Jump to content

Fuel? What's best for an rs?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, ravnj023 said:

Your comments are toxic and misleading, just straight out lies. I'm really not sure what you want to gain from this? What's your intention? 

Lies? That’s an odd claim. 
 

I just found it interesting that at least one major workshop that deals in some comparable engines to some RS models (ie smaller capacity turbos) were finding some detrimental effects from using 98 where 95 is specified.

Left me wondering what is happening. I know octane boosters can foul plugs, but given 98 is the same energy content as 95 and 91 I’m not sure how it could be burning hotter and eroding plugs. I’ll ask again if it’s fouling or erosion they’re finding.

Modern piston engines all have far more in common than differences, it’s all interesting if have thought. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 132
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Just a note on this. I’m very skeptical there is much, if any, difference between fuels in Australia.   As you will have seen or read in the news, Australia has a very high dependence on imported refi

Just to clarify, 95 is “OK” — what Renault is saying is that 95 is the minimum octane rating fuel you should use in your RS, not that is “the recommended” or “the best”, just that it is the minimum.

Not sure what's upset you so much. In general, this thread is discussing fuels, with a reference to the Renault 'recommended' 95. There is a lot of BS out there that 98 is 'better' than 95, or 'i

Posted Images

Lies? That’s an odd claim. 
 
I just found it interesting that at least one major workshop that deals in some comparable engines to some RS models (ie smaller capacity turbos) were finding some detrimental effects from using 98 where 95 is specified.
Left me wondering what is happening. I know octane boosters can foul plugs, but given 98 is the same energy content as 95 and 91 I’m not sure how it could be burning hotter and eroding plugs. I’ll ask again if it’s fouling or erosion they’re finding.
Modern piston engines all have far more in common than differences, it’s all interesting if have thought. 


I thought you found it difficult to trust workshops, in particular dealership run facilities?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyhoo. The Alfa/Maserati/Ferrari dealer workshop say the 98 is cooler burning because of the additives. Cooler burning combined with the additives means they find a lot of fouled plug problems, especially on cars that do short trips and city use. For those of you swinging your own spanners and using 98 anyone seen carbon build up on plugs?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, trixie said:

 


I thought you found it difficult to trust workshops, in particular dealership run facilities?

 

I do as a rule, but FCA gave me free servicing for three years and it got a transmission software update. They did claim to change the brake fluid and all the bleed nipples look very very untouched! 
 

The 98 fuel fouling plugs is just an interesting anecdote I’ll research.

Edited by Haakon
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just done 3400km using 98 and got an average of 8.5L/100km

I'm now switching to 95 for the same distance, to see if i see a difference

I have a very regular driving route with almost no traffic, so the comparison should be apples vs apples

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, oscargamer said:

I've just done 3400km using 98 and got an average of 8.5L/100km

I'm now switching to 95 for the same distance, to see if i see a difference

I have a very regular driving route with almost no traffic, so the comparison should be apples vs apples

 

I should probably do the same but my driving is too irregular, so I resort to chemistry, physics and engineering - which I am passingly decent at all of but happy to be corrected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Anyhoo. The Alfa/Maserati/Ferrari dealer workshop say the 98 is cooler burning because of the additives. Cooler burning combined with the additives means they find a lot of fouled plug problems, especially on cars that do short trips and city use"

Buy a performance vehicle then you should drive it like a performance vehicle..... i don't have any issues  with fouled plugs and i live 3 minutes from work....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Haakon - My comments are based on the label on the fuel tank that says 95 but 'people' tell me that 98 is 'better'.

Personally I do not believe that 98 should produce any different results to 95. I hope that to be the case, as the auto engineers that designed the RS should know a whole lot better than me about what octane rating their designed engine works well on.

I'm an ex-civil engineer, so I have a lot of time for us engineering types.

Be back in 3 months with my 95 results.

Edited by oscargamer
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, oscargamer said:

Haakon - My comments are based on the label on the fuel tank that says 95 but 'people' tell me that 98 is 'better'.

Personally I do not believe that 98 should produce any different results to 95. I hope that to be the case, as the auto engineers that designed the RS should know a whole lot better than me about what octane rating their designed engine works well on.

I'm an ex-civil engineer, so I have a lot of time for us engineering types.

Be back in 3 months with my 95 results.

Nice one :) I look forward to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

cough! Data to support claims/anecdotes, please

Well, FWIW, I have fuel logbooks covering my old BMW M135i, our X1 25i, the Trophy-R and my Pug 308 GTi.
 
Of these, the M135i had four 95 fills, the X1 8, the T-R 2 and none so far for the Pug — all when 98 was not available (X1 does most country travel, obviously). In all instances, the fill was 35+L. Every use of 98 delivers (ooops) LOWER fuel consumption, in some cases by 5% and a worst case of 7% in the M135i. But a bigger effect is the lethargic nature of the cars, which I’ve felt every time.
 
That’s the data. Apparently, data beats opinion.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is turning into a joke, I hope ppl from other car scenes don't ever read this thread, it's embarrassment for the Renault scene. Most car scenes argue about tuners or aftermarket brands.  Here we are in ozRENAULTSPORT talking about 95 and 98 are the same🤯🤯🤯🤪🤪🤣

Edited by ravnj023
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ravnj023 said:

This is turning into a joke, I hope ppl from other car scenes don't ever read this thread, it's embarrassment for the Renault scene. Most car scenes argue about tuners or aftermarket brands.  Here we are in ozRENAULTSPORT talking about 95 and 98 are the same🤯🤯🤯🤪🤪🤣

I’d argue the lack of technical literacy amongst some of the more aggressive posters here is a bit embarrassing... But hey, whatever floats your boat - if you’re ok to accept the marketing spiel for the fuels on face value that of course is your prerogative.   
 

But just don’t think RS engines are particularly unique - the concepts being discussed here will apply to all modern internal combustion engines.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ravnj023 said:

This is turning into a joke, I hope ppl from other car scenes don't ever read this thread, it's embarrassment for the Renault scene. Most car scenes argue about tuners or aftermarket brands.  Here we are in ozRENAULTSPORT talking about 95 and 98 are the same🤯🤯🤯🤪🤪🤣

Not sure what's upset you so much.

In general, this thread is discussing fuels, with a reference to the Renault 'recommended' 95. There is a lot of BS out there that 98 is 'better' than 95, or 'i get better mpg or acceleration when using 98 over 95'.

Surely by discussing (for example) my 3000km run on 98 vs my next 3000km run on 95, has some validity? I am actually trying to show that the recommended 95 is recommended for a reason. ie people shouldn't waste their money on 98 in the RS280 engine.

If this topic doesn't interest you ravnj023, then don't read it.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, 95 is “OK” — what Renault is saying is that 95 is the minimum octane rating fuel you should use in your RS, not that is “the recommended” or “the best”, just that it is the minimum.

Whether you use “the minimum” recommended octane rating in your car is entirely a matter for you and the way you use your car.

Equally, you can choose to use a higher octane rating fuel (98 in Australia) in your RS because the car is tuned to yield the higher power and lower pollution such fuel enables — hence, this use might be described as “more efficient”.

Talk to any reputable tuner, and they will confirm more power is produced by an RS on 98 octane fuel; if you are not interested in pure power, remember this can equally be reflected through great efficiency as better fuel economy.

A separate issue, as this thread discussed at the beginning, is the quality of Australian fuels, and whether there is much, if any, difference between brands. The ‘detuning’ of certain Euro cars’ outputs due to the stated reason of Australia’s poor fuel quality might also give RS owners cause to consider whether 95 might actually be adequate to meet “the minimum” fuel octane for Renault’s performance-oriented RS engines.

For all the above reasons, I use 98 as an exercise of both educated judgement and free choice!

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ttimbo said:

Just to clarify, 95 is “OK” — what Renault is saying is that 95 is the minimum octane rating fuel you should use in your RS, not that is “the recommended” or “the best”, just that it is the minimum.

Whether you use “the minimum” recommended octane rating in your car is entirely a matter for you and the way you use your car.

Equally, you can choose to use a higher octane rating fuel (98 in Australia) in your RS because the car is tuned to yield the higher power and lower pollution such fuel enables — hence, this use might be described as “more efficient”.

Talk to any reputable tuner, and they will confirm more power is produced by an RS on 98 octane fuel; if you are not interested in pure power, remember this can equally be reflected through great efficiency as better fuel economy.

A separate issue, as this thread discussed at the beginning, is the quality of Australian fuels, and whether there is much, if any, difference between brands. The ‘detuning’ of certain Euro cars’ outputs due to the stated reason of Australia’s poor fuel quality might also give RS owners cause to consider whether 95 might actually be adequate to meet “the minimum” fuel octane for Renault’s performance-oriented RS engines.

For all the above reasons, I use 98 as an exercise of both educated judgement and free choice!

I’d be interested in hearing what the tuners reckon is behind the cited improvement on 98. Is it the map being written to advance and/or increase boost? 
 

Given the energy content is the same (because physics...) the advantages is in being able to extract more. Now there is obliviously no change in compression ratio, so it must be either boost (Clio 2/3 owners look away) or ignition timing.

Anecdotes just don’t do it for me. I’d love to see some evidence of software that will explicitly be able to take advantage of the higher octane.

Failing that, I just don’t want to buy into sales pitches... Fill up with 98 on your way to Maccas and home to watch your favourite home renovation show. Consume baby consume.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I stated much earlier in this thread what was found with my car during the tuning process but here is a summary to save you searching back

when running lower octane fuel my logs show a higher timing correction being applied by the ecu. This is done to prevent pinging. And when the correction gets to a certain point the ecu dumps extra fuel into the cylinders to prevent damage. This fuel is not burnt as such. So the fuel economy drops dramatically at this point. 
 

95ron requires more timing correction than does 98ron. So the higher octane is preventing pinging. Pinging is bad and can kill a motor. 

There was one exception found. 

BP Ultimate performed no better than 95ron fuels from various brands

However Caltex and Mobil 98ron fuel definitely showed better results in the log runs

I have the logs. The difference was measured. 98ron reduces ping. 98ron didn’t require excess fuel dumping. And I have better average fuel economy now I know not to use BP Ultimate 

And as a happy coincidence. My local Mobil is on average 30-40c per liter cheaper than all the other brands near me

I actually pay less for Mobil 98 than I would buy 91ron from Caltex or BP ( there isnt a Shell servo anywhere near me)

 

Edited by Deet
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Deet said:

I stated much earlier in this thread what was found with my car during the tuning process but here is a summary to save you searching back

when running lower octane fuel my logs show a higher timing correction being applied by the ecu. This is done to prevent pinging. And when the correction gets to a certain point the ecu dumps extra fuel into the cylinders to prevent damage. This fuel is not burnt as such. So the fuel economy drops dramatically at this point. 
 

95ron requires more timing correction than does 98ron. So the higher octane is preventing pinging. Pinging is bad and can kill a motor. 

There was one exception found. 

BP Ultimate performed no better than 95ron fuels from various brands

However Caltex and Mobil 98ron fuel definitely showed better results in the log runs

I have the logs. The difference was measured. 98ron reduces ping. 98ron didn’t require excess fuel dumping. And I have better average fuel economy now I know not to use BP Ultimate 

And as a happy coincidence. My local Mobil is on average 30-40c per liter cheaper than all the other brands near me

I actually pay less for Mobil 98 than I would buy 91ron from Caltex or BP ( there isnt a Shell servo anywhere near me)

 

What’s your model? Turbo? Standard? 
 

it’s an interesting idea though that our 95 is shit enough that some engines might need “98” to get back to performance engineered for European 95...

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Haakon said:

What’s your model? Turbo? Standard? 
 

it’s an interesting idea though that our 95 is shit enough that some engines might need “98” to get back to performance engineered for European 95...

Not telling you

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, oscargamer said:

Not sure what's upset you so much.

In general, this thread is discussing fuels, with a reference to the Renault 'recommended' 95. There is a lot of BS out there that 98 is 'better' than 95, or 'i get better mpg or acceleration when using 98 over 95'.

Surely by discussing (for example) my 3000km run on 98 vs my next 3000km run on 95, has some validity? I am actually trying to show that the recommended 95 is recommended for a reason. ie people shouldn't waste their money on 98 in the RS280 engine.

If this topic doesn't interest you ravnj023, then don't read it.

You guys are just plain delusional, and lack of experience, stop reading books, go to tuners or learn to tune yourself and you will find out how utterly ridiculous you guys sound. I'm not upset, it's quiet entertaining to be exact. My mates from other car scenes makes fun of the renault scene, I don't blame them even though I love Renaults. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Deet said:

Not telling you

Oh. Odd. Mature...

If it’s not standard and has a map that is deliberately designed to take advantage of any increased knock resistance, than that’s not really relevant to road cars mapped for 95. 
 

My original point is that at least one testing round found many 98 fuels were not 98, but as I think you or someone said even the 98 fans acknowledge brands vary in efficacy. So I understand that some will indeed be greater than 95 at least. Now if you have a non standard map designed around that than obviously you’ll see a difference.

Im saying that that is not always the case with road cars with factory maps around 95. And that there can be other detrimental effects (cold starts in NA Clios, plug fouling in Alfas). 
 

So you’re being weird and unnecessarily aggressive. We can both be right ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ravnj023 said:

You guys are just plain delusional, and lack of experience, stop reading books, go to tuners or learn to tune yourself and you will find out how utterly ridiculous you guys sound. I'm not upset, it's quiet entertaining to be exact. My mates from other car scenes makes fun of the renault scene, I don't blame them even though I love Renaults. 

Haakon doesnt own an RS

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ravnj023 said:

You guys are just plain delusional, and lack of experience, stop reading books, go to tuners or learn to tune yourself and you will find out how utterly ridiculous you guys sound. I'm not upset, it's quiet entertaining to be exact. My mates from other car scenes makes fun of the renault scene, I don't blame them even though I love Renaults. 

And you’re still completely missing the point. And I can’t make it any clearer... 

Although if you hang out with “other car scenes” perhaps you should at least understand Renaults are not all that unique...? These are all basic ICE tuning 101 principles. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Haakon said:

And you’re still completely missing the point. And I can’t make it any clearer... 

Although if you hang out with “other car scenes” perhaps you should at least understand Renaults are not all that unique...? These are all basic ICE tuning 101 principles. 

You see Haakon, this is why I like you, the Renault scene is pretty unique trust me, unique because it has ppl like you, that's why my mates are making fun of me, which is pretty funny😂.  What I do appreciate is that Renault has more mature members(liars or not😆

I don't even bother go into why all cars behave differently to "basic ICE tuning 101 principles"(FFS did you really have to type that much😆)  because all cars are unique, even if they have the same engine. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ravnj023 said:

You see Haakon, this is why I like you, the Renault scene is pretty unique trust me, unique because it has ppl like you, that's why my mates are making fun of me, which is pretty funny😂.  What I do appreciate is that Renault has more mature members(liars or not😆

I don't even bother go into why all cars behave differently to "basic ICE tuning 101 principles"(FFS did you really have to type that much😆)  because all cars are unique, even if they have the same engine. 

 

Lol. Ok, I think you’re probably deliberately missing the point. Maybe it makes you feel better... tevs.

Enjoy your tribalism and your toys.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ravnj023 said:

What I do appreciate is that Renault has more mature members(liars or not😆

 

 

Gee, I wish I was young and delusional like you again, but only so I could drink like I used to and be able to recover and keep drinking the next day, especially during the Xmas holiday period. Being older can be a bitch sometimes.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, 63x1092 said:

Gee, I wish I was young and delusional like you again, but only so I could drink like I used to and be able to recover and keep drinking the next day, especially during the Xmas holiday period. Being older can be a bitch sometimes.

Ok boomer. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 63x1092 said:

Gee, I wish I was young and delusional like you again, but only so I could drink like I used to and be able to recover and keep drinking the next day, especially during the Xmas holiday period. Being older can be a bitch sometimes.

That and being able to retain fitness are the only things I want back from my misspent yoof... Finally figuring women out long after my looks faded was a cruel twist of fate too. 
 

(sorry @biologist...)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...