Octane | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Octane

I was curious about this on my 2.5 NA, it's still a relatively high compression engine, I'm wondering if the engine can take advantage of the higher octane fuel. A few places seem to hotly debate (as is tradition) the benefits of higher octane, and I'm thinking of just trying it out and logging my results. A bit of a tangent away from motorcycling but still interesting.

Thread on an external forum that dives into this topic: bobistheoilguy.com
On a modern NA engine it will depend on the "computer". If the engine advances timing to take advantage of the higher octane there will be an improvement. If the computer programming is based on lowest common spec (lowest spec octane) then no. This last one is likely the case on a NA car spec'ed for low octane fuel but not always.

Over simplified above but the computer senses pre-detonation/knock/ping (not actually octane) and adjusts (retards) timing to get rid of it. Forced induction engines do the same but have boost and timing in the adjustment bag, still won't help unless it is designed to increase these to take advantage of the higher octane fuel. Other things can also impact this (engine temp, air temp, etc) but the tool is to retard/advance timing (or boost) based on sensor outputs. Getting more power will depend on the ability to advance these things beyond the base fuel spec.

In contrast a NA performance engine may be tuned based on the high spec fuel the manual calls for but if you put 87 in it will sense the pinging and retard timing to not ventilate the pistons. In the pre-computer era you could manually rotate the distributor to increase/decrease timing and set the engine up for the fuel you were running (more timing advance). Without fancy equipment some trial and error with your ears and seat of your pants resulted in it dialed in.... and a handful of more power.
 
Last edited:
I was curious about this on my 2.5 NA, it's still a relatively high compression engine, I'm wondering if the engine can take advantage of the higher octane fuel. A few places seem to hotly debate (as is tradition) the benefits of higher octane, and I'm thinking of just trying it out and logging my results. A bit of a tangent away from motorcycling but still interesting.

Thread on an external forum that dives into this topic: bobistheoilguy.com
Vehicles that recommend running 91 are tuned for 91 so they make more power on it but can dumb down the settings (tune) to run 87 without detonation. That's why it makes less power on 87.
Vehicles that recommend 87 don't have the smarts in the ecu and design to take advantage of the 91 so they're not going to make more power.
The 2.3T in my Mazda CX-7 is a prime example. First years the manual )and big sticker inside fuel door) stated Premium Required. They would run on 87 but reliability suffered. Beginning in 09 the manual/sticker changed to Premium Recommended and you could more reliably run 87 at a performance/mileage decrease.
I tried running 87 against 91 for long 401 runs on cruise. Mileage cost per litre was still better when using premium so there was zero benefit to using 87.
 
I was curious about this on my 2.5 NA, it's still a relatively high compression engine, I'm wondering if the engine can take advantage of the higher octane fuel. A few places seem to hotly debate (as is tradition) the benefits of higher octane, and I'm thinking of just trying it out and logging my results. A bit of a tangent away from motorcycling but still interesting.

Thread on an external forum that dives into this topic: bobistheoilguy.com
My turbo car theorectically behaves like the mazda given above and is down 10 hp or so on 87 (87 is required but brochure hp numbers need premium to obtain). Ran premium for a few tanks to give long-term fuel trim time to adjust. Butt dyno didn't notice a difference. Fuel mileage wasn't noticeably different. Cost per km was higher with the more expensive fuel.
 

Back
Top Bottom