Do Octane Additives Really Work ?
#41
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2000
Location: CA
Posts: 11,218
Received 897 Likes
on
403 Posts
2017 C5 of the Year Finalist
St. Jude Donor '08
Another Torco Fan Here:
I've been using Torco Unleaded Accelerator since 2002 with no issues other than it makes your plugs unreadable.
I completely agree with those that state fuel additives do not increase horsepower, they slow the burn rate of the fuel, which by itself, will actually decrease horsepower. But by slowing the burn rate it makes the mixture less susceptible to detonating, allowing you to run more timing and consequently make more power.
In the case of a C6Z running on 91 in a hot environment, it would keep the knock sensors from triggering the ECU into retarding the timing.
I run it in both of my mustangs, #1 a 95 Cobra running 20lbs of boost on an 800 hp Renegade engine and #2 a 98 Cobra with 9lbs of boost in a mildly modified 4.6 4 Valve.
I don't use it in my Z06 because it is stock and no issues running it on Amoco 93.
I've been using Torco Unleaded Accelerator since 2002 with no issues other than it makes your plugs unreadable.
I completely agree with those that state fuel additives do not increase horsepower, they slow the burn rate of the fuel, which by itself, will actually decrease horsepower. But by slowing the burn rate it makes the mixture less susceptible to detonating, allowing you to run more timing and consequently make more power.
In the case of a C6Z running on 91 in a hot environment, it would keep the knock sensors from triggering the ECU into retarding the timing.
I run it in both of my mustangs, #1 a 95 Cobra running 20lbs of boost on an 800 hp Renegade engine and #2 a 98 Cobra with 9lbs of boost in a mildly modified 4.6 4 Valve.
I don't use it in my Z06 because it is stock and no issues running it on Amoco 93.
Nice stable of cars, and explantion!!
JB
#42
Team Owner
I'll break down my HP increase one more time for you, so you can see the how it played out.
Bone stock on 91 = 376
bone stock with Torco/91 and a tweak on the tune=397
add a filter and bridge with the 91/torco, retune=415
add headers and catback, increase torco mixture alittle, retune=455
JB
We backed up the best run of 455 with a few 448s hot.
Bone stock on 91 = 376
bone stock with Torco/91 and a tweak on the tune=397
add a filter and bridge with the 91/torco, retune=415
add headers and catback, increase torco mixture alittle, retune=455
JB
We backed up the best run of 455 with a few 448s hot.
The first one makes sense - 20 hp with a tune, and taking advantage of the higher octane gas, I fully comprehend that one.
The second one seems a bit high - effectively you are saying you picked up 20 rwhp with just a filter (not sure what the bridge brings to the party). I would not think the octane would be giving you much in addition to phase I here.
Phase III is getting you 30hp with exhaust. I've seen 30hp for headers AND a tune, but in your case you have already had the tune, so the 30 seems high for just headers.
Typically, gains are not cumulative. I frequently see people trying to add up the gains that can be had based upon claims from manufacturers of CAI, headers etc. As I'm sure you know, it never works that way. 20+20 almost never equals 40 (just as an example).
Thanks for sharing the information. While I admit to being skeptical that 80 rwhp can be gained with these mods, I can honestly say I'm reading and listening with an open mind. I also am curious about the 376 stock reading. I will try to go back and look after I post this, but isn't that a 6 speed manual LS3? If so, that is by far the lowest reading I've seen for one.
My car - LS3 manual with NPP dynod at 390.5 on MTIs dyno. I have a lot of experience with MTI and I find their dyno runs to be very consistent and realistic. Any thoughts on why the 376 number seems so low?
Thanks again.
#43
Race Director
I put 1 bottle of OCTANE BOOST (LUCAS ) in my C6 LS2 then drove around a few miles. After that WOT and i cant say there is any noticable difference. Im presumably running 96 Octane. Perhaps ill try it tomorrow with a few degrees of timing increase. I kind of have my doubts about this stuff but the jury is still out.
We dont have any torco around here to try.
We dont have any torco around here to try.
I have no idea of current cost of Torco, it used to add $1.40 to the cost of a gallon of 93 Oct. It's not cheap but it was cheaper (and more available) than race gas and much easier to use.
#44
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2000
Location: CA
Posts: 11,218
Received 897 Likes
on
403 Posts
2017 C5 of the Year Finalist
St. Jude Donor '08
I'll admit I'm having a hard time getting my brain to comprehend the numbers.
The first one makes sense - 20 hp with a tune, and taking advantage of the higher octane gas, I fully comprehend that one.
The second one seems a bit high - effectively you are saying you picked up 20 rwhp with just a filter (not sure what the bridge brings to the party). I would not think the octane would be giving you much in addition to phase I here.
Phase III is getting you 30hp with exhaust. I've seen 30hp for headers AND a tune, but in your case you have already had the tune, so the 30 seems high for just headers.
Typically, gains are not cumulative. I frequently see people trying to add up the gains that can be had based upon claims from manufacturers of CAI, headers etc. As I'm sure you know, it never works that way. 20+20 almost never equals 40 (just as an example).
Thanks for sharing the information. While I admit to being skeptical that 80 rwhp can be gained with these mods, I can honestly say I'm reading and listening with an open mind. I also am curious about the 376 stock reading. I will try to go back and look after I post this, but isn't that a 6 speed manual LS3? If so, that is by far the lowest reading I've seen for one.
My car - LS3 manual with NPP dynod at 390.5 on MTIs dyno. I have a lot of experience with MTI and I find their dyno runs to be very consistent and realistic. Any thoughts on why the 376 number seems so low?
Thanks again.
The first one makes sense - 20 hp with a tune, and taking advantage of the higher octane gas, I fully comprehend that one.
The second one seems a bit high - effectively you are saying you picked up 20 rwhp with just a filter (not sure what the bridge brings to the party). I would not think the octane would be giving you much in addition to phase I here.
Phase III is getting you 30hp with exhaust. I've seen 30hp for headers AND a tune, but in your case you have already had the tune, so the 30 seems high for just headers.
Typically, gains are not cumulative. I frequently see people trying to add up the gains that can be had based upon claims from manufacturers of CAI, headers etc. As I'm sure you know, it never works that way. 20+20 almost never equals 40 (just as an example).
Thanks for sharing the information. While I admit to being skeptical that 80 rwhp can be gained with these mods, I can honestly say I'm reading and listening with an open mind. I also am curious about the 376 stock reading. I will try to go back and look after I post this, but isn't that a 6 speed manual LS3? If so, that is by far the lowest reading I've seen for one.
My car - LS3 manual with NPP dynod at 390.5 on MTIs dyno. I have a lot of experience with MTI and I find their dyno runs to be very consistent and realistic. Any thoughts on why the 376 number seems so low?
Thanks again.
Go to go to work, but 2 things real quick:
The intitial run at 376 was on 91 octane only, and we made a few pulls to back that one up.
People seeing 390s are most likely using 93 or 94 to start...
Once we put the headers and exhaust on, and increased the octane with a stronger Torco mix, we then did extensive tuning to redial the car in!!
Charlie was on a "load" dyno for a few hours to get the fueling right before we got the big #s!!
JB
#45
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Mar 2006
Location: Studio City CA
Posts: 2,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as HP, my 08 is right there with a BONE stock Z06. My Tq seems a bit higher in some cases. It would come down to driver. Now most Z06 owners might have a problem with this, but it's all for fun anyway!! Yes the Z06 is lighter, but my car has more TQ. I'm pretty sure the tranny and diff are the same as well...
No offense taken, but if he did edge me out for some reason, I'd just line back up with the 98 and say BYE BYE!!!
No offense taken, but if he did edge me out for some reason, I'd just line back up with the 98 and say BYE BYE!!!
So is Charlie at RPM.
You need to calculate with 10 percent loss under the 08's new SAE rating.
LEX
#46
Team Owner
Member Since: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 46,128
Received 2,491 Likes
on
1,952 Posts
St. Jude Donor '15
"In honor of jpee"
So once again, you're saying, more octane means more rwhp. Is that correct?
#47
Burning Brakes
Member Since: Sep 2007
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa
Posts: 921
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes
on
15 Posts
As the octane goes higher the amount of energy in the fuel usually goes down (not counting oxygenated racing fuels). The rule of thumb by people in the know at the drag strip is to use the lowest octane your car will handle without detonation. That may be easy to detect with old school engines, but with newer engines and computer controlled systems you can change the timing curves to take advantage of the higher octane. Anti-knock sensors can also make it hard to tell that there is a problem with the octane level. Unless you have the need for 100 octane racing gas, it will slow your car down. Octane is a number that represents the anti-knock factor of the fuel, which basically is how slow it will burn. Octane boosters slow down the burn of the fuel, and may have the side affect of reducing the energy in the fuel even more than a normal premium fuel of the equivelent octane. One example is ethanol blends, which increase octane but decrease the energy in the fuel. If you have a 93 octane tune in your car and it does not detonate on 93 octane pump gas, you will loose power by going to anything higher.
#50
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2000
Location: CA
Posts: 11,218
Received 897 Likes
on
403 Posts
2017 C5 of the Year Finalist
St. Jude Donor '08
Thanks for your input and sarcastic attitude Mike.
Yes Torco will discolor your plugs, and leave a slight residue. I've said this many times before. This particular motor appears to have a few other issues going on.
You come on here showing some pretty ugly stuff, and try to make it all appear to be from Torco.
I've run Torco in my 98 for over 5 years in every tank, and never saw anything like this. While I only sell Torco on the side, and it is by no means a real source of revenue to me, I have probably sold well over 500 cases in the last few years. I have never had one customer come back to me with a single complaint!!
Torco has been selling this product for over 10 years now. If it really did this to motors, do you think this product would still be around?
Yes Torco will discolor your plugs, and leave a slight residue. I've said this many times before. This particular motor appears to have a few other issues going on.
You come on here showing some pretty ugly stuff, and try to make it all appear to be from Torco.
I've run Torco in my 98 for over 5 years in every tank, and never saw anything like this. While I only sell Torco on the side, and it is by no means a real source of revenue to me, I have probably sold well over 500 cases in the last few years. I have never had one customer come back to me with a single complaint!!
Torco has been selling this product for over 10 years now. If it really did this to motors, do you think this product would still be around?
#54
Former Vendor
Explain how I should apply your calculation factor when both cars put down similar RWHP numbers on the same chassis dyno.
I think you are talking about Flywheel HP ratings and confusing that with Wheel Hp ratings.
Here's the program outline directly from SAE's website...
About SAE J1349 Certified Power
Power and torque certification provide a means for a manufacturer to assure a customer that the engine they purchase delivers the advertised performance. This SAE Standard has been written to provide manufacturers with a method of certifying the power of engines to SAE J1349 or SAE J1995. Document SAE J2723 specifies the procedure to be used for a manufacturer to certify the net power and torque rating of a production engine according to SAE J1349 or the gross engine power of a production engine according to SAE J1995. Manufacturers who advertise their engine power and torque ratings as Certified to SAE J1349 or SAE J1995 shall follow this procedure. Certification of engine power and torque to SAE J1349 or SAE J1995 is voluntary, however, this power certification process is mandatory for those advertising power ratings as "Certified to SAE J1349".
SAE Engine Rating Standard Prevents Numbers Fudging (an article on how GM will use SAE J1349 Certified Power, AEI May 2005, Vol 113 No.5, p 59 )
General Motors has become the first manufacturer to certify an engine's power and torque ratings using a newly adopted SAE standard (J2723), James Queen, GM Vice President, Global Engineering, announced during his keynote address at the SAE World Congress and Exhibition in April 2005. The world's largest automaker plans to certify all of its engines to the voluntary standard, and is encouraging its competitors to do the same. The LS7 engine for the 2006 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 was certified under the new standard this month. The 7.0-L V8 unit produces 505 hp (377 kW) at 6300 rpm and 470 lboft (637 Nom) at 4800 rpm. "The new voluntary SAE power and torque certification procedure ensures fair, accurate ratings for horsepower and torque as it uses third-party certification," said Queen. "SAE technical standards level the playing field, and this certification procedure is just the latest example of the value SAE has offered over the past century." To tout power and torque ratings as "SAE-certified," engine manufacturers must have an SAE qualified witness watch over the entire testing procedure to ensure that it is conducted in conformity to SAE standard J1349. Third-party witnessing is the main provision of J2723. An existing SAE standard, J1349, spells out how the actual testing is to be done. J1349 was updated last year to eliminate some ambiguities that allowed engine makers to cite power and torque ratings higher than the engine's actual capabilities. Engine makers are free to cite power and torque figures drived from testing conducted outside the scope of the SAE standards, but they may not claim the figures are SAE-certifed. "We feel that both the consumer and industry are well served by having accurate, consistent ratings from all manufacturers," said David Lancaster, a Technical Fellow in GM Powertrain and Chairman of the SAE Engine Power Test Code Committee that updated J1349 and wrote J2723. Data from a wide array of parameters (e.g., air:fuel ratio) will be collected during testing conducted to the SAE standards. SAE will create a database and offer it to industry in different packages and at different price points.
#55
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Feb 2006
Location: Eastern PA:ECS Paxton Novi 1500(676rwhp,585tq on stock engine),LG headers, 410's, Corsa Sports, ECS Alky Kit
Posts: 2,007
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
St. Jude Donor '08-'09
#57
MMT is an additive in TORCO used to increase octane and it's the MMT that causes the discoloration/deposits/problems. Read your owners manual (pages 5-5 and 5-6) for GM's take on MMT...they recommend against the use of it as it reduces the life of the spark plugs and may cause problems to the emission control system leading to a "check engine" light. Repairs may or may not be covered under warranty.
Link to an online copy of the owners manual, just scroll to the pages listed above:
https://www.mygmlink.com/pdf/go2cont...06corvette.pdf
The "2006" in the link can be changed to reflect the year of other 'Vettes.
#58
Team Owner
Member Since: May 2002
Location: Bann Camp & N.Y.C.
Posts: 26,900
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
St. Jude Donor '08
Yesterday i purchased a bottle of "LUCAS OCTANE BOOST".
After reading the label it indicated up to 25 gal w 1 15oz bottle.
After searching i found out that there is no practical way to
boost octane say from 93 to 96 on a full tank of gas in a c6 corvette.
It simply indicates pour 1 bottle into a tank of gas. Thats kind of vague for me.
Any of you guys have any experience with this? would appreciate any comments on this.
After reading the label it indicated up to 25 gal w 1 15oz bottle.
After searching i found out that there is no practical way to
boost octane say from 93 to 96 on a full tank of gas in a c6 corvette.
It simply indicates pour 1 bottle into a tank of gas. Thats kind of vague for me.
Any of you guys have any experience with this? would appreciate any comments on this.
DO NOT PUT THAT SHEET IN YOUR TANK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I put 3 bottles of it and went to the track, the car ran slower, I may not be the best driver at 1/4 mile racing, but the best I got out of the LS3 (bone stock 392 dyno'd)was a 12.7 @ 114mph ..... Everyone told me after the fact, higher octane will burn slower and not ignite fully, the only way it will work is if the car is tuned for the higher octane!!! I am so pissed at myself
#59
Team Owner
FWIW, spark plugs are cheap... O2 sensors for 97-04 Corvettes are now sold at pep boys for cheap and have a lifetime warranty.
If you truly have a need for Torco to make big horsepower. These little things like spark plugs or replacing O2 sensors are not a big concern. FWIW, I have been using Torco for years and the only time I needed to replace the O2 sensors was after my last motor blew up and "flushed" coolant down my exhaust system. I've had the same spark plugs in my car for over a year without any problems. The set I had in before stayed in for almost 2 years as well.
If you truly have a need for Torco to make big horsepower. These little things like spark plugs or replacing O2 sensors are not a big concern. FWIW, I have been using Torco for years and the only time I needed to replace the O2 sensors was after my last motor blew up and "flushed" coolant down my exhaust system. I've had the same spark plugs in my car for over a year without any problems. The set I had in before stayed in for almost 2 years as well.
#60
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Member Since: Sep 2007
Location: READING PA
Posts: 2,597
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
St. Jude Donor '08-'09-'10
DO NOT PUT THAT SHEET IN YOUR TANK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I put 3 bottles of it and went to the track, the car ran slower, I may not be the best driver at 1/4 mile racing, but the best I got out of the LS3 (bone stock 392 dyno'd)was a 12.7 @ 114mph ..... Everyone told me after the fact, higher octane will burn slower and not ignite fully, the only way it will work is if the car is tuned for the higher octane!!! I am so pissed at myself
Your the first to share info on that stuff ( lucas as pictured in the post ). Those guys are promoting torco, maybe it works but no
additives for this guy.