Standard Unleaded in Euro

[Eurotony]

A friend of mine has a Euro a few months younger than mine has told me that she uses Standard Unleaded in her car & has done so since the first service. She was advised by her dealer on the Gold Coast that there will be no problems & they even confirmed it in writting.
She travels from the Gold Coast to Brisbane daily & has an average fuel consumption of 7.95 litres per 100km.
With the cost of PULP these days, is anyone else using standard ULP & what difference has you noticed in the cars performance.

Thanks
Eurotony :confused:

[EuroAccord13]

I won't recommend that she do this as a long term solution to save petrol although I am pretty sure the Euro has a knock sensor...

Performance wise, there will definately be a drop in performance as the car was tuned to run on Premium....

I personally won't put Regular in and if I have to, I'll have a bottle of Octane booster handy :)...

[euro1978]

This has been covered a few times.

The engine has been tuned to run on 95 RON or higher.

I would strongly not recommend running it on normal ULP.

[as001]

Blasphemy! regular unleaded in the EURO!??!

unless your stranded in woop woop

[aaronng]

No, I use PULP all the time. If you look at the fuel door, there is a label that says "95 unleaded only". So nothing below 95 for my car. Also, is the journey between Gold Coast and Brisbane a 100% highway at 110km/h? If so, that is poor fuel consumption. I get 7.0L/100km on the highway with 98 octane premium. That translates to a saving of 0.95 litres per 100km. which is a savings of about $7.60 per full tank.

If I were to use regular, I'd save $0.10 per litre, which is $6.50 a full tank. So in the long run, I will end up paying $1.10 per tank more as well as causing the engine to retard timing, thus reducing the power output.

[ECU-MAN]

u sure your sticker says 95 RON, I thought they say 98.

EURO does have knock thats why its safe to run RON 95, but not wise

[FWCL]

When I picked up my Euro, the dealer said the same thing. Apparently, premium is only recommended by Honda. He also said that putting in regular will not void the warranty.

Personally, I will use 98RON because it burns cleaner, there is more power and the better fuel efficiency will negate some of the additional cost.

[aaronng]

u sure your sticker says 95 RON, I thought they say 98.

EURO does have knock thats why its safe to run RON 95, but not wise
It's 95. The knock sensor doesn't make it safe to run a lower octane fuel. It's meant to prevent engine damage in case someone does put in lower octane petrol. At 95 octane, the engine runs as normal. If the petrol quality dipped, the knock sensor would detect it and retard the ignition and cam timings. There is a limit as to how much it can retard the timing. Once you exceed that limit, it's ping ping city.

[aaronng]

When I picked up my Euro, the dealer said the same thing. Apparently, premium is only recommended by Honda. He also said that putting in regular will not void the warranty.

Personally, I will use 98RON because it burns cleaner, there is more power and the better fuel efficiency will negate some of the additional cost.
I don't get it... The fuel flap states minimum 95 octane unleaded only. I think the dealers think Premium = 98 octane and 95 = regular. But to us consumers, regular = 91, premium = 95, Optimax/Ultimate/Vortex98 = 98. Also, it's cheaper to run 98 premium as the Euro's VTC can change the timing to improve fuel consumption with higher octane fuel (also up to a limit).

It makes no sense why people want to save $0.10 ($6.50 full tank, $5.50 by the time the light comes on) by using 91 octane when they can use 98 octane, get better fuel consumption and at the end of 1 tank, run the extra distance that it actually comes out slightly cheaper than 91 octane. :confused:

[FWCL]

I'm hoping that the full tank of fuel that came with the car is PULP!! With such an attitude, the dealer may have filled up the tank with ULP. I just don't trust dealers ...

[aaronng]

I'm hoping that the full tank of fuel that came with the car is PULP!! With such an attitude, the dealer may have filled up the tank with ULP. I just don't trust dealers ...
My dealer filled with 95 octane for my first tank (they had a petrol pump near the car wash bay!). But if you really don't trust him, then fill up with some 98 octane as soon as you use up say 1/4 of the tank. At least the overall octane will be higher.

[FWCL]

Good idea, thanks. I'll do that. Have not had much chance to drive it since delivery a few days ago so tank is still nearly full.

[euro1978]

The dealer may have meant well but they are not that knowlegable about the cars. They only remember a few key features which are identified as the strongest selling points.

In future consult your owners bible.

[eurosp]

My dealer also told me I can use regular with my Euro when I take delivery of my car and I did use it for two months. Change to Primium after that. I have also notice the fuel comsumption is better using premium ULP.
Anyone tried the new Shell 95?

[splinter]

why would you want ULP, premium is bad enough.

my style of driving

50% freeway, bit of rev to 40km/hr in 1st gear.
euro manual does 550 km per 55 L

10L/100Km

not as good as my old accord vti 98, does 50L per 550Km and thats ULP

9L/100Km

considering ROn95 costs 7% more.

my new euro manual is costing me 18% more in fuel to run than previous accord auto

which is... ok u decide.

ok I love ranting about the new euro.

[aaronng]

With the Euro, you can reduce consumption by using less throttle. You save more fuel by using 1/2 throttle and revving up to 4000rpm than using FULL throttle and revving up to 2000rpm before shifting. Even better is to change your driving style for less throttle, and shifting at 3000rpm in 1st, 2500rpm in the other gears and then cruising in 5th at 2000rpm or below. If this is your regular driving style, then you can do a full throttle up to redline in 1st once a day and your fuel consumption will stay below 10L/100km.

I drive this way, do less than 30% highway and my average since I got my car last year is 9.5L/100km. Of course, those 2.2 Camrys will be outrunning you at the lights. But hey, it's saving fuel! LOL

[Mr_will]

No, I use PULP all the time. If you look at the fuel door, there is a label that says "95 unleaded only". So nothing below 95 for my car. Also, is the journey between Gold Coast and Brisbane a 100% highway at 110km/h? If so, that is poor fuel consumption. I get 7.0L/100km on the highway with 98 octane premium. That translates to a saving of 0.95 litres per 100km. which is a savings of about $7.60 per full tank.

If I were to use regular, I'd save $0.10 per litre, which is $6.50 a full tank. So in the long run, I will end up paying $1.10 per tank more as well as causing the engine to retard timing, thus reducing the power output.

Just so you know, running a higher octane fuel will not give you greater fuel economy, nor will it give you more power, as has often been suggested (i know you didnt say it). Higher octane fuel burns differently and will actually give you less power.

as for the euro, most newish cars with a decent ecu are programmed to cope with different fuels eg most of the newer LS1 v8's will run fine on standard, but ecu will allow different settings if 98 is used, ie some more power.

the bottom line is - if your manual says use 91, use it, youll get nothing out of a higher octane fuel unless you used advanced timing, which is a whole different thing in itself

[BiLL|z0r]

Our manual says use minimum 95RON fuel, as does the sticker inside the fuel flap.
Higher octane fuel (98 RON) DOES give better economy on the Euro, every1 with a Euro will vouch for that. As for more power, debatable. I don't think it does on mine but others think it does.

[Mr_will]

Our manual says use minimum 95RON fuel, as does the sticker inside the fuel flap.
Higher octane fuel (98 RON) DOES give better economy on the Euro, every1 with a Euro will vouch for that. As for more power, debatable. I don't think it does on mine but others think it does.


You can vouch for it all you like, but it doesnt make you right.
If it says use 95, then that is what the engine is optimised for.
98 ron will NOT give better fuel economy, it will give you less power which will mean you have to work the engine harder for the same performance.
Like i said, unless you are coupling an increase in fuel RON with advanced timing, it will just reduce the power.

[yfin]

If it says use 95, then that is what the engine is optimised for.98 ron will NOT give better fuel economy, it will give you less power which will mean you have to work the engine harder for the same performance. Like i said, unless you are coupling an increase in fuel RON with advanced timing, it will just reduce the power.

Hi Mr_Will - don't take this the wrong way - but you are a newcomer so we don't know you from a bar of soap. Now I am not saying you are wrong but it would be great if you could back up your generalised statement - this one in particular "98 ron will NOT give better fuel economy, it will give you less power". Do you have a source for this?

The other thing I would like you to comment on is on what basis you assume the Euro ECU can not recognise 98 ron and advance the timing accordingly. You say the LS1 can do this from 91ron - so presumably some ECUs can do this. The Euro takes 95 ron minimum - not 95 ron.

[Mr_will]

Hi Mr_Will - don't take this the wrong way - but you are a newcomer so we don't know you from a bar of soap. Now I am not saying you are wrong but it would be great if you could back up your generalised statement - this one in particular "98 ron will NOT give better fuel economy, it will give you less power". Do you have a source for this?

The other thing I would like you to comment on is on what basis you assume the Euro ECU can not recognise 98 ron and advance the timing accordingly. You say the LS1 can do this from 91ron - so presumably some ECUs can do this. The Euro takes 95 ron minimum - not 95 ron.

i did not say that the euro ecu could, if youd read my post carefully you would realise that i said SOME ecu's can. that is a fact - some ecus can do it.

Its all pretty much to do with ignition timing as i have partially explained to you.

98 ron burns far more slowly than 95 ron, and so if you wanted to gain increased efficiency from this, you would need to advance your ignition timing.

SO if you increase the ron of the fuel - eg from 95 to 98, without advancing the timing, you are decreasing the efficiency of the engine. im sorry if this doesnt explain it to you then perhaps rather than asking me to explain it further, you might want to research the basics of engine operation - dont take that the wrong way, im just saying that really if you dont know what im talking about that its because you havent properly researched what youre saying

[yfin]

i did not say that the euro ecu could, if youd read my post carefully you would realise that i said SOME ecu's can. that is a fact - some ecus can do it.

Its all pretty much to do with ignition timing as i have partially explained to you.

98 ron burns far more slowly than 95 ron, and so if you wanted to gain increased efficiency from this, you would need to advance your ignition timing.

SO if you increase the ron of the fuel - eg from 95 to 98, without advancing the timing, you are decreasing the efficiency of the engine. im sorry if this doesnt explain it to you then perhaps rather than asking me to explain it further, you might want to research the basics of engine operation - dont take that the wrong way, im just saying that really if you dont know what im talking about that its because you havent properly researched what youre saying

Perhaps you shouldn't be so rude if you want to post in this forum. It is totally appropriate for me to ask you to justify the remark that using 98 ron will not increase power.

You seem to be awash in generalised comments. This thread is about the Euro. Unless you can say to us the Euro cannot adapt its timing to adjust to 98 ron - take your comments about "losing power" elsewhere as it is just misleading.

[Mr_will]

well excuse me - i was offering technically sound advice but all you can seem to do is repeat yourself in stataing that i am awash in generalised comments - that just doesnt make any sense. youre right it is reasonable for you to ask for justification, but for a start there are nicer ways to do it, and secondly when i did justify it you either ignored it, or you didnt understand - its pretty obvious that this issue is beyond your understanding of engine operation.

as a matter of fact, the euro's ecu cannot adapt to 98, so everything I have said remains correct. this means that the timing cannot be advanced, and thus power will be lost. seriously, google efi or something, ********YFIN EDIT *** TAKE YOUR PERSONAL ATTACKS ELSEWHERE - PM SENT - FIRST WARNING***

[wynode]

Guys lets calm down and be constuctive with something to backup our facts........thats all that yfin is trying to say.

Now from what I have read (on this forum and off), engines with knock sensors can only retards timing to avoid detonation (by running ULP <95 RON). However they cannot 'detect' better fuel and increase performance without 3rd party intervention (ie ecu remap or ignition timing advance).

[Mr_will]

Guys lets calm down and be constuctive with something to backup our facts........thats all that yfin is trying to say.

Now from what I have read (on this forum and off), engines with knock sensors can only retards timing to avoid detonation (by running ULP <95 RON). However they cannot 'detect' better fuel and increase performance without 3rd party intervention (ie ecu remap or ignition timing advance).

Thats not really true, not.
The example I used was in LS1 holdens, particularly monaros. The ecu can detect the fuel type and allows slightly higher power output when 98 octane is used. The euro ecu however, cannot do this

[yfin]

Thats not really true, not.
The example I used was in LS1 holdens, particularly monaros. The ecu can detect the fuel type and allows slightly higher power output when 98 octane is used. The euro ecu however, cannot do this

In simple terms though - you appear to be saying a Euro on 98 ron (is less "efficient") and therefore it produces LESS power than the Euro on 95 ron.

Perhaps you should confirm this is your point of view. Wyn is saying it will not necessarily produce more power - however - my reading of what you are saying it will produce less power.

[PERTH_EURO]

wa has run out of ultimate98 apparently.
Im bush yorum... can you confirm?

[as001]

I guess the only to prove the debate about the euro on 98 ron v 95 ron is is dyno a stock euro on 98 ron then on 95 ron but who the hell can be assed doing that?! Im been running my euro on 98 since day one however i will give 95 ago at my next fuel refill if there is a difference

[eurotrash]

Hey timbo - you r correct - the BP pulp refinery had some issues a couple of weeks back & supplies are running very low -some servo's have run out..

The news reader bimbo - " motorists will just have to do with regular unleaded for the time being" -I DONT THINK SO :thumbdwn:

Is the BP refinery the ONLY one in WA producing PULP?

[Mr_will]

In simple terms though - you appear to be saying a Euro on 98 ron (is less "efficient") and therefore it produces LESS power than the Euro on 95 ron.

Perhaps you should confirm this is your point of view. Wyn is saying it will not necessarily produce more power - however - my reading of what you are saying it will produce less power.

yes, running 98 octane when your recommended fuel is 95 (even if it was 95 minimum) will result in a decrease in power. As a result you'll most likely be revving higher, and thus using more fuel.

You also won't be able to get conclusive evidence from a dyno.

The two sets of results will be closer than the mean tolerance in a dyno run so any results you get will be void....

Where you gain/lose power will depend exactally on how the timing map is setup standard. If at one point the map is more advanced than MBTT (incredibly unlikely but i'll humour you) then you will see a HIGHER power. But for the rest part, you will see a lower power level everywhere.

[wynode]

Can you confirm this somehow Mr_Will?

[Mr_will]

Can you confirm this somehow Mr_Will?

maybe try googling efi and ecu's

i cant really provide a better explanation than i have in relation to timing and such.

id bet $100 on it though.

[wynode]

No offence Mr_Will but I don't see why we have to find the evidence for YOUR claim?

[Mr_will]

No offence Mr_Will but I don't see why we have to find the evidence for YOUR claim?

well no offence to you mate, and i mean that seriously, but its a a pretty basic claim in terms of ignition/timing operations, so maybe researching this some more would be worthwhile for you. at the end of the day, i understand it because i know how it all works

[yfin]

Mr_Will

Putting aside what you say about dyno comparisons (which is fair enough)- you are the first person I have heard say 98 ron will produce less power than 95 ron in a car rated as 95 min

I have definately heard people say (like Wyn) it may be no better unless you get an ECU remap, etc - but saying it will produce LESS power on the stock ECU tune - is news to me.

Eg - look at this article - my understanding is the MY99 WRX was tuned for 95 ron just like the Euro. Accepting what you say about dyno comparisons - it didn't show less power. Same with the Audi S2 in the breakout article.

http://autospeed.drive.com.au/cms/article.html?&A=0429

Now maybe we are all wrong - but perhaps you should explain more than just say we should do some research on "ECUs, and EFI".

Maybe I should get my Euro dynoed 5 times with 95 ron (to minimise the dyno variances) and then 5 times with 98 ron. Average out all the numbers, etc.

If the 98 ron averages lower than the 95 ron - you pay for all the dynos and pay me $100. If the 95 ron averages higher than the 98 ron - i pay for the dynos and give you $100. Still willing to bet the $100? :D

[Mr_will]

Putting aside what you say about dyno comparisons (which is fair enough)- you are the first person I have heard say 98 ron will produce less power than 95 ron in a car rated as 95 minI

I have definately heard people say (like Wyn) it may be no better unless you get an ECU remap, etc - but saying it will produce LESS power on the stock ECU tune - is news to me.

Eg - look at this article - my understanding is the MY99 WRX was tuned for 95 ron just like the Euro. Accepting what you say about dyno comparisons - it didn't show less power.

http://autospeed.drive.com.au/cms/article.html?&A=0429


Yeah the important bit in that article wasnt stated particularly clearly "Knock sensors allow the ECU to retard the timing to just before the knocking occurs. This effectively optimises the combustion process, maximising the output of the engine."

However we are dealing with two very different things - knock sensors are designed to work occasionally under extreme conditions, whereas an ecu that can alter timing to suit different RON fuels is designed for everyday driving - my point being that knock sensors are not a substitue for the better ecu.

the relevance of that test to this argument would most certainly hinge on whether the wrx ecu is of the type that can advance ignition timing, and I am fairly certain that it is.

i have put considerable research time into this and my arguments are in fact based on the fundamental operations of the engine, so id be very interested to see a more specific test that would prove me wrong

[EuroAccord13]

1. This topic is about Regular Unleaded Petro (91RON) for the Euro...

2. Argument at hand can go both ways.

Taken from Repair.org...

Can higher octane fuels give me more power?

On modern engines with sophisticated engine management systems, the engine can operate efficiently on fuels of a wider range of octane rating, but there remains an optimum octane for the engine under specific driving conditions. Older cars without such systems are more restricted in their choice of fuel, as the engine can not automatically adjust to accommodate lower octane fuel. Because knock is so destructive, owners of older cars must use fuel that will not knock under the most demanding conditions they encounter, and must continue to use that fuel, even if they only occasionally require the octane.
If you are already using the proper octane fuel, you will not obtain more power from higher octane fuels. The engine will be already operating at optimum settings, and a higher octane should have no effect on the management system. Your driveability and fuel economy will remain the same. The higher octane fuel costs more, so you are just throwing money away. If you are already using a fuel with an octane rating slightly below the optimum, then using a higher octane fuel will cause the engine management system to move to the optimum settings, possibly resulting in both increased power and improved fuel economy. You may be able to change octanes between seasons ( reduce octane in winter ) to obtain the most cost-effective fuel without loss of driveability.
Once you have identified the fuel that keeps the engine at optimum settings, there is no advantage in moving to an even higher octane fuel. The manufacturer's recommendation is conservative, so you may be able to carefully reduce the fuel octane. The penalty for getting it badly wrong, and not realising that you have, could be expensive engine damage.


Source :Chevron.ca
What will happen if I use the wrong octane gasoline in my vehicle?

Using a gasoline with an Anti-Knock Index lower than that required by your vehicle will cause the engine to knock or, if the engine is equipped with a knock sensor, decrease the vehicle's power and acceleration. Using a gasoline with an AKI higher than that required by your vehicle will not improve its operation.



Not much of a read and I'm not standing on anyone's side... Basically, there are claims that using a higher RON than recommended will not lead to better performance and economy BUT if tuned efficiently to run on a higher RON will lead to better performance and economy....


Keep this debate friendly ya all or I will be forced to close this if I deem this to be "Unfriendly" of sorts.... :)

CHEERS

[Mr_will]

1. This topic is about Regular Unleaded Petro (91RON) for the Euro...

2. Argument at hand can go both ways.

Taken from Repair.org...

Can higher octane fuels give me more power?

On modern engines with sophisticated engine management systems, the engine can operate efficiently on fuels of a wider range of octane rating, but there remains an optimum octane for the engine under specific driving conditions. Older cars without such systems are more restricted in their choice of fuel, as the engine can not automatically adjust to accommodate lower octane fuel. Because knock is so destructive, owners of older cars must use fuel that will not knock under the most demanding conditions they encounter, and must continue to use that fuel, even if they only occasionally require the octane.
If you are already using the proper octane fuel, you will not obtain more power from higher octane fuels. The engine will be already operating at optimum settings, and a higher octane should have no effect on the management system. Your driveability and fuel economy will remain the same. The higher octane fuel costs more, so you are just throwing money away. If you are already using a fuel with an octane rating slightly below the optimum, then using a higher octane fuel will cause the engine management system to move to the optimum settings, possibly resulting in both increased power and improved fuel economy. You may be able to change octanes between seasons ( reduce octane in winter ) to obtain the most cost-effective fuel without loss of driveability.
Once you have identified the fuel that keeps the engine at optimum settings, there is no advantage in moving to an even higher octane fuel. The manufacturer's recommendation is conservative, so you may be able to carefully reduce the fuel octane. The penalty for getting it badly wrong, and not realising that you have, could be expensive engine damage.


Source :Chevron.ca
What will happen if I use the wrong octane gasoline in my vehicle?

Using a gasoline with an Anti-Knock Index lower than that required by your vehicle will cause the engine to knock or, if the engine is equipped with a knock sensor, decrease the vehicle's power and acceleration. Using a gasoline with an AKI higher than that required by your vehicle will not improve its operation.



Not much of a read and I'm not standing on anyone's side... Basically, there are claims that using a higher RON than recommended will not lead to better performance and economy BUT if tuned efficiently to run on a higher RON will lead to better performance and economy....


Keep this debate friendly ya all or I will be forced to close this if I deem this to be "Unfriendly" of sorts.... :)

CHEERS


oh.my....god. i am going to keep this in relatively restrained form so that noone has a cry...
i seriously cannot believe the mods here. are you all so sensitive that anything which could possibly be construed as not being super nice is sufficient for you to take action on?
asking for advice on something is an absolute waste of time if you cant actually take the advice (esp if it doesnt fit with what you think).

do you all not realise that people can have heated arguments without actually taking it to the stage of becoming angry/wanting to stab the other person? i mean just because someone says, for example "no youre completely wrong you obviously dont get it, learn about this first" doesnt mean they hate the other person, its not a personal attack, and noone should go and have a cry about it. seriously its lame

[Mr_will]

1. This topic is about Regular Unleaded Petro (91RON) for the Euro...





and btw youre wrong about this. it started out that way but quickly turned to being about the difference between running 95 and 98, in a car that recommends 95 minimum

[aaronng]

yes, running 98 octane when your recommended fuel is 95 (even if it was 95 minimum) will result in a decrease in power. As a result you'll most likely be revving higher, and thus using more fuel.

You also won't be able to get conclusive evidence from a dyno.

The two sets of results will be closer than the mean tolerance in a dyno run so any results you get will be void....

Where you gain/lose power will depend exactally on how the timing map is setup standard. If at one point the map is more advanced than MBTT (incredibly unlikely but i'll humour you) then you will see a HIGHER power. But for the rest part, you will see a lower power level everywhere.
If you are saying that the difference between using RON95 and RON98 is within the error of a dyno, then why are you so adamant that there is a loss of power if you yourself say that it is not measurable by the dyno (which is the only way to quantitatively measure torque and power of cars). You are contradicting yourself.

And you say that in order to reap the benefits of higher octane, you need to be able to advance ignition timing. Yes, that is true and yes, there is a limit up to which the ignition can be advanced. The Euro has VTC as well which advances cam timing. It has been done by Hondata on the K series engines that more cam timing allows more power to be extracted by the engine.

So while I am not saying that using RON98 on the Euro gives more power, I am saying that it is possible to remap the ECU so that ignition and cam timings are advanced so much that more power can be produced. In order to run the engine at that ignition and cam timing, RON98 is needed. RON98 does not give the engine power. It is the ability for the engine to advance ignition (which is what the monaro and K24 does) and cam (K24 though VTC) timing that gives power. As a consequence of the timings, you need RON98.

And BTW, A/F ratios, ignition and cam timings have been remapped for the K24 by Hondata (using PON93 which is RON96). They did not produce a large increase in peak power (about 3hp at roughly 7200rpm) but instead produced a fat chunk of power between 5000-7000rpm. At 6000rpm, the gain was 28.8hp. So it is the total opposite of your claims that through advancing the timing that you gain only at one optimum RPM point.
All the dynos you could possibly want from Hondata on the K24: http://hondata.com/reflash_tsx.html

Here is my sweeping statement of the day. On the Euro, using RON98 over RON95 does not give an added power boost. Higher octane rating does not give you added mileage. BUT! All the RON98 fuels in Australia are sold with the marketing point that the fuel is of higher density and hence has more energy per gram. If that is true, then that is why there are reports of added fuel mileage when using aussie RON98. BTW, I see the same mileage gains on a 2001 Astra as well not just the Euro. On the Astra, there is no appreciable gain in mileage when using RON95 over RON91. But there is a 50km benefit out of using 3/4 of a tank when using RON98 over both RON91 and 95. So it is not from the wizadry of the magic four letter word in the Honda engine but from the higher density fuel.

[Mr_will]

If you are saying that the difference between using RON95 and RON98 is within the error of a dyno, then why are you so adamant that there is a loss of power if you yourself say that it is not measurable by the dyno (which is the only way to quantitatively measure torque and power of cars). You are contradicting yourself.

And you say that in order to reap the benefits of higher octane, you need to be able to advance ignition timing. Yes, that is true and yes, there is a limit up to which the ignition can be advanced. The Euro has VTC as well which advances cam timing. It has been done by Hondata on the K series engines that more cam timing allows more power to be extracted by the engine.

So while I am not saying that using RON98 on the Euro gives more power, I am saying that it is possible to remap the ECU so that ignition and cam timings are advanced so much that more power can be produced. In order to run the engine at that ignition and cam timing, RON98 is needed. RON98 does not give the engine power. It is the ability for the engine to advance ignition (which is what the monaro and K24 does) and cam (K24 though VTC) timing that gives power. As a consequence of the timings, you need RON98.

And BTW, A/F ratios, ignition and cam timings have been remapped for the K24 by Hondata. They did not produce a large increase in peak power (about 3hp at roughly 7200rpm) but instead produced a fat chunk of power between 5000-7000rpm. At 6000rpm, the gain was 28.8hp. So it is the total opposite of your claims that through advancing the timing that you gain only at one optimum RPM point.
All the dynos you could possibly want from Hondata on the K24: http://hondata.com/reflash_tsx.html



ok ill deal with the errors one by one..

1. I am not contradicting myself by saying that there is a loss of power which is not measurable by a dyno. At worst, I would be unable to prove my point. Perhaps you dont know what contradiction is? Besides, my reasoning for the loss of power wasnt really backed up by the dyno results, because i dont have any, it was backed up by the fact that I understand how ignition systems work, and that when you use a fuel that burns more slowly(ie a higher RON), your ignition timing is not optimised for this thus you LOSE POWER

2. The euro has VTEC...not VTC.

3. Cam timing and ignition timing are the same thing, so stop discussing them like they are

4. I did not claim that "through advanced timing you gain only at one optimum rpm point" that is a blatant lie. Do not falsely quote me. If anything I would say that it makes a difference right across the rpm range, so what you said was just incredibly foolish.

[Banana]

I won't recommend that she do this as a long term solution to save petrol although I am pretty sure the Euro has a knock sensor...

Performance wise, there will definately be a drop in performance as the car was tuned to run on Premium....

I personally won't put Regular in and if I have to, I'll have a bottle of Octane booster handy :)...
performance, performace. euro's aint made for performace mate, its a nice cruiser made by honda, why do u think they made ITR's and s2k's and NSX. and octane booster aint gonna work, coz of the stock ignition timing, ur just gonna stuff up the pistons anyways, octane booster are made for those imports that can run on 110RON and up. so dun waste ur money on those octane boosters, ur just paying to kill ur engines, unless u got ur ecu re-programmed for diff ignition timing

[aaronng]

Since you gave me the courtesy of giving your opinion on each of my point, it would be rude for me not to reciprocate. BTW, I don't have personal agendas. I'm just stating facts and info that people have tested. If you prove me wrong, I will admit that I am wrong.

ok ill deal with the errors one by one..

1. I am not contradicting myself by saying that there is a loss of power which is not measurable by a dyno. At worst, I would be unable to prove my point. Perhaps you dont know what contradiction is? Besides, my reasoning for the loss of power wasnt really backed up by the dyno results, because i dont have any, it was backed up by the fact that I understand how ignition systems work, and that when you use a fuel that burns more slowly(ie a higher RON), your ignition timing is not optimised for this thus you LOSE POWER
And I agree with your point IF the ECU cannot advance ignition timing sufficiently. And this is true of many cars. The Astra that I used to drive was specced for RON91. It could advance ignition timing for RON95 and it was stated in the manual that the power produced was higher. However, putting RON98 it in only gives the same power as RON95. So is the Astra's ECU map set for RON91 or RON95? Please answer this. The part I don't agree with regards to the Euro, I'll elaborate on the next point.



2. The euro has VTEC...not VTC.
The Euro has i-VTEC, which is VTEC and VTC. VTC is variable timing control, which is just the ability to rotate the intake camshaft thus giving letting the ECU advance cam timings by 25 degrees. This ability allows the Euro to advance timings to a larger degree than other cars using only ignition timing. This is why I believe that on the Euro, using RON98 will not result in an appreciable decrease in power. The ECU can advance ignition timings and if it is not enough, it will advance cam timings as well to accomodate. It won't make more power though because the fuel maps set for RON95.



3. Cam timing and ignition timing are the same thing, so stop discussing them like they are
I thought you said you were well researched on the topic of ignition systems! Ignition timing is the point at which the spark is produced by the spark plug, while cam timing is the points at which the intake and exhaust valves open and close. 2 totally different things!



4. I did not claim that "through advanced timing you gain only at one optimum rpm point" that is a blatant lie. Do not falsely quote me. If anything I would say that it makes a difference right across the rpm range, so what you said was just incredibly foolish.
You said:
Where you gain/lose power will depend exactally on how the timing map is setup standard. If at one point the map is more advanced than MBTT (incredibly unlikely but i'll humour you) then you will see a HIGHER power. But for the rest part, you will see a lower power level everywhere.

What I get here is that you said on the standard setup for the timing map, you get more power if the map is more advanced than MBTT at one point (which I assume point is RPM) and for the rest part (which is the rest of the RPM range) you will see a lower power level everywhere.

So you said it, not me.

[aaronng]

performance, performace. euro's aint made for performace mate, its a nice cruiser made by honda, why do u think they made ITR's and s2k's and NSX. and octane booster aint gonna work, coz of the stock ignition timing, ur just gonna stuff up the pistons anyways, octane booster are made for those imports that can run on 110RON and up. so dun waste ur money on those octane boosters, ur just paying to kill ur engines, unless u got ur ecu re-programmed for diff ignition timing
Uh, he said that he carried octane booster in case he could not find premium petrol and has to run instead on regular petrol.

[Mr_will]

I thought you said you were well researched on the topic of ignition systems! Ignition timing is the point at which the spark is produced by the spark plug, while cam timing is the points at which the intake and exhaust valves open and close. 2 totally different things!


arg conceeded - youll see that that sentence makes much more sense if you replace my can with a cant - i agree you are right that they arent, that is what i meant - otherwise why would i say "so stop discussing them like they are"

further points to come

[EuroAccord13]

oh.my....god. i am going to keep this in relatively restrained form so that noone has a cry...
i seriously cannot believe the mods here. are you all so sensitive that anything which could possibly be construed as not being super nice is sufficient for you to take action on?
asking for advice on something is an absolute waste of time if you cant actually take the advice (esp if it doesnt fit with what you think).

do you all not realise that people can have heated arguments without actually taking it to the stage of becoming angry/wanting to stab the other person? i mean just because someone says, for example "no youre completely wrong you obviously dont get it, learn about this first" doesnt mean they hate the other person, its not a personal attack, and noone should go and have a cry about it. seriously its lame

Reinforcing a reminder to keep it friendly, not taking a shot at you, who's the one always thinking everyone is against him??

Yes, I'm a mod but I am not taking side with anyone AS stated earlier... If you have an issue with me or any other mods, report it....



and btw youre wrong about this. it started out that way but quickly turned to being about the difference between running 95 and 98, in a car that recommends 95 minimum

Exactly my point.....:rolleyes:


The euro has VTEC...not VTC.

Thought you will know that Euros have VTC....

[BiLL|z0r]

So in conclusion, don't run 91 RON in ya Euro ;) (as that was the original question)

I think for the people that wanna run 95RON, do it, for the people that wanna run 98RON, do it. It's your car and put in it what you like. At the end of the day, this argument will never be finished (since we can't even prove it on a dyno).

[wynode]

I think for the people that wanna run 95RON, do it, for the people that wanna run 98RON, do it. It's your car and put in it what you like. At the end of the day, this argument will never be finished (since we can't even prove it on a dyno).

Well as stated by the manual you need to run 95RON fuel minimum.

But I think this a good discussion as the the use of 98RON fuel over 95 RON.

[yfin]

I need convincing 98 ron produces less power in the Euro than 95 ron.

Mr_Will can only say to me and others "go research ECUs and EFIs" and it is "basic engine operation". That really isn't an answer and flies in the face of what petroleum companies say about 98 ron. I am not saying it produces more power - I am really trying to drill down this claim it produces LESS power.

[aaronng]

Octane number just defines the resistance to knock. Some sources say that a fuel that is resistant to self ignition tends to burn slower, while other sources say that there is no relationship between the two. All of them however say that higher octane rating does not give power nor added mileage. I think that in Australia, the RON98 premium fuels were formulated to give added density because of what Shell started with their Optimax. However, our cars do not take full advantage of the mileage benefits because the ECU is not aware of the change in fuel density. We might be seeing a 50km advantage when using high density RON98, but I think with the leaning of the fuel mapping for RON98, additional mileage can be gained. Power-wise, it's all up to the compression ratio, ignition and cam timings. Altering those for use in conjunction with RON98 will give more power. But for a stock engine, it should be the same between RON98 and RON95 for the Euro as long as it is able to advance the timings sufficiently.

[wynode]

Octane number just defines the resistance to knock.

I thought it would be more effective to say it reduces the chance of pre-ignition.

[yfin]

I emailed BP Australia as to whether 98ron in a 95ron vehicle will produce less power. Here is the answer. I have removed the persons name from the response.

** MY QUESTION ***

I have a technical question about BP Ultimate 98 ron.

I have been using this product in my Honda Accord Euro for some time (95 ron minimum vehicle).

I have heard a claim that using 98 ron in a vehicle designed for 95 ron will result in LESS engine power. The claim is that unless I advance the timing on the vehicle the engine runs less efficiently thereby producing less power.

Please let me know if this is correct or incorrect as I would prefer to keep using BP Ultimate (but not if 98 ron results in less power).

Thanks in advance

*** ANSWER***

Dear sir

Thank you for your enquiry

It is true to say that if you want to get the maximum power output from a higher octane petrol you would tune the engine to that octane.

It is incorrect to say that if you use a higher octane fuel than your engine is specified for then you get less power, that is not correct.

The advantages of a higher octane fuel in an engine tuned for a lower octane fuel is that with the higher octane you get better performance when the engine is under load - for example high speed running, hot weather operation, acceleration, hill climbing etc

With Ultimate you also get a powerful engine cleaner to keep inlet valves, injectors and fuel systems clean, this aids combustion and reduces stress on the engine. All this has been demonstrated in tests in Europe and Australia

In fact our testing of Ultimate against 95 octane in a Ford XR6 on an engine dynamometer demonstrated a 2% improvement in power output over the 95 octane grade.


Regards

#
Product Assurance Manager

[aaronng]

I thought it would be more effective to say it reduces the chance of pre-ignition.
Hehe, yeah, that's true. I should have said resistance to pre-ignition or self ignition before the spark from the plug.

[aaronng]

Hehe, nice one yfin! And 2% on the engine dyno means after subtracting drivetrain losses, there is only about 1.6% (guessing) of power gain left!

I would like to add that when the engine is under load as stated by BP's rep as high speed running, hot weather operation, acceleration, hill climbing etc, the engine is more prone to pre-ignition or knocking. So in those situations, a higher octane fuel would help your car get back within operating specifications.

[msnealo]

I see Mr_Will has been mysteriously absent since people (namely yfin) have asked experts for their thoughts on this topic. Maybe instead of "googling efi" as suggested by Mr_Will he should of asked the correct people (those who make the petrol) what the truth is.

And before Mr_Will replies and says that BP will say anything to sell some petrol, I believe them and the forum members experiences over your unsubstantiated claims.

[Mr_will]

I see Mr_Will has been mysteriously absent since people (namely yfin) have asked experts for their thoughts on this topic. Maybe instead of "googling efi" as suggested by Mr_Will he should of asked the correct people (those who make the petrol) what the truth is.

And before Mr_Will replies and says that BP will say anything to sell some petrol, I believe them and the forum members experiences over your unsubstantiated claims.

again this comes back to a fundamental lack of understanding of the way an engine operates.
if you understood, then you wouldnt be believing the ludicrous explanation given both by bp, and other members.

i had stopped posting because it was obvious that you people dont bother to understand these things properly, you just like to believe what suits you

[aaronng]

I see Mr_Will has been mysteriously absent since people (namely yfin) have asked experts for their thoughts on this topic. Maybe instead of "googling efi" as suggested by Mr_Will he should of asked the correct people (those who make the petrol) what the truth is.

And before Mr_Will replies and says that BP will say anything to sell some petrol, I believe them and the forum members experiences over your unsubstantiated claims.
There is no point to egg other people on. Continuous egging on an already hot topic will lead to fried eggs and arguments.

[yfin]

again this comes back to a fundamental lack of understanding of the way an engine operates.
if you understood, then you wouldnt be believing the ludicrous explanation given both by bp, and other members.

i had stopped posting because it was obvious that you people dont bother to understand these things properly, you just like to believe what suits you

Hey man, I'd love to believe you - just show us some more evidence instead of pushing it back and saying it is "basic engine operation".

If you are confident you are correct may I suggest you report BP to the ACCC for misleading and deceptive conduct under the Trade Practices Act.

As you probably are aware - it is unlawful for them to give false and misleading representations regarding their product. You say it is "ludicrous" so presumably you believe it is false. If you want this guys details PM me - as you will need it when you call the ACCC.

[aaronng]

again this comes back to a fundamental lack of understanding of the way an engine operates.
if you understood, then you wouldnt be believing the ludicrous explanation given both by bp, and other members.

i had stopped posting because it was obvious that you people dont bother to understand these things properly, you just like to believe what suits you
If you think that the others have a lack of fundamental understanding, then please explain to them so that they will have an understanding and reason to believe your claims rather than just by your statements without clarification.

Many people claim that higher octane petrol gives them better power and response. I am not one of them. I believe that the fuel that you need is what is determined by the state of tune of the engine. I always see people wanting to try higher octane fuels, either with octane boosters or the new Shell 100 with 5% ethanol. I myself won't try the stuff as I don't believe that it will give my engine any advantage. Heck, I even think that the 100 RON shell fuel is a ripoff. All they probably did was take 98 RON Optimax and add 5% ethanol to it. That would be enough to account for the 2 point increase in RON.

Let me get this thread back on track. You said that the LS1 ECU is able to detect the type of fuel that is used. I am interested in how it is able to do so. What sensor does it use?

[Mr_will]

If you think that the others have a lack of fundamental understanding, then please explain to them so that they will have an understanding and reason to believe your claims rather than just by your statements without clarification.

Many people claim that higher octane petrol gives them better power and response. I am not one of them. I believe that the fuel that you need is what is determined by the state of tune of the engine. I always see people wanting to try higher octane fuels, either with octane boosters or the new Shell 100 with 5% ethanol. I myself won't try the stuff as I don't believe that it will give my engine any advantage. Heck, I even think that the 100 RON shell fuel is a ripoff. All they probably did was take 98 RON Optimax and add 5% ethanol to it. That would be enough to account for the 2 point increase in RON.

Let me get this thread back on track. You said that the LS1 ECU is able to detect the type of fuel that is used. I am interested in how it is able to do so. What sensor does it use?



You mentioned ethanol (and yeah i know you didnt say you were a fan) - im a bit wary of that, i mean i cant say ive seen long term studies on its effect on engine life. apart from that, no cars that i know of were 'designed' to run on fuel with ethanol, and by that i mean car manufacturers test their cars on regular petrol, be it 91 - 98.

as for the LS1 sensor, to be honest im not sure i read it in several articles, in relation to power output, as holden does in some instances actually quote two figures, i guess perhaps they believe some people are too stupid/dont want to pay the extra (or some other reason). i would assume that they must have a pretty good reason for doing it, but im not really sure of that either, will look into it.

finally, the bp situation. if you give me this persons contact details id be more than willing to email them stating my opinion on the issue.
not to be pedantic or anything, but strictly speaking as the email/letter/whatever it was was not a communication by a company to a range of consumers, it would be considered "professional misstatement", if this gentlemans claims regarding the fuel issue were incorrect. itd be misleading advertising if on the tv ads it claimed this

dont forget im not really gaining anything with this argument, i dont even drive a euro so its not as though i have an agenda here

ok since its obviously not going to be enough until i explain this in full detail, i am going to, so i apologise in advance for the long post but i think its necessary

Timing is a tool to get peak cylinder pressure event to the best time to promote maximum torque, however You don't advance timing to get more power. You add more AIR to get more power. Timing is just there to control when your peak cylinder pressure occurs.

Higher octane fuel takes longer to burn, thus you must start the burn process earlier than normal if you are running these fuels. Otherwise you are delaying peak cylinder pressure, and reducing overall power - that is to say that if you increase the RON of the fuel- EG 95 to 98...WITHOUT advancing timing - you delay peak cylinder pressure and YOU LOSE POWER

there is an ideal point where the timing should be, usually referred to as best mean torque, or something similar... if your timing is set before that, advancing it will make more power, if your timing is set at or after that, advancing will make you lose power(and also increase the chance of damage to the engine)

If you get power from advancing timing (without changing fuel), it means that before you did it you were wasting power which was allready there available to you.

[yfin]

but strictly speaking as the email/letter/whatever it was was not a communication by a company to a range of consumers, it would be considered "professional misstatement", if this gentlemans claims regarding the fuel issue were incorrect. itd be misleading advertising if on the tv ads it claimed this

Thanks for explaining your view - finally :thumbsup:. As for the BP email not being covered by the Trade Practices Act - I beg to differ. You may know about ignition systems but how about you let me cover the legal point. As a lawyer I'll resist the temptation to tell you try google or something if you want to research the point.

[Mr_will]

Thanks for explaining your view - finally :thumbsup:. As for the BP email not being covered by the Trade Practices Act - I beg to differ. You may know about ignition systems but how about you let me cover the legal point. As a lawyer I'll resist the temptation to tell you try google or something if you want to research the point.

im a law student...once again you just made that up i did not say it wasnt covered by the trade practices act PLEASE stop misquoting me its seriously annoying.
i know what the trade practices act is, and i know what false/misleading advertising is. i seriously doubt that email sent by that person would not constitute advertising, that was my point.yes, what i suggested, the professional misstatement thing was not in relation to the tpa, it would be a tort in negligence, however i did NOT say that this wasnt covered by the tpa. as you would well know, even the full page spreads in newspapers dont constitute advertising, in a legal sense, so its not as though anything made public by the company can be classified in this way.

[yfin]

im a law student...once again you just made that up i did not say it wasnt covered by the trade practices act PLEASE stop misquoting me its seriously annoying.
i know what the trade practices act is, and i know what false/misleading advertising is. i seriously doubt that email sent by that person would not constitute advertising, that was my point.yes, what i suggested, the professional misstatement thing was not in relation to the tpa, it would be a tort in negligence, however i did NOT say that this wasnt covered by the tpa. as you would well know, even the full page spreads in newspapers dont constitute advertising, in a legal sense, so its not as though anything made public by the company can be classified in this way.

ooh a law student! Excellent. Well if it covered by the Trade Practices Act it is actionable. And since when is the TPA limited to "advertising"? Ever read s52? If you want to argue about everything I say (even the legal points!) perhaps move to PM as it is off topic.

[Mr_will]

ooh a law student! Excellent. Well if it covered by the Trade Practices Act it is actionable. And since when is the TPA limited to "advertising"? Ever read s52? If you want to argue about everything I say (even the legal points!) perhaps move to PM as it is off topic.


arg jeezuth christh! i didnt say the tpa was limited to advertising!!! i enjoy a decent argument with someone who obviously knows what theyre on about but it ruins things when you just keep misquoting me! obviously in the law department you have me owned, and thats fine, but please, i can take being wrong if its because you know more than me, but not if your argument is based on misquoting me

[aaronng]

You mentioned ethanol (and yeah i know you didnt say you were a fan) - im a bit wary of that, i mean i cant say ive seen long term studies on its effect on engine life. apart from that, no cars that i know of were 'designed' to run on fuel with ethanol, and by that i mean car manufacturers test their cars on regular petrol, be it 91 - 98.

as for the LS1 sensor, to be honest im not sure i read it in several articles, in relation to power output, as holden does in some instances actually quote two figures, i guess perhaps they believe some people are too stupid/dont want to pay the extra (or some other reason). i would assume that they must have a pretty good reason for doing it, but im not really sure of that either, will look into it.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ok since its obviously not going to be enough until i explain this in full detail, i am going to, so i apologise in advance for the long post but i think its necessary

Timing is a tool to get peak cylinder pressure event to the best time to promote maximum torque, however You don't advance timing to get more power. You add more AIR to get more power. Timing is just there to control when your peak cylinder pressure occurs.

Higher octane fuel takes longer to burn, thus you must start the burn process earlier than normal if you are running these fuels. Otherwise you are delaying peak cylinder pressure, and reducing overall power - that is to say that if you increase the RON of the fuel- EG 95 to 98...WITHOUT advancing timing - you delay peak cylinder pressure and YOU LOSE POWER

there is an ideal point where the timing should be, usually referred to as best mean torque, or something similar... if your timing is set before that, advancing it will make more power, if your timing is set at or after that, advancing will make you lose power(and also increase the chance of damage to the engine)

If you get power from advancing timing (without changing fuel), it means that before you did it you were wasting power which was allready there available to you.
Good explanation! Yes, Holdens do quote 2 power figures in the manual. Makes me wonder though how the ECU detects the fuel type. Maybe it was tuned for 95 RON and if pre-ignition is detected, it then uses the fuel maps for 91 RON. That could work.

And no need to apologise for long posts as long as it is informative. :)

[G33K]

Guys its obvious this argument is not going to end. even if you got an answer from one another you will keep disagreeing with each other. From reading through all those posts (even though i own a Honda prelude), it was quite amazing how much information was written in here. but you guys must have put in what.....2-3hours worth of typing to prove one another wrong when no ones going to admit theyre wrong.

I believe this thread should be closed. Its already had imformative posts but i dont think theres much more to add.

Just drive your cars and enjoy it! : )

Peace out.

[Mr_will]

Guys its obvious this argument is not going to end. even if you got an answer from one another you will keep disagreeing with each other. From reading through all those posts (even though i own a Honda prelude), it was quite amazing how much information was written in here. but you guys must have put in what.....2-3hours worth of typing to prove one another wrong when no ones going to admit theyre wrong.

I believe this thread should be closed. Its already had imformative posts but i dont think theres much more to add.

Just drive your cars and enjoy it! : )

Peace out.

lol i kinda agree - but its getting kinda interesting too :thumbsup: im going to be interested to see what bp says when i tell them my side of the story...id say theyll probly just stick to their alleged dyno results. the only way i can see their claim being correct is if the xr6's ecu is similar to that in some LS1 cars in that it can advance the timing to take advantage of the fuel

[as001]

In the latest fifth gear episode they place 3 different cars (renault clio sport / vw golf gti / current sti wrx) on the dyno using 95ron (uk reg unleaded) BP utilmate 97ron and Shell Optimax 98ron to verfiy if any cars increased hp or torque (each had the ecu reset after fuel tank was drained to make it a even playing field for each fuel used)

Renault Clio sport (the closest to the euro as it was the only n/a car also its tuned to 95ron fuel as well)
Showed no difference in torque or power delievery

VW Golf GTI
Show steady increase as ron rating went up higher however power gain was margainal it was a rough gain of about 5kw and also increase in torque

Subaru WRX STI
Showed the most response to higher rating ron fuel it was the rough gain from 95 - 98 ron fuel was about 10-15kw biggest area improvement was torque it was in a different measurement to NM my best guess was 20nm

[V205]

Putting power output aside:

If the higher octane is able to get more mileage that equates or betters the cost value, then it's worth it in terms of less time going to the stations?

ie. If they made a fuel that cost me a mth's normal fuel pump price but allows me to only need to pump once a mth, why not? :)

As mentioned be others, the extra octane is insurance against extreme conditions that cause pinging like very hot days and sudden acceleration needs going uphill

[wynode]

Mr_will, thanks for that post. If you said that at the start it would have saved all these pages of reading :p


Guys its obvious this argument is not going to end. even if you got an answer from one another you will keep disagreeing with each other. From reading through all those posts (even though i own a Honda prelude), it was quite amazing how much information was written in here. but you guys must have put in what.....2-3hours worth of typing to prove one another wrong when no ones going to admit theyre wrong.

I believe this thread should be closed. Its already had imformative posts but i dont think theres much more to add.

Just drive your cars and enjoy it! : )

Peace out.

I've enjoyed this read and i'm doing some reading up on this so as long as we are sharing information.....i don't see why it should be closed ?

[yfin]

I don't think we should close this. I emailed BP again. I'll let their words speak. Suffice to say if the XR6 does not lose power (the opposite) on 98 ron I don't see why the Euro would.

MY QUESTION
My friend has seen your email and says that the XR6 must be able to advance its timing to get more power with 98 ron. He says the Euro cannot advance its timing. Do you know if the XR6 can advance its timing to take advantage of the fuel? Here is another response from him after seeing your email:

Timing is a tool to get peak cylinder pressure event to the best time to promote maximum torque, however You don't advance timing to get more power. You add more AIR to get more power. Timing is just there to control when your peak cylinder pressure occurs. Higher octane fuel takes longer to burn, thus you must start the burn process earlier than normal if you are running these fuels. Otherwise you are delaying peak cylinder pressure, and reducing overall power - that is to say that if you increase the RON of the fuel- EG 95 to 98...WITHOUT advancing timing - you delay peak cylinder pressure and YOU LOSE POWER

there is an ideal point where the timing should be, usually referred to as best mean torque, or something similar... if your timing is set before that, advancing it will make more power, if your timing is set at or after that, advancing will make you lose power(and also increase the chance of damage to the engine)

If you get power from advancing timing (without changing fuel), it means that before you did it you were wasting power which was allready there available to you.

*** RESPONSE ***

The XR6 is mapped to 91 , turbocharged is mapped to 95 neither can adjust their timing to 98. However 98 octane fuels habve a higher density than 95 and 91 octane fuels so you have more energy and get more power per unit of fuel injected.

power output is also a function of compression ratio, the higher the compression ratio the greater the power output and the higher the octane fuel required. Changing timing is a way of modifying compression ratio.

Adding more air leans out the mix and increases the temperature of the burn so you get more power from more complete combustion, however you run the risk of overheating and knocking unless the fuel has a high enough octane.

High octane fuels do not burn more slowly than low octane fuels. They all burn at the same rate.

regards
#

[G33K]

Ok.....i guess im wrong then. lol

Maybe move it to technical since it is getting pretty technical......and since its going to a stage where other cars, not the Accord Euro no more?

Only a suggestion though........but il keep reading.

[aaronng]

Putting power output aside:

If the higher octane is able to get more mileage that equates or betters the cost value, then it's worth it in terms of less time going to the stations?

ie. If they made a fuel that cost me a mth's normal fuel pump price but allows me to only need to pump once a mth, why not? :)

As mentioned be others, the extra octane is insurance against extreme conditions that cause pinging like very hot days and sudden acceleration needs going uphill
For the Euros which were specced to run with 95 octane, 98 is good enough insurance already. :)

[euro77]

Putting power output aside:

If the higher octane is able to get more mileage that equates or betters the cost value, then it's worth it in terms of less time going to the stations?

ie. If they made a fuel that cost me a mth's normal fuel pump price but allows me to only need to pump once a mth, why not? :)


This is from a test they did on TV (today's tonight or smthg similar) a while back. Basically they are comparing the 98, 95, 91 ron, 5% ethanol, and 10% ethanol. The test is done on the same car brand and model (but of course not necessarily the same timing etc because the ecu might have slightly different mapping) running constant (60 kph if not mistaken). To my surprise, car with 98 ron went out of gas first, followed by 95, 91, 5% ethanol, and lastly 10% ethanol. Now this somehow proves that 98 ron doesn't give you the extra milage? The cars they use to test are commodores.

[Mr_will]

This is from a test they did on TV (today's tonight or smthg similar) a while back. Basically they are comparing the 98, 95, 91 ron, 5% ethanol, and 10% ethanol. The test is done on the same car brand and model (but of course not necessarily the same timing etc because the ecu might have slightly different mapping) running constant (60 kph if not mistaken). To my surprise, car with 98 ron went out of gas first, followed by 95, 91, 5% ethanol, and lastly 10% ethanol. Now this somehow proves that 98 ron doesn't give you the extra milage? The cars they use to test are commodores.


lol read the previous few pages....higher rated fuel gives less power so the engine has to work harder and will thus use more fuel...that was half the point of what i was saying dude

[euro77]

lol read the previous few pages....higher rated fuel gives less power so the engine has to work harder and will thus use more fuel...that was half the point of what i was saying dude

so are you saying that if the the test was done on a car that has ecu which can advance its timing based on the fuel, you'd get more milage from ron 98?

also, since we are on this timing topic, aftermarket air fuel controller, if tuned when running 98 ron, surely would give the right timing, thus giving more power and more milage?

[Mr_will]

so are you saying that if the the test was done on a car that has ecu which can advance its timing based on the fuel, you'd get more milage from ron 98?

also, since we are on this timing topic, aftermarket air fuel controller, if tuned when running 98 ron, surely would give the right timing, thus giving more power and more milage?

i understand what youre getting at - but youre not quite expressing it in the right way. heres how it works -
take my LS integra for example. it aint putting out huge amounts of power, so to get decent acceleration i need to rev to 3-4 (normal-ish driving)

HOWEVER if i was to get myself a turbo conversion (setting aside the particulars of where turbo power arrives in the rev range, it doesnt matter if the power increase comes from cams, turbo, super whatever, its just not relevant for this argument) -

then if all i wanted was similar acceleration, i wouldnt need to rev as high to get the same power level, and thus it would be reasonable to assume that id use less fuel (and its important to take into account that the fact that im making more power means that more fuel will being injected into the cylinder in every injection cycle, however this effect will be less than the amount of fuel that wouldve been used had i had the need to rev higher)

SO if what youre aiming for is mileage, then advancing timing and using 98 ron as opposed to 95 or 91, then the fact that your power is arriving earlier and potentially you are getting more of it, then youll need to rev less and as a result youll use less fuel and get more mileage

however if power is your aim, things are a little different. considering that you will need to rev lower to get the same power as you were getting before (and obtain similar acceleration), if you want to feel this power increase then you will need to rev higher, which means using more fuel. you cant have it both ways.

air fuel controllers as im sure you are aware actually only control fuel. theyre not really designed for this scenario. you wont really see significant, if any gains from using an air fuel controller if all youve done is advance the timing and increase the rating of your fuel. im going to claim that you wouldnt see any increase in power as a result of this at all, UNLESS you had incorrectly advanced your timing, dont forget that it can be advanced as far or as little as you like.

[PERTH_EURO]

sad to say but my euro is running on standard unleaded.

Something went balls up with refinery over here, and all stations/brands in my local area (as of thurs) have no Ultimate 98 and not even any premium.

Only put $10 in and the guy there could not tell me when the supplies would be back.

There is a noticble dif in performance too.

[aaronx88]

In Melbourne, most BP and Mobil run out of 98Ron late last week. But as of yesterday, the supplies seems to be back and I quickly pumped a full tank of BP Ultimate.

Perth Euro, have u considered some octane booster for the time being? I'm just worried about the damage it might cause to the engine.

Aaron

[Mr_will]

sad to say but my euro is running on standard unleaded.

Something went balls up with refinery over here, and all stations/brands in my local area (as of thurs) have no Ultimate 98 and not even any premium.

Only put $10 in and the guy there could not tell me when the supplies would be back.

There is a noticble dif in performance too.


if you value your engine you will get some octane booster quicksmart :thumbsup:

[yfin]

sad to say but my euro is running on standard unleaded.

Something went balls up with refinery over here, and all stations/brands in my local area (as of thurs) have no Ultimate 98 and not even any premium.

Only put $10 in and the guy there could not tell me when the supplies would be back.

There is a noticble dif in performance too.

Looks like there will be supplies from today although it will take a while for all the deliveries. I wouldn't worry about booster it you only put $10. Presumably your car had some 98 ron still in the tank (ie it wasn't dry). Even though the car has a knock sensor perhaps keep the revs under 3000rpm until you can fill up with premium.

http://www.fuelwatch.wa.gov.au/news/dsp_news_details.cfm?news_id=131

[PERTH_EURO]

my car is not going or doing anything.. taking the GFs car instead

[yfin]

With no Ultimate stock in Perth I have run on 95 ron Shell today.

It is definately a step down from Ultimate - whether it is the ron, detergents I don't know (does it matter?). Mr Will I wish you had a Euro to feel the difference - it is definately there in responsiveness.

[Menzy]

well all i know is that all Vtec engins should run with premium coz of its timing so how would you run it on standard unleaded .......

[Mr_will]

well all i know is that all Vtec engins should run with premium coz of its timing so how would you run it on standard unleaded .......


lol sounds like you havent read this thread from the start...the timing issue has been discussed in a fair amount of detail. you could retard the timing on a vtec engine to run regular unleaded if you wanted to, thatd just be a stupid thing to do. i dont mean to be rude, but i really doubt that if youd read this thread you would say something like that

[aaronng]

lol sounds like you havent read this thread from the start...the timing issue has been discussed in a fair amount of detail. you could retard the timing on a vtec engine to run regular unleaded if you wanted to, thatd just be a stupid thing to do. i dont mean to be rude, but i really doubt that if youd read this thread you would say something like that
With proper DOHC VTEC, the change in cam timing is fixed when you pass the VTEC cam change point. So even if you retarded the ignition timing, the cam timing would still be advanced. Since Hi-cam advances cam timing to enable the intake valve to open earlier and for longer, you get better filling but coupled with a quicker compression stroke from high RPM, thus resulting in higher temperatures that can cause the mixture to prematurely ignite before the engine was anywhere close to sparking the plugs. So for DOHC VTEC engines that have high compression ratios of above 10:1 and make close to 100 hp/litre, it is still advised to run on premium unleaded even with retarded ignition timing.

[Menzy]

lol sounds like you havent read this thread from the start...the timing issue has been discussed in a fair amount of detail. you could retard the timing on a vtec engine to run regular unleaded if you wanted to, thatd just be a stupid thing to do. i dont mean to be rude, but i really doubt that if youd read this thread you would say something like that

what im trying to say ... is if it does retard your engin why would anyone want that ...

thats why i said it ... if it does harm your engin why do it

[PERTH_EURO]

giddy up ultimate 98 is back in wa

[REV888]

Today I had no other option then to fill my car with 91 RON @ a BP station.

Ever since day 1 of ownership I have only ever filled it with 98 BP Ultimate, I can tell you for sure that Its worse thing I have ever had to do to my car internals!

The car feels sick put $10 worth in. Now need some 98RON! Just goes to show at least for me what 98 RON does for my Euro.

[eurosp]

The Caltex near my place did not any premium petrol last night, I had to try Shell. Lucky I got some. Don't know if it is the same thing happen to WA a few weeks back.

[aaronng]

Today I had no other option then to fill my car with 91 RON @ a BP station.

Ever since day 1 of ownership I have only ever filled it with 98 BP Ultimate, I can tell you for sure that Its worse thing I have ever had to do to my car internals!

The car feels sick put $10 worth in. Now need some 98RON! Just goes to show at least for me what 98 RON does for my Euro.
Why didn't you put in 95 octane instead or go to another station? There are heaps of petrol stations with 98 and 95 in sydney. It's not like you're in the countryside where there are only 1 or 2 stations with premium.

You're doing more damage to your engine with 91 than by putting in Mobil/Caltex/Shell 95 octane. Heck, once you try Mobil 8000 98 octane, you might even like it better than BP ultimate!

[REV888]

Why didn't you put in 95 octane instead or go to another station? There are heaps of petrol stations with 98 and 95 in sydney. It's not like you're in the countryside where there are only 1 or 2 stations with premium.

You're doing more damage to your engine with 91 than by putting in Mobil/Caltex/Shell 95 octane. Heck, once you try Mobil 8000 98 octane, you might even like it better than BP ultimate!

I was in the middle of nomansville LOL! There was no 95 RON and had the low level petrol light on.

Really it was silly on my part should of filled up before I left sydney early this morning but was in to much of a rush :(

Since then I am now back home and filled her up with some BP Ultimate.

Will give Mobil a try and perhaps even the new Shell 100RON

[aaronng]

I was in the middle of nomansville LOL! There was no 95 RON and had the low level petrol light on.

Really it was silly on my part should of filled up before I left sydney early this morning but was in to much of a rush :(

Since then I am now back home and filled her up with some BP Ultimate.

Will give Mobil a try and perhaps even the new Shell 100RON
Ahhh... that's good news. With the 6MT, I've been able to go about 80km after the light is on. Can use that as an estimate of the remaining range next time.

No Mans Ville.... Lots of women eh? :D

[REV888]

Ahhh... that's good news. With the 6MT, I've been able to go about 80km after the light is on. Can use that as an estimate of the remaining range next time.

No Mans Ville.... Lots of women eh? :D

Thanks for that info aaronng there was just a pub and a BP Service Station there as for women no but alot of beer :p ;)

[Mr_will]

has nobody read my rather detailed explanation of why there is no point running anything other than 95 in the euro?

[yfin]

has nobody read my rather detailed explanation of why there is no point running anything other than 95 in the euro?

Yes we have read it - doesn't mean it is right.

IMO the Euro runs better on 98. Until you prove otherwise (start by buying a Euro first) - I'll follow my senses and experiences with how the car drives on both 95 and 98 over someone who does not drive the car every day.

[Mr_will]

Yes we have read it - doesn't mean it is right.

IMO the Euro runs better on 98. Until you prove otherwise (start by buying a Euro first) - I'll follow my senses and experiences with how the car drives on both 95 and 98 over someone who does not drive the car every day.


my dad owns a euro...i drive it 4-5 times a week....

[yfin]

my dad owns a euro...i drive it 4-5 times a week....

And you have tested the car with BP Ultimate and noticed nothing different?

[Mr_will]

And you have tested the car with BP Ultimate and noticed nothing different?

when he first got it, and during the run in period it ran on 95, its done about 9000 (he only drives it to/from work) now and ive put it through 95 to empty, then 98 till empty etc etc 3 times and i can confidently say that it only furthers my previous assertions on the topic. :thumbsup:
but that being said at the end of the day, if putting 98 in your car makes you feel better, do it, but youre basically ignoring the technical facts which prove that because higher RON fuel burns more slowly you are delaying peak cylinder pressure and without advanced timing causing a loss of power

[yfin]

The APEXI RSM with G sensor records consistently faster in gear times with 98 ron fuel on the same road, same temp. So no launch issues to stuff times - ingear. That is a better test than your theories.

If your response is the rsm is inaccurate, what were the test conditions, air temp, fuel load - etc. Don't bother. You are not interested in anything other than your "technical facts" (which BP says is wrong) so why should I bother.

[fortec@sprint.net.au]

Guys,

Have been following the debate - too techincal for me.

For my part I have alternated betwen 95 and 98 (over two years on a weekly basis) and noticed no improvement in economy when using 98. however, the Euro seems to go better when using 98 - especially going up hills. I drive a stock standard Euro (no mods) and it is serviced by the dealer (so presumably no frills standard factory setting tuning).

I notice that Shell has introduced an Optimax 100 (contains ethanol).
Has anyone tried it? Is it safe for use in the Euro?

[aaronng]

Honda has issued a statement that the Euro can handle up to 10% of ethanol. Optimax 100 has 5% so it should be alright. But I'm still not going near the stuff. Especially since it is more expensive while independent stations are able to offer ethanol blend 98 at lower than 95 prices!

[Mr_will]

Honda has issued a statement that the Euro can handle up to 10% of ethanol. Optimax 100 has 5% so it should be alright. But I'm still not going near the stuff. Especially since it is more expensive while independent stations are able to offer ethanol blend 98 at lower than 95 prices!

handle with no adverse consequences in terms of engine life, performance, fuel economy etc?

[aaronng]

handle with no adverse consequences in terms of engine life, performance, fuel economy etc?
That is the question. All Honda said was that the vehicles would operate satisfactorily. How long the seals would last, nothing was mentioned. I'd guess that 10% would be alright for quite a few years as most manufacturers try to build their car/engine to accomodate as many conditions/fuel as possible. But for me, I'm keeping my car for the long term, so I won't be using any ethanol blends yet. In the future if ethanol blends become mandatory, at least I would have tried my best in minimising exposure to ethanol.

If there was some form of benefit for me to try Optimax Extreme, then I might give it a go. But for my car, 100 octane is no different over 98 octane, the detergents used in 98 octane here is quite sufficient and 98 octane is still cheaper. If they offerred the ethanol blend at the same price as 98 or cheaper, that would be more enticing. :)

[coyote]

MELBOURNE CREW...

Does anyone know anything about that fuel "Boost 98" that's available from that service station on Kings Way in Melbourne? (The one with the Hungry Jacks)...

[btchia]

i can felt the different of optimax and 91 regular even my friend didn't didn't told me his wife put the wrong fuel, until i asked...91 regular put into honda Euro can be desribed as "wild bow tighted with string", you can felt loss power very obvious.

[aaronng]

91 octane in the Euro is a no-no. I hope your friend had put in 98 octane as soon as he could to increase the octane of the fuel in the tank of his Euro.

[coladuna]

I have no clue why anyone would even consider using 91 octane unleaded when the sticker on the car clearly says to use 95 octane AT MINIMUM.

[Spec83]

Before the euro i owned a hyundai excel - and i could feel the difference in that when i cheap fuel was used as opposed to shell / BP...

As for the euro i got slightly better ecconmy with BP 98 than BP 95 - i only get 98 due to its clensing properties....

I still dont quite understand your argument Mr Will - We are talking about little minor adjustments to timing which in the grand scheme of things really means stuff all on a stock motor car - i doubt many people would acually feel the difference between 140kW and 150kW let alone 140kW Vs 139.5kW if infact your argument is valid (which i can see no reason for there not to be)... Say i do loose power - i'll spend 30 mins indexing my plugs and i will have it back again - more than one way to skin a cat :)

[Mr_will]

Before the euro i owned a hyundai excel - and i could feel the difference in that when i cheap fuel was used as opposed to shell / BP...

As for the euro i got slightly better ecconmy with BP 98 than BP 95 - i only get 98 due to its clensing properties....

I still dont quite understand your argument Mr Will - We are talking about little minor adjustments to timing which in the grand scheme of things really means stuff all on a stock motor car - i doubt many people would acually feel the difference between 140kW and 150kW let alone 140kW Vs 139.5kW if infact your argument is valid (which i can see no reason for there not to be)... Say i do loose power - i'll spend 30 mins indexing my plugs and i will have it back again - more than one way to skin a cat :)

im pretty sure most people will be able to tell the difference between 140kw and 150kw...if you cant, then by all means dont bother advancing your timing.
timing would make more than 0.5kw difference here, its about taking avantage of the better quality (higher RON) fuel, there is a point to it, but again, if you dont agree, dont do it, its that simple
i dont know what youre talking about with 'indexing your plugs', can you please explain this further

[Spec83]

Indexing you plugs involves placing washers under all/some of you spark plugs so that the gaps all point in the same direction - a little towards the intake valve... its easy enough to do just mark down where the gap is with a marker and screw the plug in - if the mark (gap) doesn't point a little to the intake valves put a washer under it to make the spark plug thread a little shorter... add washers till all the marks are in the same position and you are done :)

Its an old school v8 tuners trick to get a few extra hp - just helps to achive a more complete burn in the combustion process - i've seen a 2kW increase out of a turbo car by doing this :) You can do it in your driveway and take a punt but a dyno is the best way as you can see the effects of different positions to obtain an optimal result :)