Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I've noticed its been out at pretty much every caltex servo.

On some info (proper testing) I read a while ago the vortex 98 was by far and away the better fuel to use. But as also noted on the testing is that not all fuel is made in the state its sold in. So I guess transport delays, longer in the heat etc could affect its performance.

So the question is, has anyone tried it. Is it any better than ultimate or optimax?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/131244-vortex-98/
Share on other sites

Ive tried it in my 1998 Nissan Skyline r34 Non Turbo, i usually put just plain vortex 95 cause the car doesnt require more. Ive also tried optimax and bp ultimate. For me i felt the greatest pull with vortex 98 but the petrol wasted the fastest over a weeks persiod. The BP Ultimate lasted the longest in the car but i felt no difference between that and plain vortex. Optimax 98 out lasted all the fules in the car but again no difference from the plain vortex.

Thats Just my experience in my NA.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/131244-vortex-98/#findComment-2427302
Share on other sites

the theory is that bp ultimate has a minimum octane of 98ron, whereas shell and vortex98 (not 100% sure on vortex) are an average of 98ron.

in reality the difference between ultimate, vortex98 and optimax isn't much. what happens is that if a fuel company doesn't have a refinery in a state, then they will buy fuel off another company and pass it off as their own.

so if BP was the only fuel refinery in qld, then both votex98 and optimax would be the same as ultimate. it works out cheaper for shell and castrol than shipping it in from another state.

just don't buy vortex98 from woolies servo's, cause it may not be actual 98 ron fuel.

but i personally use ultimate, but i know guys that use vortex98 and have no problems. i use ultimate because a mate was a mechanic for repco and the nulon rep came though 1 day with a ron tester and he got some fuel out of my mates car to do tests with octane booster. it was ultimate and without octane booster it was 98.3ron.

for those interested, with nulon pro strength octane booster at reccomended strength it went up to 103ron. with it at twice the recommended strength it dropped to 97.2ron.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/131244-vortex-98/#findComment-2428987
Share on other sites

Ive been using vortex98 in my 32 gtr since it come to the servo down the road which was when it 1st come out and i noticed alot compared to the others and bp ultimate which was what i was using...

It would idle heaps nicer with the vortex98 over any of the other fuels and thats what kinda sold me cause i noticed it straight away, was like it cleaned out the crap that was in the lines or filter ?? :P i dunno ...

and it seem to rev nice all the way up to redline-ish ;)

Whereas the shell 100 was pretty dogey i thought, rev'd a bit yuk, like it wouldnt be smooth at all and didnt like to be above 7 grand :laugh: ... i might try it again sometime but i been using the vortex98 for like 5 months and i think its the best out of the lot anyway.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/131244-vortex-98/#findComment-2430234
Share on other sites

Well I tried it. But it is 12c more than normal petrol where as the ultimate is 10c more... So unless I get something like 700kms to the tank I dont know if I can justify the extra expence. (got 658kms to the last tank, and have a photo to prove it :O )

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/131244-vortex-98/#findComment-2430620
Share on other sites

Well I tried it. But it is 12c more than normal petrol where as the ultimate is 10c more... So unless I get something like 700kms to the tank I dont know if I can justify the extra expence. (got 658kms to the last tank, and have a photo to prove it :D )

Not all of us drive with our eyes fixed on the boost guage and backing off at the slightest sign of boost :D

But the question that really needs to be asked. Is the 'extra' ~$8 per tank really matter that much? Seeing as we pay ~$80 per tank anyhow.

It really makes me laugh when theres a 3c difference between servo's and people go on about how they always try and find the cheaper one, when at the end it only makes a couple of bucks difference

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/131244-vortex-98/#findComment-2431552
Share on other sites

It really makes me laugh when theres a 3c difference between servo's and people go on about how they always try and find the cheaper one, when at the end it only makes a couple of bucks difference

unless they are across the road from each other there is no point hunting down the best fuel unless you pass them all on the way to work and can see which 1 is cheapest and stop there on the way home.

if you get 300kms per 50L, then you do an average of 6km per litre. so if the first servo was $1.38 per litre you go hunting for a better servo and drive more than 3.33km (6.66km round trip) to save 3 cents, then you will end up spending more money that you saved.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/131244-vortex-98/#findComment-2432325
Share on other sites

Not all of us drive with our eyes fixed on the boost guage and backing off at the slightest sign of boost :/

But the question that really needs to be asked. Is the 'extra' ~$8 per tank really matter that much? Seeing as we pay ~$80 per tank anyhow.

It really makes me laugh when theres a 3c difference between servo's and people go on about how they always try and find the cheaper one, when at the end it only makes a couple of bucks difference

Yeah, see I drive past both anyway. So the 2c saving isnt actually going to cost me more. But if its not a better quality product and just the same then Im not paying 2c extra for it.

And just for the record Shane I dont drive off boost all the time. I drive so the car isnt straining, I also drive gateway traffic each day, so its not like its all 2am highway stuff. I found making the car work less by making it sometimes work more uses less petrol. 660kms compaired to 400kms that does make a big difference at the end of the year.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/131244-vortex-98/#findComment-2432662
Share on other sites

actually they did an article on Autosalon magazine about these hi octane fuel ages ago and they tested BP / SHELL and Caltex and they find out that Caltex Vortex has about 98.5 while the rest are only 98ron.

but either way,.. they all work equally the same for me...although i use Vortex more often.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/131244-vortex-98/#findComment-2437679
Share on other sites

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


  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah i found that alot of parts can be wrong or "very" hard to get the real right one. I already bought some brakes years ago on me "old" GT calipers and they were wrong too 😄  I told them too. Even send them pictures...but they said "EBC catalogue has them on my car... So i dont know what their answer will be. I call monday them and let them know that they are really not on my car. If they were they would be already on a car...
    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
×
×
  • Create New...