Be interesting to see a fuel consumption comparison.

Sometimes 95 is a slightly higher rating than adervertised and 98 is sometimes lower. 95 is by far the best value. Gains in 98 are usually minimal / non-existent.

The big difference between regular 91 and premium 95&98 is sulphur content as well. ULP is 150PPM and the premium is 50PPM. The lower the number the cleaner the fuel is. I can't wait until Dec 2024 when the new regulations kicks in that only allow 10 PPM for all fuel to see if makes a difference again.

My personal experience is that if it says "91 RON or higher" then you're wasting your money going higher. Our Mercedes C300 (2l turbo) was 95 RON (or higher). I often had to run 98 in it because 95 wasn't available. All I noticed was an increased cost. I use apps to monitor fuel and other car usage. The average 1/100km figure never varied between the two grades of fuel. And with my motorbikes, one of them, a Honda 1100cc Blackbird used 91 RON. I ran 95 and 98 in them. Performance-wise, I couldn't pick it from day-to-day riding which included the mandatory fanging of said bike. Fuel economy didn't change. My current bike requires 95 or higher. Again, being a litre+ V twin it doesn't make any difference if I go higher. BUT, if I do put 91 in it as I had to recently up around the Snowies on a ride as nothing else was available, the damn thing rattled and pinged its sorry way to the next servo and I had to take it easy to stop it pinging, despite it having the fancy-dancy ECU, knock sensors and so on. Then there's diesel and "premium" diesel. Makes no difference in the 3.2 Ranger except for the cost of filling up is greater. If this article wasn't sponsored by a fuel company which enjoys massive margins when selling higher octane fuel I'd have taken it a bit more seriously. Sorry, but that's how it came across to me.

Good to see you did this test properly by starting with premium. It can take a while for engine to adjust to better fuel but swapping to lower grade 91 the difference is felt straight away.

80L fuel tank and price at the pump right now, 91 = $145.52, 95 $157.52 and 98 $163.92. 91 to 98 fill up difference is $18.40. Almost a $1000 saving over a year if you are filling up weekly.

Confirmed what many of us have learned via experience. Use 91 for day to day in a town environment and fill with 98 for a trip (where power for overtaking is needed). Also I know from recorded observations from a 2009 AWD Territory, it would get about an extra 50km plus range from the higher octane option.

Hi Paul, we have a FG G6E Turbo that requires at least 95ron, on occasion when 95 was unavailable running it on 98 only made minimal differences to performance and fuel consumption. However on occasions when we towed a caravan 98 was a winner in terms of performance and fuel consumption in marginal figures for both.

Would love to see a comparison on L/100kms on different fuel types as that is how vehicles are sold. People who live in rural eareas drive further than people in big cities

I’ve only used 98 in mine so far, as I haven’t been anywhere remote enough not to have it, yet. On a related note, tried Sport mode on twisty, hilly roads for the first time last weekend. JEEEEEZUS, it’s quick, loud, angry, wild!

I’m not sure what you actually did to wash out each preceding fill of fuel, but the first transition seemed to happen at “26km to empty”, which means there’s still the reserve in the tank, 15-20L, so your quarter tank fill is actually diluted by the residuum. If you did a full washout, I suspect the differences would be even more significant. Anyhoo, thanks for this test, as it confirms that those of us who care about performance, should always use the best fuel they can find. However, it also demonstrates that, if you’re in the middle of nowhere, and all you can find is 91 RON, the car will run fine!

Love this. Been wondering the same thing. Would like to see a consumption comparison too. E10 too please!!!

Thanks for all your videos, I really value and enjoy them. When I first saw this video appear in my feed my expectation off the cuff was a L/100km economy comparison. At this point and apart from the obvious performance benefits, I'd love to be convinced about the Cost L/100km comparison and in the current economic climate it would be quite relevant. Hoping this might be something you might consider for a future video. PS while you're at it, how about Diesel vs Premium Diesel comparison as well. Thanks again.

Over the years I've tested using 98 fuel in standard cars (ones that didn't need anything higher than 91) and I never noticed any fuel economy difference/gains. I think the people that say they do notice a difference are experiencing the placebo effect.

I am interested to see the other fuel companies stacked up against each other. BP v AMPOL v Coles Express v Caltex etc - I am curious to see how their RON95/98 fuel competes with each other

95 is the sweet spot, in terms of both performance & value for money!!

Confirms the tests I have done on Bp fuel, 95 is the best value for money, and you still get the cleaning additive to keep your injection system clean . 95 for me . Good video

You’re not going to see the performance differences unless tuning it specifically. However, using only 98 all the time will keep the inside of the engine in better condition for longer. And it’s especially so when you have a GDi engine, they build up a hell of a lot of gunk in the intake chamber.

For my 2012 Volkswagen Jetta TSI I have always used 98 RON. I'm absolutely delighted the car runs as well today as the day I purchased it.

Great performance comparison but like a lot of other people I would like to see the fuel consumption difference between the fuels for everyday driving

E10 would have been interesting to add as well. Many people say it’s garbage would be nice to see that backed up with facts

I have a Ford FG G6E N/A and I've found that yes 98 gives it more "pep" but that 95 and 98 see fuel consumption increase whereas with 91 that's where the best fuel consumption is achieved. I can run it on E10 which is 94 but never have. For some strange reason driving in the more remote areas at consistent high speeds (110-130kph) and car "feels" more lively performance wise even on 91 which is basically what it's designed to run on.

I definitely noticed the difference of fuel grade with my motorbike, but also in each brand of fuel station. At the extremes, my 650cc parallel twin could either feel lumpy, sluggish and hard to start.... or smooth, rocket-ship-like and starting first turn.

I woulld be interested to see what E10 would do for performance as it has a octane of around 94 without being a premium fuel.

Our Kia Rio was always pinging under load with 91. Now use 95, no pinging and just drives better.

I still remember when Shell had 100 Ron. Noticeable difference in my xr6 turbo

Thank you for your confirmation....yes i have noticed the difference...I now only use 95 within the city and 98 when driving long trips

Run anything modern on 91Ron and under load listed to that engine knock…even as a pedestrian I’ve heard cars set off and the engine pre ignition knocking like mad. Knock is out of control combustion, can cause damage in multiple parts including engine bearings and ring lands etc.

I always use 98 in my gardening power tools, they always run better

Any chance of some heat soak affecting performance difference. Great video as always.

In all my cars I've noticed a significant difference when using premium. The biggest was when I had a manual v6 Jeep Wrangler 2 door. It was very eager on 98, and even kept up with cars it really shouldn't have. The best example was an xr6 turbo, the driver didn't believe me that my engine was stock! It also seemed to use about 2 litres per 100 k's less on premium 98, which usually made up for the difference in cost.

Great video with interesting results. Would have been good to see some dyno runs with each fuel type also. Cheers.

I've got one of the last 4.0Lt V6 Hilux SR5's and used to always run 91 but I swapped to 98 a couple of years ago, made a slight difference to the economy but the big difference is in the mountains as I spend a fair bit of my work in the Snowy Mountains. Using 98 makes it not kick back gears anywhere as much as when using 91 so drivability is so much better. I have every tank of fuel in an App on my iPad and the average has dropped from 14.7 down to 14 even over 200,000 Km.

Was the 98 fuel fully purged before refilling with 91? And. Ambient temperature and humidity also play a role in performance. A test for ltrs/100 would be awesome too.

Paul fit the herrod performance pack and do a vid on that. Currently theres no vids on the hugely popular pack. Cheers.

Insightful! Nice comparison. I was waiting for such a video. Thank you!

While back I had a manual DE Mazda 2 hatch, which I ran on 98 as it hardly used any fuel. Out of curiosity I tried all the other fuels, anything lower than 95 and it would take longer to crank over when cold and some hills required a gear lower to climb. Fuel economy was also noticable worse using 91 or E10. But before that I had manual BL 2.0L Mazda3 sedan, that had an adjustable crank angle sensor. Before I adjusted the sensor it was absolutely gutless in 6th gear on the highway. After the adjustment and running 98, it actually wanted to accelerate in 6th on the highway. So, really the answer to does higher octane fuel increase performance/ economy is.... it depends!

When 98 first came to Australia I had a V6 4Runner with a long range tank, I spent a few months playing with it to see if it was worth it. My only metric was range, I had no way to track other performance figures. from First click to the warning light I had almost 100km range difference from a 200lt load between 91 and 98, while the cost difference at the time was about $10 between the two. Ever since then I have run 98 in all of my cars whenever it was available. Two of them I had tuned specifically for it to actually make the most out of it. The cost difference between the grades these days varies quite wildly from one servo to the next, one day to the next, so I don't really think about that anymore.

Needs to be a blind test. Need to see the brake boosting off the line for each run.

Would love to see a comparison between the main brands on 98 only.

How long would it actually take for the ECU to adapt to the different fuel and ensure max performance on the given fuel? Also would love to see a fuel consumption comparison on a car that usually runs on 91. 👍

I'd have loved to have seen a e10 run as well. Despite having a lower octane number the ethanol is an excellent knock suppressant. It's also the cheapest fuel and I'd bet it would have performance on par with 98.

I've had more cars than I care to remember, economy aside, I've found that 98 seems to make engines run more smoothly. It's kinder on the mechanicals I think.

The proper way to do this test should be on a dyno to compare hp and tq figures.

Agreeing to a previous comment below; I would like to see the difference in Litres/100km for the three fuels on a long run (open road). I’m sure we will see more interesting information.

Haven’t watched this video yet, but I did my own experiment recently and found that I get better fuel economy in my next gen Raptor using BP fuel over the others, about 1-1.5L/100km better off.

Be interesting if you also tried E10 to see how much of a performance difference there is using Ethanol blend

Can’t wait for them to say it’s fine to run 91 Then it can be just like the good ole days at VW when we had a 5x5 room filled and stacked 3 engines high all with cracked pistons from detonation because people ignored the sticker on the fuel flap that says “premium only”

Very interesting Paul, I would love to know what the difference would be you driving a diesel with Ampol fuel and the cheapest one. Is one really better than the other. Love your videos and love learning. Nick

I'm in the United States most newer cars if they require premium for the added performance they will still run fine on 87 octane cuz they have the knock sensor... I just run 87 octane or whatever the recommended ⛽ is unless the vehicle is dyno tuned with higher grade ⛽ than you need to run that obviously 💯👍👍

CX5 with the 2.5 Turbo 4. Massive difference between 91 and 98. Its had 2 tanks of 91 through it purely because 98 wasnt available. Substantially better both with spirited driving and highway driving. Better on fuel with 98 too.

Hi Paul, try it with Shell and BP please.😊

I'll save this video for Ron.

We have 99RON and 102RON here and in a performance car that can take advantage of the higher octane it's quite noticeable.

@CarExpert ok so agreed and tbh pretty obvious in those extreme conditions of a drag race and higher speed track work( so any higher performance requirement) the 98 is always going to have the edge(0.5secs approx on the 1/4 mile and 0-100) but what about normal everyday driving, doing some 40-80km commutes mixed motorway and town driving without being a plonker on the throttle at every traffic light because you cant as there’s always traffic ahead of you and the lights keep changing during your commute. And then taking the kids to sports practice, going to visit some relatives doing a couple of 100ks round trip. In other words fill the tank and let’s see what you get out of the tank full with each type and do a cost comparison. With today’s rising costs of everything - actual cost of ownership( after initial purchase and service costs) the most expensive part is day to day and week to week budgeting. If I want to go hoon I can budget for that, if im towing the caravan for a weekend away I can budget for it.- so towing costs with different fuel would also be useful. I suppose it’s not as fun and more time consuming but certainly what most people will be interested in.

98 Ron is 93 octane for the us not 91.

Wheels mag did a comparison about 10 years back with a commodore. They used e85 e10 91 95 and 98.the 98 got the furthest but after doing the calculations turns out 95 is the most cost efficient fuel.

Whilst I hate vehicles like the Raptor and you cannot say that the handling is very good with that body roll in the video BUT this is a very interesting comparison and the stop watch does not lie. I would be more interested though in a long term test showing economy differences and even longer showing any advantage the 95 RON and 98 RON may have in terms of cleaner engines and engine life. I always use 98 RON in my 2019 BMW 330i and am always impressed with the economy, both around town and on the open road. With lower sulphur fuel coming on line in late 2024, (whether it will still be 91 RON we do not know) it would have to be an improvement on the current 91 RON. My old 2000 E46 323i is always run on 98 RON and to date has done over 350,000 kms, so that must say something for the cleaning properties of 98.

People that tell you it 'makes no difference' are basing it on old info for outdated tech cars. 91 vs 98 has always made a difference for my cars power- and even if it didn't, the higher fuel efficiency (for me, approx extra 50km range) and potential additives are a bonus.

Nice video, interesting result. BTW, is it true that in Australia, fuel brands don't matter because all fuel is produced in the same refinery per state?

The simple answer is Yes. Modern engines have knock control systems that allow for the engines to run closer to MBT depending on the fuel type. So lower quality fuel = less spark = less performance.

Unless it’s an older or a performance base vehicle.. 98 might aswell be a donation to the servo in my eyes

I have a heap of scrapped cars and some have premium and some have normal, the ones with normal after sitting for about 6 months the fuel gunked up into a black tar almost, had to take the fuel pump and fuel lines apart to clean it, don't use normal if your car is going to be sitting for a while

Based on those numbers I’d just fill up using both 95 and 98 each consecutive fill and save a few bucks.

Here in South Africa we have 93 as entry and 95 as top of the range

Yeah I drive a 2021 Mk4 Focus ST which takes 95 and 98 RON. I see a notable difference between these two. Especially off the mark.

it would be interesting to see what a RON/Octane booster to 98 could do for performance like the STP Octane booster or similar.

Ford's own literature states that the Raptor will only output the full 292kW of power on 98RON. They don't state how much of a power drop from using 91 but there is one. I feel like it would have been interesting to have another car that wasn't a high performance machine just to really double down and prove the point that its not worth your money spending on premium fuels on a car that runs on all of them.

I had a 2014 Lexus 300h Hybrid, basically a Camry , I used 98 most of the time , but I did drive from Melb to Brisbane, and tried 91 against 98 , I got a bout 80kms more on a tank of 98 ron , motor slightly more punch , but not a performance motor ,

Should of mention about the cleaning properties as well. I always put a tank full of 98 in my petrol car every few months

95 in my 2023 swift...runs much sweeter than 91....98 doesnt seem any better than 95 so 95 it is

Hi Paul. Good question to answer but maybe could have been examined better. Firstly you should have been blinded to what the fuel is to reduce personal bias. It would also help if there are more than one participant. That Ampol funds the "trial" does not help as they would surely like more people to buy their more expensive fuel. The result of a good comparison would help choose fuel for most everyday cars and not the performance ones.

Hi, I do enjoy your Segments, thankyou and keep doing a great job.

I am more interested in seeing the difference in the claimed cleaning properties of the 98 fuel and if it is truly better for the engine. Project Farm video in a different setting suggested these higher octane cleaning fuels were better as long as the engine burnt it properly, but it did result in higher engine temps on some engines with greater wear on seals, exhausts and rubber/plastic items under the hood/bonnet.

Was more interested in fuel consumption on highway rather than just performance, If the fuel consumption is significantly better the expensive stuff might end up costing the same, on a cost per km basis

Another excellent video Paul, the results were interesting. You kept referring to affordability, and I’d really like to see that point tested. I’ve always understood that the premium fuels, whilst delivering better performance, also delivered better economy and so could in fact be more affordable. How about you partner with Ampol for a longer treat to determine a cost/kilometre comparison?

I only put 98 BP in my raptor. My 0-100 times have been all over the place. My best time was 5.1 seconds and it actually felt like it was that fast. The rest of my times have been anywhere from 5.7 - 6 seconds. I don’t know what I did differently to get that quick time but I can’t replicate it for some reason. I’ll check again after the Herrod upgrade coming this Thursday 🎉

Correct me if I’m wrong but the difference from 0-100 was 0.72 seconds and the quarter mile was just 0.53. Does this mean the 91 octane fuel was quicker from 100-150 hence more power and the main difference was traction off the line?

Only ever put 98 in my cars, best way to sleep well at night. Hey Paul the number plate holder, im awaiting delivery of my new Raptor, how did you customise this so is not hanging down over the radar sensor? Plate attached at the top or the bottom. Love your reviews btw. Thanks!

A real world fuel consumption comparison between the 3 different fuels would be nice please. Based on 1/4 tank again. I'm interested to know what the real world figures are between fuels as daily driven, not track driven.

Would love to see this with E10 for cars rated for it.

Seems like it could be beneficial to just use 91 when going on a long trip and day to day use then only use 98 for when your going off-road or just looking to have some fun.

Great video, would love to see a similar video on fuel economy for 91 vs 98 in the raptor.

Great test. I’d always wondered how much difference it really made. 👍

If a car has a map for 95 from the factory, it will usually run on 91 in a safe reduced power mode. The knock sensor will pull back ignition when it detects detonation. But you get nothing from 98 - the engines are not designed to feed in more ignition timing etc. And you cant increase the compression... 98 is basically snake oil - there is a reason the oil companies spend so much on advertising, its extremely profitable!

Can you do a “real world” test, not having fun on a private track day? I’d like to see the results in $ per 100km over a 5000km test. Years ago we had a 2 litre Impreza that gave us an extra 100km per 40 litres round town on 98 compared with 91 but the $ saving was minimal due to the difference in cost, we ran it on 98 because we believed it was better for the engine.

I am doing this comparison now, after advice from mechanic.

I didn't expect that much of a change. I thought it was more about engine life. I drive an m240i I always use 93 octane (US) because sometimes I drive spiritedly and want to protect the motor. But now I know on your vehicle at least, octane makes a huge difference

yep got told about this years ago and thought it was rubbish, back then Driving an EA Falcon i averaged about 470 kms per tank on 91, changed to 98 after a couple of tanks was getting 590 per tank, Later on my BA the difference was only about 90 ks per tank but did feel the performance difference, Great test it is quit interesting the difference between them usually more noticeable over a couple of tanks .

Bp ultimate 98 fan. Really noticed the difference in my ex colleague's toyota rav 4 once.

The test results may* not be 100% accurate. To get the max out of these comparisons, usually you need 2 or 3 fuel cycle to let the mixture become full tank of the currently tested out fuel. I think it allows the ecu will have sufficient data to adjust to the new fuel as well.

Great video keep up the good work

Nice comparison mate. Do you still have rough idle issues? My gearbox occassionally shifts very rough. I also experience rough idle which is also inconsistent but more noticeable and worse in the afternoon during the hotter part of the day. Performance still seems good though

It would be interesting to do this as a blind/uninformed test. Have the host/driver not know which fuel is in during each test. Just to eliminate any conscious or unconscious preconceptions.

I used to run my VY commo on 91 and it ran like a dog............went to 95 and ran wonderful. I would like to see some Dyno runs with different fuels. With the tank fully drained each time etc.

Could you do an explained video on how to effectively use the Auto function on climate control? When setting the climate control to LO and pushing the auto button, the fan speeds up and doesn’t slow down or do anything else. Not sure how to use this function correctly.

We can't even get 91 in the UK. Our normal fuel is 95 RON E10, and our super unleaded is 97/98 RON E5, with Shell and Total super being 99 RON.

In my Yaris I noticed no discernable difference between using hinger octane fuels. Just stick to 91RON and use fuel injector cleaner every year or so. Personally, I would use what the manufacture recommends, if I'm not mistaken in your fuel cap it says to use 91RON.

I drive the raptor on long dirt roads multiple times a week with plenty of potholes, corners but really can't feel the difference in the suspension settings. Would love to see a video detailing the modes in more detail and perhaps how they differ if you just change the suspension vs changing the entire drive mode to something like "off-road".

Have you ever checked the cost per distance travelled. Sometimes things are not what they seem. We may be surprised the 98 is cheaper than the 91.