closed track, same cars, same milage, same weight, empty tanks, same volume of petrol.
every car is different. so same type of car maybe, but very small differences. a car is not a calibrated device, plus the driver moving the wheel on a different angle, tyre pressures, wind direction... any testing like this would be thrown straight in the bin by any analyst.
Ever seen how they do the testing for fuel economy ratings on new cars? it is a very involved and in depth process where a computer pretty much runs everything
DA9 LS w/JDM SiR B18C turbo
Looking for older Honda project car pre-1985
i find that all of our cars are different - my eg civic (d15b7), dc2 teg (B18c2) and libert rx2.5 genIII (EJ25 n/a) all got the best milage and average performance on caltex 95
the civic showed an improvement with 98 but only marginally - the teg and the liberty didnt really show a difference
our 2005 Corolla Accent (facelift) will run the same on just about anything ... we just put caltex 91 in it ... iv tried putting better stuff in it and it didnt make a difference at all
i have found that getting fuel from the deppo is usually cheaper and the fuel seems to run better/cleaner/longer as well
If you can find another station to pump 95RON, then that's fine. But if your local station only sells 91 and 98 RON now, then your only choice is 98. So fill 98.
This
/thread
Originally Posted by flipfire
ACA did a comprehensive test on different fuels and 98RON came out the winner in distance per cent.
How would the 98ron allow the OP's motor to perform better than the 95ron???
a negative rep or positive rep rests on what your answer will be.
Higher octane reduces pre detonation hence allowing possibility of better performance as opposed to knocking? Well that's what I read on the octane boost bottle
Bookmarks