Unleaded or Super Unleaded

[Borb]

Could anyone please tell me if the FR TFSI needs super unleaded or just unleaded as there doesn't seem to be any info on Seat's website or in the brochure.
Many thanks

 

[Saul]

it will take 95 but will run much much better on 97/98

 

[P0LKR]

better still 99ron ie Shell V-Power or Tesco.

As the manual says, it wil take 95 ron unleaded but run on reduced power.

 

[5imonharri5]

On the cupra's there's a sticker (I assume its the same for the FR's) inside the petrol flap that says 95 RON
But it runs loads better on 99 RON

You really can tell the difference.

 

[mode]

They need superunleaded for the stratified process to work

 

[carlt69]

They need superunleaded for the stratified process to work

Excuse my ignorance, but what does that mean?

 

[alimck]

'Stratification' is the build up of 'layers' of something isn't it? What layers?

The only way to really know if the car runs better on super or regular is to stick it on a dyno in controlled conditions.

If it says on the petrol cap (or handbook) to run the car on regular (95) then that is what the car is mapped to run on. Running anything higher will not produce more power from the engine and can potentially hinder performance.

The only thing you may see a very slight increase in is fuel efficiency and the cleaning additives that are included in a lot of the super fuels allowing the engine to maybe last longer. The extra cost doesn't really make it worth it though in the long run.. especially when you can buy a bottle of reddex once every couple of weeks from Halfords for 99p instead.

To those that say 'you can feel the diference' (I would say have most likely experienced the placebo affect of filling up with 'SUPER FUEL!'), I say prove it..

 

[john_ach]

The RON number is the octane rating of the fuel, or to what extent the fuel can be compressed before it self ignites (which would cause knocking as cylinders fire too early). If a higher octane fuel is put into a turbo/supercharged car then the ECU map can change to increase the boost and compress the fuel more, gaining more fuel and air in the cylinder and producing more torque and power.
Other benefits are the additional cleaners and additives which will be of benefit in a naturally aspirated engine.

The RON number in the fuel cap is the minimum. I guess below this the lowest compression of the engine could cause premature detonating and poor running.

Its up to you whether you think the benefits are worth the cost really. I use the higher octane fuel in my 1.6 even tho its not turbo for the cleaners n lubricants as the engine runs quieter and feels more responsive at higher revs.

 

[Neg.]

'Stratification' is the build up of 'layers' of something isn't it? What layers?

The only way to really know if the car runs better on super or regular is to stick it on a dyno in controlled conditions.

If it says on the petrol cap (or handbook) to run the car on regular (95) then that is what the car is mapped to run on. Running anything higher will not produce more power from the engine and can potentially hinder performance.

The only thing you may see a very slight increase in is fuel efficiency and the cleaning additives that are included in a lot of the super fuels allowing the engine to maybe last longer. The extra cost doesn't really make it worth it though in the long run.. especially when you can buy a bottle of reddex once every couple of weeks from Halfords for 99p instead.

To those that say 'you can feel the diference' (I would say have most likely experienced the placebo affect of filling up with 'SUPER FUEL!'), I say prove it..

(Link taken from Revo section, thanks to speedsix for finding it!!)

http://www.ecutek.com/tuning/ignition/

Think its proven HTH

 

[alimck]

I understand that ignition timings change with different combustion variables in fuel - but that's all the article says. There are no dyno-graphs with varying grades of fuel in the same car under controlled conditions in that link at all.

My argument isn't that torque or bhp isn't increased necessarily, just that the increase is actually noticeable. I don't think it is. To 'feel' a performance increase you'd need to be running a car with 400bhp + that actually relies on having proper fuel put in it.. and even then.. when you've got that amount of power under your foot, the 30bhp or so difference is really nothing at all.

And on the subject of 'feeling the difference', even a 10bhp difference would barely be noticeable in a 200bhp car, where as it's a very well documented fact that if someone does something to their car which they're told will boost performance, they will feel that even if it's not really there. Scammers on ebay feed off this type of delusion with their 'electric superchargers' and 'ignition timing advancing diodes' etc.

 

[toledoChris]

The handbook states run on 98 or 95 with a reduced power output if running on 95, it doesnt state the difference though.

 

[phil3012]

I e-mailed SEAT UK customer services and actually spoke to their technical department on this before ordering my Cupra.

They said that it is recommended to run on 98 RON however it will run on 95 RON with loss of economy and or performance.

The same applied to the FR as I queried it for both vehicles.

 

[5imonharri5]

To those that say 'you can feel the diference' (I would say have most likely experienced the placebo affect of filling up with 'SUPER FUEL!'), I say prove it..

Try it, you might like it.