Fuel Power as octane booster

[segfault]

The short version: In my car, during my first test today, Fuel Power does not appear to function as an effective octane booster.

The long version:
My car is a 1999 VW Jetta GLS VR6, and specifies premium fuel with at least a 91 octane rating. In the past, I have run 87 octane without noticing any adverse effects, but nearly all of the fuel going into this car has been 93 octane. I have been running Lube Control and Fuel Power for about 3,000 miles and had planned to experiment with Fuel Power's reported octane-boosting properties. The recent spike in the price of gasoline led me to question whether I really needed the premium grade if I supplemented the fuel with Fuel Power.

I have the VAG-COM diagnostic software for Volkswagens, and a laptop with a 12 volt adapter. I used the VAG-COM to log the values of measuring blocks 1, 20, and 21 on the engine controller. In short, they allowed me to log a time/RPM stamp along with idle stabilization values for each of the six cylinders. The idle stabilization values should be zero if the timing is not being retarded due to knock detection. I confirmed this by logging data for the 93-octane, FP-treated tank before filling it with a lower grade. During an hour of driving, timing was never retarded on any cylinder. I added approximately 2 oz. of Fuel Power last night in preparation for my fill-up today. I added 8.965 gallons of 87 octane gasoline to my 14.5 gallon tank. By consequence, 5.535 gallons of previously FP-treated 93 octane fuel remained in the tank. The average octane value of the gasoline contained in the tank is now 89.29. During ten minutes of driving after filling up with 87, the logs showed that knock was being detected and compensated for via retarded timing on several occasions. I could not tell any difference in driveability.

Once I returned home, I added about 3 oz. more Fuel Power to the tank, in hopes of getting more of an octane boost effect than I had earlier today. I plan to continue testing how my car reacts to different combinations of fuels, with and without the Fuel Power additive. My initial conclusion is that in this application, a 1 oz./5 gallon treat rate of Fuel Power does not enable me to run regular gasoline without the engine operating in conditions that are less than ideal, due to the timing retard.

I realize that this result is contrary to what others have seen, but thought I would post my initial results to solicit suggestions for improved testing or product usage. Any such suggestions are greatly appreciated! Also, although FP did not work in this application as an octane booster, I'm sure it had other effects that are not yet measurable (cleaning out the fuel system).

Pax,
segfault

[ August 23, 2003, 12:24 AM: Message edited by: segfault ]

 

[springnr]

My car is a 1997 Infinity J30 V6 3.0L and specifies premium fuel with at least a 91 octane rating. I have been running Fuel Power and 93 octane. I noticed my exhaust pipe was black from running rich with this combo. I decided to try 87 octane and FP at 1oz to 5 gallons. The car computer retarded the timing so I did not hear any knocking but the J30 turned into a gutless wonder and my butt dyno registered no power curve.

The last two tanks I have filled up with half 93 and half 87 to equal 90 octane and FP. This combo managed to get the horses back in the corral with maybe a little bit of the quickness gone.

I may have to look for an old laptop as hooking into the OBDII data for feedback sounds interesting. Is it hard to find software? Do some cars output more data than others?

 

[shortyb]

I was just about to post my final report with Fuel Power and lower octane fuel. After 400 miles with 87 and FP, I have noticed not one incident where the timing retarded. I have several lenghty logs from my Harrison/Palm OBD II reader that confirmed no timing retard occured. I don't believe FP is sold as an octane booster per se, but rather has the capability of increasing the fuel's energy in addition to it's cleaning ability. I suppose its like anything else, some cars respond better with a certain product while others may not

I haven't noticed any indication of rich mixture on the 3.5l VQ35DE in the Maxima. One parameter that I can measure with the Harrison is total deviation from stoichmetric. If I'm not mistaken, I've seen it as high as 10:1 during start-up. It settles close to ideal 14.7:1 shortly thereafter but I may log this too just for grins.

 

[segfault]

After adding about 3 oz. more Fuel Power to the current tank, I'm still getting some timing retard. I plan to "flush" the 87 octane out by running two tankfuls of 93 with Fuel Power, then retry the test with mid-grade (89 octane). I also plan to retry the test during the winter, as I have heard that cold weather reduces the need for premium fuel.

Springnr,
Some cars do output more data than others. Mine has a variety of outputs that go above and beyond the OBD-II specifications. Things like the behavior of the power door locks are configurable via the OBD-II connector and VAG-COM software. This may be the case for Nissan/Infiniti as well, but each car manufacturer is free to develop their own proprietary interfaces for protocol functionality above and beyond OBD-II, so long as the standard OBD-II parameters can be read with an OBD-II reader. I don't know if timing is a standard OBD-II parameter or not, or if Nissan has additional functionality via the engine and other onboard computers.

 

[shortyb]

segfault-I have never seen a more "configurable" system than the VAG offerings. VW Sport, which is now 1551 Designs, used to be in my area. I remember going in there from time to time and hearing the new tricks they taught the car to do via the VAG software. Pretty amazing.

As for the Nissn/Infiniti, there doesn't seem to be much other than the normal engine parameters available thru the OBD port. I personally have been able to access 14 different items, most available in real-time or loggable. I wish it were as easy to change things like you can with the VAG-COM and I bet a few tuners like Jim Wolf Technologies do to. As it stands, cracking the codes makes Chinese arithmatic look easy

(no offense meant to anyone out there)

 

[segfault]

shortyb,
Last I heard, Ross Technologies (makers of the VAG-COM tool) was working on a BiM-COM for BMW vehicles. Also, Volvo uses a proprietary system called VADIS, but I don't think there is any aftermarket software available or planned.

 

[springnr]

The Infinity "Consult" diagnostic tool, an electronic device which reads signals being sent to individual engine controls. When plugged into the electrical system, the CONSULT diagnostic tool can simulate actual driving and atmospheric conditions, reducing diagnostic time for various systems including automatic transmission, ABS, air bags, cruise control, power steering and traction control.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sounds like the car is setup to send and receive a lot of data. My guess is not enough interest/market for somebody to reverse engineer the data protcol. My son was telling me that for the Civic you can buy a prom blower for a couple of grand so even local car clubs can afford to play.

I plan to ease down to 89 octane with the FP but need to get setup to read from the OBD II before I go any lower. Thanks for the info.

 

[shortyb]

quote:

---

Originally posted by segfault:
shortyb,
Last I heard, Ross Technologies (makers of the VAG-COM tool) was working on a BiM-COM for BMW vehicles. Also, Volvo uses a proprietary system called VADIS, but I don't think there is any aftermarket software available or planned.

---

I've heard rumor about the BiM-COM tool/software, a close friend is a service manager at a local BMW dealership. All pretty neat stuff.

springnr-A few folks on a Nissan website have reported changing timing advance with the Consult II. Of those that were done, all were on the QR25DE 4-cyl. from the Spec-V or the SR20DE 4-cyl.

I have a Harrison/Palm setup that allows me to read parameters through the OBD port. This is how I logged my base timing reads while dropping the fuel octane. Check here http://www.ghg.net/dharrison/obdscan.html

 

[MolaKule]

quote:

---

Fuel Power does not appear to function as an effective octane booster.

---

Was it ever advertised as being an octane booster??

 

[segfault]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MolaKule:
Was it ever advertised as being an octane booster??

---

No, and I didn't mean to imply that it was. I had, however, heard anecdotal reports that it worked as such, and just wanted to report my experiences.

 

[Terry]

On average expect an apparant 1 average octane point boost in using FP at 1 ounce to 5 gallons. This is according to tests Odis shared with me.

This is from improved combust efficiency provided by potential energy improving adds, not octane boosters. The product does not increase apparant octane above that level. It does however clean and improve combust efficiency and many of my customers can drop at least one grade of fuel in using FP at the above levels.

Seg,

If you can use 89 octane and FP over the 93 you have been using it will more than pay for itself in fueling costs and improved performance and CC cleaning. I wonder if after longer term use and totally cleaned CC that you may be able to drop to 87.

Experimentation is the key in finding the optimum levels to use in your car and fuels in the area you drive in.

In diesel School buses using FP over 6 months or so at normal levels Odis has been able to drop to a 1/2 ounce per 5 gallons treat with improved performance in MPG and smoothness. This running cummins 6 cylinder engines according to Odis.

 

[shortyb]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Terry:
I wonder if after longer term use and totally cleaned CC that you may be able to drop to 87.

---

With only 4K on the Max when I started with FP, I'm sure the CCs were very clean. So to answer that question, in my case anyway, it would be yes. No performance loss, cleaner fuel system, and lower cost to boot. Thanks for the advise

.

 

[Ken2]

Keep in mind that the octane required in some engines to eliminate knock is partly due to deposits in the combustion chamber that cause preignition. If FuelPower, or Schaeffer's SoyUltra, or other effective fuel system cleaner removes these deposits, the engine can run as well on lower octane fuel, much like it did when new.


Ken

[ September 14, 2003, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: Ken2 ]

 

[shortyb]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken2:
Keep in mind that the octane required in some engines to eliminate knock is partly due to deposits in the combustion chamber that cause preignition. If FuelPower, or Schaeffer's SoyUltra, or other effective fuel system cleaner removes these deposits, the engine can run as well on lower octane fuel, much like it did when new.


Ken

---

Exactly what is happening with my Xterra. A BG44K treatment got about 50% of the deposits from 100K of build-up. It would still ping like mad on 87 and ping with 89 if it were hot outside or under moderate load (obviously never ran it for more than a couple of seconds like this to prevent damage). The FP/Neutra brew I've been using lately has pretty much cleaned the rest. It will ping if pushed real hard on 87 but nothing with 89. I'm sure that another 10K or so and I'll have no problems anymore with 87.

 

[gavinl]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Terry:
On average expect an apparant 1 average octane point boost in using FP at 1 ounce to 5 gallons. This is according to tests Odis shared with me.

---

Hi Terry, are we looking at an overall average of 1 point octane boost or 1 point per 5 gallons with 1oz of FP?

Thanks!

 

[Terry]

gavinl, overall.

FP is not primarily designed to be a octane booster. It is just a apparant effect of the chemistry's energy enhancement capabilities.

Lack of Fuel solvency is also an issue that is underestimated and affects long drains in gasoline engined vehicles more than most realize. This is the main reason Amsoil has not done as well in the longer drain regime in the past 10 -15 years. LC and FP take care of that issue if used with Amsoil products.
New gasoline fuels are not very stable in storage and FP at 1 ounce to 5 gallons cost effectively stabilizes the gasoline quite well.

Molakule has some interesting fuel brews shared here for bumping octane.

For most of us regular daily drivers octane is not a issue, using overly additivized and oxidatively unstable gasolines is causing more problems than helping. Less is better in gasoline formulations if using FP.

[ September 15, 2003, 11:23 AM: Message edited by: Terry ]

 

[Robbie Alexander]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Terry:
--
For most of us regular daily drivers octane is not a issue, using overly additivized and oxidatively unstable gasolines is causing more problems than helping. Less is better in gasoline formulations if using FP.

---

soetimes boosting octane can impede rather than help, agreed.

But I assume you are speaking less is better by talking about how much FP additive you add to the gas ???

 

[shortyb]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robbie Alexander:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Terry:
--
For most of us regular daily drivers octane is not a issue, using overly additivized and oxidatively unstable gasolines is causing more problems than helping. Less is better in gasoline formulations if using FP.

---

soetimes boosting octane can impede rather than help, agreed.

But I assume you are speaking less is better by talking about how much FP additive you add to the gas ???

---

I believe he means what goes in gasoline additivewise from the mixing rack. Usually a higher octane fuel will contain more additives, from what I understand. Less=being a lower octane fuel with fewer additives.

 

[Terry]

The current adds used by the gas companies are inadequate to control the lack of solvency issue, but they do contribute to excess deposit formation in the newer motors.

I run the cheapest gas I can procure for my own cars, lowest octane with no retard by ECU and run 1 ounce FP per 5 gallons gas every tank to the cheapo gasoline.

2 ounces of FP per 5 gallons gas is an initial cleaning shock treat but its a waste to use more.

Shortyb is right on.

Hope that clears the air a bit.

[ September 16, 2003, 02:10 PM: Message edited by: Terry ]

 

[gavinl]

Thanks Terry, gonna get me some LC and FP soon!