of choice; the Twinair is much happier on Vpower.

Seamaster said:

I’ve been running my Panda on Vpower for the last several months, with a slight if pleasing increase in performance and MPG over normal Shell unleaded (I’ve posted about this elsewhere).

Last weekend I was running low in Scotland and pulled into a filling station that only sold E10. There was a definite drop in MPG, but whether this was just back to normal unleaded levels or worse, I couldn’t say.

I won’t be using it as a matter of choice; the Twinair is much happier on Vpower.

Click to expand...

I fill up with Vpower every now and again. And always when doing long journeys. It contains additives that clean the fuel system.

Note that in many parts of the country, Esso Synergy Supreme 99 is ethanol-free.

I'd be interested to know if this is true of some of the other brands of super unleaded.

E0 super will give you better economy than E5 super; likely somewhere between 1%-4%.

I used to have a Ford that would have a slight pink/knock
on any other fuel but Esso.
Also a bike that suffered from carb icing that never happened
on Shell Esso or BP Supreme/Ultra/V-power so I think there are
differences worth having, a engine that as a knock detector would
likely get a little more power/mpg out of super fuel as it would
allow the timing to be advanced more under the right conditions.

We use V-Power in our TwinAir Trekking and it is a noticeably better drive. My wife drives it every day, she can really feel the difference if we have to use normal fuel. She refuses to use supermarket fuel following previous poor performance in her old fiesta.

I read somewhere recently that small capacity turbo engines like the Twinair seem to gain a disproportionate improvement on Vpower. It’s certainly been my experience. I won’t go back to normal unleaded whenever I can avoid it. And I was always a premium petrol sceptic.

Seamaster said:

I read somewhere recently that small capacity turbo engines like the Twinair seem to gain a disproportionate improvement on Vpower. It’s certainly been my experience. I won’t go back to normal unleaded whenever I can avoid it. And I was always a premium petrol sceptic.

Click to expand...

I've just been looking for more info on the 'net. An old AutoCar article, (quoting a What Car test!) reports E10 could reduce petrol consumption by up to 10%. In fact What Car tested four vehicles, and the worst hit was a Dacia Sandero with an 11.5% drop in economy with E10!

The most common engine in the Sandero at the time was the Renault 0.9l 3-pot turbo - probably the most comparable engine to the TwinAir - small turbo, of similar capacity and power output.

So, the E10 being imposed on motorists in the name of reducing emissions, will in fact be producing significantly more C02 in small turbo engined petrol cars.

I don't know what percent of cars have such engines, but it must be large. Ford use loads of 1.0l eco boosts; VW/Seat/Skoda/Audi have their 1.0 turbo, as do Nissan/Dacia/Renault; the 1.2T Puretech is the mainstay of small to medium ranges for Peugeot/Citroen/DS and now Vauxhall; Kia/Hyundai same. About the only mass market manufacturers who don't heavily make use of small turbos are Mazda, and Toyota (hybrids).

Seems like a step backwards for the planet to me. I'll be on V-Power at next fill up.

My Panda hasn't been as good on fuel since the switch from E5 to E10. With E5 I used to get between 49-53 mpg driving locally & around 60 mpg on a long journey, now since this do gooder fuel has been around I'm only getting 42-46 mpg locally & on a recent long journey only got 47 mpg . I wouldn't mind but

A) by the time this climate change rubbish happens we'll all probably be long gone so whats the point.

B) you see all these hypocrites going on about cleaning the air, change to non useful pointless electric cars & saving the planet whilst going around in stinking diesel Range Rovers & flying around the world in private jets.

As far as I am concerned Boris the blob can stick his 2050 zero emissions where the sun don't shine as I will still keep my Panda on the road & get my moneys worth out of it, i'll just find something else to run it on. With the new speed limiters coming on any new models from 2022 our Panda's will be the Ferraris of the road

The inevitable next step will punitive tax rises on petrol and to bully all the refuseniks into EVs.

Seamaster said:

The inevitable next step will punitive tax rises on petrol and to bully all the refuseniks into EVs.

Click to expand...

Once a substantial number of folks make the switch to EV's, the government will need to find a way of recouping the lost duty currently levied on fossil fuels.

If electricity for road traction were taxed at the same rate as fossil fuel, the economic case for EV's would collapse.

My guess is this will be done by way of road pricing, with fossil fuel duty being retained, so that if you drive on fossil fuel, you'll effectively pay twice.

Seamaster said:

The inevitable next step will punitive tax rises on petrol and to bully all the refuseniks into EVs.

Click to expand...

The bright side is we won't have to be nice to Saudi despots any more.

Hi.
My take on E5 E10 and super are this, backed up by being told how modern vehicle ECUs memorise perameters.
If you drive on 95 octane fuel the ecu will memorise the maximum advance the engine can tolerate at different engine speeds and throttle openings, it constantly monitors maximum advance. Going to 97, 98 or 99 octane fuel means that more advance can be tolerated but the parameters for 95 have been stored so there is little advantage going up to higher octane unless the ECU is in learning mode, sending the clear request or in some disconnecting the battery for 30 minutes will do this.
E5 in comparison to E0 will reduce output and or worsen fuel economy by just a few percent, going from E5 to E10 will give a cumulative effect over E0 and another small increase between E5 & E10, unlikely to be more than 6 or 7% over E0. Its worth doing an ECU reset above and letting it relearn when going to E10.
I've been using E10 in the C3 Picasso since it was avaliable and noticed a slight drop in hill climbing after. While it was mixed it didn't make any difference but after two tank fulls it did drop. I then did an ECU reset and after a few days all has returned to just about the same ad with E5

So now I'm a couple of tanks of E10 in, and I'm not keen.

First full tank was my local Asda which I hate with a passion, like an earlier comment, I normally refuse to use it, having noticed a very discernable drop in performance and economy on other cars, but beggars and choosers etc...

Next, was topped up at a half-tank with Shell's Fuelsave unleaded with a marginal improvement, after the next fill-up at Shell, I thought it prudent to reset all the parameters in MES hoping this will do the long-term fuel trims etc.

Cue the fuel shortage, and I've been lucky enough to use my local Shell garage for a couple of fill-ups, the car should hopefully by now have a good handle on fuel trims again, but it's still noticeably sluggish from a standstill, it almost hits a brick wall at 80mph and above (no judging please) and in-gear acceleration is noticeably poorer - as it's a TwinAir I'm used to poor economy, so I don't look at the average mpg so can't comment on any loss.

ECO is definitely off, but the car has all the hallmarks of being in ECO mode - I'm yet to plug it in to see if anything's logged but no EML showing.

I'll see if there's any improvement, but maybe it's time for VPower or whatever it's called now, last time I checked it was £1.51 a litre at my local shell vs £1.39 for Fuelsave Unleaded.

All very interesting.
So far, my Panda 1.2 60hp seems to be more economical on E10, rising from around 51mpg to 54mpg. But, this has coincided with cooler weather, so the climate control is using the aircon less. Having said that, current economy is still better than usual, and better than overall over the last 11 years. From the comments above, I'm expecting to come down with a bump very soon.

My Fabia, 1.2 direct injection, manual, seems not to have noticed the different fuel. No apparent change in performance, or economy, but only on the second fill as yet. This seems to be quite different to the results obtained by varesecrazy, with the same engine, but driving a dual-clutch auto.

It may take a little while for definitive results to be established.

So far, Both only a couple of fill ups.

Fuel economy
100hp about 2mpg down
1.2 about the same.

Driving experience
1.2 doesn't seem to care at all, but the 100hp seems a little lumpier than it was on E5.

Future plans
Getting towards the time of year when the 100hp will be getting to snooze in the garage for longer periods, so I'm going to run it low and fill up with Esso Synergy+ 99 for a couple of tanks. I've had bad experiences* with leaving E5 in fuel systems for extended periods, so going to treat it like my lawnmower and go ethanol-free over winter.

*my Honda Rotavator got left with ordinary unleaded in it from Spring 2020 to September 2021. Took the carb apart and was shocked to see the amount of gummy c**p in the fuel bowl and all the jets. Worse, the emulsion tube is pitted and has a line of white corrosion on it. Not had that before on any Honda garden tools, although they rarely get left as long.
Leaving it with a small amount of E0 fuel in this winter in the hope it doesn't get any worse.

My Skoda was 'pinking : pinging' when climbing in the Beacons last weekend

Not heard it before in that.. or in any FIAT SINCE 95RON Unleaded came out

Seamaster said:

The inevitable next step will punitive tax rises on petrol and to bully all the refuseniks into EVs.

Click to expand...

And once all the refuseniks are in EVs, there will be a HUGE,COLLOSAL MASSIVE, STUPENDOUSLY, ENORMOUS rise in taxes on electricity. Where else are the "powers that be" going to replace the lost revenue from petrol.

I also note that a great deal of electricity is produced from gas powered stations. Paradoxical. or should that be hypercritical

I further note that there is, at one and the same time, too much CO2 going into the atmosphere and too little CO2 available for the packaging industry! Work that one out!:bang:

Should we now call this thread "Petrol and THE economy"