Octane boost fuel additive

Bluehair

Anyone use these things (doesn't matter what brand) and was there any difference? Same for these 'engine cleaning' additives..

natnif

haven't used them myself, but I've heard it's kinda like using v power from shell....same octane just slightly cleaner,better fuel. doesn't do a whole lot for performance....do u need higher octane petrol?there is a chemical you can buy which you add and increases the octane I think...I'm not all that sure cause I don't have to use it, I can find out for u though if ou want.

SouperComputer

I occasionally throw fuel injector cleaner in once in a while, every couple of months or so.

Contary to popular belief, higher octane fuels dont give out more power, they are just less lilkely to pre-ignite or detonate. So if you have a highly forced induction engine, or high compression, you will see a drop in running temps and higher power output. But in the vast majority of cases, it makes no difference.

Henry Ford III

www.broquet.co.uk

An in tank fuel catalyst. Worth reading up on. I've used one in a "leaded fuel only" engine, for a few years without any trouble at all. No pinking nor loss of performance.

5500

What car do you drive?unless its a jap or something hipower thats mapped for 100 ron you dont really need octane booster unless you want to empty your pockets fairly quick!

Anyone i know with evo's/scoobys ect use millers cvl,as for the fuel catlyist,i wouldnt waste my money on one

Ratchet

there is also chance that you will cat converter all clogged up , if your car can't take hi octane, it did happen to few guys

Bluehair

It's a BMW 323i (2.5 litre 6pot) and optimax/bp ultimate seems to be a good pairing for the engine for the UK guys but obviously we don't get that stuff here.

The ecu is designed to burn 98ron ideally but there's no problems with the stuff we get here i just wanted to get the best from the car, not expecting anything major but would be happy to do it on every fill if i thought it was helping.

greglo23

if i was going to use anything i'd use millers injecta http://tinyurl.com/xcxv
i've heard very good reports of this and i use their diesel clean myself and find it excellent. as in anything like this it comes down to personal experience so why not give it a go and give us some feedback !!!

smarty

SouperComputer wrote:

Contary to popular belief, higher octane fuels dont give out more power, they are just less lilkely to pre-ignite or detonate.

Are you sure about that? If the car is designed to run on 95 octane then I would agree with you, but surely if the car is designed to run on 98 then using 95 octane fuel will restrict the output.

Henry Ford III

eireal wrote:

What car do you drive?unless its a jap or something hipower thats mapped for 100 ron you dont really need octane booster unless you want to empty your pockets fairly quick!

Anyone i know with evo's/scoobys ect use millers cvl,as for the fuel catlyist,i wouldnt waste my money on one

This relates to a classic car I own and run occaisionally in better weather. It was designed to run on leaded fuel only. It will run on 95 u/l but the engine will pink, and dmage will occur in the cylinder head, around the valves, where the absence of lead leads to VSR (valve seat recession).

There are a few remedies:-
1/. Remachine the head to take hardened valve inserts. This is expensive, and performance will suffer due to having to retard the ignition.
2/. Fit later head. Possible but same performance loss occurs.
3/. Fit catalyst.

3/. works for me. No loss of performance, economy actually increased, emissions improved, no pinking, and the car has done 5 trackdays all in the UK
and has driven over and back to all off them.

Modern jap stuff I've no idea about tbh.

5500

Im wondering if its actually a different fuel cat im thinking of.

The ones im talking about are "supposed" to boost your octane by 3 - 4 points by ioniosing the fuel or some waffle like that

SouperComputer

but surely if the car is designed to run on 98 then using 95 octane fuel will restrict the output.

Nah, it may run a bit hotter, but in most cases you would be "okay" with 95. Again unless its a high output engine. Although, more modern engines with ECU's have a detonation sensor that can adjust the ignition\injection timing to compensate.

fletch

SouperComputer wrote:

I occasionally throw fuel injector cleaner in once in a while, every couple of months or so.

Contary to popular belief, higher octane fuels dont give out more power, they are just less lilkely to pre-ignite or detonate. So if you have a highly forced induction engine, or high compression, you will see a drop in running temps and higher power output. But in the vast majority of cases, it makes no difference.

You are wrong and right there.... Fifth Gear recently did a test of those higher octane fuels and revealed that "normal" cars do not notice a difference in power output, however performance cars can benefit from it....they showed how a Subaru Impreza went from 235bhp on normal fuel to 249bhp using Shell Optimax...the torque figure also improved
YAY my 2000th post!

Big Balls

Bluehair wrote:

It's a BMW 323i (2.5 litre 6pot) and optimax/bp ultimate seems to be a good pairing for the engine for the UK guys but obviously we don't get that stuff here.

The ecu is designed to burn 98ron ideally but there's no problems with the stuff we get here i just wanted to get the best from the car, not expecting anything major but would be happy to do it on every fill if i thought it was helping.

That car is 170 odd bhp, doesn't need it anyway.

I noticed Texaco are selling purple bottles of Octane booster behind the counter now, I asked the guy could I have a look at it tonight, read the label and it said throw it all in with every 30 litres of fuel. Didn't ask the price.

IDMUD

Alright, another one of these posts

The thing is that people believe what they want to believe. Having me say that fuel cats do not work will only bruise their ego, they're way too smart to be tricked by a salesman.

Also, me saying that octane boosters harm the engine with prolonged use can't be true either right? Or the fact that they only raise octane ratings by .5 ron.

There's so much crap on the market today and it's only because folks don't want to listen to facts but rather want to think they're making a great deal.

Here's the lowdown on octane boosters:

1) If you want to raise the octane rating use xylene or toluene, both are harmful chemicals and probably illegal in Ireland. (Edit: You will need several liters per tank to make a noticable difference in your RON rating)
2) A higher octane rating in a performance engine will raise your horsepower and torque and consume less fuel per 100KM thanks to higher efficency during combustion.
3) Fuel cats/ionizers/magnets/fans in your intake/* will not lower your fuel consumption or raise your octane rating AT ALL. If a 5€ gadget could do all that why do car manufacturers spend billion of euros in research?

Ok, I won't waste any more of your time witht his, as I'm sure you all will continue in your stupid ways and continue to buy snake oil products to boost your egos.

IDMUD

SouperComputer wrote:

Nah, it may run a bit hotter, but in most cases you would be "okay" with 95. Again unless its a high output engine. Although, more modern engines with ECU's have a detonation sensor that can adjust the ignition\injection timing to compensate.

Knock sensors have been around for ages, since the early 90s. If the ecu detects a detonation it will back off the timing and increase the injector time to compensate. However, a car with a fuel map for 98 ron will strive to run with those values, hence lose performance if it has to back off from those due to running 95 ron.

High octane fuel is a good thing, it makes engines more efficent thanks to more pre-ignition and compression, not offering it in Ireland is a real shame.

Bluehair

IDMUD wrote:

2) A higher octane rating in a performance engine will raise your horsepower and torque and consume less fuel per 100KM thanks to higher efficency during combustion.

Which is what members on the bmw forum would suggest from experience. I've ordered some Millers Octane boost and will give it a try for a few fills and report back then. I've no doubt there's a lot of 'snake oils' out there but would have more confidence in Millers than most.

Bluehair

IDMUD wrote:

High octane fuel is a good thing, it makes engines more efficent thanks to more pre-ignition and compression, not offering it in Ireland is a real shame.

Couldn't agree more. I'd love to be able to get optimax here but i guess with our predominantly small-engined cars (due crappy tax regime) there's probably little or no demand for it.

unkel

eireal wrote:

unless its a jap or something hipower thats mapped for 100 ron you dont really need octane booster unless you want to empty your pockets fairly quick!

Agree. I would guess it's poor value for money for an E46 323i

Bluehair wrote:

Which is what members on the bmw forum would suggest from experience. I've ordered some Millers Octane boost and will give it a try for a few fills and report back then

Go on so! Let us know the results

SouperComputer

You are wrong and right there.... Fifth Gear recently did a test of those higher octane fuels and revealed that "normal" cars do not notice a difference in power output, however performance cars can benefit from it....they showed how a Subaru Impreza went from 235bhp on normal fuel to 249bhp using Shell Optimax...the torque figure also improved

I dont get it, doesn't my post mean Im right on both counts? You pretty much agreed with me in your post!

Originally Posted by Bluehair
Which is what members on the bmw forum would suggest from experience. I've ordered some Millers Octane boost and will give it a try for a few fills and report back then

Should be interesting. I doubt there will be much if any difference as it's not really a performance engine. It puts out a reasonable amount of power, but not relative to it's displacement so it's not a high-performance engine as such. And no im not trying to diss your lovely new motor!

You might see a drop in temps, thats about it id say.

Bluehair

SouperComputer wrote:

Should be interesting. I doubt there will be much if any difference as it's not really a performance engine. It puts out a reasonable amount of power, but not relative to it's displacement so it's not a high-performance engine as such. And no im not trying to diss your lovely new motor!

LOL Don't worry i don't mind. Loving the car i must admit so this is just part of caring for it and getting the best from it rather than expecting any particular performance gains.

Whats leaning me that way though is that while hardly a performance engine as you say it should be running Ron98 under ideal conditions but will manage fine with Ron95(obviously).

It's going in for a full service next week and probably putting 17s on it shortly afterwards so while i've ordered the Millers i might leave trying it out for a month or so to get a better feel for the car and gauge any difference.

I'm tracking mpg too so will see if there's any noticeable difference there too. Should be an interesting experiment anyway

unkel

SouperComputer wrote:

I doubt there will be much if any difference as it's not really a performance engine

My thoughts exactly. The 2.5 straight six is a great engine that has no need to rev to 9,800,000,000,000 rpm before it finally and reluctantly agrees to start moving the car, unlike some Japanese performance cars

IDMUD

Bluehair wrote:

Couldn't agree more. I'd love to be able to get optimax here but i guess with our predominantly small-engined cars (due crappy tax regime) there's probably little or no demand for it.

Even small engines would benefit from higher quality fuel. Only allowing for 95 ron (due to tax reasons) is not very enviromentally friendly.

And instead of spending loads on octane boosters all year round, a better solution would be to use E85 when it becomes wide-spread. The alcohol/petrol mixture has a ron rating of 104-107 depending on refinement. The downside is that it requires some modifications to the engine and fuel system to become reliable.

Big Balls

IDMUD wrote:

ron rating of 104-107 depending on refinement. The downside is that it requires some modifications to the engine and fuel system to become reliable.

I'm pretty sure putting something like that into a car which does not require it will result in the engine potentially blowing up.

If it says it needs RON 98 on the inside of the filler door, it needs it, if it doen't then...

IDMUD

Big Balls wrote:

I'm pretty sure putting something like that into a car which does not require it will result in the engine potentially blowing up.

If it says it needs RON 98 on the inside of the filler door, it needs it, if it doen't then...

You can NEVER damage an engine from running a higher octane rated fuel than it was mapped for, but you can do it the other way around.

The reason why you have to modify your fuel system for E85 is that it is corrosive and needs parts certified for alcohol use. There's also the fact that it has less energy per unit than petrol so you need 30-40% more fuel to compensate for it. This downside in fuel economy is made up by the fact that it has less tax (about 80 cents per liter) and that it enables you to run a much earlier ignition and thereby increasing power. On supercharged engines this will also allow you to turn up the boost as alcohol is much more resistant to detonation.

Henry Ford III

IDMUD wrote:

Alright, another one of these posts


1) If you want to raise the octane rating use xylene or toluene, both are harmful chemicals and probably illegal in Ireland. (Edit: You will need several liters per tank to make a noticable difference in your RON rating)
2) A higher octane rating in a performance engine will raise your horsepower and torque and consume less fuel per 100KM thanks to higher efficency during combustion.
3) Fuel cats/ionizers/magnets/fans in your intake/* will not lower your fuel consumption or raise your octane rating AT ALL.

I can only speak about my own experience in using a broquet catalyst in a "leaded only" classic car engine. It's far from cheap btw, but comes with a warranty against valve seat recession.

I've no idea how it works but it just does.

My NCT tests over a few inspections (car is emissions exempt but they ran the test anyway as I asked them to) show that the emissions would pass much more modern standards.

Motorway driving at 70 mph gives almost 30mpg, whereas running on LRP gave 27mpg.

IDMUD

Henry Ford III wrote:

I can only speak about my own experience in using a broquet catalyst in a "leaded only" classic car engine. It's far from cheap btw, but comes with a warranty against valve seat recession.

I've no idea how it works but it just does.

My NCT tests over a few inspections (car is emissions exempt but they ran the test anyway as I asked them to) show that the emissions would pass much more modern standards.

Motorway driving at 70 mph gives almost 30mpg, whereas running on LRP gave 27mpg.

^^^^^ This is why there are still products like these on sale. Pseudo science at its best

Some parts of the emission test is not affected by the lack of a catalyst, and even an older car will pass that one.

All measurements of MPG is very dependant on weather, driver and speed/traffic flow. It's impossible to see a 3 mpg increase/decrease over the span of say a year.

Henry Ford III

It works. Bottom line.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Matt Simis

Not one to drag up posts over and over, but just thought this post could benefit from this article:
http://europeancarweb.com/tech/0503ec_techboost/

Basically they scientifically and quantifiably tested the effects of Octane Boosters (2 different types) and Toluene and the effect on RON/MON, as opposed to running it through a car and trying to work out any benefit which can be altered by many other uncontrolled effects (car oddities, weather, training of car computer etc).

Check the article and results at the bottom but they found that:

-US Spec "91 Octane" is 95.8 RON (posted already, but worth mentioning again)
-20% Toluene brought RON to 99
-Too much Toluene had a negative effect
-Both types of Octane boosters did bring RON levels to 97+ and worked well.
-The boosters seem more efficent and effective than Toluene for practical use. They werent expensive either.

I dont know if we can get either booster here (one is MMT and the other US Street Legal one is Ferosene based) and I dont know if they are dramatically different than the ones sold here, but the results seem to to contradict what the naysayers have claimed about Octane boosting.



Matt

CrowdedHouse

Anyone ever try Avgas ?

It's 100 octane

Robbo

CrowdedHouse wrote:

Anyone ever try Avgas ?

It's 100 octane

It's also chock full of lead if I recall correctly. Ran 100cc Two Stroke kart engines off it before as an experiment and you could set the carb incredibly lean without seizing.