Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

the only place that i have seen iton the coast is at shell currimundi, and i wasnt going to pay $1.38/L just to cruise around town so i gave it a miss, if it did give u a power gain id put it in to go to the track or sumthing if i ever was, but in my opinion it isnt worth it for round town driving.

I sometimes think that people don't get it....You don't have to retune your car to get benefits from it. If you have the stock ECU you can reset it to modify the settings to suit the new fuel. If you have a powerFC or something similar you don't have to go to a dyno and get it run again...that's just stupid. The 5% of ethanol will not harm your engine in any way as it's NOT splash blended, it's refined that way and, therefore, is not that same as just adding straight ethanol. A lot of you have been reading all that crap about E10....Optimax extreme 100 is not E10.....E10 is a 10% blend and can effect some of the newer cars. Due to the fact that it wears runbber out slightly faster than normal fuel....that doesn't mean that running a few tanks of it is gonna make your engine explode. And because the new 100 ron is only 5% it has even less of an adverse effect than the E10. I have run several tanks of the 100 and have noticed a couple of things...My car runs borderline tuning and will ping extremely heavily on 95 (premium unleaded) so I have to run the BP ultimate which is 98. I have to say be careful as I have found that some BP's are actually putting premium into their Ultimate tanks so be aware of this. On a hot day, sometimes the car will ping when using the 98....using the 100 stops it and it doesn't ping at all....ever. The second thing I noticed was fuel economy went crap. I used it up twice as fast as the 98.

Running a higher octane fuel will give added power gains whether you believe it or not....that is fact. It will decrease the likelyhood of detonation so protects your engine that little bit more.

i agree with u dan, only thing i was talking about is to me ( a owner of a stock R33 gtst) i dont think its worth it 2 pay $1.28+ a litre for me to drive my car around town when in actual fact im not racing any1 or trying to get my car down the strip quicker or gain more h.p. for round town driving, so i wouldnt buy it, there is no need for me to atm. but if i was on the dyno or trying to gain power, drags, etc i definately would try it. its gota make sum difference over all.

If shell says it is not to be used on nissans made before 2004 there must be a reason. it may not be that it makes it run like a dog or lose power maybe it can have long term effects too.

Shell only say that because Nissan told them to. They had to get approval from all car manufacturers and issue a statement to confirm whether that manufacturer would allow it. Fact is that ethanol eats away at rubber. The rubber which makes up the fuel lines and the rubber seals in your injectors. It also burns leaner and dryer. It only has adverse effects in a more than 10% mix though and even at 10% it would take like 10 years to damage an injector and you would have to be constantly running it through the system. The shell 100 is not potent enough to have any of these effects whatsoever.....the statement which was issued regarding all car manufacturers was in relation to E10 which is a more concentrated mix.

It will use more fuel as Ethanol like Methenol or any alcohol fuel is no where near as burn efficient-my old methanol dragster(99.5% methanol) would use double the fuel a hydrocarbon burning dragster (c16, unleaded or whichever) would use.

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 have no hard data to report, but I have to say, having driven it to work and back all week, mostly on wet roads (and therefore mostly not able to contemplate anything too outrageous anywhere)..... it is real good. I turned the boost controller on, with duty cycle set to 10% (which may not be enough to actually increase the boost), and the start boost set to 15 psi. That should keep the gate unpressurised until at least 15 psi. And rolling at 80 in 5th, which is <2k rpm, going to WOT sees the MAP go +ve even before it crosses 2k and it has >5 psi by the time it hits 90 km/h. That's still <<2.5k rpm, so I think it's actually doing really well. Because of all the not-quite-ideal things that have been in place since the turbo first went on, it felt laggy. It's actually not. The response appears to be as good as you could hope for with a highflow.
    • Or just put in a 1JZ, and sell me the NEO head 😎
    • Oh, it's been done. You just run a wire out there and back. But they have been known to do coolant temp sensors, MAP sensors, etc. They're not silly (at Regency Park) and know what's what with all the different cars.
    • Please ignore I found the right way of installing it thanks
    • There are advantages, and disadvantages to remapping the factory.   The factory runs billions of different maps, to account for sooooo many variables, especially when you bring in things like constantly variable cams etc. By remapping all those maps appropriately, you can get the car to drive so damn nicely, and very much so like it does from the factory. This means it can utilise a LOT of weird things in the maps, to alter how it drives in situations like cruise on a freeway, and how that will get your fuel economy right down.   I haven't seen an aftermarket ECU that truly has THAT MANY adjustable parameters. EG, the VAG ECUs are somewhere around 2,000 different tables for it to work out what to do at any one point in time. So for a vehicle being daily driven etc, I see this as a great advantage, but it does mean spending a bit more time, and with a tuner who really knows that ECU.   On the flip side, an aftermarket ECU, in something like a weekender, or a proper race car, torque based tuning IMO doesn't make that much sense. In those scenarios you're not out there hunting down stuff like "the best way to minimise fuel usage at minor power so that we can go from 8L/100km to 7.3L/100km. You're more worried about it being ready to make as much freaking power as possible when you step back on the loud pedal as you come out of turn 2, not waiting the extra 100ms for all the cams to adjust etc. So in this scenario, realistically you tune the motor to make power, based on the load. People will then play with things like throttle response, and drive by wire mapping to get it more "driveable".   Funnily enough, I was watching something Finnegans Garage, and he has a huge blown Hemi in a 9 second 1955 Chev that is road registered. To make it more driveable on the road recently, they started testing blocking up the intake with kids footballs, to effectively reduce air flow when they're on the road, and make the throttle less touchy and more driveable. Plus some other weird shit the yankee aftermarket ECUs do. Made me think of Kinks R34...
×
×
  • Create New...