Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Can't say as I've seen 130 RON, the unusual ones are;

AVSP11, that's 107 RON but mostly used in racing bikes (2 and 4 stroke).

AVGAS 2T, it's 120 RON, only used in 2 stroke racing, bikes, snowmobiles, water bikes, jet skis and outboards

AtmoBoost is 106 RON and leaded, but not oxygenated. Good for high rpm N/A engines that need lead.

So I think it must be TurboBoost at 115 RON, which was around $7 a litre last time I bought it. But it has been my experience that TurboMax makes better horsepower higher in the RPM range.

:D

Hi Adrian, I have not tried MS103 but looking at the data sheet it looks much like Elf LMS which I have used with much success. Oxygen content is good at 2.55%, it's a bit light at 0.744, so I don't think you could lean it out as much as LMS. The RON at 107 and MON at 99 indicate some serious ignition advance may be possible. The ECU would definitely need retuning to get the best out of it, you couldn't just stick it in the tank and expect to gain something.

Hope that helps:cheers:

The ECU would definitely need retuning to get the best out of it, you couldn't just stick it in the tank and expect to gain something.

My name's not wreckedhead....come on :)

When I run on PULP, I take 4 degrees out across the whole map using the power fc's ignition trim function in the settings menu. This resets when I turn the car off. I am looking to avoid having to do that and save some valuable horsepower in the process.

What is the relevance of the "Motor Octane" everyone seems to quote? I am led to believe that PULP with a quoted octane level of 98 (optimax etc) has a motor octane of 89???

Thanks all.

Adrian

When I try decent fuel, I just add extra ignition to the whole map, it takes 5 seconds.

It has been my experiecne that with an oxygenated fuel, particularly one with a high specific gravity, I also need to take some fuel out of it as well. It is the weight of the fuel that matters, not the volume. The ecu operates by varying the volume, so to allow for the extra weight I have take out some volume to get back to the correct weight.

Hope that makes sense:cheers:

That makes sense. As I see it, this fuel will allow me to keep the timing into the tune whilst also providing a buffer against detonation.

That being said, I think I'll run it at the Nationals at the end of this month and see how I go. I have four passes to get it right before it gets serious. ;)

Will post results and if I get time (doubtful) dyno comparisons on Optimax vs. 103.

Adrian

Guys dont get confused.

Some quick shiftin thru the net strongly suggests that MON is a better indication than RON of a fuel's resistance to detonation. Quick quote;

"The MON is a measure of the gasoline's ability to resist knock under sever operating conditions. MON affects high speed, part throttle and performance (under load such as in passing). The RON on the other hand, is a measure of gasoline's ability to resist knock under less severe conditions. RON affects low to medium speed knock and engine run-on (dieseling). "

VP's Motorsport 103 is some nice stuff. With a MON of 99, thats well over 10 units increase over say, Shell Optimax which is rated at 87.5. Motorsports RON is 107 by doing a lil math. Thats some serious fuel. VPs C16's MON is 117, and thats a whole new ball game again....

Got some stats of the ET 102 bowser fuel:

RON: 102

MON: 90

Density: .778

Oxygen: 2.7%

Going by those stats, I guess it is slightly above Elf LMS but down on oxygen content on the TurboMax. What's the price on LMS?

So the MON (or: MoreimportantOctaneNthat) is:

Optimax: 87.5

Doughboy Super-Fuel: 90

VP 103: 99

That sorta says to me that the VP really is worth nearly double the price as it offers more than four times the MON increase.

Thanks guys. Anyone else wanna add?

Adrian

So the MON (or: MoreimportantOctaneNthat) is:

Optimax: 87.5

Doughboy Super-Fuel: 90

VP 103: 99

That sorta says to me that the VP really is worth nearly double the price as it offers more than four times the MON increase.

Thanks guys.  Anyone else wanna add?

Adrian

Hi Adrian, the problems I see with 103 is it is bit light at 0.744 which is 5% less than TuboMax and its oxygen content is way down (over 40%). The high RON/MON is not the only factor I would consider. I would say from the specs that 103 is designed for very high boost levels (2.5 bar +) on engines with big injectors, hence the high RON/MON and low density. TurboMax because of its much higher oxygen content, would work better in engines at lower boost levels (say 1.5 bar +). Due to its density level, it would definitely work better in engines with marginal injector sizing.

Horses for courses:cheers:

TurboMax because of its much higher oxygen content, would work better in engines at lower boost levels (say 1.5 bar +). Due to its density level, it would definitely work better in engines with marginal injector sizing.

When you talk about higher boost, are you referring to a higher measure of total manifold pressure or higher cylinder pressures? I am only running 1.0 bar and standard Nissan injectors but the cylinder pressures experienced with the nitrous are far greater than a similarly powerful non-nitrous motor. If the higher oxygen content in Elf fuels will be advantageous, which one should I use that is unleaded and doesn't cost $100000/litre?

Adrian

When I try decent fuel, I just add extra ignition to the whole map, it takes 5 seconds.

How much ignition...i ask because i want to start running crappy std unleaded instead of BP Ultimate/Optimax etc. Wondering how much ignition i should take out to allow for the lesser grade fuel?

How much ignition...i ask because i want to start running crappy std unleaded instead of BP Ultimate/Optimax etc.  Wondering how much ignition i should take out to allow for the lesser grade fuel?

And y would you do that roy? You dont want your car sitting in a workshop again for a few months do ya?? :D

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I dunno man, that VX S with 200,000 k's is still hanging out for 1.5 I reckon the R34 is the better buy, personally.
    • Dang, doesn't even include on roads.
    • Only in a market where OBD was a thing. The rest of the world was quite happy to let the US EPA only affect US cars for quite a while. The* problem with datalogs is that unless you are very familiar with what every trace should look like, on their own and as an ensemble, you can and will see weird shit that can and will lead you astray, not realising that what you are seeing is the normal consequence of various transient inputs. *Really, "a" problem, as there are of course many other problems too. Look, these cars are so bloody simple that if it is missing or stumbling, the obvious thing is to break out the old mental diagnostic list and just go do all the things that you know you should. After proving that the plugs are clean and sound, ditto the coil stalks, coils, loom connectors, etc, and then making sure that there is fuel pressure at about the right numbers (while driving!, not while sitting in the garage free blipping it), then maybe you go looking at AFM voltages, manually testing the igniter, putting a scope on the CAS, etc. Then you're into pulling the injectors for a spray pattern look-see and perhaps a clean, squirting carby cleaner around the inlet manifold looking for leaks, and all the more annoying and esoteric, but still common as muck faults that these things have. I wouldn't ever bother looking at the trims, as they are usually bullshit on these old clunkers anyway.
    • Jousting sticks! Tell 'im he's dreamin!
    • GTR owners are wankers - 2025
×
×
  • Create New...