Has there ever been such as test....

MoreHPformyXR6 · 06-07-2007, 10:02 PM

Hi Guys

Does anyone know if there has been such as test? The same car on the same dyno on the same day. With no changes other than changing from one brand of 98 ron too another. Too see if there is any measurable increase in HP with one 98 over another.
This is the kind of example im looking for:

Well a matter of fact last Wed I put my BA I6 NA on the dyno three power runs where on X Brand 98 & it pulled 180rwkw. Next three power runs where on Y Brand 98 & it pulled 178.4rwkw. Last three power runs we tried M Brand 98 & it pulled 181.2rwkw.

I know its a big ask, but hey if you dont ask.

Donut King · 06-07-2007, 10:15 PM

I am pretty sure MRT did a test like this, and then had so many threats from various fuel companies they never released it

MoreHPformyXR6 · 06-07-2007, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donut King

I am pretty sure MRT did a test like this, and then had so many threats from various fuel companies they never released it

Why does that not suprise me.

Falchoon · 06-07-2007, 10:31 PM

I'm sure I remember reading the MRT one a while and they reckoned Vortex 98 was the best.

**PepeLePew** · 06-07-2007, 10:52 PM

Have a good hard look around the net for that MRT test if you're interested, its out there but I read it so long ago I dont remember what it said!

MoreHPformyXR6 · 06-07-2007, 11:13 PM

Parden my ignorance but MRT is/stands for? Has anyone got a link to there test b4 I goggle!

Donut King · 06-07-2007, 11:58 PM

Their site is here http://www.mrtrally.com.au/ I think at the time the version which got out wasn't the official final version.

GT-E · 06-07-2007, 11:58 PM

It stands for Middleton Racing Team and is Brett Middleton (the rally driver) workshop that does mainly WRX and Evo's.
Yeah from memory it was Caltex 98 folowed closely by BP Ultimate 98. The differences were tiny.

OLDFORDNUT · 07-07-2007, 08:53 AM

unless you got the BP from the coast of NSW ,quite a few had watered down fuel i read somewhere.

Lightning Strike GT · 07-07-2007, 08:59 AM

The fuel was not waterded down but the ULT98 tanks were filled with ULP91 as per the good old A Current Affair

JBomb3000 · 07-07-2007, 09:19 AM

It would be an irrelevant test anyways as you could do the test with brand X from one servo and it would be different to brand X from a a different servo location.

XR6_BABE · 07-07-2007, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JBomb3000

It would be an irrelevant test anyways as you could do the test with brand X from one servo and it would be different to brand X from a a different servo location.

Yeah true you wouldn't no if the other servo's petrol is watered down or using ethanol some servo's are pretty doggy this day & age.

RG · 07-07-2007, 09:39 AM

Street Machine did a similar test but tuned an LS1 to suit each fuel. United Boost 98 (E10) came out on top by a fair bit (30odd rwhp IIRC).

MoreHPformyXR6 · 07-07-2007, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donut King

Their site is here http://www.mrtrally.com.au/ I think at the time the version which got out wasn't the official final version.

Thanks for the link man. Ive had a good look around cant seem to find the MRT test. Anyone been able to find the MRT test or the SteetMachine test another member mentioned by chance?

:

Donut King · 07-07-2007, 11:01 PM

MRT released this regarding the released version of the test:

UPDATE as at 7th October

Re Illegal use and distribution of incomplete document

(if you have seen or read a fuel test document on the web.....)

To say we are surprised to see this document on the net is an understatement!

The document is wrong and incomplete!
We wish to publicly state that we accept no responsibility for the accuracy of this document.

The disappointing fact is that it was our aim to show the best fuel solution and not crucify the worst.

As this document has been illegally obtained, it now compromises our position to finish the full and final release of the complete (and accurate) document.

I cant go into details of how the copy was obtained, but I can say it was distributed illegally and we have had legal advice on what do do for several reasons.
its not accurate
it portrays MRT as approving the data (which is wrong)
and it compromises several other companies.
it puts us in an awkward position

We ask everyone who has this document to destroy it as it is copyright to MRT Performance and this is in breach (it clearly states this in every page) and it significantly compromises us.

We hope to come up with a solution shortly that meets everyone's needs and will allow us to list the full and very detailed complete report!

I am sure you will understand our difficulty in this situation

Sincerely

Brett Middleton

MRT Performance

XR.1967 · 08-07-2007, 11:15 AM

RPM did a test on shell fuel a few weeks back. But it was about the fuel the V8 supercars run on and not sure of the other. I think it's still on there site.

nugget378 · 08-07-2007, 11:26 AM

A dyno test like this would mirror what ive seen in on track performance.
And that is no difference whatsoever between various brands of 98.
The only pump fuel Ive found that is better than the rest is the optimax ultimate extreme 100..
Pays to remember that some dyno's cant even hold a consistant figure from run to run that close,and a motor can heat soak also affecting figures.
How much time is needed for a test like this,a few hours?
A whole day?
The temp and humidity can change in this time frame,so a dyno in a climate controlled room would be needed even if the dyno could repeat so closely..

More likely than fuel watered down intentionally (although im not saying this dos'nt happen) is that fuel can be watered down literally,Ive seen so many tanks that have a fair bit of water in them,usually old tanks,and a few instances of fuel companies paying for complete engine rebuilds because of it,although they arent about to admit that...
I find its best to get fuel for performance use from a newer or upgraded servo...