Quote Originally Posted by gmonkey View Post
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.

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)