DER BEWEIS! Es stimmt etwas nicht mit unseren Tankstellen... (Super Plus Test)

Super Plus Fuel Test: Key Findings

The video compares fuel samples from several stations, focusing on measured octane ratings and ethanol content. The host performs a visual ethanol test at the stations and sends samples to a laboratory. Octane is measured using a test engine under DIN EN ISO 5164.

Reported Super Plus Octane Results

Station/fuel Measured octane Edeka (the unusually cheap station under investigation) 98.5 Jet 98.4 Esso 97.5 Aral, advertised as 100 octane 99.4

The host was especially impressed by Edeka and Jet: both are relatively inexpensive, yet their Super Plus results were close to or above 98 octane. Aral’s sample came in below its advertised 100, though the host says small measurement tolerances may need to be discussed with the lab. The video gives no formal product score.

Ethanol and Sample Observations

• Regular E5 samples generally appeared to be within the permitted range. One discount-station E5 sample was described as very close to the limit.
• The host said the Super Plus samples looked good in the ethanol test.
• Agip Super 100 Tech Plus showed slightly more ethanol than some other samples, but was still described as a good result for a high-performance fuel.
• The samples differed visibly in colour. The host suggests this may reflect additives, but acknowledges that colour alone does not establish fuel quality.
• The discount station’s diesel sample looked unusually yellow. Its quality was not determined in this video; further lab testing was planned.

Pros, Concerns, and Buying Advice

Positives

• Edeka and Jet delivered strong reported octane values despite their lower prices.
• The host considers high-octane fuel particularly important for vehicles requiring 98 octane and for tuned or high-performance engines.
• The ethanol tests did not reveal an obvious problem with most of the Super Plus samples.

Concerns and caveats

• The discount station’s E5 result was borderline, and its diesel sample looked unusual. The host said more testing was needed before drawing conclusions.
• Some customers reportedly complained of reduced range, rough running, or engine damage after using fuel from a discount station. These were anecdotes, not findings established by the tests shown.
• The host argues that ethanol can increase fuel consumption and, based on earlier performance-bench tests, may reduce performance in some circumstances. He also stresses that ethanol is not inherently bad: its high octane rating can be useful for tuning.
• Premium-fuel additive claims are discussed skeptically. The host suggests it may be more worthwhile to buy affordable fuel and use a separately chosen, reputable cleaning or protective additive rather than paying extra for branded premium fuel. That is his recommendation, not a result proven by this test.

Comparisons and Context

The host recalls earlier tests in which V-Power Diesel performed near the bottom of a diesel comparison, at about 51.2, only slightly above the cited 51 minimum in the relevant diesel standard; cheaper diesel samples did better. He also refers to earlier tests suggesting that E10 performed poorly on their test bench, while noting that this does not make ethanol universally undesirable.

The unnamed cheap station’s Super Plus was listed at €2.279. The host cites price gaps of roughly 8–20 cents compared with other stations. He notes that Edeka’s reportedly high fuel turnover could potentially affect freshness, but this was speculative.

Verdict

The results shown do not support a blanket conclusion that cheap Super Plus is poor quality: Edeka and Jet produced strong octane readings, while the more expensive Aral sample measured 99.4 rather than its advertised 100. The fuel comparison is encouraging for budget-conscious drivers, but the video does not resolve the concerns about the discount station’s diesel or establish whether customer-reported vehicle problems were fuel-related.

Other Speakers’ Contributions

• A gas-station employee and customers reportedly described complaints involving reduced range, rough running, and possible engine damage at a discount station. The host treated these as reasons for further investigation, not verified evidence.
• The host’s companion participated in the sample testing and discussed the results, but the substantive conclusions and buying advice came primarily from the host.