How many of you have found no difference by using Optimax
09 June 2003, 02:23 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: WYIOC. The Foxglove, Kirkburton, Huddersfield.
Posts: 5,400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MY02 WRX. Better on Optimax than NUL (ie smoother, but not really any faster).
But, ironically, better on SUL than Optimax (ie, slightly more responsive).
Will stick with Optimax though, as it's cheaper than SUL in Yorkshire.
But, ironically, better on SUL than Optimax (ie, slightly more responsive).
Will stick with Optimax though, as it's cheaper than SUL in Yorkshire.
10 June 2003, 02:20 PM
#34
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Optimax is worth the extra few pence. In my experience: -
Mercedes C200 - smoother gear change
BMW Evo AC Schnitzer - increased acceleration
Astra GTE - increased response
And now my '98UK Turbo (N.B.non modified) has definite and noticeable increase in acceleration.
It's intended to be a cleaner fuel in engine & environment BUT also increase "responsiveness".
Mercedes C200 - smoother gear change
BMW Evo AC Schnitzer - increased acceleration
Astra GTE - increased response
And now my '98UK Turbo (N.B.non modified) has definite and noticeable increase in acceleration.
It's intended to be a cleaner fuel in engine & environment BUT also increase "responsiveness".
10 June 2003, 03:07 PM
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Twitching with a camera
Posts: 22,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both Optimax and Super Unleaded seem to give me more miles per tank than normal Unleaded. Car also feels more responsive, especially with only a bit left in the tank.
Optimax is considerably cheaper than Super, for some reason. I've got a MY97 UK Turbo, btw.
Optimax is considerably cheaper than Super, for some reason. I've got a MY97 UK Turbo, btw.
10 June 2003, 03:46 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On my fuel cap, it says, Super unleaded only, so that what i use. I have notest, slight improvements, in the lower revs 1k - 2k when using the Super or Optimax.
Didnt know that u need to change anything on the car to tell it what its drinking though??/ what do i need to do?
Didnt know that u need to change anything on the car to tell it what its drinking though??/ what do i need to do?
10 June 2003, 05:37 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: WYIOC. The Foxglove, Kirkburton, Huddersfield.
Posts: 5,400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a point Ted.
My understanding is that the 'Super Only' sticker means Super as in minimum 95 octane for Europe, as opposed to 97 octane UK fuel....
Is this right, anybody?
My understanding is that the 'Super Only' sticker means Super as in minimum 95 octane for Europe, as opposed to 97 octane UK fuel....
Is this right, anybody?
10 June 2003, 06:28 PM
#38
In my MY96 uk model I noticed a big difference when I started using optimax a year ago. Only mods at time were back box and filter. It was most noticable at 5000 rpm upwards.
Reading through the different comments I really think it must depend on which model it is. I remember reading years ago in performance car that SUL could add upto 20 bhp to a scoob, this was pre 1997 though. What a memory!
Reading through the different comments I really think it must depend on which model it is. I remember reading years ago in performance car that SUL could add upto 20 bhp to a scoob, this was pre 1997 though. What a memory!
11 June 2003, 10:02 AM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Surrey Somewhere, From 341 bhp '99 STI V to '98 Merc CLK & '00 Peugeot 306 XSI to '01 E46 M3 :)
Posts: 3,301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, from my own experiences....
I had my car Linked ages ago with Bob Rawle and we could map the car with tons more ingnition advance with optimax and booster, so from a performance benefit it did work, if I got caught short and was 'forced' to use NUL the knocklink would light up, but that was because the ignition couldnt run so advanced without it.
Nowdays, running a std ecu, I still use Optimax & Booster purely because it does help avoid det, tho I do use Q8 SUL as the garage is more local to me, I find the Q8 SUL good, actually gives a better throttle response esp coupled with NF, it lasts longer than NF i.e. 20-25 miles longer per tankful, performance is the same and it's cheaper, and the double brucey bonus is that it doesnt make a difference on the knocklink either
I had my car Linked ages ago with Bob Rawle and we could map the car with tons more ingnition advance with optimax and booster, so from a performance benefit it did work, if I got caught short and was 'forced' to use NUL the knocklink would light up, but that was because the ignition couldnt run so advanced without it.
Nowdays, running a std ecu, I still use Optimax & Booster purely because it does help avoid det, tho I do use Q8 SUL as the garage is more local to me, I find the Q8 SUL good, actually gives a better throttle response esp coupled with NF, it lasts longer than NF i.e. 20-25 miles longer per tankful, performance is the same and it's cheaper, and the double brucey bonus is that it doesnt make a difference on the knocklink either
13 June 2003, 03:27 PM
#42
BANNED
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Your home is worthless.You can't afford to run your car.Your job is on the line.Schadenfreude rules.
Posts: 4,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know this goes on and on but I read on here somewhere that Optimax has a higher Octane rating but a lower calorific value than SUL. This might explain the apparent inconsistency in results as it's major benefit seems to be in removing engine deposits and thus increasing performance. I wish we could get a definitive answer to this!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Jonny mac
ScoobyNet General
10
09 October 2015 12:25 PM
KK3960
General Technical
3
07 October 2015 12:33 PM
bluebullet29
General Technical
9
05 October 2015 02:17 PM