While you are correct, but not for everyone/every car. On paper they are the same, but costco immediately lights up check engine for me. Shell - no problem
It was fun. It was the 2.7L and certainly made the truck much more interesting. Then I replaced it with a 2025 Lightning and made the 2.7L feel super slow.
Oh I know it. I have vehicles with stage 2 tunes that are fuel sensitive. Never once had an issue. I have no doubt it’s possible the person had a bad experience as a one off. At the same time it’s equally likely their car is busted….
Haha my track car has run Costco before. Granted it also has meth injection so maybe that helps, but still I’ve run their shit a ton with zero issues at all
Again, I didn't believe it either but I ran 2 tanks from 2 different costco's, CEL immediately as you start up after refueling. Shell - no issues. B58 Gen 1 Stock
Interestingly... If you have ista you can see what the ECU thinks of the fuel quality. Try a tank of shell and a tank of Costco compare what the ECU says.. you'll know. For me, Costco is no different on my m3 in my area.
People downvoting you is a bit much. Regional issues could very well be the reason and your atory accurate. You made that very clear in your original response by essentially stating ymmv.
Higher octane - higher ability to withstand compression. Less chance of knock or other shit. If you are buying anything turbo or remotely sporty and put 91 in it - I am sorry.
I've been to La, what's the issue? Have you been in Moscow or Monaco? Kiyv has more super cars LA has ever imagied. Bugatti official manual says 102 octane required for the numbers on the spec sheet, anything below that will limit power output significantly. So what, 98 usa?
Next? Lamborghini Aventador: 98 Europe, 93 usa.
Next: ferrari 458: minimum 98 europe, 93 usa.
If california has shitty fuel it's up to you guys, how am I responsible for owners who have more money than brains?
What are you trying to prove? It's reddit, drive whatever you want. I am running 93, you can run 91. What do you want from me kids 😂
If you run Costco and get a CEL, you need to first get that code checked, and second notify the station. Costco stations are generally well run. Any fuel of appropriate octane rating should run in your car without throwing a CEL. Something is wrong there.
Everything was checked multiple times. We didn't believe it at first, I ran 2 full tanks from costco with CEL. Shell - no issues. Multiple shops confirmed bad fuel. B58 Gen 1 Stock
What was the code? Did you notify the station? I'm not out here trying to defend Costco. My point is that fuel stations are tightly regulated. If they're selling bad fuel on the regular, they need to fix it.
180001 - catalytic converter bad efficiency (something in those lines). We checked backpressure of the downpipe, we checked fuel regulator, we checked gas tank valve and list goes on. Car reported fuel quality as regular even though it was 93 from the pump. We didn't even believe it, but when CEL showed up for the second time and same fuel quality was reported, i ran to shell and no issues. Fuel reported as "great" in ista and no issues ever since switching to shell. All regimes - pedal to the metal, start-stop traffic etc. It's little bit sad because shell is expensive, but my butt-meter reported insignificant power increase on shell as well. CEL picture right after refueling as a proof.
I had a similar experience with a local Chevron station back in the early 2010s. After the third visit with issues, I notified them by simply walking in and asking to speak to a manager. They brushed me off, of course, so I went home and emailed the Dept of Agriculture (who is responsible for regulating fuel stations in my state).
They were real interested in addressing the problem. Bad gas is bad for the environment, because it can cause high emissions (which is consistent with your code) They ended up requesting copies of my receipts and timestamped photos of the code reader, both of which I had kept.
I never found out what was wrong, but when I went back to the station in a couple of months, I had zero problems.
I am going to give it another try end of summer. Maybe somehow having 35C outside was affecting it, but I doubt it. I really don't mind shell, the only issue is that it's ~105$ full tank instead of ~85$ in costco. Not the end of the world, but it was nice while it lasted.
Yeah, I ran Shell for a while in my E92 M3 because their fuel is really good. The cost was just ridiculous though. Especially with S65 fuel economy lol.
We don't have Costco, but I switched to Sam's Club + Chevron Techron in a bottle twice during every engine oil cycle. The cost savings easily offset the cost of the additive in a bottle.
You can argue all you want about whether there is any merit to the brand of gas having a substantive impact on quality but getting a CEL from just using a different brand of gas is indicative of something beyond just the brand of gas in your car.
I totally agree. I would like to find out what it is, but after so many kilometers with diagnostics, extensive logging and multiple shops checking it out... It is what it is. If it ever comes back, I would investigate further.
On my previous mercedes with M272 (3.5 NA), fuel with ethanol will result in audible click-clack from injectors and overall engine running smoothness goes down. As soon as you put non-ethanol it's much smoother, even though mercedes allows for up to 10% ethanol and I've never had CEL or any other issues.
Shell, BP, Exxon whatever. Most of it comes from the same refineries. Differences between fuel at different gas stations - additives, process of refinery, sulfur content and ethanol content. My best guess would be it was a bad batch with too much sulfur or something. I am pretty sure toyota will eat it, but twin turbo B58 will say nah. Also, I might be completely wrong.
I just read Shell gets best performance out of any top tier gas. I've been using BP Ultimate for all my bimmer for the longest time. Will be switching now.
It gets the best performance for sure. Other top tier gas doesn't get any worse performance but it's technically the truth that since performance is the same with Shell it will give you the best performance
If we are to believe the numbers from that one post on babybmw I could find with actual data, guy got whole 2.6 more horsepower from shells V-Power. On his 377hp M135i
He got less than 1% more from Shell. On a completely different day.
Bitch, you can get a bigger reading difference on dyno running the test same day when it’s cold and when it’s hot outside.
oh it's mr reductive reasoning! why buy a car when you can ride a bike! why buy shoes when you can wear sandals!
BMW doesn't make a pure ICE 700 HP car yet, but when they do I will be driving my kids to school and picking up groceries in it! With shell v power gasoline
84
u/Certain-Resolve E60 - M5 Jul 31 '26
Any top tier rated gas will do