RE: BP expands 102-octane pumps

RE: BP expands 102-octane pumps

Author
Discussion

cossiemetro

1,092 posts

241 months

Tuesday 22nd August 2006
quotequote all
i help make that loverly drop of stuff

FNG

4,179 posts

225 months

Tuesday 22nd August 2006
quotequote all
fwdracer said:
Fuel goes off - especially noticeable when held in Jerry cans. Try the difference. Always get fuel from a busy filling stations.

I was on fumes in Scotland and had to get fuel in the middle of nowhere (payed £107.5 for the privilege tho') at the Spittal of Glenshee. Asked the attendent how often they got fuel there. He said the fill up was ever 2 months. Wasn't at all surprised when my Puma felt lethargic afterwards.


As I understand it, the additives used to boost octane levels are very prone to fading in time. Been reports of Tesco 99RON (especially but not exclusively) not faring very well after a week in the tank. Possibly why Optimax retains its reputation as the high octaine fuel of choice?

Gastro

88 posts

233 months

Wednesday 23rd August 2006
quotequote all
At this price its ridiculous by anyones reckoning.
At 102 RON - the only way to see any real perormance increase is to have your car remapped to that fuel specifically. How is Joe bloggs going to notice the difference in performance of 97 RON, Optimax and this jet fuel ? Evo Mag seemed to suggest in some of the high performance cars (eg latest M5) that RON didn't make two hoots on BHP !!!!!!!!!

Perhaps if they put more thought and effort into reducing super 97 RON - they would see a bit more support ?


Edited by Gastro on Wednesday 23 August 00:55

eliot

11,454 posts

255 months

Wednesday 23rd August 2006
quotequote all
Gastro said:
How is Joe bloggs going to notice the difference in performance of 97 RON, Optimax and this jet fuel ?

Jonny boy racer in his saxo wont notice any difference, although Joe old-bloke in his new saab will be able to take advantage because his ecu can quickly learn that it can dial more advance and boost in because the knock threshhold is higher.

snorky

2,322 posts

252 months

Wednesday 23rd August 2006
quotequote all
So why do you think Optimax stays "fresher" than Tescos then...are it's V.O.Cs better at staying in the tank ??? PS we make both from the same place....

willibetz

694 posts

223 months

Wednesday 23rd August 2006
quotequote all
Fuel degrades by two main mechanisms - evaporation and oxidation.

What you smell when you fill your car are fractions of the fuel that aren't making it into your tank, and some of them have beneficial properties that are lost.

Over a longer period, fuel will tend to oxidise and this can lead to gum formation. Proven technology exists to improve the oxidation stability of fuels.

From the specs, I can't see any obvious reason why the BP fuel would suffer excessive evaporation wrt other high performance fuels, nor an unusual tendency to oxidise.

That said, I don't understand the claim about the bio-component, and I doubt the assertion that they blend consistently to exactly 102 RON / 90 MON.

WilliBetz

Edited by willibetz on Wednesday 23 August 09:42

willibetz

694 posts

223 months

Wednesday 23rd August 2006
quotequote all
Gastro said:
At this price its ridiculous by anyones reckoning.


Is it really ridiculous? A decent fuel and adaptive / switchable map have lots of benefits - you don't have to declare the fuel you use to an insurer (afaik), cost is minimal compared to engine mods, warrantee and engine reliability shouldn't be affected, and you can revert to standard fuel to get to/from the circuit or whatever...


richiefly

92 posts

225 months

Wednesday 23rd August 2006
quotequote all
[quote=Gastro]How is Joe bloggs going to notice the difference in performance of 97 RON, Optimax and this jet fuel ?

I have run my remapped WRX on both U/L 95 and Super U/L 99 - the difference is very noticeable indeed. I now use nothing but the 99 octane stuff (from Tesco) When I switched from the 95 to 99 it took about two/three tanks for the ECU to become fully accustomed to the more explosive stuff. I understand that there are quicker ways to get it reset by disconnecting the battery for a day and then blasting it with the 99 in, but I can't be arsed with all that. There were a couple of incidents after the switch that my wife sneaked a tank of 95 in and I could always tell instantly by the drop in performance. I wonder whether I could do the same with the 102 octane - I think it would run ok and become accustomed, but we're talking about 2 odd tanks of potentially wasted 102 before it kicks in fully, and I'm not quite ready for that at the 10-20 MPG my car returns! I'm also thinking it might run too hot too, but I'm not sure.

emicen

8,600 posts

219 months

Wednesday 23rd August 2006
quotequote all
snorky said:
So why do you think Optimax stays "fresher" than Tescos then...are it's V.O.Cs better at staying in the tank ??? PS we make both from the same place....


If that is the case then the shit may well hit the fan because the Tesco 99 is meant to be 95 plus 4 points worth of octane boosting additives whereas Optimax is meant to be blended to 98 with itro 1 point worth of additives.

tomallum

93 posts

239 months

Wednesday 23rd August 2006
quotequote all
sorry to sound stupid but if it was put in the wrong type of car e.g a chavs 1.4 saxo
wouldn't it after a period of time create valve wear