Jump to content
SAU Community

Octane Boosters Test N Results

Johnny

By Johnny,
in Engines & Forced Induction

 Share

Recommended Posts

Moodles2 Grand Master

Moodles2

Posted
Posted
dosen't toluene destroy cats and melt things? There was a sticky on it somewhere on the site - I was kinda curious about it, but didnt want to risk my motor for it lol.
Toluene can be used as an octane booster in gasoline fuels used in internal combustion engines. Toluene at 86% by volume fueled all the turbo Formula 1 teams in the 1980s, first pioneered by the Honda team. The remaining 14% was a "filler" of n-heptane, to reduce the octane to meet Formula 1 fuel restrictions. Toluene at 100% can be used as a fuel for both two-stroke and four-stroke engines; however, due to the density of the fuel and other factors, the fuel does not vaporize easily unless preheated to 70 degrees Celsius (Honda accomplished this in their Formula 1 cars by routing the fuel lines through the muffler system to heat the fuel). Toluene also poses similar problems as alcohol fuels, as it eats through standard rubber fuel lines and has no lubricating properties as standard gasoline does, which can break down fuel pumps and cause upper cylinder bore wear.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toluene

R31Nismoid Grand Master

R31Nismoid

Posted
Posted

I've purchased Sunoco 104 over the counter from VPW in Thomastown, admittadly that was 4 years ago now, however i can't see such a rule being brought in.

Ring and find out, my bet is they still sell it.

Russco Proficient

Russco

Posted
Posted

Toluene won't hurt your cat or oxygen sensor, I've also found no deterioriation in my rubber fuel lines/engine bores albeit I usually run only a 25% mix which is heaps. It provides a better level of knock protection than the bottled octane boosters but you need to be careful handling the stuff.

Pricing of race fuel in Australia is criminal - I just wish E85 was more widely available....

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Duncan
      Replacing Fuel Pressure Regulator

      By Duncan · Posted

      I'm going to slap an old nismo logo sticker on my spare one and sell it to the land of the free for a thousand bucks
    • Duncan
      Replacing Fuel Pressure Regulator

      By Duncan · Posted

      lol, probably should have read further!
    • R32 TT
      33 GTR Broken front wheel knuckle

      By R32 TT · Posted

      Well - they have arrived.  And they are easy on the eye to put it mildly... These only have three bolts - but for a start there is a key that fits with vacuum like precision..  And as you can see by my ruler, the interface is large..   I listened to a podcast on HP Academy about Dan (KiwiCNC) and I'm more than comfortable he knows what he is doing. R35 Bearing assembly should arrive later today so can mock that up for a look. Can't wait to get these on and get some brake pressure logging too. IMG_3860.MP4
    • GTSBoy
      Nismo GT Pro LSD configurations

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      I would be very confident that they are the same parts (the 2 different SKUs). It seems very clear that you can drop the cam in the 2-way opening, or in the other opening. If you arrange it in the other opening in the same way that you see any other 1-way diff, ie, with the flat of the cam up against the 1° side of the opening, then it would work as a 1-way. It can only spread the ramps when driving forwards - cannot spread the ramps on overrun. It would then appear obvious that if you put the cam into the opening "backwards", that you would get the angled flats of the cam working onto the "points" of the 1° side of the opening, which would give you ramp spread in both loading directions. I do wonder if the forward direction of the 1.5-way config is equivalent to the forward direction of the 2-way, seeing as the cams are flipped and the angled surfaces on those would need to be the same on each side - AND - clearly when installed in either the 2-way or 1-1ay configuration they are not intended to work exactly the same (the ramp angles on the 2-way are 10° different between forward and backward, and the ramp doesn't exist in the 1-way config). 'twere me, I think I would rather actually have a set of rings that offered the 2-way with two different sets of ramp angles, say the 55/45 of the existing design and maybe a 45/37.5 combo for a less aggressive effect), AND another set of rings with a dedicated 1.5-way opening and a dedicated 1-way opening. The 1.5-way opening would actually have the steeper angle on the overdrive side that causes it to be less pushy than the forward drive angle, like you see in many other diffs. But really - if this Nismo thing is thought out properly and all those surfaces work on each other the way that they need to, who am I to argue?
    • GTSBoy
      Nismo GT Pro LSD configurations

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      I would be very confident that they are the same parts (the 2 different SKUs). It seems very clear that you can drop the cam in the 2-way opening, or in the other opening. If you arrange it in the other opening in the same way that you see any other 1-way diff, ie, with the flat of the cam up against the 1° side of the opening, then it would work as a 1-way. It can only spread the ramps when driving forwards - cannot spread the ramps on overrun. It would then appear obvious that if you put the cam into the opening "backwards", that you would get the angled flats of the cam working onto the "points" of the 1° side of the opening, which would give you ramp spread in both loading directions. I do wonder if the forward direction of the 1.5-way config is equivalent to the forward direction of the 2-way, seeing as the cams are flipped and the angled surfaces on those would need to be the same on each side - AND - clearly when installed in either the 2-way or 1-1ay configuration they are not intended to work exactly the same (the ramp angles on the 2-way are 10° different between forward and backward, and the ramp doesn't exist in the 1-way config). 'twere me, I think I would rather actually have a set of rings that offered the 2-way with two different sets of ramp angles, say the 55/45 of the existing design and maybe a 45/37.5 combo for a less aggressive effect), AND another set of rings with a dedicated 1.5-way opening and a dedicated 1-way opening. The 1.5-way opening would actually have the steeper angle on the overdrive side that causes it to be less pushy than the forward drive angle, like you see in many other diffs. But really - if this Nismo thing is thought out properly and all those surfaces work on each other the way that they need to, who am I to argue?
×
×
  • Create New...