TESCOS 99 WINS FUEL SHOOTOUT

[Bry]

I get lower knock readings on Tesco 99Ron than i do with Shell V-Power.

(when ragging it)

I get between 24 and 34 knock when using v-power,I'll have to try some tescos special brew and see if I notice a diff

[afennell]

I hope thats never on public roads.

R2"]I get lower knock readings on Tesco 99Ron than i do with Shell V-Power.

(when ragging it)

[TheRoadWarrior]

In a way thats good news about tescos, popped into winnal filling station and did a double take at the price of their 99ron, 93.9p! I had to check 3 times it wasnt the regular UL!!

btw afennell, wanna use a bigger signature??

[afennell]

It has been in the back of my mind for a while, I have a strange facination with size.

is it causing problems for people with dialup?

[BenF]

It has been in the back of my mind for a while, I have a strange facination with size.

is it causing problems for people with dialup?

Adam - please do trim it down. We try to keep sigs small so that they don't dominate a page.

From the Forum Rules, linked off the top of the page -

No Signature Abuse: Signitures are a premium member benefit, and should be no greater than 460x60, and around 25Kb. Any larger and the moderation team will apply their judgement to remove it. Only a single image. Or 3 lines of text.

[BenF]

Yep, been following that. Not 100% convinced by the testing that they've done - eg they didn't relaise Rev3 NAs can't adjust their timing as they don't have knock sensors

You missed the point. The lack of knock sensor on the Toyota engine is irrelevant. It simply represents an older vehicle with an engine that was as good as it got at the time. It was not a test of Toyota engine design verses BMW engine design. Their testing was rational, objective and repeatable.

OK, some additional information - I saw this earlier and have been in touch with the tuner who ran the tests.

He stated that the Rev3 NA was used as it has the ability to adjust its timing to run more advance and so more torque/power. He's wrong, it doesn't. Only Forced induction engines of that era got knock sensors.

So other than a 'control' car (Hey, you could have used a 1.2 Clio) it doesn't prove anything.

[Gordy]

Yes, I agree, I too assumed their idea was to use it as a control.

It gained power with the 'better' fuel, so at least it proved that there is an objective gain, busting a widely held assumption (not neccessarily on IMOC) that 'better' fuel is a waste of time with a modern engine design.

[Mikejc]

I far more scientific test was carried out some months back in one of the Jap mags, (i'll have to dig it out) An engine was run up on an engine dyno, (the most accurate method by the way) and was run back to back with all the available fuels at the time, including... Optimax, Tesco 99, BP Ultimate as well as regular 95ron pump fuel. The engine I believe and if memory serves to have been from a Cossie and had a whacking great big turbo strapped to it. They started with a base ignition setting of 13 degrees and advanced it in increments up and to the point of det occurring. Power outputs ranged between 400+ BHP up to and if memory serves, near 500bhp.

The results in order of best...

1st. Optimax
2nd. BP Ultimate
3rd. Tescos 99
4th. Regular 95ron

It was the first experiment I had seen carried out on fuels that left me feeling 100% confident as to what fuel I should be using! Optimax/V power everytime

Mikejc