Seeing how there doesn't seem to be objective differences between Chevron 94 and Shell 93, I will stick with Chevron for now because of Journie Rewards. I don't have Air Miles so no benefit with Shell.

IMO, Journie Rewards has a really low payout, whereas Airmiles is actually one of the higher paying reward programs out there. If you can use up 60L+ of gas each month, it's generally fairly easy to get back at least $5 through Shell's Airmiles program.

I keep collecting air miles but never looked at the rewards. Shell has the instant discount going on right now. Originally 3 cents off, then started getting 5 cents recently. 1 time it gave 10 cents.

So this will take a little while. I usually run chev 94 and have for a long time, my tune is built around it. So I just filled up, reset my ECU and once I reach a half tank then I’ll do a few datalog pulls (I’ll try 4th gear 2500-6500 but that’s pretty high speed, so might do 3rd same rpm). Once I’m done, I’ll run the tank as low as I can, I’ll top up maybe $10 she’ll 93, let that run low, then fill up fully, clear ecu, at the half tank point do more datalogs etc.

The map is optimized for 94, so theoretically if the shell 93 is LEAGUES better you might not know, as the timing tables do have min/max windows to hit. It will be clear if it’s worse though. Between knock, timing, fuel trim, etc we should have a good idea

Edit: I’m doing this because ppl say the shell in Richmond has 93. I refuse to go into Vancouver so I wasn’t going to do this test

I stopped getting the 5cpl off when the calendar ticked over to October. Are you still getting it? I think I've saved about $20-30 throughout the promo.

You have to set the preference / setting at the Airmiles website, and I have mine all going into their "cash miles" program. But after that, you can literally redeem for gas payment in $10 increments right there at the pump, or with the Shell phone app (or in person).

The 5¢/L off promo was supposed to run til Oct 3, according to the email promo that I received. But when I filled up at the end of Sept (29 or 30), I didn't get any discounts even though my previous purchase met the 30L requirement.

I may be wrong, but it seems like if people are tuned for 94, then the car will need to be tuned to shell 93 to notice any big differences if 93 is a lot better. I guess the hype is based on the potential accessible, should someone build a tune for 93.

My last fill up was Oct 1.

didn't want to believe it, but both the mini and accord make more power on shell 93 vs chevron 94

butt dyno is all you need

I also like how convenient it is to just use my phone app for Shell and pay that way instead of chevron where I had to enter my journie card, then credit card, then pin, then pump

The Shell on Mary Hill & Pitt River in PoCo has 93 now. Interestingly the "ethanol free" label is gone and it says it has 10% ethanol.

Also used shell because of this, but I noticed that my closest Chevron has credit card tap now. Yet to see if it works.

Just did a bit of experiment. I wondered what Shell was charging for their 3 level of gas - 87, 91, 93 vs. say Petro Can's 91. I was wondering if Shell's 91 would be closer to other station's 89 price ... but notta.

So the Shell 91 (mid level) is like 20 cents more than their 87 gas and a cent or two higher priced than PetroCan's 91. Both stations posted $162.5/l on their sign for regular.

FYI. It is what it is ...

Chevron94 is 0.27 more than 87

I'm not sure about Shell. I think 91 is 0.24 more and 93 is 0.27 more.

Journie's payout feels slow but sometimes they do double points for Supreme which speeds the 7c off per litre faster.

I always thought Airmiles has to be linked to a credit card but that looks like it's my dumb misunderstanding. Will look into that.

True, I suppose it will be a case by case thing, then. Guess everyone just has to look at their own data log to come to a conclusion.

Oh absolutely. It's dumb that Chevron has an app in the States, but not Canada.

Well... Adam from VanCity Audi is at it again:

https://www.gofundme.com/f/vancity-a...deo-fundraiser

I enjoyed the content and appreciated the results, so I chipped in a token amount. I am not asking anyone to do anything -- I am just sharing this little bit of info.

Hopefully, we'll see something later.

Oh yeah, I ran and datalogged the 94, now I’ve gone thru a tank of 93, just refilled last night so will datalog soon when it’s safe out.

My normal driving with 94 is around 12l/100km but after the tank of 93 it went down to 10.2 or something. I assume it’s subconsciously being more careful with a new fuel

I like that your car has a subconscious

In theory, I assume the Shell 93 should have worst mileage eventually since ethanol burns faster.

I always thought that way, but the change isn't that bad if you do the math.
Eth has 76100 BTU per gallon whereas gas has 114000, which gives us ~66% of the energy density. If you run straight eth then yeah it's gonna suck, but we are talking about a mix here.
Keep in mind at the pumps it's not a guaranteed 10% ethanol mixture, it's UP TO 10% so it's at worse 3-4% lower fuel economy, but potentially the damage is less than that depending on that batch of mixture.

My fuel usage gauge on the M3 ticked up from 13.2 to 13.3 after 3 tanks of 93 fvs using the no eth 91. The car drives a lot better though(it may potentially be related to the cooler temperatures as well)
The fuel usage on my X3 ticked up as well from 12.5 to 12.6, but I saw no butt dyno differences in drivability so that's going back to 91.

On the X3, are you saying you are planning to go back to Shell 91?

Bear in mind that prior to the introduction of Shell 93, Shell 91 is a no-ethanol gas. But with the way Shell is handling its Shell 93 gas now, their current Shell 91 has to be a mix of their 93 and 87 gas, so the Shell 91 now is still gonna be an ethanol blend up to E10.

shell 91 has been e10 at least a few years now?

Didn't Adam's video show that at the time of his testing, it has no ethanol in it?

At any rate, that is a moot point now since we know the current Shell 91 is some sort of an ethanol blend -- likely E10, and that's what we'll have going forward.

It's should less than e10 more like e5. Its a mix of 87 that I think is e10 and 94 that has zero ethanol.

Why is everyone so negative on a more than likely single digit % of ethanol in our fuels