Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

That was a great read.....

Was waiting for someone to do a proper test....

Didnt have my mone on caltex tho.... I assumed Optimax was a touch better....

My own tests....

Caltex 98 - Car pinged its tits off (thought i must have got regular unleaded)

BP Ultimate - Car ran great 270km per tank (air fuel ratios were good)

Shell 98 Optimax - Car ran a little rough 300km per tank (air fuel ratios were bordering un safe)

So i generally use Ultimate or Optimax. I find when using Ultimate my bumper is heaps dirtier after a tank and believe this is due to Optimax being a little cleaner.... Also i drive my car the same all the time.... Average fuel consumption is the same every time.... 300 per optimax and 270 from ultimate.... Plus i can get 4cents off at shell.... So i try to get shell as often as possible... However im empty today so im gonna fill on Caltex 98 and try again.... Maby i just got a bum batch the first time????

Could be a bad batch, when Vortex98 first came out we had a car towed into work with half a tank of water after filling up on it.

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I guess this shows that fuel from differing companies do vary. The government says what the RON should be and there is a plus or minus fiddle factor. Also winter fuel has a higher RVP or DYPE to make your car easier to start. Of course in summer this is reduced so you don't have problems on hot days.Though govt regs are lowering these to cut back on the smog levels.

As you can see in the states of Australia the fuel will differ because of which refinery made it.

The other thing to remember that denser fuels tend to make you car run a bit richer.

The higher the RON or MON the higher it's resistance to knocking. Hi octane fuel in a car that doesn't have the sensors that our skylines have[ knock sensors, etc] will have no increase in performance .

I guess the water problem is one of those things that happens. service station tanks get condensation in them,etc.I won't use Mobil 1 oil because i bought a 5 litre container from Big w a few years ago and luckily I notice it had a lot of water in it. I rang the Mobil help line . They couldn't explain it.

I allways found that vortex 98 pinged my skyline very hard but as soon as i put Ulimate in it the pinging went away and the car went harder. I also found that Synergy 8000 SOMETIMES would make my car go noticably harder.

weid that Vortex came out on front - i have tried it many times and got the same result every time.

I wonder how much free fuel or how much money Caltex paid MRT ? =)

Interesting that for what seems to be a fairly thorough test (to the extent of getting some folks

with a van from Caltex to analyse the fuels) they didn't:

a) adjust mixtures so that they were exactly the same for all fuels. Given that Optimax

claims to be a denser fuel, I'd have thought this was important.

B) adjust timing to take maximum advantage of all fuels (timing _was_ adjusted, but not for

individual fuels).

If we accept that the results are a) accurate and B) relevant given the sampling procedure

(and there have been some arguments to the contrary earlier in the thread) then the

test shows that Vortex98 is the best bet for 'good power' on an untuned Ecutek in a Subaru.

I don't know that it follows that Vortex98 is necessarily 'the fuel' to use on a tuned car.

My belief is that 'the fuel' to use on a tuned car is the fuel it was tuned on, batch variations

aside.

I'd love to see a comparison where the same car was adjusted for the same

mixtures across a range of fuels, and the adjustments needed shown.

Then I'd like to see the mixture-corrected car adjusted for timing (with the adjustments

tabulated) and see power measured.

Then I'd like to see the tests repeated, monthly, for 12 months.

I'm dreaming :(;)

Regards,

Saliya

something else you might be interested to know

from the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries website

http://www.fcai.com.au/ethanol.php/2004/03/00000001.html

"Nissan vehicles manufactured from 1 January 2004 onwards are capable of operation on ethanol-blended fuels up to E10 (10% ethanol), providing that blending of the ethanol component to the petroleum component of the fuel has been properly made at the fuel refinery (ie there is no "splash-blending" of the fuel).

For Nissan vehicles manufactured prior to 1 January 2004, Nissan Australia does not recommend the use of E10 because of drivability concerns and/or material compatibility issues."

regards

Jase

im still not clear about whether Ethanol is good for the car.

i remember they put it in a lot of petrols and damages engines.

theres new 'cheaper' petrol with ethanol (<10%) 98 otcane..

i just want to know, is this stuff any good??? or should i stay away.

if i could afford ultimate, i woudnt ask these questions...

The main concern with Ethanol is it's a solvent and can eat some types of fuel lines, but mate you drive a performance car, one that was designed to have a diet of Japanese super (100RON), tighten your belt and buy 98RON, buying lower octane fuel will only cost you a LOT more if you do engine damage because of it.

Siliya has hit the nail on the head. What happens when you lean out your mixtures? You get more power. All these fuels test to be similar RON, so advance sould be similar. The results that we are seeing is how close to the fuel that the ECU was tuned with, (which was vortex).

Overall I think the quality of the report is pretty poor. It looks to me like it's a draft that hasn't yet been scrutinised by the academics that should have been overseeing the testing.

eg

But why were they better? After consulta

Winter mix March 16th to November 14th maximum legislated amount is 90Kpa @40 deg C ?????????????????????

PAUL CHECK HERE.

Please refer Appendices and chart XXXX before reading this part!

If I was UNSW i'd be dissapointed that something like this was released. If I was MRT and they were asked to pay for this I'd be suitably unimpressed as well.

I'd even go further than what Siliya suggests and include ADR drive cycle testing.

Overall I think the quality of the report is pretty poor. It looks to me like it's a draft that hasn't yet been scrutinised by the academics that should have been overseeing the testing.

eg

If I was UNSW i'd be dissapointed that something like this was released. If I was MRT and they were asked to pay for this I'd be suitably unimpressed as well.

I'd even go further than what Siliya suggests and include ADR drive cycle testing.

If you go through the OCAU thread, u can see that this reports is actually an unfinished draft that was leaked.

I've heard some dyno operators in SA are recommending the ethanol blends for maximum power, but cars must be tuned to suit the fuel. Don't know how accurate these rumours are, so treat them with a grain of salt.

I don't think I'm game to try anything else unless I know for sure it won't affect longevity in my car. Ultimate is consistent for me, the cleanest of the lot, and I have enough power as it is at the moment :)

I wonder where SA gets its fuel from and which would be the most "fresh" fuel. Anybody know?

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

    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
×
×
  • Create New...