yeah ferrarista same here. only when i use ultimate, its a TAD rougher and mobil synergy 8000 is smooth as silk. i refuse to use optimax on mine as it spits it out like dirt....
Printable View
yeah ferrarista same here. only when i use ultimate, its a TAD rougher and mobil synergy 8000 is smooth as silk. i refuse to use optimax on mine as it spits it out like dirt....
I agree with you both man.. I feel that the engine runs farken smooth with BP ultimate but in my area there is 1 Shell station so its more convinience for me to go there and get 98 optimax but its still good..IMO ultimate is still better :D
this might not be related.. but those 4cents off thingy.. is quite good..
i also heard, that you can recieve another 4cents off by using your VISA, BUTT!!! the thing is.. when you use your visa.. they charge you $1.XX to use it. so.. works out the same.
its always been BP ultimate.. the car runs alot smoother.. :) too bad they don hav much 4 cents thingy off for BP :o
Reply to V205:
I have used BP Ulitmate, Optimax and Vortex Gold (98 Oct). These are all better than normal premium (95 Oct). If you use the better and more expensive fuels, you should notice more power in your acceleration.
I have not noticed much difference between the three although other people will swear one is better then the other. I have not experienced any improvement in mileage (or is that Kilometreleage?) when using the higher Octane fuel and I do mainly city driving with a good dose of Freeway. If there is a difference I have not notice it.
I have been driving the Euro for 15 months now, approaching 25Ks. As mine is a lease car, I keep very accurate records of how much fuel used, etc. So I am quoting from good historical/empirical data.
Advanced Fuel Technology may give you some improvement in consumption but it will not be ground breaking otherwise the whole world will be on to it. Just drive carefully, acelerate smoothly and you will be surprised how your fuel economy will improve.
Me too, I got a shock when I rocked up here and saw this thread up the top of the list ;) Guess the high fuel prices have everyone all fired up !!Quote:
Originally Posted by VirIIx
My 2 cents worth... I think something fishy is going on with the fuel prices, have you guys noticed that when the oil prices go down, the fuel prices don't or if they do it takes weeks? By that time the oil prices have gone up again and there goes your saving anyhow? Speaking of that, when the oil prices go up the fuel prices jump straight away! I can't help feeling that someone is benefitting from all of this, I know the government with their fuel tax are, but I think the big wigs at the oil companies and the petrol companies, are making a tidy profit!
What about the ACCC? Why arnt they intervening and doing something about it?
Anyhowz I still use Optimax, performance is good but might switch one day just to check out the others for efficiency, plus the 4c off is a bonus :)
hows about the semi petrol strike in sydney last week... i think it was thurs 22nd sept. People were told not to fill up because of the affect it would have on the petrol companies.... and then the smart ass petrol companies put out the cheapest petrol prices in like 2 months on that DAY!!
anyways.. back to topic... i started with Shell Optimax when i had my old Integra LS, but then switched to BP Ultimate. IMO it was smoother and i WAS getting about 40-50 more kms per tank. Now that I have my leased Euro ive got a BP card, which works fine by me because i can continue putting in BP Ultimate, and it is the only servo i can get fuel from so i wont be able to make any comparisons
The Laboratory Test might have determined that the RON is basically 98 between all four major Premium Fuel available, but due to the way that they are refined as well as the additives involved a major difference can be felt when more ECU tuning is done!
Not sure if it really makes a huge difference on N/A cars, but when I was still in the Turbo camp (S15 Silvia just below 200kw/wheels, basic bolt on mods plus Power FC), and with Knock Sensor function readily readable on the FC Controller, MOBIL Synergy 8000 was by far the best in terms of power and minimum knock.
APS - a well known performance company in Australia and now in America, came to the same conclusion as well testing the various fuels on their modified XR6Turbo!
Basically if you have a turbo and you are tuned to the potential of the car, NO-ONE would want to use BP Ultimate, for some reason it would run much less Ignition Timing and hence loses just below 10rwkw easily!
On a non-stressful, non-tuned N/A engine though, I wouldn't fuss so much about it! But if car's oem ECU map was tuned for only 95 RON max, I would stick to it. 98 is less volatile (just mentioned this on another thread actually!) despite having higher potential energy (at increased price!) so takes more energy to ignite, hence if car isn't tuned for 98, it will run richer and hence lose power and consumption despite paying for more!
I have NOT reached a conclusion yet however, as I've just switched to driving the EURO and haven't talked to too many tuners about how conservative the Euro's original mapping is like.... if someone who has HONDATA experience on the Euro's or any piggy-back ecu's (not VAFC-II as its only Air/Fuel adjustment) then I would love to hear about their opinion!!
:)
Thanks for your post - very interesting :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Omotesando
Re non-stressed N/A engines - I don't think the Euro is a non-stressed engine - probably the opposite given the piston speeds are way way up there with some exotic cars at red line.
I haven't heard anyone say if your car isn't tuned for 98 it will lose power. At worst people say "no difference" will be noticed - not a detrimental difference. Do you have any further information on that point - ie 98 ron in a non-tuned 98 ron vechicle can lose power?
** re the stats below - sorry I can't remember where I got these from - fairly sure it was a poster on acurazine.com
Regards
1. Honda S2000:
Engine Code: F20C1
Bore/Stroke: 3.43" X 3.31"
Redline: 9000rpm
Piston Speed: 4965 Ft/min
2. Lamborghini Gallardo
Engine Code: N/A
Bore/Stroke: 3.25" X 3.65"
Redline: 8000rpm
Piston Speed: 4866.67 Ft/min
3. Acura Integra Type R
Engine Code: B18C5
Bore/Stroke: 3.19" X 3.43"
Redline: 8400rpm
Piston Speed: 4802 Ft/min
4. BMW M3 (Germany)
Engine Code: S54
Bore/Stroke: 3.43" X 3.58"
Redline: 8000rpm
Piston Speed: 4773.33 Ft/min
5. Honda S2000 2004
Engine Code: F22C
Bore/Stroke: 3.43" X 3.57"
Redline: 8000rpm
Piston Speed: 4760 Ft/min
6. Honda Integra Type R (JDM)
Engine Code: K20A
Bore/Stroke: 3.39" X 3.39"
Redline: 8400rpm
Piston Speed: 4746 Ft/min
7. Acura Integra GSR 2001
Engine Code: B18C
Bore/Stroke: 3.19" X 3.43"
Redline: 8200rpm
Piston Speed: 4687.67 Ft/min
8. Saleen S7
Engine Code: N/A
Bore/Stroke: 4.13" X 4.00"
Redline: 7000rpm
Piston Speed: 4666.67 Ft/min
9. Acura TSX
Engine Code: K24A2
Bore/Stroke: 3.43" X 3.90"
Redline: 7100rpm
Piston Speed: 4615 Ft/min
10. Suzuki Hayabusa Sport Prototype
Engine Code: W701
Bore/Stroke: 3.19" X 2.48"
Redline: 11000rpm
Piston Speed: 4546.67 Ft/min
11. Honda Civic Type R
Engine Code: B16B
Bore/Stroke: 3.19" X 3.03"
Redline: 9000rpm
Piston Speed: 4545 Ft/min
12. Toyota Celica GTS / Matrix XRS 2001
Engine Code: 2ZZ-GE
Bore/Stroke: 3.23" X 3.35"
Redline: 8100rpm
Piston Speed: 4522.5 Ft/min
13. Honda Prelude Type S (JDM)
Engine Code: H22A
Bore/Stroke: 3.43" X 3.57"
Redline: 7500rpm
Piston Speed: 4462.5 Ft/min
14. Acura RSX Type S
Engine Code: K20A2
Bore/Stroke: 3.38" X 3.38"
Redline: 7900rpm
Piston Speed: 4450.33 Ft/min
15. Ferrari 360 Modena (incl. Challenge, Stradale, etc)
Engine Code: N/A
Bore/Stroke: 3.35" X 3.11"
Redline: 8500rpm
Piston Speed: 4405.83 Ft/min
16. Lamborghini Murcielago
Engine Code: N/A
Bore/Stroke: 3.43" X 3.42"
Redline: 7600rpm
Piston Speed: 4332 Ft/min
17. McLaren F1
Engine Code: N/A (BMW V12)
Bore/Stroke: 3.39" X 3.43"
Redline: 7500rpm
Piston Speed: 4287.5 Ft/min
18. Renault Clio 2.0 RS 2003
Engine Code: F4R
Bore/Stroke: 3.26" X 3.66"
Redline: 7000rpm
Piston Speed: 4270 Ft/min
19. Porsche 911 GT3 RS 2004
Engine Code: N/A
Bore/Stroke: 3.94" X 3.01"
Redline: 8500rpm
Piston Speed: 4264.17 Ft/min
20. Pagani Zonda C12S
Engine Code: M120 7.3 AMG
Bore/Stroke: 3.6" X 3.64"
Redline: 7000rpm
Piston Speed: 4246.67 Ft/min
21. Peugeot 206RC 2004
Engine Code: EW10 J4 S
Bore/Stroke: 3.35" X 3.46"
Redline: 7300rpm
Piston Speed: 4209.67 Ft/min
22. Porsche Carrera GT
Engine Code: N/A
Bore/Stroke: 3.86" X 2.99"
Redline: 8400rpm
Piston Speed: 4186 Ft/min
23. Acura NSX-T
Engine Code: C32B
Bore/Stroke: 3.66" X 3.07"
Redline: 8000rpm
Piston Speed: 4093.33 Ft/min
24. BMW M5 2002
Engine Code: S62
Bore/Stroke: 3.70" X 3.50"
Redline: 7000rpm
Piston Speed: 4083.33 Ft/min
25. BMW M5 E60
Engine Code: S65 (?)
Bore/Stroke: 3.62" X 2.96"
Redline: 8250rpm
Piston Speed: 4070 Ft/min
26. Nissan Primera W20V
Engine Code: N/A
Bore/Stroke: 3.39" X 3.39"
Redline: 7200rpm
Piston Speed: 4068 Ft/min
27. Ferrari Enzo
Engine Code: F140
Bore/Stroke: 3.62" X 2.96"
Redline: 8000rpm
Piston Speed: 3946.67 Ft/min
28. Ferrari 575 Maranello
Engine Code: 650 V21
Bore/Stroke: 3.50" X 3.03"
Redline: 7750rpm
Piston Speed: 3913.75 Ft/min
I tend to use mobil premium unleaded in my Euro.......as i do also have a performance motorbike and after using shell optimax in it had extensive jetting damage and engine damage due to the fuel being dirty.........almost every motorbike store out there dnt recommend using shell optimax because it is known to be dirty and dangerous 4 motorbikes, however, having said this it can be different from using it in a car.
Hondata testing for the Oz-spec Euro is with Mobile Synergy 8000, and they seem to like it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yfin
You are right in the sense that you are comparing the above engines, but not sure if you noticed that I came from the turbo camp LOL! So two things to consider is:
1) In the Accord Euro the air Compression ratio is 10.5, which is fairly high I suppose. In effect when combustion occurs yes this produces more torque and thus power, but the whole process is very simple.
When compared to a turbo car which runs standard 8.0-9.0 compression ratio but with an increase of say 1BAR or 14.7psi (sometimes more) over stock atmospheric pressure of 14.7psi, in effect you are increasing the factory compression ratio/capacity by 100%. And then there's the imminent heat increase.
We all know that turbo cars are way more stressful than N/A cars (unless its an F1 engine lasting 2 races), turboed cars don't last as long, yet they can still survive on Australian 95 or 98 Octange fuel without a problem, and that's without delaying Ignition Timing that much as to sacrifice both throttle response and low down power.
Thing is there is only a certain amount of Advanced Ignition Timing that you can run on a engine, and with 98 octane fuel on N/A car it is more than plenty!
2) If you take a look at the DATA you provided, you will see that the Euro Accord has a very higher Stoke vs Bore ratio, or I should say low Bore to Stroke ratio. This is actually a bit of an old skool and new design hybrid, more like a diesel engine. In fact the K24 is just a longer stroke version of the K20 engine, and that's where its extra capacity comes from. :D
In effect you will get a lower rpm biased torque curve as well as higher maximum torque since increasing the stroke does that, whereas decreasing the stroke like in the K20A engine you will lose torque but in essence you get back the acceleration from revving out to more 'power' at higher RPM.
Remember that Torque is just a derivative of Power plus RPM, in my eyes when I see a Torque Curve and a Power Curve it describes exactly the same picture to me, just needs extrapolation in your head. The difference between the K20A and K24 in Euro is thus the torque and its band distribution/concentration.
Max Torque on Aust Spec Euro K24 = 223Nm@4500rpm :D
Max Torque on Aust Spec Type S K20A = 194Nm@7000rpm
Max Torque on Aust Spec S2000 F20C = 208Nm@7500rpm!! :rolleyes:
But Type S has maximum power of 154KW whereas Euro only has 140KW. :(
S2000 is 176KW @8300rpm. :D
Piston speed at 'HIGHEST' RPM redline might be similar between all three cars, in fact they all all above the usually accepted 4000ft/min threshold which distinguishes high performance engines - so you are right in this comparison for N/A cars but what you got to know is that apart from the piston speed the more RPM the car works the more the crank and the bearings wear out and more heat. And more heat required Higher Octane Fuel!
Relatively speaking the Euro Accord is way more torque orientated, thus more power at less RPM, and usually people dont need to strang its neck off to get any performance from it. So in this sense - NO it is not a highly stressed engine but then it is CAPABLE OF BEING ONE, in fact the reason why it can even idle at around 700rpm is because it has a long stroke, with engine not stalling when its engaged in 1st gear with clutch fully out (partially because it also has Electronic Throttle control).
And with more torque when you put the same load on the engine, it is less prone to knock. Even though this only applies if you are in the wrong too-low a gear especially going uphill, in this sense the Euro is still not as stressed as other engines.
As for the Octane of Fuel, it is basically all about being able to handle the extra compression, heat, exact but small overlapping timing of ignition of air/fuel be it N/A or Turbo, before it ignites properly. If it pre-ignites it will cause Knocking because the piston is still travelling on compression-stroke vector wise.
By Advancing Ignition Timing it means that you try to start the Combustion process before the piston has reached TDC (Top Dead Centre), and you do this because the combustion takes time to occur with the flamefront spreading correctly, but you get it correct you get more power!! High Octane fuel is better in this aspect because they require higher activation energy, can handle more compression, more advanced ignition timing without pre-ignition (more like explosion) - this kind of speaks for itself I think. :rolleyes: