tesco wins best fuel 99 ron
01-09-2006, 09:07 AM
#1
PassionFord Post Troll
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: cumbria
Posts: 2,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tesco wins best fuel 99 ron
Fuel Test
Nicked this from Pistonheads.
TESCOS 99 WINS FUEL SHOOTOUT
First ever scientific back-to-back power test
PH tries Tescos 99 Octane
Fuel quality affects your car's power -- it's always been a truism but now it's been scientifically proven. And the best stuff you can get in the UK is Tescos 99 Octane.
Thorney Motorsport (TMS) has spent seven months of intensive testing to investigate the effect of fuel quality on an engine's power output. It's scientifically proven what the car tuners already believed: the quality of fuel you use in your car has a direct effect on the level of power your car provides.
TMS boss John Thorne said: "TMS specialises in honest, no bullsh*t tuning of BMW’s and Vauxhalls. Our knowledge, skill and attention to detail have given us a reputation of testing without compromise and product development without compare so when we develop any new product we know it’s the best that can be achieved.
"We spend countless hours seeking new ways to eke out extra power from road and race cars and always knew that the quality of fuel used in the car does make a huge difference in power level and delivery. However, we surprised to find out that no-one had conducted tests on the effects of fuel quality on cars, either tuned or standard.
"Our move to our new £750,000 custom workshop in Milton Keynes, Bucks gave us the opportunity to try the (then) new 99 Octane fuel available from Tesco (there are three local stores, all of which supply the 99 fuel) so we conducted some early testing and were amazed at the results the fuel gave: the cars drove faster, power delivery picked up quicker and they held the power for longer.
"However, anecdotal evidence based on feel is not enough for us to rely on so we set about conducting the most in depth fuel test ever done in the UK."
Thorne documents what happened next.
Equipment
To accurately measure a car’s performance you need an accurate vehicle dynometer. A chassis dynometer (also called a rolling road) is a sophisticated piece of equipment that allows you to drive a car as you would on the open road (the wheels turning on rollers) whilst it is strapped down in a fixed position. The vehicle’s static position allows us to connect up an extensive list of measuring equipment to monitor and measure what the car is doing, including power and torque. Think of it like a patient hooked up to a heart monitor.
Dyno Dynamics is renowned for creating accurate dynos for use by people from car tuners to fuel suppliers. Their accuracy has earned them the nickname the “Ego Buster” for the equipment’s ability to measure data and not manipulate it.
The Dyno Dynamics Low Boy 450 Chassis Dyno has a feature called “Shootout Mode” where the operators ability to manipulate or amend readings is locked down, and all the measuring features are locked off so all the system can do is measure. Such is their faith in the accuracy of their product that all the Dyno Dynamics dynos are linked globally and their measurements monitored to ensure accuracy. Failure to comply with their stringent methods of operation gets you removed from their global list of recognised operators. In short, it’s accurate and has a unique system to ensure that that accuracy is maintained.
To give an accurate reading of what the car is doing on a dyno you need to generate a large airflow to replicate as near as possible the conditions on the open road. To this end, we have installed the highest airflow dyno cell in the UK. Four one metre radial fans generate a combined airflow of over 120,000cfm (cubic feet per minute).
Two fans are situated behind the vehicle to suck out the hot air generated by the vehicle engine and exhaust and two further fans blow air over the vehicle. With all four fans in operation we exchange the entire air contents of the cell every five seconds. Basically, it’s a wind tunnel with a dyno in it.
We mount the dyno on the surface of the floor to allow airflow to run under the vehicle, this allows us to run low race cars but also to allow proper airflow to rear engined cars which need under floor airflow to keep cool. It also allows direct chassis strapping of the vehicle to ensure they are secure and give consistent measurements.
Vehicles
TMS specialises in tuning and enhancing BMWs and Vauxhalls. Our specialist cars are the BMW M3, the Vauxhall VX220 and the Vauxhall VXR range. We are accredited with full Vauxhall Motors warranty approval for servicing and repairs, the only UK tuning firm to have such recognition from any manufacturer.
As a consequence of our area of expertise, it made sense to test cars we knew well so we chose a 2003 BMW E46 M3 CSL, and as a control car a standard Toyota MR2. We are also testing with a 2006 Vauxhall Astra VXR and will release this data when it is finalised.
BMW E46 M3 CSL
The BMW was chosen primarily due to our view that it represents the finest engineered six-cylinder engine ever developed. The S54 engine in CSL form generates 350-360bhp at the flywheel -- an enhancement over the standard M3’s 340bhp. We have modified this further with our ‘Stage 2’ tuning package where we add a Milltek Sport performance exhaust and race catalytic converter and remap the car’s ECU with advanced engine code to give a flywheel power figure of 380bhp.
Toyota MR2
The Toyota was chosen specifically because the car represents an older vehicle but with a recognised advanced design of engine. Run in purely standard form the vehicle should generate 175bhp at the flywheel.
Testing
Thorney Motorsport believes in accurate data collection and vehicle enhancement. Honesty, integrity and transparency are all bywords of our company ethos. We planned the testing (which we imagined could potentially generate politically upsetting results) meticulously so that our data would stand up to scrutiny and expert breakdown.
Each car was initially run for three full fuel tanks on Total 95 Octane fuel, different fuel stations were chosen and the cars filled at different times of the day. After three full tanks were consumed by the vehicle we tested the car on the dyno and recorded the data. Specific data as to weather, barometric reading, humidity, air temperature and engine intake temperature were all recorded.
Next, each car was then run for three full tanks of BP Ultimate 97 Octane fuel and the process repeated. Again all external readings were taken and logged. We then repeated the process again with Shell Optimax and finally Tesco 99 Octane fuel, again we used three full tanks of each fuel between testing and logged all the external and vehicle data on each test.
We repeated this process for about eight months. In total the cars were measured between 18-34 times in temperatures varying from six to 35 degrees ambient. The dyno has an inbuilt compensator to address variations in ambient temperatures but we still ensured that each car was measured in comparable weather conditions -- and that's one of the reasons it took eight months.
Results
The different colour lines represent the different fuels used in the car.
The red line at the bottom shows the car running on 95 octane fuel, the jump in power and torque when changing to either Shell Optimax or BP Ultimate is quite significant. However what we also found was there was another jump when changing to the Tesco 99 Octane fuel (the pink line).
So switching from 95 octane fuel to Tesco 99 Octane gave an extra 8.1bhp (almost five per cent). As well as these peak gains, the charts show a clear improvement throughout the rev range.
For the E46 M3 CSL the difference was even more pronounced. The difference between running 95 Octane fuel and a higher octane fuel from BP or Shell was very noticeable on the open road and the dyno confirmed this, the car did feel sluggish on the lower octane fuel. Interestingly the BP Ultimate and Shell Optimax performed almost identically, a fact quite evident on the chart; the lines are difficult to separate.
But what was clear was the extra gains that Tesco 99 Octane fuel gave over and above the BP and Shell fuels. There was a clear improvement in both torque and power that was both evident on the road and the dyno.
This apparent gain in power is due to the ECU of the car’s ability to advance the ignition timing to take advantage of the extra power the higher octane offers. Looking at the air/fuel ratio on the charts does show that the higher octane fuel allows a more efficient burn creating more power.
The chart shows the car’s ECU when running on 95 Octane fuel enriches the fuel mixture (adds fuel) to compensate for the less efficient burn and to avoid early detonation. This extra fuel robs power as the air/fuel mix is less efficient. By changing this fuel to a higher octane the car is able to advance the ignition (essentially using less fuel at higher rpm’s) to create more power.
nicked from the lancer register
andy
Nicked this from Pistonheads.
TESCOS 99 WINS FUEL SHOOTOUT
First ever scientific back-to-back power test
PH tries Tescos 99 Octane
Fuel quality affects your car's power -- it's always been a truism but now it's been scientifically proven. And the best stuff you can get in the UK is Tescos 99 Octane.
Thorney Motorsport (TMS) has spent seven months of intensive testing to investigate the effect of fuel quality on an engine's power output. It's scientifically proven what the car tuners already believed: the quality of fuel you use in your car has a direct effect on the level of power your car provides.
TMS boss John Thorne said: "TMS specialises in honest, no bullsh*t tuning of BMW’s and Vauxhalls. Our knowledge, skill and attention to detail have given us a reputation of testing without compromise and product development without compare so when we develop any new product we know it’s the best that can be achieved.
"We spend countless hours seeking new ways to eke out extra power from road and race cars and always knew that the quality of fuel used in the car does make a huge difference in power level and delivery. However, we surprised to find out that no-one had conducted tests on the effects of fuel quality on cars, either tuned or standard.
"Our move to our new £750,000 custom workshop in Milton Keynes, Bucks gave us the opportunity to try the (then) new 99 Octane fuel available from Tesco (there are three local stores, all of which supply the 99 fuel) so we conducted some early testing and were amazed at the results the fuel gave: the cars drove faster, power delivery picked up quicker and they held the power for longer.
"However, anecdotal evidence based on feel is not enough for us to rely on so we set about conducting the most in depth fuel test ever done in the UK."
Thorne documents what happened next.
Equipment
To accurately measure a car’s performance you need an accurate vehicle dynometer. A chassis dynometer (also called a rolling road) is a sophisticated piece of equipment that allows you to drive a car as you would on the open road (the wheels turning on rollers) whilst it is strapped down in a fixed position. The vehicle’s static position allows us to connect up an extensive list of measuring equipment to monitor and measure what the car is doing, including power and torque. Think of it like a patient hooked up to a heart monitor.
Dyno Dynamics is renowned for creating accurate dynos for use by people from car tuners to fuel suppliers. Their accuracy has earned them the nickname the “Ego Buster” for the equipment’s ability to measure data and not manipulate it.
The Dyno Dynamics Low Boy 450 Chassis Dyno has a feature called “Shootout Mode” where the operators ability to manipulate or amend readings is locked down, and all the measuring features are locked off so all the system can do is measure. Such is their faith in the accuracy of their product that all the Dyno Dynamics dynos are linked globally and their measurements monitored to ensure accuracy. Failure to comply with their stringent methods of operation gets you removed from their global list of recognised operators. In short, it’s accurate and has a unique system to ensure that that accuracy is maintained.
To give an accurate reading of what the car is doing on a dyno you need to generate a large airflow to replicate as near as possible the conditions on the open road. To this end, we have installed the highest airflow dyno cell in the UK. Four one metre radial fans generate a combined airflow of over 120,000cfm (cubic feet per minute).
Two fans are situated behind the vehicle to suck out the hot air generated by the vehicle engine and exhaust and two further fans blow air over the vehicle. With all four fans in operation we exchange the entire air contents of the cell every five seconds. Basically, it’s a wind tunnel with a dyno in it.
We mount the dyno on the surface of the floor to allow airflow to run under the vehicle, this allows us to run low race cars but also to allow proper airflow to rear engined cars which need under floor airflow to keep cool. It also allows direct chassis strapping of the vehicle to ensure they are secure and give consistent measurements.
Vehicles
TMS specialises in tuning and enhancing BMWs and Vauxhalls. Our specialist cars are the BMW M3, the Vauxhall VX220 and the Vauxhall VXR range. We are accredited with full Vauxhall Motors warranty approval for servicing and repairs, the only UK tuning firm to have such recognition from any manufacturer.
As a consequence of our area of expertise, it made sense to test cars we knew well so we chose a 2003 BMW E46 M3 CSL, and as a control car a standard Toyota MR2. We are also testing with a 2006 Vauxhall Astra VXR and will release this data when it is finalised.
BMW E46 M3 CSL
The BMW was chosen primarily due to our view that it represents the finest engineered six-cylinder engine ever developed. The S54 engine in CSL form generates 350-360bhp at the flywheel -- an enhancement over the standard M3’s 340bhp. We have modified this further with our ‘Stage 2’ tuning package where we add a Milltek Sport performance exhaust and race catalytic converter and remap the car’s ECU with advanced engine code to give a flywheel power figure of 380bhp.
Toyota MR2
The Toyota was chosen specifically because the car represents an older vehicle but with a recognised advanced design of engine. Run in purely standard form the vehicle should generate 175bhp at the flywheel.
Testing
Thorney Motorsport believes in accurate data collection and vehicle enhancement. Honesty, integrity and transparency are all bywords of our company ethos. We planned the testing (which we imagined could potentially generate politically upsetting results) meticulously so that our data would stand up to scrutiny and expert breakdown.
Each car was initially run for three full fuel tanks on Total 95 Octane fuel, different fuel stations were chosen and the cars filled at different times of the day. After three full tanks were consumed by the vehicle we tested the car on the dyno and recorded the data. Specific data as to weather, barometric reading, humidity, air temperature and engine intake temperature were all recorded.
Next, each car was then run for three full tanks of BP Ultimate 97 Octane fuel and the process repeated. Again all external readings were taken and logged. We then repeated the process again with Shell Optimax and finally Tesco 99 Octane fuel, again we used three full tanks of each fuel between testing and logged all the external and vehicle data on each test.
We repeated this process for about eight months. In total the cars were measured between 18-34 times in temperatures varying from six to 35 degrees ambient. The dyno has an inbuilt compensator to address variations in ambient temperatures but we still ensured that each car was measured in comparable weather conditions -- and that's one of the reasons it took eight months.
Results
The different colour lines represent the different fuels used in the car.
The red line at the bottom shows the car running on 95 octane fuel, the jump in power and torque when changing to either Shell Optimax or BP Ultimate is quite significant. However what we also found was there was another jump when changing to the Tesco 99 Octane fuel (the pink line).
So switching from 95 octane fuel to Tesco 99 Octane gave an extra 8.1bhp (almost five per cent). As well as these peak gains, the charts show a clear improvement throughout the rev range.
For the E46 M3 CSL the difference was even more pronounced. The difference between running 95 Octane fuel and a higher octane fuel from BP or Shell was very noticeable on the open road and the dyno confirmed this, the car did feel sluggish on the lower octane fuel. Interestingly the BP Ultimate and Shell Optimax performed almost identically, a fact quite evident on the chart; the lines are difficult to separate.
But what was clear was the extra gains that Tesco 99 Octane fuel gave over and above the BP and Shell fuels. There was a clear improvement in both torque and power that was both evident on the road and the dyno.
This apparent gain in power is due to the ECU of the car’s ability to advance the ignition timing to take advantage of the extra power the higher octane offers. Looking at the air/fuel ratio on the charts does show that the higher octane fuel allows a more efficient burn creating more power.
The chart shows the car’s ECU when running on 95 Octane fuel enriches the fuel mixture (adds fuel) to compensate for the less efficient burn and to avoid early detonation. This extra fuel robs power as the air/fuel mix is less efficient. By changing this fuel to a higher octane the car is able to advance the ignition (essentially using less fuel at higher rpm’s) to create more power.
nicked from the lancer register
andy
01-09-2006, 09:16 AM
#2
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Oop Norf
Posts: 585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with this test, is they did it on cars that are prone to living off the knock sensor.. so at certain parts of the power band you may benefit from the fuel, other parts you wont.. it's fairly erratic..
On a car, like a cossie, which is typically mapped not using the knock sensor, your choice of fuel is critical.. I know Tommy Field did some tests on his engine dyno between this fuel and the other popular super fuels and the Tesco 99 didn't have much more knock resistance than normal 95.. BP Ultimate was the next best but Optimax was the ultimate (irony).
On a car, like a cossie, which is typically mapped not using the knock sensor, your choice of fuel is critical.. I know Tommy Field did some tests on his engine dyno between this fuel and the other popular super fuels and the Tesco 99 didn't have much more knock resistance than normal 95.. BP Ultimate was the next best but Optimax was the ultimate (irony).
01-09-2006, 09:29 AM
#7
I've found that life I needed.. It's HERE!!
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's completely different to the results we got when we ran the test at Field Motorsport on an ENGINE DYNO so no tyre, transmission values etc to get involved with the end output.
I can also remember another mag, I think it was EVO came to very similar conclusions to us, as did Fifth gear?
... make of that what you will, but I certainly won't be running my performance cars on Tesco's 99RON fuel.
I can also remember another mag, I think it was EVO came to very similar conclusions to us, as did Fifth gear?
... make of that what you will, but I certainly won't be running my performance cars on Tesco's 99RON fuel.
Trending Topics
01-09-2006, 09:29 AM
#8
PassionFord Post Troll
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: cumbria
Posts: 2,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is the link if anybody wants to see what the evo lads or saying
http://www.lancerregister.com/showth...hreadid=122994
andy
http://www.lancerregister.com/showth...hreadid=122994
andy
01-09-2006, 09:31 AM
#9
so one company has done a test on 2 cars and the results are cost in stone?
and yet when pf and ff have done test they've always come back with shell then bp with tesco being a very far away 3rd?
with sometimes as much as a 38bhp difference ebtween the best and worst figures?
perhaps tms should reread the words:
Thorney Motorsport (TMS) has spent seven months of intensive testing to investigate the effect of fuel quality on an engine's power output. It's scientifically proven what the car tuners already believed: the quality of fuel you use in your car has a direct effect on the level of power your car provides.
or:
"Our move to our new £750,000 custom workshop in Milton Keynes, Bucks gave us the opportunity to try the (then) new 99 Octane fuel available from Tesco (there are three local stores, all of which supply the 99 fuel) so we conducted some early testing and were amazed at the results the fuel gave: the cars drove faster, power delivery picked up quicker and they held the power for longer.
or:
TMS specialises in tuning and enhancing BMWs and Vauxhalls. Our specialist cars are the BMW M3, the Vauxhall VX220 and the Vauxhall VXR range. We are accredited with full Vauxhall Motors warranty approval for servicing and repairs, the only UK tuning firm to have such recognition from any manufacturer.
As a consequence of our area of expertise, it made sense to test cars we knew well so we chose a 2003 BMW E46 M3 CSL, and as a control car a standard Toyota MR2. We are also testing with a 2006 Vauxhall Astra VXR and will release this data when it is finalised.
or even:
We repeated this process for about eight months. In total the cars were measured between 18-34 times in temperatures varying from six to 35 degrees ambient. The dyno has an inbuilt compensator to address variations in ambient temperatures but we still ensured that each car was measured in comparable weather conditions -- and that's one of the reasons it took eight months.
so perhaps they can explain why they started testing 7 months ago and now have 8 months worth of data, on 2 cars, which varies between 18 and 34 readings?
bring it on
and yet when pf and ff have done test they've always come back with shell then bp with tesco being a very far away 3rd?
with sometimes as much as a 38bhp difference ebtween the best and worst figures?
perhaps tms should reread the words:
Thorney Motorsport (TMS) has spent seven months of intensive testing to investigate the effect of fuel quality on an engine's power output. It's scientifically proven what the car tuners already believed: the quality of fuel you use in your car has a direct effect on the level of power your car provides.
or:
"Our move to our new £750,000 custom workshop in Milton Keynes, Bucks gave us the opportunity to try the (then) new 99 Octane fuel available from Tesco (there are three local stores, all of which supply the 99 fuel) so we conducted some early testing and were amazed at the results the fuel gave: the cars drove faster, power delivery picked up quicker and they held the power for longer.
or:
TMS specialises in tuning and enhancing BMWs and Vauxhalls. Our specialist cars are the BMW M3, the Vauxhall VX220 and the Vauxhall VXR range. We are accredited with full Vauxhall Motors warranty approval for servicing and repairs, the only UK tuning firm to have such recognition from any manufacturer.
As a consequence of our area of expertise, it made sense to test cars we knew well so we chose a 2003 BMW E46 M3 CSL, and as a control car a standard Toyota MR2. We are also testing with a 2006 Vauxhall Astra VXR and will release this data when it is finalised.
or even:
We repeated this process for about eight months. In total the cars were measured between 18-34 times in temperatures varying from six to 35 degrees ambient. The dyno has an inbuilt compensator to address variations in ambient temperatures but we still ensured that each car was measured in comparable weather conditions -- and that's one of the reasons it took eight months.
so perhaps they can explain why they started testing 7 months ago and now have 8 months worth of data, on 2 cars, which varies between 18 and 34 readings?
bring it on
01-09-2006, 09:33 AM
#10
and just in case you missed it:
Addendum
TMS also measured fuel consumption and found that higher quality fuel offers better economy than 95 octane fuel. However, full fuel consumption testing is conducted in such a way that TMS couldn't reproduce the results and so this outcome cannot be considered scientific.
Addendum
TMS also measured fuel consumption and found that higher quality fuel offers better economy than 95 octane fuel. However, full fuel consumption testing is conducted in such a way that TMS couldn't reproduce the results and so this outcome cannot be considered scientific.
01-09-2006, 12:14 PM
#12
Testing the future
To give an accurate reading of what the car is doing on a dyno you need to generate a large airflow to replicate as near as possible the conditions on the open road. To this end, we have installed the highest airflow dyno cell in the UK. Four one metre radial fans generate a combined airflow of over 120,000cfm (cubic feet per minute).
Two fans are situated behind the vehicle to suck out the hot air generated by the vehicle engine and exhaust and two further fans blow air over the vehicle. With all four fans in operation we exchange the entire air contents of the cell every five seconds. Basically, it’s a wind tunnel with a dyno in it.
Two fans are situated behind the vehicle to suck out the hot air generated by the vehicle engine and exhaust and two further fans blow air over the vehicle. With all four fans in operation we exchange the entire air contents of the cell every five seconds. Basically, it’s a wind tunnel with a dyno in it.
even if they have 120,000 cfm, so what? what are is that over? if that's the whole dyno cell area, that isn't necessarily much. if you say that it's over an area of a typical car of about 5 feet high by 6 feet wide, that's only a wind speed of about 45mph. hardly a 'wind tunnel' is it?
01-09-2006, 12:46 PM
#14
Testing the future
Originally Posted by M7 COS
This thread certainly makes for some interesting reading.
)?a more useful finding would be concerning which fuel keeps your engine in a better condition regarding deposits etc.
01-09-2006, 03:43 PM
#18
10K+ Poster!!
erm if its 99ron its 99ron!!!
There is a small thing called false advertising that would stop it being some other figure!
AS for retarding - possibly its on a Japanise Map! So 99ron untill very recently was the best fuel you get for it!
Remember guys there is more to fuel than just the RON rating.
In fact high RON fuel burns more slowly than std unleaded!! Thats it job!
Alex
There is a small thing called false advertising that would stop it being some other figure!
AS for retarding - possibly its on a Japanise Map! So 99ron untill very recently was the best fuel you get for it!
Remember guys there is more to fuel than just the RON rating.
In fact high RON fuel burns more slowly than std unleaded!! Thats it job!
Alex
01-09-2006, 05:52 PM
#20
PassionFord Post Whore!!
i've tried many fuels at least 2x tanks of each
,in my xr2t, using det cans, and playing with ignition.
Tesco's 99 werent that good. and det'd the earliest.
bp super, close 2nd.
Shell optimax 2nd best.
Sainsburys super Come out best.
Thats a real life unbiased test,
bk to bk @ 101mph runs, fully loaded @ 4800 rpm in 5th gear using my brakes. (thats the cars most det prone RPM)
coolant/oil temps the same in all tests, and ACT's within 3oC of each test.
AFR the same on every test.
,in my xr2t, using det cans, and playing with ignition.
Tesco's 99 werent that good. and det'd the earliest.
bp super, close 2nd.
Shell optimax 2nd best.
Sainsburys super Come out best.
Thats a real life unbiased test,
bk to bk @ 101mph runs, fully loaded @ 4800 rpm in 5th gear using my brakes. (thats the cars most det prone RPM)
coolant/oil temps the same in all tests, and ACT's within 3oC of each test.
AFR the same on every test.
01-09-2006, 06:04 PM
#21
PassionFord Post Troll
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Essex!
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
V-power stuff just pissed itself through my tank, got about 60 miles to 20 quid. Not good considering I can get 111 out of 20 quid of bp 95. Morrisons stuff lasted ages too 37 miles out of 6 quid lol.
01-09-2006, 06:20 PM
#23
PassionFord Post Whore!!
i never noticed better fuel ecomermy from different fuels.
But i drive with too much right foot to notice, as i dont do motorway work much at all.
But i drive with too much right foot to notice, as i dont do motorway work much at all.
01-09-2006, 06:27 PM
#24
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Oop Norf
Posts: 585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by J871yhk
Originally Posted by reality
MON is more relevant than RON..
01-09-2006, 06:31 PM
#26
10K+ Poster!!
two methods of measuring this:
RON – Research Octane Number
MON – Motor Octane Number
One point to make here is that in the UK we use RON. In the USA they take an average of RON and MON (ie RON+MON/2). So if you read an American book and they mention a petrol with what seems a very low octane rating (maybe 92) they aren’t using the same numbers we are!
So what’s the difference between MON and RON?
Well the way the work out the ratings of the fuel is very similar. Both use a single cylinder engine with a variable compression ratio. The fuel being tested is compared to two know fuels (n-heptane and iso-octane). These two fuels behave in opposite ways, one knocks easily the other resists knock VERY well. So by comparing a fuel (such as petrol) to these two known fuels a value is worked out.
The RON method uses acceleration as the main condition during testing (i.e. increasing engine speed). The MON method tests at higher engine speeds. Now here’s the crunch, high rpm to this type of engine is only 900 rpm!
Either way, the more octane, the better the fuel resist detonation. The way they do this is by raising the amount of energy that is required before the fuel will do anything (burn/react). So in fact this makes the fuel harder to burn, which is different to the perception that high octane fuels are more powerful.
RON – Research Octane Number
MON – Motor Octane Number
One point to make here is that in the UK we use RON. In the USA they take an average of RON and MON (ie RON+MON/2). So if you read an American book and they mention a petrol with what seems a very low octane rating (maybe 92) they aren’t using the same numbers we are!
So what’s the difference between MON and RON?
Well the way the work out the ratings of the fuel is very similar. Both use a single cylinder engine with a variable compression ratio. The fuel being tested is compared to two know fuels (n-heptane and iso-octane). These two fuels behave in opposite ways, one knocks easily the other resists knock VERY well. So by comparing a fuel (such as petrol) to these two known fuels a value is worked out.
The RON method uses acceleration as the main condition during testing (i.e. increasing engine speed). The MON method tests at higher engine speeds. Now here’s the crunch, high rpm to this type of engine is only 900 rpm!
Either way, the more octane, the better the fuel resist detonation. The way they do this is by raising the amount of energy that is required before the fuel will do anything (burn/react). So in fact this makes the fuel harder to burn, which is different to the perception that high octane fuels are more powerful.
01-09-2006, 06:38 PM
#28
10K+ Poster!!
the low rpm test is only 300 rpm different - its not of great importance. Hence MON and RON figures follow very closely on most types of petrol.
Arguing? Moi?
Nah just chatting
Arguing? Moi?
Nah just chatting
01-09-2006, 06:39 PM
#29
Former Sponsor
Join Date: May 2003
Location: blackpool
Posts: 4,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TMS boss John Thorne said: "TMS specialises in honest, no bullsh*t tuning of BMW’s and Vauxhalls
hi mate, is my nova ready...
nope, sorry bud,....we refuse to work on it, its sooo shit...bye bye now
01-09-2006, 09:15 PM
#31
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Smits cossie also misfires when it comes on boost on tesco 99 ron iirc ..... I always put optimax in mine as thts what my tuner tells me to use and what it gets mapped on
19-09-2006, 06:45 AM
#32
Regular Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post