Fuel Octane

[RustyLugNut]

As with everything and anything in life or business, YOU must weed out the crap. Sometimes is difficult.

But it is a problem for those not as educated and experienced. All it takes is someone to put out a prodigious amount of posts to gain a mentor standing on the forum. Then, neophytes see the title and assume the "mentor" knows all. The new disciples walk away ready to spend time and money only to fail because the information they thought was true gospel is nothing more than opinion and anecdotal aggrandization at worst and simple luck at best.

The lack of a cannon on which to base discussion on is the greatest downfall of most open forums. This one is no different. The Laws of Thermodynamics can be thrown out if you so desire, to explain your over-unity device. If you are clever, you can mix in some good science with bad to obfuscate your true lack of understanding. And you can simply lie. There is absolutely no penalty to being a liar on this forum. Just be good and clever at it.

This is a generalization of course - there are good people doing good work, putting out good information on this forum. But how is the beginner to know?

The above discussion on octane is just an example. A part of it is correct. A large part of it is somewhat correct. And some of it is just plain wrong. Too many people think reading a Wiki is a substitute for years of education and experience. Thus, they miss the real life correction that goes along with all of that.

[Madsceintist]

But it is a problem for those not as educated and experienced. All it takes is someone to put out a prodigious amount of posts to gain a mentor standing on the forum. Then, neophytes see the title and assume the "mentor" knows all. The new disciples walk away ready to spend time and money only to fail because the information they thought was true gospel is nothing more than opinion and anecdotal aggrandization at worst and simple luck at best.

The lack of a cannon on which to base discussion on is the greatest downfall of most open forums. This one is no different. The Laws of Thermodynamics can be thrown out if you so desire, to explain your over-unity device. If you are clever, you can mix in some good science with bad to obfuscate your true lack of understanding. And you can simply lie. There is absolutely no penalty to being a liar on this forum. Just be good and clever at it.

This is a generalization of course - there are good people doing good work, putting out good information on this forum. But how is the beginner to know?

The above discussion on octane is just an example. A part of it is correct. A large part of it is somewhat correct. And some of it is just plain wrong. Too many people think reading a Wiki is a substitute for years of education and experience. Thus, they miss the real life correction that goes along with all of that.

I must agree with the majority of what you say in this instance, however you seem to want to run down some things which are proven to work! Just because you or someone else didn't get it to work for them, doesn't mean it doesn't work. This is more trial and error then anything........... I have boxes of parts, pipes, wire, fittings and many other things to prove this. However I had only one purpose. True I started off needing to reduce my fuel cost, but could NOT let go of what I knew possible. Don't call out a liar unless you can prove the opposite. I certainly hope you yourself aren't referencing myself!
I do not like wiki myself as anyone can edit it at anytime.
I am a mechanic, a true mechanic. Not a parts changer, or back yard buddy. I'm a perfectionist, sometimes unfortunately for my customers!
As for the laws of thermodynamics, I haven't studied them enough to throw them out! I know when I put voltage to water, I get Hydrogen. HHO as its called. I know when I put it in a container and detonate it, that it gives me more power then gasoline per square inch in the same quantity of equal mass! NOT GAS TO LIQUID, but GAS TO GAS. I know that when its ran through a magnetic field, that I get even more power than not! I know that what I have accomplished is not something you can believe without seeing. I see as many crackpots as the next guy, but I take no **** nor do I give it.

I have no gain or pleasure in misleading anyone. It just ****es people off and you lose credibility. You or anyone can verify anything that I post or say to be true simply by checking with credible sources. I like to help people when it doesn't create a overwhelming burden on myself.
As far as people being able to tell who's who here, I believe there is a rating ability on here to give credit to those who do deserve it.

[RustyLugNut]

You or anyone can verify anything that I post or say to be true simply by checking with credible sources.

I will not doubt your skill as a mechanic. I have no way to gauge that. I can only trust that.

But as far as science and engineering, I have enough credible education, experience and sources to call out much of the Junk.

I spent a semester of undergraduate time on a single cylinder, variable compression ratio dyno engine. One section was simply a demonstration of gasoline octane.

86, 89 and 93 octane was run on the engine and power output measured as well as other running conditions. The fuel was provided by Chevron corp as they had consistent fuel density between grades ( the least variability of ethanol and other additives). At a compression of 7:1, all the octane ratings provided essentially the SAME power. At 10:1 compression, the 86 detonated while the 89 and 93 provided essentially the SAME power. At 11:1 only the 93 could run.

The conclusion was:

Octane rating is simply a measure of knock resistance. With all else being equal, octane rating does not mean 93 burns "better" than 86 or has more inherent "power" or energy. My little Diahatsu 3 cylinder engine, designed for 86 octane, will not gain anymore power or mileage from 93 octane ( with all else being equal).

[Madsceintist]

I will not doubt your skill as a mechanic. I have no way to gauge that. I can only trust that.

But as far as science and engineering, I have enough credible education, experience and sources to call out much of the Junk.

I spent a semester of undergraduate time on a single cylinder, variable compression ratio dyno engine. One section was simply a demonstration of gasoline octane.

86, 89 and 93 octane was run on the engine and power output measured as well as other running conditions. The fuel was provided by Chevron corp as they had consistent fuel density between grades ( the least variability of ethanol and other additives). At a compression of 7:1, all the octane ratings provided essentially the SAME power. At 10:1 compression, the 86 detonated while the 89 and 93 provided essentially the SAME power. At 11:1 only the 93 could run.

The conclusion was:

Octane rating is simply a measure of knock resistance. With all else being equal, octane rating does not mean 93 burns "better" than 86 or has more inherent "power" or energy. My little Diahatsu 3 cylinder engine, designed for 86 octane, will not gain anymore power or mileage from 93 octane ( with all else being equal).

Let me start off with the fact that the real world road course is of course NOT a scientifically stable place. HOWEVER..............When you drive for a living or drive as much as I do you can not only see but feel the difference in various fuels and grades when you use such a wide range of automobiles. My experience isn't in a lab for a semester or so, it has been the last 23 years of real world automotive(hands on) repair and diagnostics! Anything and everything to do with an automobile has came into my path, and if not then it will.

Not to put anyone down or stick an iron in the fire, but I would rather a doctor with 10 years experience and some education and a great track record, operate on me then someone with 20 years of education and little experience and no long record even talk to me!

Don't get me wrong age has NOTHING to do with it, there are dumb***'s of all ages, and it's not hard to weed them out when they're not even able to put 2 and 2 together! When you put your LAB numbers on the road you find that they are thrown out the window when faced with real world variances and obstacles. One motor or car doesn't react to lower octane fuels like another in all cases and not all cars on the road are 3 cylinders.

[RustyLugNut]

Let me start off with the fact that the real world road course is of course NOT a scientifically stable place. HOWEVER..............When you drive for a living or drive as much as I do you can not only see but feel the difference in various fuels and grades when you use such a wide range of automobiles. My experience isn't in a lab for a semester or so, it has been the last 23 years of real world automotive(hands on) repair and diagnostics! Anything and everything to do with an automobile has came into my path, and if not then it will.

Not to put anyone down or stick an iron in the fire, but I would rather a doctor with 10 years experience and some education and a great track record, operate on me then someone with 20 years of education and little experience and no long record even talk to me!

Don't get me wrong age has NOTHING to do with it, there are dumb***'s of all ages, and it's not hard to weed them out when they're not even able to put 2 and 2 together! When you put your LAB numbers on the road you find that they are thrown out the window when faced with real world variances and obstacles. One motor or car doesn't react to lower octane fuels like another in all cases and not all cars on the road are 3 cylinders.

So? Do you agree with me or disagree? It isn't clear.

Do you want to put me down? I will simply ask the reader to look at my history of posts and yours. It is all there to see. I may be a bit boorish, but the lucidity of my arguments and the veracity of my discussions will contrast with yours.

On to the discussion:

And that is why the disclaimer "all things being equal" other than octane. Do you understand that? There is great variation in fuel. I know that. Your road tests bear that out. Just because I do not work on cars for a living, does not make me ignorant of them.

Tell you what. Why don't you go down to the nearest reputable dyno tuning shop and tell them what you just told me. "You guys are just Lab rats and your work has no meaning in the real world"! They will tell you what I know too. That Lab work eliminates as many variables to get to the BASIS of operations. Your field work may be true, that you have seen variations in fuel performance. But that just supports my viewpoint. Real world driving comes with so many variables. Do you want me to list them? Let us just go with one. Why don't you measure a gallon of fuel then measure the weight for different grades and brands. There can be significant differences. Gasoline is a blend of compounds. With so many variables, can you truly stand behind your statement? I can stand behind my lab work.

Here is a quote lifted directly from a wiki on gasoline - itself lifted almost verbatim from classical texts on fuel and industrial chemistry.

"A common misconception is that power output or fuel efficiency can be improved by burning fuel of higher octane than that specified by the engine manufacturer. The power output of an engine depends in part on the energy density of the fuel being burnt. Fuels of different octane ratings may have similar densities, but because switching to a higher octane fuel does not add more hydrocarbon content or oxygen, the engine cannot develop more power".

I can pull down literally thousands of citations supporting my statement. The industry agrees.

[Madsceintist]

I'm not looking nor was I to put anyone down. And I have associates that have a dyno, thank you! Lab rats NO, racing enthusiasts such as myself,YES.

http://higginsfordperformance.com/im...itled-1_03.gif

So where to from here ????

Do I think your ignorant, NO. What I do think is that you want the facts to be one way and only one way, and you diminish the possibility of something working that you don't understand anymore than some of us! Will I argue this, ABSOLUTELY. Facts are only valid until they are proven wrong or not completely correct!
Yes I know that fuels do not equal from one to the next, as in weight or composition. You have additives and not to mention the refinery's have a different composition for winter and summer as to reduce evaporation.
As far as the "Industry", this is the primary problem in the first place...................!!
I suppose if you have some desire to have a public view taken as to whom anyone should "follow" then take your pole! I will still be here to learn or teach what ever and who ever needs the help ........
YOU SEE if I don't know "I" can admit that with no problem. And wont take it harshly that I can learn something!

[RustyLugNut]

I'm not looking nor was I to put anyone down. And I have associates that have a dyno, thank you! Lab rats NO, racing enthusiasts such as myself,YES.

http://higginsfordperformance.com/im...itled-1_03.gif

So where to from here ????

Do I think your ignorant, NO. What I do think is that you want the facts to be one way and only one way, and you diminish the possibility of something working that you don't understand anymore than some of us! Will I argue this, ABSOLUTELY. Facts are only valid until they are proven wrong or not completely correct!
Yes I know that fuels do not equal from one to the next, as in weight or composition. You have additives and not to mention the refinery's have a different composition for winter and summer as to reduce evaporation.
As far as the "Industry", this is the primary problem in the first place...................!!
I suppose if you have some desire to have a public view taken as to whom anyone should "follow" then take your pole! I will still be here to learn or teach what ever and who ever needs the help ........
YOU SEE if I don't know "I" can admit that with no problem. And wont take it harshly that I can learn something!

Also to make it clear......... I disagree with you that the Ruskin or other methods of magnetization do not have an effect in a positive way. They DO.
But there are gains and loses depending on the whole systems ability to work together correctly.

It doesn't matter what you believe. The physical world has it's way of making a believer out of you.

Let me ask you this, can you and your "associates" build a car that seats 4, weighs in at 800 Kg, accelerates to 60 mph in under 10 seconds, and pulls down over 100 mpg using liquid hydrocarbon fuels while passing Tier 2 Bin 5 emission requirements?

[Madsceintist]

It doesn't matter what you believe. The physical world has it's way of making a believer out of you.

Let me ask you this, can you and your "associates" build a car that seats 4, weighs in at 800 Kg, accelerates to 60 mph in under 10 seconds, and pulls down over 100 mpg using liquid hydrocarbon fuels while passing Tier 2 Bin 5 emission requirements?

Yes I believe you, master.

SERIOUSLY .........?

I believe little I hear after I have seen anything, until it has a solid foundation to prove the issue. Or I will test it myself to see the validity of such.

Your request was my Caviler, and the Toyota has zero emissions. SO your point?



AND back to the original issue.......... This thread is for the discussion of octane not our personal attack show. Is there something that I can help you with? OR NOT?

[RustyLugNut]

Yes I believe you, master.

SERIOUSLY .........?

I believe little I hear after I have seen anything, until it has a solid foundation to prove the issue. Or I will test it myself to see the validity of such.

Your request was my Caviler, and the Toyota has zero emissions. SO your point?



AND back to the original issue.......... This thread is for the discussion of octane not our personal attack show. Is there something that I can help you with? OR NOT?

You haven't been able to discuss octane. Your are overly sensitive to any disagreements. You declare yourself more knowledgeable than the very standards (of octane testing and theory). Your posts in other places on this forum show your skill and knowledge in auto repair. I have no beef with that. But your discussions in chemistry, physics and engineering are found wanting.

I leave it up to the reader to decide who to believe. 100 years of proven industrial chemistry and mechanical engineering , or . . . you.

I will say it again so the reader can be clear about the discussion at hand:

Octane is not a measure of gasoline's power and combustion efficiency. It is a measure of the fuel's resistance to pre-ignition. Again, I quote. "A common misconception is that power output or fuel efficiency can be improved by burning fuel of higher octane than that specified by the engine manufacturer. The power output of an engine depends in part on the energy density of the fuel being burnt. Fuels of different octane ratings may have similar densities, but because switching to a higher octane fuel does not add more hydrocarbon content or oxygen, the engine cannot develop more power".

Please answer that point since that is a standard that auto makers design to and fuel manufacturers produce for.

By the way, did you test your Cavalier and Toyota with gas emission testers as found in your local auto shop or at an EPA facility with the ability to run the FTP 75 tests?

My Diahatsu 3 cylinder runs so clean it is below the threshold of detection of many Emission test shops here in the AQMD district ( the strictest in the nation). But, in a lab facility, it is seen to put out trace amounts of pollutants (CO, HC, NOx, etc).

[Madsceintist]

So you wish to say that the octane rating has absolutely nothing to with power or performance, CORRECT ???

So, when you have 86 octane in a car and you drive on a regular basis. With a load and in our normal driving habits. When the cars engine begins to "KNOCK" from low octane under load and the computer adjusts the timing to compensate, which adjusts fuel usage to do so, it doesn't consume more fuel then if it were not doing so ????
Higher octane fuels will cause less "KNOCK" in the engine and provides less adjustment via the computer, so there for uses less fuel. AND this is not just my theory, but yet proven by the automotive industry.
When you have engine knock at any load you are doing many things that are not in favor of fuel consumption; higher cylinder temperatures, more negative emissions, and damaging wear on the engine! Even short term continuous knock is damaging to the exhaust system as well. Clogging of the egr valve, catalytic convertor, and a dirty intake to start!

When you see the puff of smoke come out the tailpipe when you accelerate or just give it gas in park, is excess gas, largely unburnt. On any quality scanner or Modis you will see that the injector pulse is wider than usual when the engine is under load, the greater the load the wider the pulse as well as timing adjustments, because it is compensating for the "KNOCK", there for is using more fuel!

YOU can argue what you want to and I will argue what I know and have experience with. To each their own, you teach your flock and I will share my knowledge with whom ever wishes to know.

By the way the Toyota will not register any thing on the gas analyzer! I do have a friend that runs an emission station for the state. The Cavalier was returned to normal and exchanged hands.