OK. Why NOT run 87 octane??
06-11-2003, 08:27 AM
#11
Bigger question... why purchase hi-pro motor if you aren't going to give it the fuel it needs ...
to perform? I like to get every ounce of performance out of my car that I can so when you suggest running low octane fuel it just does not compute in my world. I am always thinking about getting over to the closest 76 station to get some 100 octane fuel to mix with my 91.
My .02
My .02
06-11-2003, 09:18 AM
#12
Re: OK. Why NOT run 87 octane??
Running lower octane fuel WILL decrease your engine power output. The ECU will be able to correct the timing by limiting advance but that takes away power. Also, after switching back to high octane fuel it will take a few tanks to get the timing maps straightened back out. Also, lower octane gas usually does not have all the additive package that the higher quality, higher octane does. This can lead to intake valve deposits (BMW problem) and partially clogged injectors. I always run at least 92 octane in my audis. Just skip going to McDonalds once a week...
John
00 A6 4.2
91 V8q-for sale
89 100q-sold
John
00 A6 4.2
91 V8q-for sale
89 100q-sold
06-11-2003, 12:23 PM
#15
AudiWorld Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Shore of MA
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VAG timing pull back and you'll see when/if octane matters for you
I did, and it mattered in my (stock) car!
Actually I never tried it with 87. "Someone" put 89 on top of 93 in my car by mistake, so I logged timing retard (when car was stock). Lots of pullback of timing.
Logged again after that tank was gone and I refilled with 94 -- timing did not pull back.
Not many data points, but pretty convincing to me.
If there were no knock sensor, you'd definitely be asking for problems, especially in the long term, and if you drive hard.
Pussyfooting around town or sitting in stop and go traffic you might run a little hotter, but I doubt you'd see any change.
Now that I'm running more boost and more timing, there is no way I would ever consider using anything other than 93.
My 2 cents...
Actually I never tried it with 87. "Someone" put 89 on top of 93 in my car by mistake, so I logged timing retard (when car was stock). Lots of pullback of timing.
Logged again after that tank was gone and I refilled with 94 -- timing did not pull back.
Not many data points, but pretty convincing to me.
If there were no knock sensor, you'd definitely be asking for problems, especially in the long term, and if you drive hard.
Pussyfooting around town or sitting in stop and go traffic you might run a little hotter, but I doubt you'd see any change.
Now that I'm running more boost and more timing, there is no way I would ever consider using anything other than 93.
My 2 cents...
06-11-2003, 06:27 PM
#18
AudiWorld Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Shore of MA
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've done some isolated testing with stage 4, prev. post was for stock
WRT the question about 93 vs 98 octane... I really have no idea. Sorry.
You might drop a line to Stratmosphere and let us know what you hear.
In the meantime, I'll try to do some logging of timing with stage 4.
You might drop a line to Stratmosphere and let us know what you hear.
In the meantime, I'll try to do some logging of timing with stage 4.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
shredder
12v V6 Discussion
11
05-04-2007 03:44 PM
Spooling_A4
A4 (B6 Platform) Discussion
26
02-12-2003 05:40 PM
