Odd smell at F1 races identified !!!!

[Smokes]

Note though, the general point still applies, you will not get better fuel efficiency from a higher octane rating, unless your engine is operating at reasonably high compression ratios (read, has a turbo charger). Again, higher octane fuel has less energy density than lower octane fuel, it can just be burned more efficiently, because it resists auto-ignition (and hence knocking) when compressed highly (again, because it's less volatile).

I wish I understood fuel more. So as a real world example, my car, which is not a turbo, but a 1.6L recent model, has a 40L tank. We track milage. A fill from one fuel supplier nets around 480km a tank. A fill from another fuel supplier gets about 520km. We use the same octane (91) at both and drive the same (relatively) amount each week (a week between fills). That's a big difference. So is it performance or economy making the difference here? And is the different fuel from each supplier really that different?

the fuel suppliers all use the same base fuel but each brand uses different additives e.g toulene etc to improve the performance of the fuel. The engine mapping will work better with a particular brand of fuel because the mapping was calibrated on that brand of fuel, or fuel suits the engine map.

[CosTa]

Note though, the general point still applies, you will not get better fuel efficiency from a higher octane rating, unless your engine is operating at reasonably high compression ratios (read, has a turbo charger). Again, higher octane fuel has less energy density than lower octane fuel, it can just be burned more efficiently, because it resists auto-ignition (and hence knocking) when compressed highly (again, because it's less volatile).

I drive a BMW with a M52 2.8 engine, with a compression ratio of 10.2:1... Now I have to be honest that I don't know if that is high or not.. But when I am in Germany an use the ARAL 102 fuel, it runs better.. is more economic and (at least it feels like this) it has more power..

I am aware that that last one could be a placebo effect..

Using a higher octane fuel in your BMW M52 2.8 will certainly increase power output.
That engine has Knock sensors, allowing the increase in ignition advance further using a higher octane fuel.

Higher ignition advance, until the MBT timing is reached, will increase power output. So When you feel more power using the ARAL 102 fuel surely is not a placebo effect.

[Richard]

Could someone do some sums on that? What is the power difference between 95 RON (EU standard) and 99 (super unleaded)?

By the way, we used to be able to get 100 RON in the UK from Shell but that's down to 99 nowadays.

[KurtTank]

In the US we use a system known as "R+M/2"
That is Research Octane + Motor Octane divided by 2. Or simply an average of Research and Motor octane.
93 octane is the standard high octane fuel in the Eastern U.S.
Although I just yesterday saw 100 octane at the pump, which is a rarity. That fuel is Sunoco's GT pump fuel, and it is the hightest octane available at the pump for a road car in the US. It would be rated as a "105 octane" in Europe.

[NTS]

Using a higher octane fuel in your BMW M52 2.8 will certainly increase power output.
That engine has Knock sensors, allowing the increase in ignition advance further using a higher octane fuel.

I have a similar one, the BMW N52 3.0 (which I think is a successor to the M52?). Is there some way to find out how far they've gone in the mapping? Operating manual only states that 95 is the minimum not whether 100 or 102 has any benefits over 98. (All EU numbers of course)

I can log the timing advance through the OBD port. Should there be a noticeable difference in the measurements for different fuel-types?

[yener]

The whole vid is just a PR thing. Shouldn't get too wrapped up in it, IMO.

This is the first thing which came up to me. Why would Ferrari allow a BBC reporter to let them test fuel? Ferrari would ask a huge amount of money to let someone is and do some test like that. And honestly... you guys think that all the f1 teams didnt test this years before?

It's a good PR stunt with the Shell truck and Fernando saying "nowadays there is not much different between race full and f1 fuel"

[CosTa]

I can log the timing advance through the OBD port. Should there be a noticeable difference in the measurements for different fuel-types?

Certainly you will notice higher ignition advance, probably up to 5 CA.

[langwadt]

The whole vid is just a PR thing. Shouldn't get too wrapped up in it, IMO.

This is the first thing which came up to me. Why would Ferrari allow a BBC reporter to let them test fuel? Ferrari would ask a huge amount of money to let someone is and do some test like that. And honestly... you guys think that all the f1 teams didnt test this years before?

It's a good PR stunt with the Shell truck and Fernando saying "nowadays there is not much different between race full and f1 fuel"

of course it is PR, but still being within a few % on an engine that run 3x the RPM, and maybe 4x the power of a road car without any optimizing of the maps I'd say is pretty close

[nacho]

In Finnish TV ex-engineer from Toyota said they did tests with regular fuel and the difference isn't much, you could run F1 cars and race with regular fuel.

[SpainFAN]

1/10th of a second is significant in F1, but for getting from A-B there is not that much difference for road car, that's why F1 gas IS different from regular gas, but not very much different.

[Cold Fussion]

I'm interested in why you bought such fuel for your lawn mower anyway?

[MOWOG]

There was an odd smell in the old Bog at Watkins Glen back in the 60's and 70's, but it had nothing to do with racing fuel.

[Scuderia Nuvolari]

want to smell odd fuel..go to a drag strip

There is nothing. Like the smell of nitro methane burning in the morning, it will make your nose run and your eyes tear and cure whatever ails you