Jump to content
SAU Community

Which RON  

35 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Hello All,

So there has been much debate and articles recently about how beneficial is 95 & 98 RON fuel in cars. . which got me thinking what is teh standard RON for the M35 Stag. . .many sources say 95 is good enough for non modified M35's, others say for ones with ECu's etc 98 as minimum. .

So I would be interested in your thoughts. . .

95 or 98+ RON

Jules

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/293995-m35-vq25det-95-or-98-ron/
Share on other sites

My C34 Stagea see's 98 Ron minimum if im low on juice and have to fill up at a Caltex or something... Apart from that 100 Ron is the way to go.. remember these cars a factory tuned in Japan on 100 Ron :(

it goes something like this:

* you CAN run them on 91RON (the engine has knock sensors so will retard the timing accordingly), but you probably shouldn't. If you're trying to save $10 per week on fuel you probably bought the wrong car...

actually you wont save this much because your fuel economy/mileage will suffer as well...not to mention the longevity of the engine (there is a reason why 91RON is not called 'premium').

using 91RON fuel you will not get the best from the car. you will only get the worst from it...

* the M35 will happily run on 95RON, but again, for the tiny price difference between this and 98, and the noticeable performance/economy difference... why would you own a stagea and then cheap out on fuel?

* 98 RON is probably the best fuel for the stagea (i've never tried the ethanol blends in mine). Its what its designed for and you'll get excellent results from it. If you want the car to last the distance, give it what it wants. It'll reward you for it :D

Jules, I've merged the two threads together so all the replies are on here.

Cheers, I started the other one when my unit lost power so did it again and found they both made it on the site. . many thanks.

98 is the way to go.

I'm a bit suspicious of anything with Ethanol in it.

Ethanol is hydrophilic (absorbs water easily) which means there is a good chance it will be taking some water into your engine unless its kept in pristine conditions.

Most local petrol stations don't exactly have pristine tankage, so draw your own conclusions :D

Its only a minor thing, but is it worth the 3 cents or 2 RON?

Water through the engine wont harm it, but if there's a lot in the fuel, it may make it run lean guess.

E85 is much better for turbo applications than any grade unleaded due to its cool burn properties and high octane, you just have to tune the engine for it as you need about 50% more fuel. Ideally you would want two maps though.

I run Shell or BP 98 in mine as its the best fuel I can get nearby. Has anybody tried the ethanol 100 octane that Liberty are selling?

Water through the engine wont harm it, but if there's a lot in the fuel, it may make it run lean guess.

E85 is much better for turbo applications than any grade unleaded due to its cool burn properties and high octane, you just have to tune the engine for it as you need about 50% more fuel. Ideally you would want two maps though.

I run Shell or BP 98 in mine as its the best fuel I can get nearby. Has anybody tried the ethanol 100 octane that Liberty are selling?

Umm, water in the engine WILL harm it if it's in liquid form and there is enough of it - water (in liquid form, once again), CANNOT be compressed, so it can cause major issues with pistons, conrods and valves. Want proof, ask Aron (aka R34Liner) and check out what it did to his rods: http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...t&p=4509274. I'm sure Scotty knows this, but I just wanted to make sure that no-one else gets the wrong impression of the effects water can have if used in the incorrect amounts.

Of course, water in gaseous form is a lot different, it's the density of cold air that helps us with our turbo'd cars to get better performance - more water in the air means more parts of oxygen. Some people use water injection for just this effect, but it's a matter of balance (and a lot of atomisation) to make sure you're not using too much.

You're quite right Nick - water doesn't compress, but neither does gasoline!

(liquids don't compress)

A 'little' water in the mixture is a fantastic anti-detonant and carbon-removing agent (steam cleaning the combustion chamber is an excellent thing). You can run mixtures around 13.5:1 at high boost levels if you can control the fire with water. :down:

The main reason that we run rich AFR's under boost isn't for the power, it's to control the combustion speed and keep the engine in one piece.

Having said that, I'm not paying for water when I fill up, I'm paying for combustible hydrocarbons - and ones of a defined standard.

I've used a couple of tanks of SAFF PULP with a little 'E' (can't remember the blend), and there was a difference in the drive-ability of the car (something felt 'nicer', but I can't remember the specifics - it was a long time ago).

In summary;

98 preferred, 95/96 if you must.

91 if you just don't care...

even my NA pulsar gets a LOT better mileage and much smoother running out of 98. Dunno why you would bother with anything alse really.

If you do the sums with mileage vs cost per litre the 98 comes out trumps too (well, it did for me)

At full noise you could probably run a garden hose down the inlet, not that I would recommend it. Just a fine mist under boost would work wonders though.

Brings back memorys of my ex cleaning the inside of her carby with a hose then trying to start the car.

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

    • Well the install is officially done. Filled with fluid and bled it today, but didn't get a chance to take it on a test drive. I'll throw some final pics of the lines and whatnot but you can definitely install a DMAX rack in an R33 with pretty minor mods. I think the only other thing I had to do that isn't documented here is grind a bit of the larger banjo fitting to get it to clear since the banjos are grouped much tighter on the DMAX rack. Also the dust boots from a R33 do not fit either fyi, so if you end up doing this install for whatever reason you'll need to grab those too. One caveat with buying the S15 dust boots however is that the clamps are too small to fit on the R33 inner tie rod since they're much thicker so keep the old clamps around. The boots also twist a bit when adjusting toe but it's not a big deal. No issues or leaks so far, steering feels good and it looks like there's a bit more lock now than I had before. Getting an alignment on Saturday so I'll see how it feels then but seems like it'll be good to go       
    • I don't get in here much anymore but I can help you with this.   The hole is a vent (air relief) for the brake proportioning valve, which is built into the master cylinder.    The bad news is that if brake fluid is leaking from that hole then it's getting past the proportioning valve seals.   The really bad news is that no spare parts are available for the proportioning valve either from Nissan or after market.     It's a bit of a PITA getting the proportioning valve out of the master cylinder body anyway but, fortunately, leaks from that area are rare in my experience. BTW, if those are copper (as such) brake lines you should get rid of them.    Bundy (steel) tube is a far better choice (and legal  in Australia - if that's where you are).
    • EMU Classic. For what I need it to do I see no reason to upgrade. Link and Haltech would both cost an extra chunk of money for a lot of unutilized features
×
×
  • Create New...