Steve Williams

Just filled up today with Optimax.......

Same price as SUL (which I use anyway) so no difference to me whether I use it or not, usually use shell anyway because it is convenient......


The question is, if the performence claims are true (their flyer is full of the "performence gains" angle) then what are the expected acceleration (0-60/ 0-100[private road ] and in gear) gains/ times on a scoob as compared to the usual times?

I know that the times are not that important, but it gives a "benchmark" to judge whether it is living up to the claims.....

Modrapheniac

Recently filled up with Optimax, and noticed a difference straight away, much smoother and quicker off the mark, just to test this, I filled up using another fuel for my trip to London, and the car felt much worse, plus there were fewer pops and bangs from my full SS exhaust system.

It's back to the Optimax on my next fill up.

Hoppy

Good question, Steve. So why don't you get out there and give us some figures to compare ?

I've been meaning to do some back-to-back roll-on times but it's not easy. You need calm weather, a quiet flat road, an almost empty tank and ready access to the comparison fuel, all within a few minutes. Oh, and someone with a stop-watch and an ECU reset!

I did quite a few runs testing NUL against SUL and Millers octane booster and, unsurprisingly, there were some really useful gains. Certainly the cheapest 10-plus bhp mod ever. But it's going to be harder to see big differences between SUL (which most of us use) at 97RON and Optimax at 98RON.

I think Optimax is aimed at 'normal' car drivers who will notice a difference between 95 and 98RON, especially when their ECUs have adjusted and then they bung a tank of 95 back in it and the ECU promptly switches back to max retard 'slug mode'.

The price is also a clue - Optimax is cheaper than SUL around here at 79.9p so tempting to trial. If it was aimed at turbo nutters like us, it would be 99.9p.

Richard.

Jerry B

On about my fourth or fifth tank of Optimax from 3 different filling stations and it doesn't seem noticeably better than SUL to me. Wouldn't be surprised if they've just dumped some more additives in the SUL and re-named it.
I've never run the Subaru on NUL (found all my cars have been much better on SUL). Maybe it is more noticeable when you don't have turbo-lag masking any difference in response...?
It costs up to 83.9ppl around here. No key-rings either!

scud8

iTrader: (1)

Hoppy

You're right that it is aimed at 'normal' car drivers. I was filling my Focus up last week and a geeky teenager in an Optimax sweatshirt asked me if I wanted to try Optimax. I told him that I used it in my Subaru but didn't think it was worth it in the Focus. He was persistent, despite knowing bugger all about the fuel, and only gave up when I put the NUL nozzle in the tank and pressed the trigger!

I had a much more intelligent chat with the guy behind the counter in the same service station when filling up the Scooby. He warned me to watch out for price increases over the next few months as Optimax gains market share against Esso, BP etc. SUL.

Mike

brickboy

I've tried in my std MY99, doing 40-60 and 50-70 roll-ons in 4th, compared with SUL (not back to back, over the space of a couple of weeks, but weather & road conditions roughly the same, within 2-3 degrees C).

These were inconclusive, figures for both types of fuel were within 0.2 sec which is within user error using the speedo / stopwatch system.

*However*, doing roll-ons in 5th, I shaved 0.5 sec off 50-70 and similar off other 20mph increments (if you know what I mean).

For what it's worth, in lower gears or when already on-boost, it doesn't make much, if any difference, compared with SUL. However, it does seem to make a difference when you're pulling onto boost, or in high gear / lowish rpm.

I'm also getting a repeatable 1-2 mpg gain compared with SUL, now on my 6th tank of Opti.