Fuel Power for Honda

[John in the ATL]

quote:

---

Originally posted by peterr:
John

Just curious. Details on the FP effectiveness with regular 87 octane sipping vehicles?

Anyone else have any similar experience? I just started using FP about 3 months ago. My car is a +91 AKI only motor due to the 10.9:1 compression ratio, so I am not putting 91-94 octane gas in it just because it is "Super".

---

Peter,

I use FP with 89 octane in my 2000 Maxima 3.0L(requires 91) with no loss in performance but no fuel economy gain either. I believe it is a 10.5:1 compression ratio. The 87 octane is just too low for 10.5+ engines that are finnicky about octane (just my opinion) and the timing is retarded by the ECU. I would find the cheapest available 89 to 91 octane for the Porsche and try that; I don't believe that 93-94 octane is necessary.

 

[John in the ATL]

quote:

---

Originally posted by John in the ATL:

quote:

---

Originally posted by peterr:
John

Just curious. Details on the FP effectiveness with regular 87 octane sipping vehicles?

Anyone else have any similar experience? I just started using FP about 3 months ago. My car is a +91 AKI only motor due to the 10.9:1 compression ratio, so I am not putting 91-94 octane gas in it just because it is "Super".

---

Peter,

I use FP with 89 octane in my 2000 Maxima 3.0L(requires 91) with no loss in performance but no fuel economy gain either. I believe it is a 10.5:1 compression ratio. The 87 octane is just too low for 10.5+ engines that are finnicky about octane (just my opinion) and the timing is retarded by the ECU. I would find the cheapest available 89-91 octane for the Porsche and try that; I don't believe that 93-94 octane is necessary.

---

 

[John in the ATL]

[/qb]

quote:

---

Just curious. Details on the FP effectiveness with regular 87 octane sipping vehicles? Anyone else have any similar experience? I just started using FP about 3 months ago. My car is a +91 AKI only motor due to the 10.9:1 compression ratio, so I am not putting 91-94 octane gas in it just because it is "Super".[/qb]

---

Peter,

I use FP with 89 octane in my 2000 Maxima 3.0L(requires 91) with no loss in performance but no fuel economy gain either. I believe it is a 10.5:1 compression ratio. The 87 octane is just too low for 10.5+ engines that are finnicky about octane (just my opinion) and the timing is retarded by the ECU. I would find the cheapest available 89-91 octane for the Porsche and try that; I don't believe that 93-94 octane is necessary.

 

[JHZR2]

wow, seems most people using FP in Honda engines see nice improvements... My GF's integra runs like brand new with 161k on it. I tried lucas one time after it made my 98 chevy (45k) and 91 BMW (90k) run seemingly stronger and get a few extra MPG. Lucas did nothing as far as engine power feel or MPG went (we log each and every tank). I got hooked on FP, not because of the driving feel or MPG in the other vehicles, but for the cleanliness and protection.

The acura showed no MPG improvement or power/seat of the pants improvement.

Funny how it is hit or miss...

JMH

 

[Terry]

Peter, the ECU In that older Porche is "dumb" enough to respond, I think positively to the lower octane testing with the FP.

I would reset the computer by disconnecting the battery then start the test. This will put the ECU in a relearning mode using the FP and the mid grade fuels.

Your ear, fuel economy, and performance will be the keys.

Its been a long time since I worked on the 924 Porsche so take this advice for what it is , free ! With that CR you are going to need a premium fuel, I guesstimate that with FP the ECU will see close to 92 octane and may function quite well with the current FP assisted fuels. Let us know how it works.

I have a 88 Olds Quad 4 that just wouldn't run at optimum performance using 87 and FP so we kept nudging it up in octane levels until I am back to 91 + and with the normal dose of FP. MPG and performance are exceptional on the 187,000 mile beast.

Experimentation is the only way to know.

I want to disclaim a bit here, I am not a fuels expert by any means,the kicker for FP has been cost effective , positive MPG gains ( that vary ), and positive performance changes in engines we are oil analyzing.

The main benefit of FP for the average car owner is ability to use cheap gas and keep things clean.

Solvency is the issue.. A lack of it.

 

[farang]

Terry, does FP make gasoline harder to burn?

I did a simple test. Burn 3 drops gasoline and 3 drops of FP using a lighter. The gasoline burn but FP didn't.

So is that mean FP increasing octan # (harder to burn)?

 

[JMG]

Ordered some today. Cant wait to get it.

 

[Terry]

Farang, I don't think so. The amount of FP you tested with was much too high in volume to be a valid test.

1 ounce of FP to 5 gallons is so small a dose it is amazing it could have any positive effect !

The chemist who bench tested the product says it raises the apparant octane rating of the fuel it is added to. Not by the normal octane boosting adds as I understand it.


Unscientific but valid for my pocketbook:

On the Olds quad 4 that I am testing FP in using 91+ octane fuels we have driven MPG up to a record 29 MPG vs the 24 we achieved without FP and on 87 octane. The old Quad likes 91 + octane but I am sure the FP is a major contributor to the increase.

I am a oil analysis guy but judging my own cars performance increases using the FP60 product I am very happy.

 

[416Rigby]

Maybe it slows the combustion, which is what higher octane does in gasoline.

 

[Jon]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 416Rigby:
Maybe it slows the combustion, which is what higher octane does in gasoline.

---

Actually, higher octane doesn't burn more slowly. It just ignites less easily. Octane is "resistance for preignition". 93 octane burns just as fast as 87 octane.

 

[kreigle]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kreigle:
My wife is trading in her 2001 Civic for a 2005 Accord. I think I will try to keep FP in this one also and see how it works out.

---

We picked the Accord up this past weekend. Surprising how much more power the Accord put sto the wheels that the Civic. The Civic would not do anything at engine speeds under 2k rpms. The Accord, like my Prelude, pulls strong all the way down to 1k.

Should I wait a while before starting FP use or should I go ahead and put it in with the first fill-up? We got the car with a full tank and will probably have ~500mi on it by then.

 

[tadaima]

Comparing an Accord engine to a Civic is almost apples and oranges to me.

 

[Razl]

I would agree that it is worth trying. A ton of members on this forum can vouch for it and have had positive results.

I use it on my 2004 Honda CR-V, but have not been one the lucky ones to see any improvement in MPG. After I finish my 1st gallon, I may only treat every other tank or so.