Printable View
Just wondering what petrol you guys use, i use mobile synergy 8000 for mine. can feel the car is more responsive, i've tried other premiums petrol such as optimax, caltex star and even the normal premiums ones but out of all those ones i think the synergy is more responsive. :P
Just my 2.2 cent include gst..
:wink:
yeah i use optimax or vortex and if i ever go to bp the highest octane one they've got
Pete :)
optimax goes into my tank..
i run mine on BP ultimate all the time
i use regular unleaded :roll:
i thought the jazz's engine was tuned to run on ULP? that being the case, anything more than regular unleaded will gain minimal benefits?
the european model is tuned for 95 but thats regular over there :)
I use Optimax.
I think dynodave on these forums did a fuel test dyno run from memory, and came to the conclusion that the Mobil 98 octane fuel had the best HP figures. Maybe dave can shed some light.
I have heard that Mobile is the best from various circles and only ever ran that in the BMW....
I only use regular BP on the Jazz. I haven't even tried high octane petrol in it yet. Will try it one day if I have to fill up on a cheap petrol day...
cheap petrol day??
that'll be the day..
yeah.. my car.. optimax (only once a month though)
its all shell petrol in our tanks
if you think about it you are only saving 2-4 dollars by buying unleaded
Hey, guys!! I have been using the normal unleaded for more than 1 year already. Is it too late to change to use petrol with higher Octane Petrol? Is that really good?
hey u guys i got a G@ teg.. u noe wat octane it is spose to run??
I've switched from Shell Optimax to BP Ultimate, the car feels smoother..... may be its just me.....
From all the petrol threads I've read, I find that most like Mobil Synergy 8000 or BP Ultimate. Optimax has mixed reactions. Some say it's good, some say it's bad.
I've tested all the 98RON fuels in my Euro, and I find that synergy 8000 runs the smoothest, followed by BP ultimate. Don't like Optimax, but I only get it cos of the 4c/liter off coupons.
bp ulimate sux donkeys balls, use it in my car as wat a waste. car was rough, jerky etc. neva use again.
optix is alright. synergy 8000 is the best. car is smooth and feels more responsive
hmmm funny i found this post...
im currently running shell optimax on my ITR as recomended by the previous owner...
but i've noticed that recently there's black soot/dust on the rear end bumper near the muffler... seems i'm not alone... other forums i've read seem to suggest that optimax is dirtier that synergy / ultimate...
might try mobil .... shell has alot more servos around the area i drive thou... so making a switch mite prove more troublesome for me... but yeah if its cleaner burning fuel, i'm more than happy to make an effort...
will report back n let you guys know
optimax doesnt seem as good as what it was 5 yrs ago...
i found the black dots yesterday too... but this is the first time ... been fillin up with BP Ultimate for a few months... so i guess its time to go the mobil way ...Quote:
Originally Posted by kenshin
after reading this thread...... I filled up with Mobil 8000........ have to admit.... the car DOES feels better...... just that its hard to find Mobil near my house... :S
are Jazz's meant to run on ULP or PULP?
ULP. look up your jazz manual. 91RON is sufficient.
Just Optimax it... You can't go wrong :D
the european model requires 95 but 95 over there in lot of the northern european countries is just plain unleaded over thereQuote:
Originally Posted by toE
ok i'll just keep using unleaded...
is it wise to keep changing between the ulp and the optimax one?
Anyone done a taste test yet on which is the best petrol? :p
I've noticed that more Ks outta ULP than the Optimax.
I use regular unleaded.
The Xenon tastes better.
10 c different between 91 and 98 man. ffs. if u love ur car then do 98
tight asses i say
petrol is so cheap these days its like $1.12 for unleaded at BP and $1.23 for ultimate
so ultimate all the way
u get more ks out of ur car and its better for the environment
quick question, is it true high octane gives more Kms to the car? i just bought a VTI jazz, and currently running on 91 Uld... I am looking forward to using higher octane fuel but bit worry it will drink even more... currently its on 8.8 / 100 ks........
it depends on driving style and USUALLY by using PULP you get a bit more mileage. One thing i found was since i switched from mobil 8000 to bp ultimate the car is alot more efficient than when i was on mobil. I'm getting about 50km more on the BP Ultimate with the same driving style and taking the same routes for both weeks. Weird huh
FW: :angel: BP unlimate
I only use Shell V-Power
whatever i can afford on the day
usually i fill up on a tuesday
p.s. 2 weeks ago i saw this hot asian chick whilst i was filling up so ive been going to the same place every tuesday but havent seen her since
*unhappy face*
sif normal unleaded petrol isn't already expensive, still put in all this fancy stuff lol.
Cheap?? I remember when petrol was 50 to 60 cents a litre!! Sigh, those were the days.Quote:
Originally Posted by teaseR
Do people not think much of Caltex Vortex98?? Seems the general concensus in this thread is that Mobil Synergy 8000 is the best.
Caltex Vortex 98 :)
BP ULTIMATE and nothing else
V-Power :thumbsup:
;)BP Ultimate all the way
Is it ok to use the ethanol blends? I usually just goto any petrol station & sometimes use that Liberty ethanol cheapo petrol. So far cars ok & serviced regular.
i've got a fairly new jazz 1.5, auto. was initally driving on normal unleaded from caltex/safeway stores. i then tried the 95 octance from caltex/safeway petrol stores. that was crap, as there wasn't much difference.
then i noticed the car was idling rough. like at the traffic lights i the car would "vibrate more" making it feel like a mini massage.
then tried shell v power. yea there was a difference, little smoother, and a little less roughness at the traffic lights.
then tried BP 98. Best out of them. idle problems gone, feels heaps better and smoother. yet to try mobil though
the jazzes are factory tuned to 91 RON, so technically 91 RON would be sufficient, just make sure its of good quality fuel.
having said that, premium fuel wont hurt. i've tried various different fuels when i first bought the car, and found that i personally favor BP Ultimate. and since then, i've only BP Ultimate mine for 'that' many years. :)
My bad, I just realised this is the jazz forum part.
^ haha u're here too :)
its ok, altho its a jazz forum, fuel topic is still quite a 'general discussion' for Hondas.
I've only put BP Ultimate in mine :)
good ol 7-11 petrol
wow... all of these petrols.. is dere truly a one that gives you more GAINS? im using V power now... but im considering a swap tomorrow as it will be cheap tuesday.. works out to be cheap movies aswell :P combo cant go wrong
Its a common misconception but higher octane fuel does not give better efficiency. It allows higher combustion ratios as it burns cleaner and more evenly,hence why it also helps reduce pre ignition (pinging) and things like that .Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd0rxl
A denser fuel will give slightly better fuel economy,i think shell optimax used to be a denser fuel. I ran that once in my 2 stroke race go kart and it ran much richer than any other fuels,wasnt good.
To add to the poll,i cant keep up with all the different fuels today,i use bp ultimate in my b16
but Jazz has only Unleaded fuel as recommended fuel then why all super duper fuels?
Gives them a bigger e-penis :rolleyes:
Personally EK gets 95 Octane E10 from United because it's 3-5 cents cheaper than 91 Octane anywhere else...
The CH9 gets 98 Octane non-Ethanol from BP; otherwise 95/96 Octane non-Ethanol
i use BP ultimate, but when i have the coles 4cent i will go fill up with shell v power.personally still prefer bp ultimate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew
agreed, according to Honda Australia website, Honda Jazz, will need only Unleaded fuel. :honda:
in my opinion anything above recommended is almost waste of money.
i am no fuel expert, so all these hi-fi type of fuels from different brands, will just cost you extra at pump, while you car engine dont need that. :confused:
how many k's can a full tank give u with vortex?
If your currently using normal ULP, do you need to wait for the tank to be totally empty if your going to fill up with PULP? Or can I fill it up with PULP at 3/4 empty like I usually do with ULP.
No, wont harm the car at all
runninf mobil synergy 9000 (the 98 purple one) only cos its cleaner burn cleaner for the motor (i like to look after my things and after seeing family cars fu*k up cos of fuel issues nothing but the best from now on), and i use that in my b18 civic.
If your using the 98 octane fuel tinking it will give u more power on ur jazz i suggest not to waste ur cash at the pump...
lets get real, power gains from using different petrol at different octanes isnt going to be high or even noticeable in a jazz. but jus do it for the wank factor ;)
was that to my question or the OP?Quote:
Originally Posted by 4thGenExi
I've only had my Jazz for a month now and I've been using V-power as I do in my Soarer.
MIRZ: It only adds up to be $1-2 more to fill up on PULP. So why not treat your engine to something more tasty.
Tekung89: I'm not after power gains by filling up on PULP. As I said above it's just to treat my engine to something nicer. And if I was after power I would'nt have gotten a Jazz in the first place. Hence is why I have my Soarer too.
Just my 2 cents
BP Ultimate is guaranteed to be 98RON other brands questionable. Shopper dockets don't include BP servos. Consumption is better on 98RON but BP's price makes it dearer per km traveled.
Jazz, Civic, CRV etc are all tuned for 91 octane...yet alot of us insist on using 98 octane in our rides claiming better fuel consumption, more power, etc. In our gen 1 CR-V however, using 98 octane actually DECREASES responsiveness, torque and fuel consumption appears to be the same as on 91. When I use 91 in the CR-V, the engine feels noticably more responsive and torquey. Even my wife notices the difference when she drives it and she has no idea about cars or the types of fuel...so if she notices it, then the difference is real. So we stick to 91 in our CRV, the bonus also it being the cheapest fuel.
Moral of the story - stick to the fuel recommended by Honda for your car. By all means try the higher grade stuff and experiment. If it makes your car better, then great, but if you find it honestly runs better to the fuel it's tuned for, stick to it and don't waste your money.
(this is of course assuming your car is stock and you haven't mucked around with the engine so it DOES require higher octane than stock)
www.drive.com.au explains everything...
:wave: 91 octane for me!
I certainly agree with Alpine on the cost benefit of sticking to the 91RON fuel, but when you try 98 RON you have to use a second tank as the computer takes about 1/2 tank to re-tune itself to the change. The 98 burns hotter and will clean out the carbon in the head, values and exhaust system. It adds about $5.00 to the cost of a tank (40lts) and is a bit cheaper than an injector cleaner. On that subject, I have tried a few brands and settled on FLASH LUBE. 250ml bottle is about $7.00 and I use 1/2 a bottle to treat injectors, cyl head etc. I do this every 20,000km in line with my auto trans fluid change and now stick to 91RON petrol.
98 doesn't burn hotter, it burns slower. That's why it can be used with more ignition advance. The additional advance compensates for the slower burning.Quote:
Originally Posted by debowen
If you really want to clean deposits out, use E10. The ethanol keeps water from building up in your tank and dissolves deposits that will not dissolve in petrol.
It's exactly like the old bushman's trick of putting a cupful of metho in your tank to get rid of any water that might have got in there. Ethanol will mix with water and still burn. Petrol will not.
I have tried 91, 98, 95 and E10 in my Jazz with little discernable difference. My car has no taste buds so "nicer" isn't relevant. I use whatever get me the most km for the least $ and ignore the marketing BS put out by the oil companies.
"Put in 98 if you love your car" ?? FFS!
Thanks Claymore, I got that wrong, but why did the 98ron fuel change the feel of my '91 Diahatsu Applause 1600cc when I drove it to the eastern states of Australia? I used to run it dry and fill with 98ron on my first leg out of Perth and by the time I went 200km the car would be running 'sweeter' and the colour in the exhaust pipe went from black to dark brown.
I read that article too and you're right. Using higher octane fuel DOES increase ignition advance, based on this evidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by claymore
Remember though, as you have said, the higher the octane, the slower the fuel burns. That's the only difference between "grades" of fuel.
So lets look at the example of an engine that is using higher octane fuel than it is designed for and that is therefore burning slower. All other things being equal, it will then make slightly LESS power, run hotter and use more fuel because it is effectively running retarded.
In our case (Honda Jazz) the ECU can compensate for this by increasing the ignition advance. This has been proven, so we are back close to where we were. The engine is giving the fuel longer to burn to compensate for its slower burning.
Maybe under such conditions it is possible to get 3-4MPG difference. That's a difference that can be obtained by a change in driving style, terrain or wet weather, or using the air-conditioning.
Even if the fuel consumption improvement is real, (see the Drive comparison that suggests that it is, at least for a Camry) the 13c/l difference in price in Australia means you are still on the losing end. Maybe in Thailand, the price difference is less. I don't know.
Sorry, Claymore but I think you might have missed something there.Quote:
Originally Posted by claymore
Regardless of octane, petrol has the same calorific value and has the same amount of energy in it, unless it's E10, in which case it has about 3% less.
Lets look at our scenario changing only one thing at a time. I'm sure your familiar with this as a principle. I'm going to go through some physics that are poorly understood (probably not by you, as an experienced mechanic, but by a lot of people)
If we start with our regular 91 octane fuel, and run our engine at constant speed, with an ignition advance setting that makes sure that the spark happens soon enough on the compression stroke so that all the fuel is burning by the time the engine reaches the optimum point, in other words, all of the fuel is being burned and contributing it's energy to driving the piston downward. Call this scenario A.
OK Lets change one thing. We'll advance the timing a bit.
Now the fuel is being burned too early and causing the flame front to meet the piston while it's still going up - bad! and this is the cause of detonation in cars that are being run on fuel with an octane rating too low for them. Call it Scenario B.
OK, let's now retard the timing again so that the spark happens later than in Scenario A. Now the fuel starts burning too late and the fuel is still burning and expanding after the piston has already gone. We didn't get detonation, but neither do we recover all the energy from our fuel. The fuel still burns, but the energy not transferred to the piston is lost as heat to the cooling system. This is scenario C.
OK returning to Scenario A, which is our optimum scenario, without changing the timing we alter the fuel Octane.
If we use a higher octane fuel, it burns more slowly. thus taking longer to burn completely. Remember we have injected the same amount of fuel and therefore introduced the same amount of energy into the system. Since it's taking longer to burn completely, and we haven't changed anything else, we have wound up with Scenario C, where the flame is chasing the piston back down the cylinder - at least partially, because it has taken longer for the flame front to reach it. Remember we started with optimal timing for our lower octane fuel.
If we now try a lower octane fuel than in our original Scenario A, then we get detonation again, because our now much faster expanding flame front reaches the piston while it's still on the way up, or at least before it's ready, so we have Scenario B again.
If we change both parameters, higher fuel octane and more advanced ignition timing, we start the spark sooner to compensate for our slower burn. Once again our piston is being pushed down at exactly the right moment, and our engine is happy.
The amount of energy being produced is the same in both Scenario As because the calorific value of the fuel is the same.
What I have described is simplistic - deliberately so. There may be other factors like valve timing that have an influence, but unless someone can show me dynamometer figures or consistent lap times, I remain unconvinced.
I am trying hard to be nice about this too, and making every effort not to be insulting about this, but there is a lot of misinformation on this topic and a lot of people spending money they don't need to.
I don't think it's a matter of what one can afford, it's more where one's priorities lie. I didn't buy this car for it's performance (entirely). If I wanted a track weapon I'd have bought something else.
To sum up though, my argument is that just because you are getting more timing advance, doesn't mean you are getting more power. It does mean your engine is adjusting to the different burn speed to avoid making less power. Maybe you do get more power out of this, but not as much as you'd expect I think.
I'm still waiting for someone with the resources to do a back to back dyno test that would resolve this issue once and for all.
Very interesting to read the "technical feud" above, but I'm with Claymore. Been using mobil 8000 exclusively for the last 3 months, and its great. No doubt smoother, quicker, more responsive. A small price to pay I say.
"So lets look at the example of an engine that is using higher octane fuel than it is designed for and that is therefore burning slower. All other things being equal, it will then make slightly LESS power, run hotter and use more fuel because it is effectively running retarded."
So that's the reason my Diahatsu ran hotter, cleaned the exhaust system and change the exhaust colour from black to
brown. It couldn't adjust the timing electronically! Led me to believe that higher octane ran hotter , but now I know it burns slower.
On the contrary I'm flattered. :) the rest of you, Off my lawn!Quote:
Originally Posted by claymore
I defer here to your obviously much greater experience. And thank you for making it clear. I am merely trying to understand what I know is a poorly understood subject, and I have this habit of challenging what appear to be "sacred cows". I am a mechanical engineer, but Automotive technology is not really my field. (I do other more boring stuff.) You would know yourself that there are a lot of commonly held misconceptions out there, mainly due to marketing of products of dubious worth when it comes to producing more power.Quote:
Originally Posted by claymore
I myself got sucked into it in my student days when I bought a "sports" air filter for my Mini 1100. It made stuff all difference to a car that had only about 50hp anyway. What did make a noticeable difference were things like keeping the original filter clean, and diverting the crankcase breather into a catch bottle (the rings weren't the best and removing the oil fumes from the intake made it go better).
I didn't explain what I meant when it came to the flame front being behind. What I meant was that if the spark is retarded, the cylinder pressure doesn't reach such a high peak because the piston is already on it's way back down, and the expansion happens at a lower pressure.
Now lets see if I've got it straight this time. Higher octane fuel allows a higher peak cylinder pressure without causing detonation. This in turn means you can start combustion sooner and get more cylinder pressure which means more driving force during the combustion stroke - ergo more power.
Thank you for helping me to improve my understanding in this area, and I apologise if I have caused offence. My goal is to establish the truth not to be right.
As you say, in the end, what fuel you use depends on your priorities. Myself, 88kW is more than I can use in everyday driving anyway, and if I tried, I'd probably get arrested. On this basis there is no value to me in spending money on higher octane fuel.
I think that after this discussion there will be people who go either way, and both will be happy.
I don't think the 2.0 gen 1 CRV does...in fact it seems more responsive on 91 than on 98.
Not sure about the Civic though.
i use 95 octane, but the fuel octane amount will make no difference in performance and little amount in economy in a 1.3 or 1.5ltr car.. but i dont mind spending bit more for something a bit cleaner.. dont trust bp ultimate anymore after they were caught mixing the standard and 95 together and selling it off as 98 :P dodgy to me
It's not cleaner.Quote:
Originally Posted by gmonkey
I was stating that the octane count you use in jazz is hardly worth while. if u use regular 91 or ultimate 98 it won't matter, you may produce one extra kilowatt.. and i'm stating this becuase as claymore said the ecu/igniton will correct for octane you use. And to rossw it is cleaner.. how do you come up with the idea it isnt??
I think we have an onus of proof thing here.Quote:
Originally Posted by gmonkey
You stated that higher octane fuel is cleaner. In the words of Wikipedia <CITATION NEEDED>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating
http://www.racq.com.au/motoring_advi...h_octane_fuels
http://www.powerchipgroup.com/articles/PET0605.pdf
http://autospeed.com/cms/A_108935/article.html
The ONLY difference between different octane fuels is that - octane. They are all just as clean. They have the same scavenging agents in them to remove combustion products. They have the same energy content (except Shell Optimax - claimed to be slightly denser and E10, about 3% less energy content)
Anyone that tells you different is selling something.
So, yes, you're right it isn't worth putting 95 or 98 in your Jazz, unless you are like Claymore and want every last kW - cost no object, (although then why buy a Jazz? Just get a VW Polo GTI or a Mitsubishi Colt Ralliart), but your engine on any modern fuel will run very clean compared to what fuel used to be like.
The days of removing your head every few years to clean the carbon and lead residue out of it are gone (thank goodness - I must have spent hours doing that on my earlier cars)
i agree rossw 100% why buy a jazz if you want performance, its isn't the right car in the price for it... and i agree with yes fuels are cleaner now days than they used to.. i remember the old mitsubishi colt on leaded :P.. But there is a difference in octanes for it's cleanness. An octane rating is its percentage of octane to heptane so 91 has 91% v 9%. heptane is a non-polar liquid used as a delivery agent for the octane. heptane doesnt run clean (i dont mean clean as in dirt clean i mean smooth/efficient). heptane burns faster and is more explosive and causes engine knocking (this is a proven fact), reduced amounts of heptane slows the burn-time and creates better perfomance. But yes sorry if you thought i meant clean as in it had sediments etc shoulda said smoother or something :P..
I use Shell V-Power and found it more responsive than others..but thats just me :) might have to try Mobil one day .. great info guys!