Shell Optimax

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tactile

Guest
How many on here use shell Optimax ? I use it plus an octane booster.
197millers_octaneplus_x1.jpg

hull.gif

tactile2.gif

http://www.ttoc.co.uk/
2003 Audi A2 1.6 FSI Sport
2004 Audi TT 1.8 Quattro
 
I use it...well used to when I had a smaller engined car. Don't bother with my 2l Avensis now-has all the power I need.

I may run Optimax for a month soon, just to give it a flush through, but then I use Shell normal fuel anyway so I'm not sure I would get any cleaning benefit!

Tactile-when the booster when Optimax is a higher rating anyway? Do you notice a difference with vanilla Optimax to boosted Optimax?

Is the BP Ultimate petrol one higher octane rating than Shell Optimax, or am I imagining things?

Steve - A couple of A2's, then a Corolla, now an Avensis T3-X 2.0 Auto
 
You notice a hell of a difference. Its my wifes car so i dont use it all the time but intially she came out of an Alfa 147 Gta there was a bit of a power differnce LOL and found the A2 using normal fuel very slow. But since then we use Optimax and the octane booster and it flies !!!!!!!!!!! looking at upping the BHP at AMD to 120 +
BP has the same 98 octane rating as Optimax
hull.gif

tactile2.gif

http://www.ttoc.co.uk/
2003 Audi A2 1.6 FSI Sport
2004 Audi TT 1.8 Quattro
 
Interesting.
I can't say I notice any difference in my TT when using Optimax - maybe because it's a V6? I know that Audi are now 'recommending' it to counter the various hesitation issues which they don't seem to be able to address with the DSG box, but really haven't noticed any major difference. Our A2 Sport is a diesel so can't really try it in that!

lion.jpg
 
I may try it but not sure if it would help in a 1.4 A2. Has anybody tried it in a 1.4 would be intrested to get a view point on this before I try it

1.4 PETROL A2 BLACK WITH OPEN SKY AND REAR BENCH SEAT
 
You should notice it in a 1.4 the octane rating will be 100 ron with the adative (assuming the 1.4 is an FSI engine it is more responsive than std engines )

cams_fundraiser%7E.gif

tactile2.gif

http://www.ttoc.co.uk/
2003 Audi A2 1.6 FSI Sport
2004 Audi TT 1.8 Quattro
 
Hi Hollyrescue, injector cleaner is something else. This is an octane booster and it depends on a host of criteria.
what size engine.......the bigger the engine the more you feel the difference
How old is the car............... if its newish you will not quite feel the diffence unlike an older car.
You have to use the octane booster over about 1 month to feel the difference. ITS NOT A QUICK FIX !!

cams_fundraiser%7E.gif

tactile2.gif

http://www.ttoc.co.uk/
2003 Audi A2 1.6 FSI Sport
2004 Audi TT 1.8 Quattro
 
hi found this on shell
Optimax Petrol what do you think about it now.

A review by KatiePuckrik on Shell Optimax Petrol
March 28th, 2003



Author's product rating:


Advantages: Will make a marked improvement on your car .
Disadvantages: Won't happen overnight . More expensive .

Recommend to potential buyers: yes

Full review
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Optimax petrol is very good. It does make your car more responsive <great in traffic! >. To put my theory to the test, I ran my car on Optimax for 1 year the changed back to regular 95 RON petrol. My car became more sluggish and the MPG came down significantly. From 380 per tank (about 50 litres) to 280. So, the extra 3p per litre could justify this.

Because Optimax is more refined <hence, the bigger octane rating> it burns much cleaner and hence, you get a better MPG. This opinion is obviously tying to my car; other people may <and probably will> get different results. The "Optimax" effect will not happen overnight. To really feel a difference you'll have to run it for at least 3000 miles.

However, please don't be fooled that the higher octane rating the better it will be for your car! This is a fallacy. Most UK cars runs on 95 RON, using a higher octane rated petrol will make no effect on your car's performance. If higher octane ratings make a car perform better then 95 RON petrol would have been phased out a long time ago! If you wish to know more then read this bit. If not go to the next paragraph. Octane can withstand pressure well, Pentane cannot. When petrol is refined a mixture of Pentane and octane is produced. The quality of the petrol is defined in its octane rating (95 RON denotes 95% octane: 5% Pentane. Likewise, if the petrol is extra refined you'll have 98 RON 98%octane: 2% Pentane). Now, if a car is set at 95 RON petrol, in the combustion chamber (where the petrol ignites with the spark plugs causing the petrol to become a gas) the piston compresses the chamber where the gas is. The amount of pressure is enough for the octane in petrol to withstand. So, if you think about it, why put a more expensive petrol in your car if the piston will only apply enough pressure for 95% octane? It won't damage your car, but it won't make it go any faster. However, if you put a 95 RON petrol in a car that is set to 98 RON petrol, the piston will compress the chamber too much and the pentane will push the piston down too early causing a shuddering in the drive. This is known as "pinking" or "pinging". This will damage your car. This is why octane ratings are important. I will leave this part of my review <unless people find this confusing> because I believe the point of the website is to educate people with your knowledge. Thank you kindly.

Optimax, however, does make a difference <in my opinion! > but not because of the octane rating but how they have formulated the product; by making it more cleaner burning and putting new detergents in it. It's a great feeling knowing you're cleaning your car as your driving.

The petrol is so clean; it won't bake onto the inlet valves and cause problems near the combustion chamber. When the fuel travels down the fuel line to the engine it cleans there as well. Because the fuel is more refined there are less particles that will clog your fuel filter.

In short, generally good, but it's up to you whether the extra 3p <subject to regional variations> is worth it for your car...?
 
Sounded interesting until i got to the bit about Octane - it is a rating, not a substance.

Years ago I remember 101 octane being available, back in the days when there was lead in petrol!

1.4 Petrol Special Edition, Ebony Black, grey leather, heated seats, climate, opensky, five spoke alloys for SWMBO (Replaced a 2002 1.4 Petrol SE) Honda Accord Tourer 2.2 iCDTi for me.
 
that passage above regarding octanes/pentanes is woefully inaccurate to the point of nonsense I'm afraid.

a fuels resistance to pre-ignition is far more complicated than attempting to base it on simple ratios of 'ingredients' - and what most people don't realise is that the higher RON rated fuels like optimax etc DO NOT GUARANTEE a certain RON at all - that's why they were legally forced to remove any such claims from their pumps - the 98 RON thing has become a bit of a meme in the publics eye - which of course they're happy to encourage.

the reason for this is that the RON number degrades rather rapidly after refinement - by the time you get to put it in your tank you may not be getting anything significantly better than regular unleaded.

The reason that any RON increase you do get takes time to be noticed to full effect is due to the engine management and the way that the adaptive mapping is modified based on lambda sensor mixture information - basically it takes time for the engine to recalculate optimal values and so on - so the real benefits of being able to advance the ignition based on knock detection and control may not be realised until the fuelling has been adjusted - pre-ignition is not only a function of RON etc, mixture ratio has a far greater effect.

I've run cars on aftermarket managements with wideband lambda correction - and have noticed improvements from optimax - fuels sites dropped 2-3% on average to maintain about 0.9 lambda, which is about what you'd expect.

Remember though that the majority of standard cars are equipped with narrow band lambda sensors and as such can only tell the difference between rich/lean - the linear response area is only a tiny fraction centered around 14.7:1 (i.e stoichiometric ratio) - anything above or below that is simply classified as rich or lean - so the net effect is the engine is ulimately tuned for economy/emissions - NOT performance - in any case, a fuels ability to resist pre-ignition is of significant benefit only when tuning the ignition advance - so if your car is not equipped with fully adaptive knock control you may see no benefit at all, except under more stressful engine conditions like a very hot day - in which case all you'll notice is the performance doesn't drop off with a higher RON fuel.
 
Well that has simplified things quite nicely!

Dolphin Grey 1.4 petrol c/w OpenSky
 
I concur.[30]
We can make an informed decission from
this day fourth.
I used it in my GTI6 and thought it made
quite a difference. Worth a few pence I
think ,if only to keep it cleaner.



andy

1.4TDI SE, DIS ,Leather ,CD ,ipod ,Climate ,Road Angel ,Tom Tom Go.
 
an A2 with the FSI system has to use a higher octane fuel in order for the engine to work as it was designed - remember that FSI mode injects fuel on the compression stroke - and it is probably for this reason that the resulting combustion is far more prone to pre-ignition. It's likely the engine management will run in normal mode at the slightest hint of knock - this is probably the reason why optimax et al gives such a marked improvement on FSI engines.

in case anyone is interested - knock is what occurs when the fuel charge starts to transition from a controlled burn to an explosive burn, and parts of the mixture start to spontaneously combust in isolation from the point of the spark - this is detected as a 15Khz (approx) oscillation by the knock sensor. Knock is the warning sign that the management looks for, and then backs off the ignition to a safer advance, preserving the engine while obtaining maximum performance for any given fuel.

Detonation is what occurs when the mixture starts to combust even before the spark - and this will quickly destroy an engine if unchecked. Det is the no.1 enemy of forced induction engines, simply due to the more stressful conditions inside the engine when it's boosting.

sorry for going on and on! - in another life I used to build/tune engines as a hobby and regularly came into contact with some pretty serious petrol heads and their toys :)
 
quote:Originally posted by gjp33

sorry for going on and on!
Don't be sorry, this is most educational.

Re your comment that unless an engine has fully adaptive knock control it only detects "rich" or "lean", so you might not see a difference: do you know how the A2 specifically works? And more generally are forced-induction engines generally more sophisticated in this area?

I ask because I've noticed a tangible improvement in performance and throttle response with Optimax on two turbo cars I've recently owned (TT and RS4, for both of which Audi recommends 98 RON) and pretty-much no difference on the normally-aspirated A4 cabriolet.

Cheers, Richard.

5a5bpg

2005 A2 Tdi. Dolphin with red leather.
2001 RS4. Standard 380bhp.
 
knock control and mixture control are quite separate processes in theory, but they overlap because they can each affect the other.

the lambda sensors job is to monitor excess oxygen in the exhaust and hence determine the AFR (air-fuel ratio), and in the case of narrow band sensors, simply rich or lean with very little determination in between.

the knock sensor, in essence, monitors the quality of combustion - but only in so far as it will pick up the knock signal present when the mixture starts to pre-ignite - other than that, it provides no input to the ECU other than 'no knock detected'

it makes perfect sense that higher RON fuels are beneficial to forced induction engines as they are typically running with a much greater flexibility wrt fuel types - the conditions inside a turbo engine are much more variable than normally aspirated so the management has to be able to cope with this - so as well as being able to retard the ignition on a hot day, it's also able to advance it on a cool damp night, or when it detects that the fuel quality is better - or both of course.

aspirated engines are far more linear and predictable, even under wildely varying conditions - so other they will have the same knock control, the net variability either way is much smaller, so just the same as you will not notice much advantage when running a fuel with a couple of points better RON, you'll not see performance dropping off so much either.

this is way oversimplified mind - and really only addresses knock etc as a single entity - in actuality like I said, mixture also has a huge part to play, and the above only really holds true for standard factory engines and their managements - once you start getting into aftermarket management and tuning, and proper wideband lambda control, and throw the economy/emissions book out the window - it's a whole different ballgame. For instance excess fuel is actually used to cool the engine and stave off knock/detonation under full load conditions - AFRs as low as 11:1 are not uncommon (if you've ever seen a full on turbo engine under full load and wondered why it's smoking like it's going to burst - that's the excess fuel which is actually preventing it from doing so - also the reason why you see the spectacular flame outs)

exhaust gas temperatures are another important monitoring point in turbo engines - they are another indicator of the current state of the engine - if they climb too high they'll also set off detonation etc.

I'm not surprised your RS4 is quicker with a better fuel - any percentage of 380bhp is naturally going to be more noticable than 200 or so.

other than reading up on FSI, I've no more knowledge of the A2 engines - other than doing cylinder heads for people, I've told myself no more mucking around with engines! Until such time as I buy something more interesting, the A2 and A4 are strictly off limits!

I nearly put down a deposit on one of the new RS4s myself, but sense prevailed - as I've only just managed to escape from the grip of oily engines, skinned knuckles, late nights and complaints from the Wife[B)]
 
crikey I only wanted to know if using a higher octane fuel would give me better fuel economy

1.4 PETROL A2 BLACK WITH OPEN SKY AND REAR BENCH SEAT
 
My 1.6 FSI is certainly affected by using "super unleaded" either Shell or BP. It gives about 2mpg more on super than regular unleaded and the acceleration is better, especially when flooring the throttle. These observations are based on about 33000m over 3 years.
When I first bought the car I always used super, then the stingy git in me thought why should I pay about 5~6 pence per litre extra. In the last year year I've swopped back and will now always use a super grade fuel if possible.

2002 FSi SE, Ebony Black with Red Nappa Leather, 17" Sport Wheels, 2004 grill, Tinted Security Glass (+Road Angel)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top