boon's log 1110.03: Ron95 versus Ron97 Challenge

I've been having this hunch for quite sometime and have finally taken the extra step to execute the evaluation to prove to myself (at least) that my hunch was correct...

Most of us (including myself) have been under the impression that the cheaper alternative petrol option - Ron95 - will save us more money as compared to the more expensive, RM2.05, option (Ron97).

I've always wanted to find out, whether it is a psychological effect that makes us think or believe that by paying less per liter means having to pay less overall.

So, off I went experimenting. I used a 11-year-old Japanese model car with fairly new tyres inflated to the suggested amount of air. I've also tried to control the number of passengers to an average of 3 during the entire experiment. All-city driving within Penang Island, no highways; routes used during the experimental time period were standard routes used between work-and-home-and-places-with-food.

Here are the results:


Ron95 versus Ron97

From a mileage standpoint, I am definitely getting more kilometers per liter, running on RON97 - pushing 1.3km/liter more on the RON97.

But in order to prove that my hunch was correct, the RON97 needs to outperform Ron95 from a km/RM standpoint.

And I have to say, though the results show that, mathematically, the RON97 fared better than the 95 variant, but there is no significant differences between the 2 - only by a mere 84meters/RM - a world of a difference, for an ant, maybe (!!!).

Of course this just a rough comparison for inner-city driving - it does not take into account the noise injected into the results due to road level and weather conditions - i.e. it is not a fully controlled experiment - even though we try to minimize the noise as much as possible.

But it does go to show that running on RON97 does get you further per every full tank, but because of the price differences between the 2, will you get more kilometers out of your wallet by using Ron97?

The answer will most probably be a "No!"...

boon out...